Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-01-13
AN IMPORTANT DECISION.

All Western Pennsylvania Greatly Inter-
ested in a Supreme Court Opinion
Drinking Water Must Not Be Sailed by
Drillers for Gas or Petroleum.
A suit of great interest to Western Penn
sylvania was decided by the Supreme Court
at this session, the opinion arriving yester-
day. 1t is that OF Mamie r. Collins vs.. The
CHARTERS Natural Gas Company, and it car
ries with it those of Mary Osborne. Mary
Wall, Andrew Floyd, Nettie Tyndall. M.
e. Karns. ]. Smith and Agnes Mcqueen. who
have secured verdicts aggregating 5000 for the
sailing of fresh water wells and springs on their
respective holdings.
Messrs. Young & Trent were attorneys for
the plaintiffs, and are at length on TOP after a
stubbornly contested night IN Common Pleas
No. 2 Judge Ewing would not agree with the
plaintiffs, but as he thought the case of Mamie
Collins, which is similar TO all the rest, might
not come under the ruling of Sanderson versus
the Pennsylvania Coal Company, he favored
letting the Supreme Court have whack. and
the opinion he expressed has been substanti-
ated by that Court.
Attorney N. w. Shafer some months ago
called attention to the gravity of the issue, and
at his suggestion lengthy report OF the case of
SandersOn versus The Pennsylvana Coal Com
pany was published in THE DISPATCH. 1t was
there held that, as coal mining was legitimate
poisoned water had no recourse, provided the
mines were drained at their natural outlet
The decision was somewhat of stun
ner, as it conficted with much pre-
well as among laymen, and Justice
Clark was careful to say that if large commu-
nifty, say the City of Scranton. for instance,
were to have its water supply ruined, the hold
ing of the Court might be different. AS it was
Mr.. Sanderson had fine residence property
ruined. and was forced to accept the ruin with
out compensation.
Judge Ewing suggested that it might be
shown that the inevitable damage done by
coal mining, in the case referred to- was not
analogous to that done by boring for petroleum
or natural gas, as he said the geological strata
OF Western Pennsylvania had been SO
the tiooding by fresh water courses in the
earth might perhaps be avoided with compare
lively little expense and trouble The borers
knew pretty nearly at what depth they would
strike salt water, and there was testimony
going 20 show that the expense of preventing
TRANSMISSION was not very great The testimony
was that the cost of retaining the salt water in
its stratum was only $50 to $3.50 in each well.
The Supreme Court says that while persons
have the right to drill, they must exercise
proper care to confine the salt water, taking
the same ground as suggested by Judge Ewing,
that its horizon is well ascertaiped, the expense
of prevention generally moderate, and that il
an effort is not made to prevent the mlngl1ng
the charge of negligence will lie.
This decision may be provocative of consider
able more legislation. Compainants in some
cases in Beaver county were knocked out by
the lower court, and they may PICK hints and
complaint in this and surrounding counties
regarding the impregnation, but generally
people supposed it was one of those that cannot
be helped. In many leases now being written,
the lessees stipulate that means to retain the
salt water in Its horizon be used by the COM
pany.