Ocean Grove Camp-Meeting Ass'n v. Comm'rs of Asbury Park

• Decision Date: 20 November 1885
• Citation: 40 N.J.E. 447,3 A. 168
• Parties: OCEAN GROVE CAMP-MEETING ASS'N v. COMMISSIONERS OF ASBURY PARK.
• Court: New Jersey Court of Chancery

3 A. 168

40 N.J.E. 447

OCEAN GROVE CAMP-MEETING ASS'N

v. COMMISSIONERS OF ASBURY PARK.

Court of Chancery of NEW JERSEY.

November 20, 1885.

Bill for injunction.

R. Ten Broeck Stout, for complainant.

D. Harvey, Jr., and F. Hawkins, for defendants.

BIRD, V. C. More than 15 years ago the complainant purchased a large tract of land fronting upon the ocean, chiefly for the purposes of a summer resort, to exercise the right of worship. The enterprise has so grown that in winter it has a population of about 5,000, and in summer of 10,000 to 15,000. The authorities soon discovered that, to preserve the good health of the residents and visitors, it was absolutely necessary to improve their water supply and sewerage system. To do this they bored for water, and at the depth of about 408 feet struck water, which gave them a flow of 50 gallons per minute at an elevation above the surface of 28 feet. they carried into the city by means of pipes, and supplied therewith about 70 hotels and cottages. They also applied it to the improvement of their sewerage system. The volume of water thus produced continued to flow undiminished in quantity and with unabated force until the action of the defendants complained of, and to restrain which the bill in this cause was filed.

The commissioners of Asbury Park, a corporate body,, purchased a large tract of land immediately north and adjacent to the tract owned by Ocean Grove. Under their management, this, too, has become a famous seaside resort. Its population is equal to, if not greater, at all times than that of Ocean Grove. The authorities saw a like necessity for an increased supply of wholesome water. They entered into a contract with others, a portion of these defendants, to procure for them water by boring in the earth. These, their agents, sank several shafts to the depth of over 400 feet without satisfactory success. One shaft yielded about four gallons to the minute, and another, which yielded the highest, only nine. All of these wells were upon the land and premises of the Asbury Park Association. It became evident, and is manifest to the most casual observer, that these wells would not supply the volume of water needed. It was also manifest that the experiment to procure water by digging upon their own land was quite reasonably extended, although not so complete as to satisfy the mind that they cannot obtain water on their own premises as well as elsewhere, since it is in evidence that there are two wells on their premises, sunk by individuals, which produce 15 gallons each per minute, being as much in quantity as they procure from the well which is complained of. . Failing in their efforts upon their own premises, they went elsewhere, on the land owned by individuals, and, procuring a right from individual owners, sunk a shaft upon the public highway near to the land of the complainants, and within 500 feet of the complainant's well. This bore extended to the depth of 416 feet, within eight feet of the depth of complainant's well. At this depth they secured a flow of water at the rate of 30 gallons per minute, and the supply from the complainant's well was almost immediately decreased from 50 gallons to 30 per minute. The diminution in water was immediately felt by many of those who depended for a supply from this source in Ocean Grove. The Asbury Park authorities propose to sink other wells still nearer the well of complainant. This bill asks that they may be prohibited from so doing, and that they may be commanded to close the well already opened, which it is alleged is supplied from the same source that the complainant's well is supplied from.

The complainant is first in point of time. It...