Summary

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Bienville Water Supply Company v…

Complainant contended that the city had no legal right to impair the value of its plant and to destroy or diminish its income therefrom, which would be the effect of the city's action in building waterworks and furnishing water to its inhabitants, and it was averred that defendant was insolvent, and that the only way complainant could protect itself was through the interposition of a court of equity.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Bienville Water Supply Company v…

The circuit court observed that the city of Mobile granted complainant no rights or privileges whatever, but that the legislature of the state granted it the right to build waterworks and to use the streets of the city for water purposes, and authorized complainant and the city to contract together for the purpose of supplying the city with water.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature