ABSTRACT
At common law, a person is guilty of a nuisance when he or she pollutes a water source used by the public for drinking or cooking. It is no excuse that a municipal corporation provided inadequate drainage.*
Also at common law, it is a nuisance to obstruct a public waterway in such a way as to interfere with navigability.‡ This could include construction of a dam, wharf, or bridge§ or by deposit of waste or rubbish.¶ The owner of the soil between the high-and low-water marks may use it for his own purposes, so long as those purposes do not interfere with the navigability of the waterway.** The interference must be significant.†† In the event that a boat accidentally sinks in the waterway, the owner is not guilty of a nuisance, even if it obstructs navigation. Therefore, public authorities may move the ship.‡‡ The obstruction of passage for fish is not normally considered a nuisance.§§ If the obstruction overflows the waterway and endangers public health, it is a nuisance.¶¶ When a lower landowner fills in a waterway and the
* Charles E. Torcia, Wharton’s Criminal Law 15th Edition vol. 4, § 530 (1996); see Jacksonville v. Doan, 48 Ill. App. 247 (1892); Commonwealth v. Kington Coal Co., 175 Ky. 780, 194 S.W. 1038 (1917); Messersmidt v. People, 46 Mich. 437, 9 N.W. 485 (1881); Mergentheim v. State, 107 Ind. 567, 8 N.E. 568 (1886); State v. Smith, 82 Iowa 423, 48 N.W. 727 (1891).
