CHICAGO RIVER, ILLINOIS

This suit was brought by the State of Missouri against the State of Illinois and the Sanitary District of Chicago. The latter is alleged to be

“a public corporation organized under the laws of the Illinois and located in part in the City of Chicago, and in the County of Cook, in the State of Illinois, and a citizen of the Illinois.”

The remedy sought for is an injunction restraining the defendants from receiving or permitting any sewage to be received or discharged into the artificial channel or drain constructed by the Sanitary District under authority derived from the State of Illinois in order to carry off and eventually discharge into the Mississippi the sewage of Chicago, which had been previously discharged into Lake Michigan, and from permitting the same to flow through said channel or drain into the Des Plaines River, and thence by the River Illinois into the Mississippi. The bill alleged that the nature of the injury complained of was such that an adequate remedy could only be found in this Court at the suit of the State of Missouri. The object of the bill was to subject this public work to judicial supervision upon the allegation that the method of its construction and maintenance will create a continuing nuisance, dangerous to the health of a neighboring state and its inhabitants, and the bill charged that the acts of the defendants, if not restrained, would result in the transportation, by artificial means, and through an unnatural channel, of large quantities of undefecated sewage daily, and of accumulated deposits in the harbor of Chicago and in the bed of the Illinois River, which will poison the water supply of the inhabitants of Missouri and injuriously affect that portion of the bed or soil of the Mississippi River which lies within its territory. The bill did not assail the drainage canal as an unlawful structure, nor aim to prevent its use as a waterway, but it sought relief against the pouring of sewage and filth through it by artificial arrangements into the Mississippi River, to the detriment of the Missouri and its inhabitants. The defendants demurred to the bill for want of jurisdiction and for reasons set forth in the demurrer. This Court held that the demurrer could not be sustained, and required the defendants to appear and answer.

In January, 1900, the State of Missouri filed in this Court a bill of complaint against the State of Illinois and the Sanitary

Page 180 U. S. 209

District of Chicago, a corporation of the latter state, in the following terms:

“The complainant, the State of Missouri and one of the states of the United States, brings this its bill of complaint against the State of Illinois, one of the states of the United States, and the Sanitary District of Chicago, a public corporation organized under the laws of the State of Illinois and located in part in the City of Chicago and in the County of Cook in said State of Illinois, and a citizen of the State of Illinois.”

“And your orator complains and says that it is a state containing a population of upwards of three millions of people, and lying on the west bank of the Mississippi River, a public, navigable, and running stream, and having a frontage on said stream of over 400 miles.”

“And your orator shows that, by the act of Congress providing for the organization and admission of Illinois and Missouri as states of the Union, it was declared that the western boundary of Illinois and the eastern boundary of Missouri should be the middle of the main channel of the Mississippi River; that the shores of the Mississippi River, where its waters form the Missouri and Illinois boundary, and the soil under the waters thereof, were not granted by the Constitution of the United States, but were reserved to the States of Illinois and Missouri, respectively.”

“And your orator shows that the States of Missouri and Illinois each have concurrent general jurisdiction over the waters of the Mississippi River forming the boundary between them, and each of said states has exclusive territorial jurisdiction over that portion adjacent to its own shore, and your orator shows that the Illinois River empties into the Mississippi River at a point above the City of St. Louis on the Illinois side of said Mississippi River.”

“And your orator further shows that, within the Territory of your orator and on the banks and shores of said Mississippi River and below the mouth of the Illinois River are many cities and towns in the State of Missouri, and many thousands of persons who are compelled to and do rely upon the waters of said river in their regular, natural, and accustomed flow for their daily

Page 180 U. S. 210

necessary supply of water for drinking and all other domestic and agricultural and manufacturing purposes, and for watering stock and animals of all kinds, and that said Mississippi River has been flowing in its regular course and has been used for the purposes aforesaid by the inhabitants of the said State of Missouri for a time whereof the memory of a man runneth not to the contrary, and that said river and its waters and the use thereof for drinking, agricultural, and manufacturing purposes in their accustomed and natural flow are indispensable to the life and health and business of many thousands of the inhabitants of the State of Missouri, and of great value to your orator as a state.”

“And your orator shows that cities and towns below the mouth of said Illinois River, within the Territory of your orator, do and are compelled, by means of waterworks, water towers, and intakes built and constructed for that purpose to supply the inhabitants of said cities and towns with an adequate supply of pure and wholesome water fit and healthful for drinking and all other domestic purposes and uses from the said Mississippi River so flowing in its ancient, accustomed, and natural course.”

“And your orator shows that said waterworks systems are constructed with reference to said Mississippi River and for the purpose of taking water therefrom, and not from any other source.”

“And your orator shows that heretofore, to-wit, in 1889, the State of Illinois enacted a law known as the Sanitary District Act, together with an act for the improvement of the Illinois and Des Plaines rivers, and that, under said act of said state, the said corporation known as the said Sanitary District of Chicago was organized and is now existing and operating, and that, by the express terms of said act, any canal or drain corporation organized in accordance with its provisions may have conditions, restrictions, or additional requirements placed in said corporation, or the act authorizing the creation of said corporation may be amended or repealed, and that, by the express provisions of said act, before any water or sewage shall be admitted into any channel constructed under said act, the trustees of said channel shall notify the Governor of Illinois

Page 180 U. S. 211

of the completion of said channel, and the Governor of Illinois shall appoint three commissioners to examine said canal or channel, and report to the Governor if the same complies with the act of the State of Illinois, and if it does, the Governor shall authorize the water and sewage to be turned into said channel, and that, without the said permit, it cannot be so turned in, and that, by the general provisions of said act, said channel is at all times subject to the control and supervision of the State of Illinois and her authorities.”

“And your orator further shows that the Chicago River is situated in the basin of Lake Michigan, and has two forks or branches flowing through the City of Chicago and into Lake Michigan, and that the natural drainage of Chicago, Illinois, is into Lake Michigan, and the sewage and drainage of the territory embraced in the defendant’s district, the Sanitary District of Chicago, is led into or flows into the Chicago River and Lake Michigan.”

“And your orator further shows that the defendant herein, the Sanitary District of Chicago, with the authority of the State of Illinois, and acting as a governmental agency of said state and under the supervision and control and subject to the approval of the State of Illinois, has constructed a channel or open drain from the west fork of the south branch of the Chicago River, in the City of Chicago and County of Cook, in the State of Illinois, to a point near Lockport, in the County of Will in said state, where said channel or drain connects with and empties into the Des Plaines River, which empties into the Illinois River, and which latter river flows and empties into the Mississippi River at a point distant about forty-three miles above the City of St. Louis, Missouri.”

“And your orator further states that the channel built by the Sanitary District of Chicago was so built by said sanitary district as one of the governmental agencies of the State of Illinois, and by the pretended lawful authority of said state, and under the direction, supervision, and control and governmental power of the State of Illinois, and which said state has heretofore at all times sanctioned, and now, through its Governor and other officers, sanctions, the building of said channel and opening thereof. ”

Page 180 U. S. 212

“And your orator further shows that in the construction of said channel or drain the defendant, the Sanitary District of Chicago, Illinois, with the sanction and approval of the State of Illinois, cut through the natural bridge or watershed which divides the basin of Lake Michigan from the basins of the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers and the basin of the Mississippi River, and that, having so constructed said channel, and having about completed the same, and having, under the supervision of and with the sanction of the State of Illinois, extended said artificial channel through said natural divide of the watershed, the defendants now propose and threaten to receive into said channel or drain the sewage matter and filth of the Sanitary District of Chicago, which embraces nearly the whole City of Chicago and a portion of the County of Cook, and, without any legal authority so to do, has already in part effectuated its said threat and purpose, and threatens to permit and to cause said sewage and filth, by artificial means of pumping and otherwise, to flow through the channel or drain towards and into the said Des Plaines River and eventually into the Mississippi River, thereby, with the approval of and subject to the inspection and control and supervision of the State of Illinois, and by the pretended authority thereof, reversing the natural flow of said Chicago River.”

“And your orator further shows that the sewage matter and poisonous filth which it is thus threatened to receive and to permit and to cause to flow through said artificial channel into said Des Plaines River is that which is created by a population of upwards of one and one-half millions of people, besides that which is created by a great number of stockyards, slaughtering establishments, rendering establishments, distilleries, and other business enterprises and industries lining both sides of the Chicago River, producing filth and noxious matters; all of which are there discharged into the said Chicago River or drained therein from the surface.”

“And your orator further shows that, for many years past, the said City of Chicago, the greater portion of which is embraced in the limits of the defendant corporation, the Sanitary District of Chicago, as aforesaid, has been discharging its sewage matter

Page 180 U. S. 213

and filth into the Chicago River and into Lake Michigan in such large quantities that much of it has accumulated in the bed and along the sides of the river and upon the bed of said Lake Michigan, near the shores thereof, and that the plan threatened and attempted now to be adopted by the defendant, the Sanitary District of Chicago, acting in conjunction with and subject to the control of the defendant, the State of Illinois, and by the pretended authority of the said State of Illinois, will loosen said accumulated matter and filth, and will also direct it and cause it to flow towards and into said artificial channel or drain, and thence into said Des Plaines River, and finally into the Mississippi River and into the waters thereof within the jurisdiction and under the control of your orator and past the homes of the inhabitants of your orator and the towns and cities within the borders of your orator, and past the waterworks of said cities and towns within the State of Missouri.”

“And your orator further shows that the amount of said undefecated filth and sewage and poisonous and unhealthful and noxious matters proposed to be, and now about to be, permitted to be turned into said artificial channel and through said Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers into the Mississippi River from the said Sanitary District of Chicago by the defendants, acting jointly, will amount daily to about 1,500 tons, and that, if defendants should be permitted to carry their said threats into execution, and should cause said above amount of undefecated sewage and other poisonous and noxious matters, which would otherwise flow into Lake Michigan, to flow into the Mississippi River, that the waters of the Mississippi River within the jurisdiction of your orator will of a certainty be poisoned and polluted and rendered wholly unfit and unhealthful for drinking and domestic uses, and will render wholly valueless and entirely worthless the various waterworks system of towns and cities on the borders of the State of Missouri established and acquired at great cost and expense, and will deprive your orator, the State of Missouri, and its inhabitants, of the right to use of the waters of said river for drinking and all other domestic and manufacturing and agricultural purposes, as said water has been so used in its accustomed and natural flow heretofore

Page 180 U. S. 214

for the length of time that the memory of man runneth not to the contrary thereof.”

“And that said threatened action of the defendants will amount to a direct and continuing nuisance, and be an interference with the use by your orator and its inhabitants of the waters of the Mississippi River flowing in their natural state, polluting and poisoning the same by the means aforesaid, whereby the health and lives of the inhabitants of your orator will be endangered and the business interests of said state will be greatly and irreparably injured, and which said damage to the lives and health and the business interests of said state resulting from said poisoning and polluting of said waters as aforesaid to your orator cannot be estimated in money value.”

“And your orator, on information and belief, states and charges the fact to be that said 1,500 tons of poisonous undefecated filth and sewage of said Sanitary District of Chicago will be daily carried through said artificial channel and sent through the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers into the Mississippi, and great quantities thereof will be deposited in the bed and soil of said river belonging to your orator and wholly within the jurisdiction thereof, to your orator’s great and irreparable damage, and that the 1,500 tons of undefecated sewage and filth now about to be daily injected into the waters of the Mississippi River and into the portion thereof over which the State of Missouri has jurisdiction, and from which thousands of her inhabitants obtain drinking water, will pollute and poison the said water of the Mississippi River to such an extent as to render it unwholesome and unfit and unhealthful for use for drinking by the said inhabitants in the Territory of your orator, and unfit for use for watering stock and for manufacturing purposes.”

“And your orator further shows that great quantities of undefecated sewage turned into the Mississippi River in the manner and by the means aforesaid will poison and pollute said water with the germs of disease of various and many kinds. And your orator further shows that the acts herein complained of on the part of the State of Illinois, acting in conjunction with one of her governmental agencies, the said Sanitary District of

Page 180 U. S. 215

Chicago, will cause a continuing nuisance in the Mississippi River, and that the said State of Illinois has no power or authority to cause, or permit or assist in causing, the commission and continuance of a nuisance in the flowing waters of the Mississippi River, a navigable stream, to the detriment and irreparable and continuing damage and injury of the State of Missouri and the continuing and irreparable injury to the lives and health of the citizens and inhabitants of the State of Missouri, and that, unless restrained by the order and decree of this Court the defendants, the State of Illinois and the Sanitary District of Chicago, acting together, will, in accordance with the terms of the act under which said sanitary district is organized, upon the permit and authority of the Governor of Illinois and of the State of Illinois, turn said water and sewage aforesaid, by the manner and means aforesaid, into the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers and thence into the Mississippi; all of which your orator says and avers is contrary to equity and good conscience, and would result in the manifest and irreparable injury of your orator and the health of her citizens in the premises, and your orator is wholly without remedy at law and without any adequate remedy to prevent the flowing of said sewage, as aforesaid, save by the interposition of this Court.”

“Forasmuch as your orator can have no adequate relief except in this Court, and to the end therefore that the defendants may, if they can, show why your orator should not have the relief prayed, and to the end that the defendants may make a full, true, direct, and perfect answer to the matters hereinbefore stated and charged, but not under oath, an answer under oath being hereby expressly waived, and to the end that the defendants, their officers, agents, servants, and employees may be restrained by injunction issuing out of this Court from receiving or permitting any sewage to be received or discharged into said artificial channel or drain, and from permitting the same to flow or causing the same to be made to flow through said channel or drain towards and into the Des Plaines River, your orator prays that your honors may grant a writ of injunction, under the seal of this honorable Court, properly restraining and enjoining the defendants, the officers, agents, employees, and

Page 180 U. S. 216

servants of the Sanitary District of Chicago and the State of Illinois from permitting or causing any of said sewage to be discharged into said channel or drain and from permitting or causing said sewage and poisonous filth thence to flow into said Des Plaines River; that defendant, the State of Illinois, be enjoined and restrained from issuing to its codefendant permission and authority to do and perform the acts aforesaid or to allow them to be done, and your orator also prays for a provisional or temporary injunction pending this cause, restraining and enjoining the several acts aforesaid, and for such other and further relief as the equity of the case may require and to your honors may seem meet.”

“May it please your honors to grant unto your orator not only a writ of injunction conformable to the prayer of this bill, but also a writ of subpoena of the United States of America, directed to the State of Illinois, the Governor and attorney general thereof, and to said Sanitary District of Chicago, its officers, trustees, and agents, commanding them on a day certain to appear and answer unto this bill or complaint and to abide such order and decree of the Court in the premises as to the Court shall seem proper and required by the principles of equity and good conscience.”

In March, 1900, came the defendants and filed a demurrer to the bill of complaint in the following terms:

“Now come the State of Illinois by its attorney general, Edwin C. Akin, and the Sanitary District of Chicago by its attorneys, and demur to the bill of complaint filed herein, and say that the said bill of complaint and the matters therein contained, in manner and form as the same are above stated and set forth, are not sufficient in law for the said State of Missouri to have and maintain its aforesaid action against the said State of Illinois and the Sanitary District of Chicago, and that said defendants are not bound by the law of the land to answer the same, and the said defendants, according to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, state and show to the court here the following causes of demurrer to the said bill of complaint:”

First. That this Court has no jurisdiction of either the

Page 180 U. S. 217

parties to or of the subject matter of this suit, because it appears upon the face of said bill of complaint that the matters complained of, as set forth therein, do not constitute, within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States, any controversy between the State of Missouri and the State of Illinois, or any of its citizens.”

Second. That the matters alleged and set forth in said bill of complaint show that the only issues presented therein arise, if at all, between the State of Illinois and a public corporation created under the laws of said state, and certain cities and towns in their corporate capacity as such, in the State of Missouri, and certain persons in said State of Missouri, residing on or near the banks of the Mississippi River, and which matters so stated in said bill of complaint, if true, do not concern the State of Missouri as a corporate body or state.”

Third. That said bill of complaint shows upon its face that this suit is in fact for and on behalf of certain cities and towns in said State of Missouri situate on the banks of the Mississippi River and certain persons who reside in said state on or near the banks of said river, and that, although the said suit is attempted to be prosecuted for and in the name of the State of Missouri, said state is, in effect loaning its name to said cities and towns and to said individuals, and is only a nominal party to said suit, and that the real parties in interest are the said cities and towns in their corporate capacity as such, and said private persons or citizens of said state.”

Fourth. That it appears upon the face of said bill of complaint that the said State of Missouri, in her right of sovereignty, is seeking to maintain this suit for the redress of the supposed wrongs of certain cities and towns in said state in their corporate capacity as such, and of certain private citizens of said state, while, under the Constitution of the United States and the laws enacted thereunder, the said state possesses no such sovereignty as empowers it to bring an original suit in this Court for such purpose.”

Fifth. That it appears upon the face of said bill of complaint that no property rights of the State of Missouri are in any manner affected by the matters alleged in said bill of complaint,

Page 180 U. S. 218

nor is there any such property right involved in this suit as would give this Court original jurisdiction of this cause.”

Sixth. That in order to authorize this Court to maintain original jurisdiction of this suit as against the State of Illinois or against any citizens of said state, it must appear that the controversy set forth in the bill of complaint and to be determined by this Court is a controversy arising directly between the State of Missouri and the State of Illinois, or some of its citizens, and not a controversy in vindication of the alleged grievances of certain cities and towns in said state or of particular individuals residing therein.”

Seventh. The said bill of complaint is in other respects uncertain, informal, and insufficient, and that it does not state facts sufficient to entitle the said State of Missouri to the equitable relief prayed for in said bill of complaint.”

“Wherefore, for want of a sufficient bill of complaint in this behalf, the said defendants pray judgment, and that the said State of Missouri may be barred from having or maintaining the aforesaid action against said defendants, and that this Court will not take further cognizance of this cause, and that the said defendants be hence dismissed with their costs.”

On November 12, 1900, the case came on to be heard on bill and demurrer, and was argued by counsel.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.

This suit was brought by the State of Missouri against the State of Illinois and also the hygienical District of Chicago. The latter is speculated to be

“a public corporation organized beneath the laws of the Illinois and set partially within the town of Chicago, and within the County of Cook, within the State of Illinois, and a national of the Illinois.”

The remedy hunted for is associate degree injunction restraining the defendants from receiving or allowing any waste matter to be received or discharged into the synthetic channel or drain created by the hygienical District beneath authority derived from the State of Illinois so as to hold off and eventually discharge into the Mississippi the waste matter of Chicago, that had been antecedently discharged into Lake Michigan, and from allowing identical to flow through aforesaid channel or drain into the Des Plaines stream, and thence by the stream Illinois into the Mississippi. The bill alleged that the character of the injury complained of was specified associate degree adequate remedy might solely be found during this Court at the suit of the State of Missouri. the item of the bill was to subject this public work to judicial supervising upon the allegation that the strategy of its construction and maintenance can produce a seamless nuisance, dangerous to the health of a neighboring state and its inhabitants, and also the bill charged that the acts of the defendants, if not restrained, would end in the transportation, by artificial means that, and thru associate degree unnatural channel, of huge quantities of undefecated waste matter daily, and of accumulated deposits within the harbor of Chicago and within the bed of the Illinois River, which is able to poison the water of the inhabitants of Missouri and injuriously have an effect on that portion of the bed or soil of the Mississippi that lies among its territory. The bill didn’t assail the drain canal as associate degree unlawful structure, nor aim to stop its use as a waterway, however it wanted relief against the gushing of waste matter and filth through it by artificial arrangements into the Mississippi, to the damage of the Missouri and its inhabitants. The defendants demurred to the bill for wish of jurisdiction and for reasons set forth within the demurrer. This Court control that the demurrer couldn’t be sustained, and needed the defendants to look and answer.

In January, 1900, the State of Missouri filed during this Court a bill of grievance against the State of Illinois and also the hygienic

Page 180 U. S. 209

District of Chicago, a company of the latter state, within the following terms:

“The litigant, the State of Missouri and one in every of the states of the u. s., brings this its bill of grievance against the State of Illinois, one in every of the states of the u. s., and also the hygienic District of Chicago, a public corporation organized below the laws of the State of Illinois and situated partially within the town of Chicago and within the County of Cook in aforementioned State of Illinois, and a national of the State of Illinois.”

“And your speechifier complains and says that it’s a state containing a population of upwards of 3 lots of individuals, and lying on the geographical region of the river, a public, navigable, and running stream, and having a frontage on aforementioned stream of over four hundred miles.”

“And your speechifier shows that, by the act of Congress providing for the organization and admission of Illinois and Missouri as states of the Union, it had been declared that the western boundary of Illinois and also the japanese boundary of Missouri ought to be the center of the most channel of the watercourse|river}; that the shores of the Mississippi River, wherever its waters kind the Missouri and Illinois boundary, and also the soil below the waters therefrom, weren’t granted by the Constitution of the u. s., however were reserved to the States of Illinois and Missouri, severally.”

“And your speechifier shows that the States of Missouri and Illinois every have synchronic general jurisdiction over the waters of the river forming the boundary between them, and every of aforementioned states has exclusive territorial jurisdiction over that portion adjacent to its own shore, and your speechifier shows that the Illinois River empties into the river at some extent on top of the town of St. Louis on the Illinois facet of aforementioned river.”

“And your speechifier any shows that, within the Territory of your speechifier and on the banks and shores of aforementioned river and below the mouth of the Illinois River square measure several cities and cities within the State of Missouri, and plenty of thousands of persons UN agency square measure compelled to and do depend on the waters of aforementioned stream in their regular, natural, and accustomed flow for his or her daily

Page 180 U. S. 210

necessary provide of water for drinking and every one alternative domestic and agricultural and producing functions, and for watering stock and animals of all types, which aforementioned river has been flowing in its regular course and has been used for the needs said by the inhabitants of the aforementioned State of Missouri for a time whereof the memory of a person runneth to not the contrary, which aforementioned stream and its waters and also the use therefrom for drinking, agricultural, and producing functions in their accustomed and natural flow square measure indispensable to the life and health and business of the many thousands of the inhabitants of the State of Missouri, and of nice worth to your speechifier as a state.”

“And your speechifier shows that cities and cities below the mouth of aforementioned Illinois River, among the Territory of your speechifier, do and square measure compelled, by suggests that of waterworks, water towers, ANd intakes designed and made for that purpose {to provide|to provide|to produce} the inhabitants of aforementioned cities and cities with an adequate supply of pure and wholesome water work and healthful for drinking and every one alternative domestic functions and uses from the aforementioned river thus flowing in its ancient, accustomed, and natural course.”

“And your talker shows that aforesaid waterworks systems square measure created with respect to aforesaid Mississippi River and for the aim of taking water therefrom, and not from the other supply.”

“And your talker shows that til now, to-wit, in 1889, the State of Illinois enacted a law called the healthful District Act, along side associate degree act for the advance of the Illinois and Des Plaines rivers, and that, beneath aforesaid act of aforesaid state, the aforesaid corporation called the aforesaid healthful District of Chicago was organized and is currently existing and operative, and that, by the categorical terms of aforesaid act, any canal or drain corporation organized in accordance with its provisions might have conditions, restrictions, or further needs placed in aforesaid corporation, or the act authorizing the creation of aforesaid corporation could also be amended or repealed, and that, by the categorical provisions of aforesaid act, before any water or waste product shall be admitted into any channel created beneath aforesaid act, the trustees of aforesaid channel shall apprise the Governor of Illinois

Page 180 U. S. 211

of the completion of aforesaid channel, and also the Governor of Illinois shall appoint 3 commissioners to look at aforesaid canal or channel, and report back to the Governor if identical complies with the act of the State of Illinois, and if it will, the Governor shall authorize the water and waste product to be become aforesaid channel, and that, while not the aforesaid allow, it can’t be therefore turned in, and that, by the overall provisions of aforesaid act, aforesaid channel is in the least times subject to the management and direction of the State of Illinois and her authorities.”

“And your talker any shows that the Chicago stream is settled within the basin of Lake Michigan, and has 2 forks or branches flowing through the town of Chicago and into Lake Michigan, which the natural drain of Chicago, Illinois, is into Lake Michigan, and also the waste product and drain of the territory embraced within the defendant’s district, the healthful District of Chicago, is diode into or flows into the Chicago stream and Lake Michigan.”

“And your talker any shows that the suspect herein, the healthful District of Chicago, with the authority of the State of Illinois, and acting as a governmental agency of aforesaid state and beneath the direction and management and subject to the approval of the State of Illinois, has created a channel or open drain from the west fork of the south branch of the Chicago stream, within the town of Chicago and County of Cook, within the State of Illinois, to a degree close to Lockport, within the County of can in aforesaid state, wherever aforesaid channel or drain connects with and empties into the Des Plaines stream, that empties into the river, and that latter stream flows and empties into the Mississippi River at a degree distant concerning cardinal miles on top of the town of St. Louis, Missouri.”

“And your talker any states that the channel engineered by the healthful District of Chicago was therefore engineered by aforesaid healthful district together of the governmental agencies of the State of Illinois, and by the false lawful authority of aforesaid state, and beneath the direction, direction, and management and governmental power of the State of Illinois, and that aforesaid state has til now in the least times sanctioned, and now, through its Governor and alternative officers, sanctions, the building of aforesaid channel and gap thence. ”

Page 180 U. S. 212

“And your speechmaker any shows that within the construction of same channel or drain the suspect, the healthful District of Chicago, Illinois, with the sanction and approval of the State of Illinois, cover the natural bridge or watershed that divides the basin of lake from the basins of the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers and also the basin of the river, and that, having therefore made same channel, and having regarding completed identical, and having, below the management of and with the sanction of the State of Illinois, extended same artificial channel through same natural divide of the watershed, the defendants currently propose and threaten to receive into same channel or drain the waste matter and filth of the healthful District of Chicago, that embraces nearly the entire town of Chicago and a little of the County of Cook, and, with none legal authority therefore to try to to, has already partly effectuated its same threat and purpose, and threatens to allow and to cause same waste and filth, by artificial suggests that of pumping and otherwise, to flow through the channel or drain towards and into the same Des Plaines stream and eventually into the river, thereby, with the approval of and subject to the examination and management and management of the State of Illinois, and by the put on authority thence, reversing the natural flow of same Chicago stream.”

“And your speechmaker any shows that the waste matter and toxic filth that it’s therefore vulnerable to receive and to allow and to cause to flow through same artificial channel into same Des Plaines stream is that that is made by a population of upwards of 1 and simple fraction numerous individuals, besides that that is made by an excellent variety of stockyards, slaughtering institutions, rendering institutions, distilleries, and different business enterprises and industries lining either side of the Chicago stream, manufacturing filth and vesicatory matters; all of that ar there discharged into the same Chicago stream or drained in this from the surface.”

“And your speechmaker any shows that, for several years past, the same town of Chicago, the bigger portion of that is embraced within the limits of the suspect corporation, the healthful District of Chicago, as same, has been discharging its waste matter

Page 180 U. S. 213

and filth into the Chicago stream and into lake in such giant quantities that abundant of it’s accumulated within the bed and on the perimeters of the stream and upon the bed of same lake, close to the shores thence, which the arrange vulnerable and tried currently to be adopted by the suspect, the healthful District of Chicago, acting in conjunction with and subject to the management of the suspect, the State of Illinois, and by the put on authority of the same State of Illinois, can loosen same accumulated matter and filth, and can conjointly direct it and cause it to flow towards and into same artificial channel or drain, and thence into same Des Plaines stream, and eventually into the river and into the waters thence among the jurisdiction and below the management of your speechmaker and past the homes of the inhabitants of your speechmaker and also the cities and cities among the borders of your speechmaker, and past the waterworks of same cities and cities among the State of Missouri.”

“And your speechmaker any shows that the number of same undefecated filth and waste and toxic and unhealthful and vesicatory matters planned to be, and currently on the brink of be, allowable to be was same artificial channel and thru same Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers into the river from the same healthful District of Chicago by the defendants, acting conjointly, can quantity daily to regarding one,500 tons, and that, if defendants ought to be allowable to hold their same threats into execution, and will cause same higher than quantity of undefecated waste and different toxic and vesicatory matters, which might otherwise flow into lake, to flow into the river, that the waters of the river among the jurisdiction of your speechmaker can of a certainty be poisoned and contaminated and rendered totally unfit and unhealthful for drinking and domestic uses, and can render totally worthless and fully trashy the assorted waterworks system of cities and cities on the borders of the State of Missouri established and bought at nice price and expense, and can deprive your speechmaker, the State of Missouri, and its inhabitants, of the correct to use of the waters of same stream for drinking and every one different domestic and producing and agricultural functions, as same water has been therefore employed in its accustomed and natural flow yet

Page 180 U. S. 214

for the length of your time that the memory of man runneth to not the contrary thence.”

“And that same vulnerable action of the defendants can quantity to an on the spot and continued nuisance, Associate in Nursingd be an interference with the utilization by your speechmaker and its inhabitants of the waters of the river flowing in their state, polluting and poisoning identical by the suggests that same, whereby the health and lives of the inhabitants of your speechmaker are going to be vulnerable and also the business interests of same state are going to be greatly and irreparably injured , and that same harm to the lives and health and also the business interests of same state ensuing from same poisoning and polluting of same waters as same to your speechmaker can’t be calculable in cash price.”

“And your speechmaker, on info and belief, states and charges the very fact to be that same one,500 plenty of toxic undefecated filth and waste of same healthful District of Chicago are going to be daily carried through same artificial channel and sent through the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers into the Mississippi, and nice quantities thence are going to be deposited within the bed and soil of same stream happiness to your speechmaker and totally among the jurisdiction thence, to your orator’s nice and irreparable harm, which the one,500 plenty of undefecated waste and filth currently on the brink of be daily injected into the waters of the river and into the portion thence over that the State of Missouri has jurisdiction, and from that thousands of her inhabitants acquire drinkable, can soil Associate in Nursingd poison the same water of the river to such an extent on render it unhealthy and unfit and unhealthful to be used for drinking by the same inhabitants within the Territory of your speechmaker, and unfit to be used for watering stock and for producing functions.”

“And your speechmaker any shows that nice quantities of undefecated waste was the river within the manner and by the suggests that same can poison and soil same water with the germs of unwellness of assorted and lots of types. And your speechmaker any shows that the acts herein complained of on the a part of the State of Illinois, acting in conjunction with one in every of her governmental agencies, the same healthful District of

Page 180 U. S. 215

Chicago, can cause a unbroken nuisance within the river, which the same State of Illinois has no power or authority to cause, or allow or assist in inflicting, the commission and continuance of a nuisance within the flowing waters of the river, a passable stream, to the hurt and irreparable and continued harm and injury of the State of Missouri and also the continued and irreparable injury to the lives and health of the voters and inhabitants of the State of Missouri, and that, unless restrained by the order and decree of this Court the defendants, the State of Illinois and also the healthful District of Chicago, acting along, will, in accordance with the terms of the act below that same healthful district is organized, upon the allow and authority of the Governor of Illinois and of the State of Illinois, flip same water and waste same, by the way and suggests that same, into the Des Plaines and Illinois Rivers and thence into the Mississippi; all of that your speechmaker says and avers is contrary to equity and smart conscience, and would lead to the manifest and irreparable injury of your speechmaker and also the health of her voters within the premises, and your speechmaker is totally while not remedy at law and with none adequate remedy to stop the flowing of same waste, as same, save by the interposition of this Court.”

“Forasmuch as your speechmaker will don’t have any adequate relief except during this Court, and to the tip so that the defendants might, if they will, show why your speechmaker mustn’t have the relief prayed, and to the tip that the defendants might build a full, true, direct, and ideal answer to the matters hereinbefore explicit and charged, however not below oath, a solution below oath being herewith expressly waived, and to the tip that the defendants, their officers, agents, servants, and staff could also be restrained by injunction issue out of this Court from receiving or allowing any waste to be received or discharged into same artificial channel or drain, and from allowing identical to flow or inflicting identical to be created to flow through same channel or drain towards and into the Des Plaines stream, your speechmaker prays that your honors might grant a instrument of injunction, below the seal of this honorable Court, properly restraining and cease and desist order the defendants, the officers, agents, employees, and

Page 180 U. S. 216

servants of the healthful District of Chicago and also the State of Illinois from allowing or inflicting any of same waste to be discharged into same channel or drain and from allowing or inflicting same waste and toxic filth thence to flow into same Des Plaines River; that suspect, the State of Illinois, be enjoined and restrained from issue to its co-defendant permission and authority to try to to and perform the acts same or to permit them to be done, and your speechmaker conjointly prays for a conditional or cease and desist order unfinished this cause, restraining and cease and desist order the many acts same, and for such different and any relief because the equity of the case might need and to your honors could appear meet.”

“May it please your honors to grant unto your speechmaker not solely a instrument of injunction conformable to the prayer of this bill, however conjointly a instrument of subpoena of the us of America, directed to the State of Illinois, the Governor and professional person general thence, and to same healthful District of Chicago, its officers, trustees, and agents, commanding them on on a daily basis guaranteed to seem and answer unto this bill or grievance and to abide such order and decree of the Court within the premises on the Court shall appear correct and needed by the principles of equity and smart conscience.”

In March, 1900, came the defendants and filed a demurrer to the bill of grievance within the following terms:

“Now return the State of Illinois by its professional person general, Edwin C. Akin, and also the healthful District of Chicago by its attorneys, and demur to the bill of grievance filed herein, and say that the same bill of grievance and also the matters in this contained, in manner and kind because the same ar higher than explicit and set forth, don’t seem to be ample in law for the same State of Missouri to own and maintain its same action against the same State of Illinois and also the healthful District of Chicago, which same defendants don’t seem to be sure by the law of the land to answer identical, and also the same defendants, consistent with the shape of the statute in such case created and provided, state and show to the court here the subsequent causes of demurrer to the same bill of complaint:”

Page 180 U. S. 217

parties to or of the topic matter of this suit, as a result of it seems upon the face of same bill of grievance that the matters complained of, as set forth in this, don’t represent, among the which means of the Constitution of the us, any difference of opinion between the State of Missouri and also the State of Illinois, or any of its voters.”

“Second. That the matters alleged and set forth in same bill of grievance show that the sole problems given in this arise, if at all, between the State of Illinois and a public corporation created below the laws of same state, and bound cities and cities in their company capability in and of itself, within the State of Missouri, and bound persons in same State of Missouri, residing on or close to the banks of the river, and that matters therefore explicit in same bill of grievance, if true, don’t concern the State of Missouri as a company body or state.”

“Third. That same bill of grievance shows upon its face that this suit is actually for and on behalf of bound cities and cities in same State of Missouri situate on the banks of the {mississippi stream|Mississippi|Mississippi River|river} and bound persons WHO reside in same state on or close to the banks of same river, and that, though the same suit is tried to be prosecuted for and within the name of the State of Missouri, same state is, in impact disposition its name to same cities and cities and to same people, and is just a nominal party to same suit, which the important parties in interest ar the same cities and cities in their company capability in and of itself, and same personal persons or voters of same state.”

“Fourth. That it seems upon the face of same bill of grievance that the same State of Missouri, in her right of sovereignty, is seeking to take care of this suit for the redress of the supposed wrongs of bound cities and cities in same state in their company capability in and of itself, and of bound personal voters of same state, while, below the Constitution of the us and also the laws enacted under it, the same state possesses no such sovereignty as empowers it to bring a resourceful suit during this Court for such purpose.”

“Fifth. That it seems upon the face of same bill of grievance that no property rights of the State of Missouri ar in any manner suffering from the matters alleged in same bill of grievance,

Page 180 U. S. 218

nor is there any such ownership concerned during this suit as would provide this Court original jurisdiction of this cause.”

“Sixth. That so as to authorize this Court to take care of original jurisdiction of this suit as against the State of Illinois or against any voters of same state, it should seem that the difference of opinion set forth within the bill of grievance and to be determined by this Court may be a difference of opinion arising directly between the State of Missouri and also the State of Illinois, or a number of its voters, and not an issue in vindication of the alleged grievances of bound cities and cities in same state or of specific people residing in this.”

“Seventh. The same bill of grievance is in different respects unsure, informal, and meager, which it doesn’t state facts ample to entitle the same State of Missouri to the evenhanded relief prayed for in same bill of grievance.”

“Wherefore, for wish of a ample bill of grievance during this behalf, the same defendants pray judgment, which the same State of Missouri could also be barred from having or maintaining the same action against same defendants, which this Court won’t take any cognizance of this cause, which the same defendants be thence laid-off with their prices.”

On Gregorian calendar month twelve, 1900, the case came on to be detected on bill and demurrer, and was argued by counsel.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *