Summary

Portrait of George Shiras, Jr. George Shiras, Jr. Green Bay Canal Company v. Patten Paper Company…

The improvement of the navigation of a river is a public purpose, and the sequestration or appropriation of land or other property, therefore, for such purpose, is doubtless a proper exercise of the authority of the state under its power of eminent domain. Upon the other hand, it is probably true that it is beyond the competency of the state to appropriate to itself the property of individuals for the sole purpose of creating a water power to be leased for manufacturing purposes.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of George Shiras, Jr. George Shiras, Jr. Green Bay Canal Company v. Patten Paper Company…

This would be a case of taking the property of one man for the benefit of another, which is not a constitutional exercise of the right of eminent domain. But if, in the erection of a public dam for a recognized public purpose, there is necessarily produced a surplus of water, which may properly be used for manufacturing purposes, there is no sound reason why the state may not retain to itself the power of controlling or disposing of such water as an incident of its right to make such improvement.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature