authority. In the case cited it appeared was in the following way : A physician that in a populous farming district a building placed a quantity of bromide of lithia in a was erected in which party began to manu | hole in the bottom of a grave freshly dug at facture fertilizing materials. The materials the distance of about two hundred feet from used were the carcasses of animals that the well. In seventy-three hours afterwards, have died of disease or have been killed, — a trace In considering of the lithia the was case, found the in theSupreme wells. bones, blood, flesh and entrails. The mate rials were cut up and placed in a large steel Court held that the journey of the lithia boiler called a "digester," and subjected to a from the grave to the well did not prove any temperature of from two hundred and fifty to pollution of the well by dead bodies. That four hundred degrees. The most improved there had been one hundred interments of machinery and appliances and the best proc bodies in the cemetery, all of which began esses known to the business were used, but to throw off poisonous germs several hours notwithstanding all these precautions an after burial and would continue to do so for offensive and disagreeable odor or stench a long while, yet there was no testimony of was noticeable for a mile or two over the actual pollution of the water of the wells by surrounding country. This stench, while it emanations from dead bodies. That there did not injuriously affect the workmen in was no proof of any disagreeable smell or the factory, yet to people generally was of taste of the water from such source. That fensive and disagreeable, causing nausea, the water was used, but there was no proof vomiting and loss of appetite, and rendered of any injury from its use. That on the the house much less desirable than formerly contrary there was evidence that the water as a place of residence. Such a business was used by neighbors and was as good as it was declared to be per se a nuisance. Ap ever was before the cemetery was established, plying this authority to a cemetery case, the and no injury could be traced to it. There was evidence, additionally, bearing Court said is no reason why a cemetery should be declared a nuisance per se, for the upon the question whether well-water sup plied from underground streams could be circumstances are totally different. In a very recent case, the bill in equity polluted from the burial of dead bodies in asked for an injunction to restrain the main the land. A witness spoke of living in Phil tenance of a cemetery for burial purposes, adelphia in a property adjoining cemetery grounds containing hundreds of bodies. That from burying dead bodies therein, from pol luting and contaminating the wells in the the graveyard had been in use for seventy-five neighborhood and for the removal of dead years. That a well on his land was con bodies which had already been interred in stantly used. That three wells on the cem the cemetery. It was alleged that the ceme etery grounds were used. That the water tery was on high ground and sloped towards had always been good and that he had never the lands of the party complaining and that known or heard of any sickness or other bad the wells were supplied with water from effects from the drinking of the water of the springs and underground streams flowing wells. He further spoke of a well in Green under the cemetery ground. The natural wood Cemetery, Brooklyn, where over three drainage of the cemetery land was towards hundred thousand bodies are buried. That the well had been in use for years. That he the wells. The attempt to show pollution of the wells had drank of its waters. That visitors go to
