The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1882-03-02
The D.ai.ion Ia the Water Care.

lie reel al decision III the water case,
Garfield ". Andrews, in causing some
commotion among the owners Of lumber
aud other mills aud people living on the
situated L, has been the general custom
To dump great deal OF the waste coming
from sneh mills into the stream regardless
OF the rights Of those living farther down
the same stream Though the question
had never been brought directly before
the Supreme Court II was considered TO be
settled hy custom, but this decision, now
il has heen made will render change
necessary ia this respect or there will he
numerous suits Tor damages. OF course
it is unavoidable that some waste aud dirt
get into the stream aud the court IN its
decision recognizes this fact and only re'
quirrs that the owners OF the mills use due
cars aud vigilance IN the matter, but they
IL puts them to an extra expense,
Wa give below some OF tbs points ia the
decision together With the reasons for the
same:
The fact that the defendant had been III
the habii - either lisclinr sing the waste
FROM i..cir mi iirretl, intu Tia. stream "a
leaytll II on the bank. 10 such position
that 1t hiuul it, s,y into the strraa, il
,uch lni ti,irr that It all,d up Tie GA
tors lp,ul to The citeni that they were put
10 cons.lsrhbl" necessary rtprus' in re.
moving it, ~ ! that It sfri pp.ls iuterierel
~iin tue prom able use OF their miII Ia es'
t,blis ,el hv proofs IL was equally well
established that there aas no necessity
Tor the dsisulaat, 10 dispose OF their
Waste ia that maunsf II was a matter Of
convenience Tor them 10 30 Il spos. of it;
they conl have gotten ril Of 1t N some
other way, itut that would have eutaileI
upon iheu additional expense.
Upon these tindlng- ia. equitable rights
OF the parties are TO be leteruiine, Shall
ia. ,lefrn lauts be permitted 10 dispose y!
their waste a, they have hitherto done,
notwithstanding the Injury II ma, cause
to the or4,or.y Or shall they b. enioinei'
While IL Is true that manufacturer has
the right ~ apprr pirate and use the water
Of d stream Va = proper manner It i, equal
" true that lie must respect and regard
The rights VI riparian proprietor. below |
him; anl sbllo .poh Owners must submit
a. saeb Inconvenience apl Injury as may |
re' ALI fruui sadh Use, they are not com
pellrd la submit 10 damages v lIicl are not (
.,cssnar,iy oceasiuueil thereby. Such dam.
ages a. arr iucidrnt 10 aud necessarily re-
sult irun apr oprf Use oi the water must
h. borne. hni the, manufacturer has no
light 10 10 ant at thu, IL It. e0n@qneoce |
n iujufioa, TO other, b..cansr u Is a matter I
of cun,pbnuer OF rcoAoms iog him 10 do 1
IT, II Is a. mneh tbs duty Of manaiss.
inret 10 20 dispose Of hi- waste as not 10
iujure oil rrs a. II Is 10 refrain frJm iular. I
ing others by sny other act No one Is al /
lo~el TO deposit any substance 10 a run
Bing stream that will pollu,. its wsters 10
ii.e injiry Of riparian proprietor below.
Wood ,s. sniclinr l.. aud Ia, X 2l7;
I lolIarl's Law OF Easements Benefits
4 liiioaD 81 aud 25s Neither has sn. o1s
the risl, to deposit any other substance
ia .ech stream. beyond what is absolute
IL necessary TO heueheial use OF il, 70 the
lnjar, Of mill.osuers OF the lands through
q hicli the stresm may ran. II would be
ADJUST ~ hold thai msnniae.
larcs rsall ~ cia,lasi his bu-lne.s a. 10
sef,oa.l, Impair ihe valae Of the rishts %
,,ruprgt, 81 manufacturer oa the sAme
.ir.am iseia~ anl l'ilnrs ~ p-rhsp' rni6