|
ton streets, might have been carried off, and would have gone off through
different streets, and been thus discharged into the river at different points,
and produce no injury; the water now thus collected, did formerly pass
off through four different streets, running from different directions, and
then produced no injury; witness heard no complaints then about the injury
to the navigation by reason of these waters. The witness stated that he
had known the grounds and streams since 1784; that the western cove men-
tioned covers from thirty to forty acres of land, and, if the waters from the
points aforesaid had been suffered to pass down its natural channel and dis-
charge itself there, it would never have done any injury to the navigationj ^\
that the navigation to the upper harbor was injured, not by the water,
or deposite by it carried down, but by Jones's Falls from the hill to the
east of Washington street; the defendants have diverted the water from
its natural course, and directed it also into Washington street, where it is
directed to Q Q: by the gullies or ravines, it would naturally have dis-
charged itself to the eastward of County street, or through County street;
there might have been some some slight deposite from Alisanna street near the
plaintiff's wharf, but nothing to do injury, nothing comparable to the pre-
sent deposite. Witness, for a long time, was superintendent of the streets
in the part of the town; an estimate was made of the expense of conducting
the waters referred to off to Harris's creek, and, to the best of his recol-
lection, the estimate made the costs about $6,000; it was made by William
Dailey. . -
The plaintiff further offered evidence by Jehu Boulden, that, in his opi- ^
it would have been practicable to have diverted more than two-thirds of
mon,
all those waters into Harris's creek, and that he was appointed by the city
to ascertain the practicability of so doing by an actual survey, and to
make an estimate of the expense; that the expense was estimated at $10,000.
No tunnel or canal to Harris's creek was ever made, but the city proceeded
to dig ditches and to erect dams as delineated on the plats; which ditches
and dams diverted the waters from their natural channel down Ann street
to Washington street, and other streets to Q Q on said plat. Witness always
understood that the wharves at the end of Market street and Ann street,
designated on said plats by the letters U and F, are city property; and by
the descent of Alisanna street, at the intersection of said street and Ann
street, the waters flowed east down Aliceanna street, instead of south, at the |
letter U. - ':?'?
The plaintiff further offered in evidence, by Col. Thomas Shepparcl, that
he was appointed, in 1813, one of a committee to ascertain the practicability Jf
of remedying the injury proceeding from the waters flowing down Ana •*
street and Washington street; that the committee were of opinion that those
waters might be mostly diverted into their natural channel, but the recom-
mendation was not regarded by the city, and that this was a matter of grea*
astonishment to him and others that this was not done by the city: that the
city then ordered, by the ordinance and resolutions aforesaid, the ditches
and mounds at N and M, designated on the plat in the cause, and that
these dams and ditches produced all the mischief. The committee, of which
witness was one, wished to follow the natural course to the western cove»
which the city are now filling up at a great expense, ' ^
The plaintiff further offered in evidence, by William Barker, that he had .
lived near the property in controversy for 32 years; that there was formerly
ao wash whatever, the hills being in grass; the water of the eastern coir*
was very deep, by far the best in the city; that, in 1808, Captain Vickers
brought the ship Hamilton to the wharf now owned by William Dawson,
near to Q Q> at twelve feet water, at the wharf which is now fast land. In
1802, the water at Curtis's wharf, next to Craig and Barron's wharf, was
from 19 to 20 feet; that witness measured the depth at Dawson's, and found
it 15 feet, which is now dry land; that vessels of 450 tons used to load at
Craig's wharf. The deposite of mud, clay, and gravel, is at this time enormous;
vessels of much burthen could not now go there, or find water.
The plaintiff then offered in evidence by James Beacham, that, in 1816,
the water at the plaintiff's wharf was at least 17 feet, and much the same at
Flannagan's; the depth of Flannagan's at this time is reduced to about two
feet at high tide; the water at plaintiff's wharf was about 14 feet in 1826;
the water at plaintiff's wharf, close to it, is somewhat deeper than at some
distance ou;, where there is a bar of sand and gravel, wholly impassable by
vessels of such burthen as might lay close to the wharf; that, in the month
of June, 18:26, witness, having occasion to launch the frigate Baltimore at
the wharf of the plaintiff, was compelled to have a narrow channel of about
25 feet long by 10 feet deep dug, making the depth also 25 feet for the re-
ception of the vessel, which cost witness between 200 and $?00, and which
sum was paid by him to the city of Baltimore for the use of their mud ma-
chine; that this channel, in the two years since it was dug, has filled up at
the rate of 5 feet in two years, but that a channel of this sort would fill up
sooner than a level bottom; that, before the injury to the water in the east-
ern cove occurred, William Flannagan's wharf and lot sold for $8,000; that
witness gave for said lot, in 1827, only $900; that, if the said water lot had
remained with good water, witness would have given, in 1827, $4,UOO for
it; that this lot is 80 feet front by about 200 feet deep, and that the plaintiff's
lot is 220 feet on the water by 436 feet deep to WAolf street; thai the plaintiff
expended $6,000 in making the two piers delineated on theplat, but thatsaid
piers delineated on the plat but that said piers are now of much less value;
that Craig and Barron paid for this lot $25,000 in the year 1815, that it
Was a very great bargain; that the plaintiff's lot was worth rather more than.
$ than the witness's lot ever was, in proportion, because the plaintiff's was
always a deeper water; that the property is now worth, he thinks, from ten
to twelve thousand dollars, but that if the water had remained to this day
in the state it was when plaintiff purchased it, the property would now sell
for §26,000, and is injuring every day, at the rate of several feet of deposite
every year.
And the plaintiff further offered in evidence by James Beacham, that after
the water in the eastern cove, contiguous to the plaintiff's wharf, had been
80 diminished in depth, by reason of gravel and sand, that vessels no longer
sought wharfage there, the said plaintiff hired a wharf of R. Oliver, and
converted his own lot to a repairing wharf in 1S24, '5, and for this purpose
.the plaintiff expended a laVge sum of money, witness thinks about the sum
u '^®0, by which means the said property has continued to be rented in
the manner already staled by him.
And the plaintiff further offered in evidence by Hezekiah Waters, that
the plaintiff's water lot was always considered the best and most valuable
navigable water lot in the city, until these dams and ditches diverted the
waters from the natural channel to the western cove, he thinks the depth of
the water was something more than twenty feet; this ruinous work was
done against our remonstrances: Mr. Johnson, the mayor, never heeded;
88—3
|
