The weekly sentinel. [volume] (Winston-Salem, N.C.) 1886-1887, 1886-06-24
LEGAL NOISE.
what the Law Allows and What It Con
siders q Nuisance.

What the Law Allows and what H OCn.
siders q Nuisance.
Every rood citizen is interested in
knowing how much noise the law will
compel him to endure at the hands of
his neighbors without redress, and
many citizens who are not good will
doubtless like to ascertain how much
noise they can inf1ict upon their neigh
bors without fear of punishment Sew
eral decisions bearing upon these
points have lately been made by the
courts. One broad principle well |
established in the law of noise, both in |
this country and England. curiously
illustrates the serious bent OF our
Anglo-Saxon nature, and that is the
sharp distinction drawn between
money-making noises and those which
are made in the pursuit of pleasure
The law Is tender to steam engine or
boiler maker, and will allow them 70
disturb a whole neighborhood with I'M
punity, but it is severe upon brass
band or a game of skittles- The good
citizens must be very wary about play
ing bowls or skittles in populous
places, The Italians order this matter
differently. and restrain blacksmiths,
boiler makers, etc, within somewhat
close limits as to time and place,
whereas they allow musical merry
makers to make night hideous or beau
| tiful, as the case may be, without any
| restraint whatever.
The dog, in English and American
| jurisprudence, stands upon the border
| line, because he may be considered in
| either aspect-as kept for use, when
watch dog, or for pleasure, when re-
| garded merely as a companion or an
ornament Here, however, we run
against another principle of the COM
mon law, according to which dogs are
privileged persons. For instance, it is
unlawful for farmer to shoot an
others dog who has eaten his sheep,
provided it be the animals first Of
Tense of that kind; for the dog who IS
Young in the sin of sheep-kilhng may
repent and lead a respectable life
thereafter; but if he has already been
convicted of the crime, then it is law
full to shoot him. In other words. as
Lord Mansfield once said: 1.-The law
allows every dog in England one bite
at sheep"
1t has, however, been held that 1.-The
noise produced by dog barking in the
night is a nuisance, and that a man
may shoot the dog and abate the nui-
sance when on his own premises; that
is, we presume, when on his own, the
shooters. premises, for it has never
been lawful for man to stand
on his own premises and Shoot
dog in his neighbours yard
A great Judge, Lord Ken
Won, held that dog barking at nigh
is not a nuisance, but it is doubtful i
; this would be considered a good law a
the present day. According to thu
: definition given by one writer, nois'
: is a nuisance when it is ''unusual. Ill
timed or deafening." This is plainl.
incorrect, for the noise of a nightin
: gale in the streets of Boston would b
l "unusual," but hardly nuisance
t Some very "ill-timed" noises are also
/, in the eye of the law, not nuisances
= Thus it has been held in the case @
e Pool against Higginson and DAILY tina
K it is not a nuisance for the parent
t an infant suffering from collie to trun
= die a baby-carriage all night in
It boardin house over the head OF
nervous bachelor editor. This nois
n NAV not have been unusual and pei
" haps was not deafening, but it woul
r be an abuse of language to say that
IL was not '.ill-timed." Probably VIII:
is saved the parent in this case was tt
=, fact that the noise was useful, for tt
s. evidence tended to show that the bat
4. was relieved by the trundling- On ii
81 other hand, useless noises, '4such as
s; concert 1--WE quote from decision
IS the Supreme Court of Massachusetts
e. although they disturb but single pc
son, may constitute nuisance"
has very properly been held that
.sshow having brass bands, when co
tinued two weeks is a nuisance.
It's is not likely that many people W
quarrel with this decision.
ce A kindred subject is that of nuisan
ct by vibration. If a man attempts
w operate a steam hammer next door
r., a dwelling-house the law will restrs
him One authority states the rule
follows: 1.-The vibration must pl
OF duce such a condition of things as,
We the Judgment of reasonable men,
We naturally productive of actual phi.
&c ical discomfort to persons OF ordins
rn sensibilities and of ordinary tastes a
habits The words in italics seem
IS imply that some persons like M
'ed vibration than others, and are in
for habit of vibrating" themselves
he Residents in the Back Bay who
cry accustomed to pile-drivers in tn
yer close vicinity may be said to have
we quired the habit of vibrating, but
doubt if they have any "taste" for
fly However this may be, the sum of
matter is that in the interest of tr
ON or manufactures you may vibrate
in, deafen your neighbor with few rest
lily tons, but that for purposes OF pleas
YES your faculty of noise-making must
lall verely be repressed--Bostoss adj
Its tiSer.
are --s-s -
the The Paris Figaro has published
ew article on the 'tManufacture of SIX
ce- tons,'' in which the writer says