Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Railroad Commission

The appellant Henry is and was the owner, for five years past, of certain upland which, prior to 1885, was drained of surface waters through a natural channel across the point in the railroad embankment where the Railroad Commission directed the opening by the order held void by the trial court. The evidence is sufficient to sustain the finding- of the commission that a portion of the waters discharged from the appellant’s upland passed through a natural channel at such point prior to ■ 1885. ' The railroad company, in 1885, built its road over such channel and filled the same by the creation…