Sparks Manufacturing Co. v. Town of Newton
New Jersey Court of Chancery
The two causes heard together, by consent. The complainants are each the owner of a tract of land situate on the Wall kill river, at Hamburg, in the county of Sussex, with mills thereon operated by the developed power of the fall of that stream; and by their respective bills, filed December 28th, 1895, they complain that the town of Newton, through its commissioners for that purpose (who are defendants), by works erected during that year, diverted a portion of the waters of…
Read the full summary
The two causes heard together, by consent. The complainants are each the owner of a tract of land situate on the Wall kill river, at Hamburg, in the county of Sussex, with mills thereon operated by the developed power of the fall of that stream; and by their respective bills, filed December 28th, 1895, they complain that the town of Newton, through its commissioners for that purpose (who are defendants), by works erected during that year, diverted a portion of the waters of that river and proposed to divert more thereof .for the purpose of supplying the town of Newton not only with water for…
1Opinion of the Court
Pitney, V. C.
The defendant, by its answers, sets up and claims the right to divert all the water which its works as actually constructed are capable of diverting. That amount was, during the hearing, at first agreed upon as one million two hundred and fifty thousand gallons in twenty-four hours. But that estimate was based upon the flow due to a head produced by an open pipe at the level of the court-house in Newton; and when it was pointed out that such use of the pipe would leave a large portion— nearly, if not quite, one-half of the town which is situate on ground higher than the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Curtiss v. . AyraultNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- East Jersey Water Co. v. BigelowSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1897
- Ætna Mills v. Inhabitants of WalthamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Butler Hard Rubber Co. v. Mayor of NewarkSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1897
- In re TracyNew York Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by4 opinions
- City of Battle Creek v. Goguac Resort Ass'nMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Benton Holden v. Central R.R. Co. of N.J.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1937
- Israelson v. SaulDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 2019
- Ventura Land & Power Co. v. MeinersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902