Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1898-02-10
MILLER VS.. GREENWICH TOWN.
SHIP.

Garrison and jury, and terminated Thurs
day morning, somewhat abruptly, by tn
Judge directing the Jury to find verdic
in favor OF the defendant.
The history Of the case is this: In 1891
the Town Meeting authorized the raising
of $500 for the improvement of the MAR
street of Paulsboro. A surveyor was EN-
ployed to fix the grade of the street SO thai
surface water would run of, and this
money was spent as far as it would go.
Main street was graded well up to Laws
Block substantially as at present.
The citizens OF Paulsboro kept contin-
ualIy complaining to the Township Com
| mittee of the want of proper drainage, and
that on account of the level surface rain
water would not run off, but would lay in
places until it became stagnant and green.
With this in view the Township Com
mittee in 1895 had William NJ Carter to
survey the whole town, and make grade
map. which, at regular meeting, was
adopted.
In April 1896. John Rambo, one Of the
Township Committee, commenced to repair
and amend South Commerce street, and in
order to do so properly, it was necessary to
follow largely the grade given by the Sur
veryor. Mr.. Edward G. Miller, the plain
tiff in the suit, owns valuable property
on one Of the corners of the street where it
joins Main street. a sewer runs from this
across South Commerce street, and then up
Main street to the creek. Thinking that
the work would iDjure this property and
deprive him of the use of his sewer. he
applied to the Court of Chancery for an in
junction to restrain its prosecution. The
Chancellor granted a rule to show cause
with dd interim restraint. Upon the return
of the rule it was dismissed with costs.
The bill itself was then dismissed upon the
application of Mr.. Miller. Subsequently
the Township Committee passed ordinances
! fixing the grade of all the streets of Pauls-
boro so that surface water would flow
thereon with the least obstruction, and
with as little damage t. private property
as possible, and also to establish the
boundrles and grade of South Commerce
street, and fix the width of the sidewalks
and the height of the curb lines. After the
restraining order had been dismissed, Mr.
Rambo finished repairing South Commerce
street
10 May 1896. Mr. Miller obtained writ
of eertiorari from the Supreme Court to
take up the resolution by which the grade
map was adopted in 1895. The Township
authorities did not contest this. In Febru-
airy 1897, the Supreme Court set aside the
resolution adopting the grade map, holding
that it should have been adopted by
ordinance and not by resolution.
In May 1897, Mr.. Miller commenced an
action for trespass vi ct. Grmi in the Supreme
Court against the Township and Mr..
Rambo, laying his damage at $4,000. This
is the suit which was decided last week.
Mr.. Miller has some twenty witnesses to
prove that he had been damaged by the
change of grade of South Commerce street.
The first legal point raised was, that, out
side of his drain, the only damage he sus-
tanned was the temporary damage sustained
from the beginning of the grading to the
commencement of that suit. This was
upon the legal theory that the action was
on trespass, and that consequently the de-
PENDANTS were trespassers, and that the
act done by them was illegal and was not
possessed of any quality that would i'm
part to it the character of a permanent con.
dition. The plaintiff attempted to prove
that they were trespassers, and then to en-
nance the damages by treating the thing
done as legal, and therefore permanent.
Under this ruling all that Mr.. Miller's
witnesses could say was that his residence
did not look SO well, although some of
them admitted that grading of the street
was necessary, but not so much as had been
done. Mr.. Miller said that Mr. Rambo
had taken out his sewer, and that he had
obtained verbal permission from Charles E.
Paul, the property owner on the opposite
side, to lay it, and that he had been COM
PEELED to lay new sewer at cost of about
$50. With this evidence the plaintiff
closed his case.
The defendants opened their case last
Wednesday afternoon, and said that they
were prepared to prove that Mr.. Miller
owned no part of South Commerce street,
that when that street was opened all of the
land for it, opposite the Miller property was
taken from the Baher, (now Paul's) prop
erty on the Easterly, and so the presump-
ton of law that an abuttiDg property
owner owned to the centre of the street, did
not apply; that it was necessary that South
Commerce street should be amended and
repaired; that the defendant, John Rambo,
was member Of the Township Committee
at that time, and that the work was done
in reasonable and proper manner, and
that the plaintiffs property was not in the
least injured. They had snbp@naed over
twenty-five witnesses to prove these facts.
The first allegation, that Mr.. Miller
owned no part of the road bed of the
South Commerce street, was proven. The
Court then took the case in hand, and held
that the right to lay drain or sewer was
an interest in land, and could not be given
by parol, it must be by deed And SO Mr..
Miller had no right to lay his sewer across
South Commerce street that in order to
maintain an action of trespass and recover
he must prove possession, and possession
had been clearly proven in another. The
Court said that it was useless to go with
the case any further, as he would direct the
Jury in the end to bring in verdict of moi
guilty. The defendant swore two witnesses
t, prove the one fact and then retired
The jury then, under the direction of ths
Court, brought in verdict of not guilty.
i Mr. Miller's attorney took an exception tt
the ruling of the court.
i A. H. swaokhamer, attorney for Miller
and JOS. ]. Summerill and D J. Pancoasi
attorneys for the Township.
Camden Armory Opening.
Il The new Sixth Armory in Camden, N. J..