Indiana Natural Gas And Oil Co. v. Jones

• Decision Date: 11 December 1895
• Docket Number: 1,711
• Citation: 42 N.E. 487,14 Ind.App. 55
• Parties: INDIANA NATURAL GAS AND OIL CO. v. JONES ET AL
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

42 N.E. 487

14 Ind.App. 55

INDIANA NATURAL GAS AND OIL CO. v. JONES ET AL

No. 1,711

Court of Appeals of Indiana

December 11, 1895

From the Howard Circuit Court.

Judgment reversed.

Winfield & Taber, for appellant.

Branyan & Branyan, Morrison & Holman and Blacklidge, Shirley & Moon, for appellees.

OPINION

REINHARD, J.

Appellant instituted separate condemnation proceedings against the appellees for the purpose of laying pipes to convey natural gas through their lands. Appraisers were duly appointed by the Grant Circuit Court, who made an award in each case to which appellees filed exceptions. By change of venue the causes were transferred to the Howard Circuit Court, and there the appellees filed amended exceptions. The causes having been consolidated by agreement, there was a trial by jury, and a verdict in favor of each of the appellees assessing the damages largely in excess of the amount awarded by the appraisers.

Many errors are relied upon, but in view of the conclusion we have reached, the solution of most of these will become unnecessary.

On the trial of the cause the court, at the request of the appellees, charged the jury as follows:

"In cases of this kind it is presumed that the company will put in and maintain a pipe line, in a reasonably prudent and careful manner, but natural gas is a highly inflammable substance, and liable to explode; so in this case, in considering the damages to be assessed, you may take into consideration the probability of injuries from fire or explosions, which may result from the ordinary, prudent and careful operation of the pipe line."

In another instruction the court charged the jury as follows:

"All damages to which defendants are legally entitled must be recovered in proceedings of this character in one action, for successive actions cannot be maintained. In considering the question as to the amount the defendants should recover you should include not only damages for the injuries to the land resulting from putting in a pipe line but also all damages which will probably result from the careful and reasonably prudent maintenance of the same in the future."

It is true that courts take judicial knowledge of the fact that natural gas is a highly inflammable and explosive substance. Jamieson v. Ind. Nat. Gas and Oil Co., 128 Ind. 555 (12 L. R. A. 652, 28 N.E. 76); Mississinewa Mining Co. v. Patton, 129 Ind. 472, 28 N.E 1113. Hence, the first part of the first instruction as above set forth is correct, at least as an abstract proposition of law. But that there is any "probability of injuries from fire or explosions, which may result from the ordinary, prudent and careful operation of the pipe lines," we are not prepared to affirm. On the other hand, it must be presumed, we think, until the contrary is made to appear by proper evidence, that natural gas may be safely confined and transported in receptacles and pipes for an indefinite distance. We grant that courts must take cognizance of things that must happen according to the laws of nature, and that, therefore, they will take notice of the fact that when natural gas comes in contact with air and fire it will ignite, and that explosions may follow. Gas pipes may also explode from the mere pressure exerted by the gas. But that it is impossible or even improbable that iron pipes can be manufactured which will not explode or leak when natural gas is conducted through them is quite another proposition, and one of which courts will not take notice in the absence of proof. It seems to us that in the first instruction, as above set out, the court assumed that with the best of care there would be a probability of accidents arising from the causes named. This was invading the province of the jury. The court should have left it to the jury to decide from the evidence whether or not there was such a probability.

The Legislature has imposed upon gas companies the duty of conducting gas only through sound wrought or cast iron pipe and casings, tested to a pressure of at least four hundred pounds to the square inch, and forbids the transportation thereof through such pipes and casings at a pressure exceeding three hundred pounds per square inch, nor otherwise than by the natural pressure of the gas flowing from the wells. The law likewise requires that natural gas shall be safely and securely confined in well-pipes and other safe and proper receptacles, and shall not be allowed to escape. R. S 1894, section 7507, et seq. By the very act under which the appropriation proceedings are carried on, it devolves upon such companies as the appellant to bury their pipes in the ground so as not to interfere with the cultivation of the soil, or the existing drainage, and to replace the soil in the manner in which it was taken from the ground. R. S. 1894, section...