Johnson v. Rand
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Case, for diverting the water from the mills of the plaintiff. The cause was tried here, at May term, 1831, upon the general issue ; when it appeared, in evidence, that James J. Swan, being seized of a mill privilege, in Lisbon, in this county, with a saw mill, to which the water was conducted by a canal, and a grist mill with two runs of stones, the water to turn which, was taken from the said canal ; on the 16th March, 1812, conveyed his said privilege to a person, whose…
Read the full summary
Case, for diverting the water from the mills of the plaintiff. The cause was tried here, at May term, 1831, upon the general issue ; when it appeared, in evidence, that James J. Swan, being seized of a mill privilege, in Lisbon, in this county, with a saw mill, to which the water was conducted by a canal, and a grist mill with two runs of stones, the water to turn which, was taken from the said canal ; on the 16th March, 1812, conveyed his said privilege to a person, whose title the plaintiffs have since acquired, reserving to himself “ the exclusive right to the corn mill with two sets of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court.
The only question which this case presents, is, whether the defendant had a right to change the mode, in which he used the water, for the purposes of his mill, provided he took no more water than was necessary to work the mill, before he made the changes r This question has long been settled, and we think that the direction, to the jury, was as favorable to the plaintiffs, as the law will warrant. 1 B. & A. 258, Saunders v. Newman; 2 N. H. Rep. 255, Bullen v. Runnels; 4 Coke, 86, Luttrel's case; 5 Taunton, 454, Alder v. Lavil.
Judgment on the verdict.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bullen v. RunnelsSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1820