The Pascagoula democrat-star. (Pascagoula, Miss.) 1878-1920, 1900-06-08
IMPORTANT DECISION
HANDED Down By THE SUPREME
COURT OF MIssIssIPP1.
IT Is OF EsPECIAL CONSEQUENCE TO
THE LUMBER INTERESTS OF
THE STATE.

The Supreme court rendered decis.
ion OF more than passing concern to
the public generally, and OF immense
consequence to the lumber interests
Of the State on Mondy In the case Of
the Pascagoula Boom Company and
Others against Dixon & Co., appealed
from Greene county chancery court.
Dixon s. Co, had erected = boom in
the Pascagoula river near the bounda.
ry line between Greene and Jackson
counties, and 1t was so constructed
that it would, when closed. obstruct
the passage OF logs down the river
and divert them from the main chan.
mel Of the stream, and, when set for
the purpose, cause them to pass into
40 old or dead river upon which the
mills Of Dixon 4 Co. were located.
The Pascagouls Boom Co. and 9TH
ers Interested 10 the floating Of logs
down To the sea coast, died their bill
to have Dixon h Co.'s boom declared
a public nuisance and to have IL
abated. To this complaint Dixon b
20. answered, denying that their boom
was an obstruction to navigation, even
for logs. They asserted the right,
averring ownership Of the lands on
both sides Of the river, to maintain
and operate the boon for stopping
their own logs, and clol~H the right
not only to float those \ belonging
to them, but also to stop Ill logs, no
matter to whom they belonged, for y
reasonable time, u A1lef TO separate
their own from The scumuon mass Of
logs.
The evidence in the case tended to
show Dixon 4 Co.'s contention OF
facts to be correct, but it was proved
that they had caused q few Of the
logs belonging to several Of the com.
plainants TO be f0ated into the old
river and caused them to be consumed
in their mill. The chsncery court Of
Greene county denied the complain.
ants the right to have the boom aba.
ted as a nuisance, but enjoined Dixon
4 Co. from saving up the logs Of the
complainants, whose properly was
proved to have been consumed BY
them. The other complainants were
by the chancery court denied all relief.
From this decree the complainsnts
appealed, and the Supreme Court sf.
tirmed the decree OF the court below
only IN SO far as it was favorable to
the cOmplainants, reversing II In 50
far as II was adverse to their conten.
tion Of the law, and rendered 6nal
Judgment decreeing Dixon h Co.'S
boom TO be a public nuisance, and or.
dered the case remanded to the chance.
ry court Of Greene county, with In.
structions to issue process in the ma.
ture Of q mandatory injunction d..
recting and requiring Dixon b Co. to
remove the boom with appurtenances
from the river, and requiring the
chancery court to see that the same IL
done. The entire cost OF both courts
was adjudged against Dixon & Co.
The opinion Of the Supreme Court,
an able one, was delivered BY Judge
Terral, and It proceeds upon the idea
that under our State constitution aud
laws no person, even II he own the
land on both sides, has right to place
any sort of obstruction In navigable
stream, unless he do so by legislative
authority.
The case not only removes Dixon 4
Co.'S boom, but Is direct authority FOL
the removal, at the suit OF private
parties who are especially interested
OF all Obstructions TO the navigation
for logs Of our rivers and usvisable
streams.
Messrs. ]. l. Ford and c. H. Wood,
OF Scranton, were the stt0rneys for
the complainants 10 the court 6slOw,
and Messrs. Melville h Thonpeos. Of
yackson, we're their attorneys 10 the
Supreme Court. NJ. Gregory L. Smith,
LOT Mobile, was the attorneys for Dixon
q Co.
The ROCKVILLE (Tenn.) Chamber Of