Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1890-08-21
A HARVEST FOR LAWYERS
Beginning of One Of the Biggest Suits
in the History of Wisconsin
numbering.
Eau Claire, Chippewa County and
Numerous Citizens Claim ST.
100000 Damages.
Satisfaction Demanded For the Enor-
nous Damages Done by the
Great Flood of 1885.

EAU CLAIRE, Wis, Special Telegram,
Aug. l6.-The heaviest series of actions
for damages ever known in this section are
about to be commenced, as a result of the
great food in the Chippewa Valley in
September, 1884 The limitation for the
commencement of these actions will expire
| in few days, but before that time there
will be the biggest sensation, of the kind
| in the history of the lumber world of the
northwest. The plaintiffs will probably
be the city of Eau Claire, the county of
| Chippewa and a large number of individ-
81 100000, and the defendants will
! holders of the Mississippi River Logging
com pany itself, the Chippewa Logging
company, the Chippewa Lumber and Boom
: company, and the Chippewa River Log
Driving and Improvement company. The
suits will be the result of long, careful and
painstaking investigation.
In 1878. Frederick Weyerhauser, w. J.
Young. Peter Musser. of Muscatine, Iowa,
Earl S. Youmans. of Winona, Mimi, and
other stockholders In the Mississippi River
Logging company, without a charter, con-
structed a dam at Little Falls, in Chip
pewa county, about thirty miles above
Eau Claire. Prior to this a corporation
known as the Chippewa River Improve
ment and Log Driving company had been
| formed by them to operate this dam and
other structures to float and drive logs
on the Chippewa river. The real parties
who owned the dam and furnished the
money was long mystery and is claimed
l. lon In,
| 1880. owing, it is claimed, to poor and In
sufficient construction of the dam. the
water washed around the east end. In
| 1890, the Chippewa Logging company
was formed, and since that time has used
all the works and dams in the river above
| Eau Claire to handle logs.
! In September, 1884, came the great
food. By Mr.. Weyerhauser, an effort
was made to hold back the rising waters
until it was too late to avert disaster
Little Falls dam went out, and a solid
wall of water swept down the valley, the
| Chippewa rose TO % feet above low water
mark at Eau Claire, and more than a mil
| lion dollars worth of property In the valley
was damaged or destroyed. One of the
| dams which went out was the Paint creek
dam of the Chippewa Lumber 4 Boom
company. Chippewa county lost In
bridges S75 900; Eau Clai re in Bridges
and otherwise, 5l00,000 the Chicago,
Milwaukee & st. Paul about $3.50, 900;
while the smaller losses were innumerable.
1t had always been claimed that the
damage was caused by the poor construc-
ton of the dams and the negligent way in
which they were operated. But the diff
Guilty was to determine the responsible
parties The title of record was tor some
time carried by the Chippewa River I'M
provement Company w. ]. Viles and w.
J. Young, then by the Chippewa River
Improvement and Log Driving Company.
| 1t became important to settle who built
the dam, because of the liability OF the
originator of a nuisance even after the
title mas passed from him to others.
Recently an action was commenced by
Sewer Fortier against the Chippewa Log
ging company for damages to the plain
tiff's farm above Little Falls dam. It's
real purpose was to decide who built the
dam, and who subsequently owned, leased
and operated it. Under the statute an
examination was concluded today before
Hon. J. A. Anderson, county Judge of
! Chippewa county, Secretary Chichester
of the Chippewa Lumber company, being
on the stand Every step has been strenu
ously fought by the Chippewa Logging
company, on the ground that this is a
pioneer suit seeking information not
necessary for the plaintiff is now
J in order to frame his COM
plant This shows that the corporation
stockholders and Mr.. Weyerhaeuser, pres
ident of the company, know whaS is COM
ing. A motion was made before Judge
Bundy at Menomonie, the 18th. for an
order to limit the subjects to which the
examination of Mr. Chichester should ex
tend, but the judge denied the motion,
holding that when corporations or persons
destroy property, the owner has right to
determine who they are.
1t is claimed by PORTER attorneys that
they have now secured sufficient evidence
on which TO maintain his suit. This SIM
ply means that ammunition has been pro-
vided for the big fight TO come.
Either the affairs of the corporations
mentioned which have had to do with
Little Falls dam are so intermlngled that
the officers are unable to tell what COM
pany does particular wo7k, Or, as claim
ed by plaintiff, assertions are made on be-
half of each company for the purpose of
deception. Part of the dam is on land to
which the title is nominally in the Chip
pewa River Improvement Company. That
CORPORATION was Organized 80 years ago
and now has practically no existence; and
it is said the defendant corporation IN the
Fortier suit would like to have it appear
that the title to an allie, ed nuisance is
not in it but in company which mas
ceased to exist.