-
Clark, C. J. We think that the nonsuit was properly granted and there was no error in the admission of the evidence, which was conclusive, that this freshet was the largest over known in that section and “the memory of man runneth not to the contrary.” There was no evidence of negligence in the construction of the dam and powerhouse, or in clearing away the ledge of rock and shrubbery for the construction of the tail race, or in piling the rock on the defendant’s own land, nor that so doing was the cause of washing the plaintiff’s land, nor if it had been, was it negligence not to have foreseen that there would be a freshet so abnormally high that it would divert the water — if it did so.
The dam was not broken, and no more water came over it and went over the plaintiff’s land below than would have come down the river, and it would have gone over the plaintiffs land to exactly the same depth if there had been no dam. It was the hydraulic force of the great volume of water rolling down the river which washed the plaintiff’s land and there is no evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant which would have justified submitting the ease to the jury. •
The great sun, 1,300,000 times larger than the globe upon which we live, brooding over the tropical waste of waters with untempered heat, rarified the atmosphere over the summer seas of the West Indies, at the same time drawing up by evaporation water which formed clouds above. The heavier air of the colder regions, north and south, impelled by the force of gravity, rushed in to fill the vacuum. The counter movement of the winds, and the precipitation of the water, caused a hurricane which passed up the Atlantic coast. This, by some unknown cause, was diverted near Charleston and Savannah northwesterly to the mountains. When over the upper reaches of the-French Broad and the Catawba and neighboring streams, the electricity between the stormclouds and the earth caused a cloudburst. It could not be called a rain, but literally “the windows of Heaven were opened and the waters descended.”
The defendant, or any other mortal power, was not responsible for the damage caused by the abnormal height of the flood, nor responsible for negligence in not providing against, if it could have been foreseen, the damage which would be done by so unprecedented a flood.
*624 Tbe writer of tbis opinion was marooned at Morganton by tbis same flood, wbicb cut off communication on all sides by rail and wire and by public road for several days, and saw tbe flood that filled tbe valley of tbe Catawba, wbicb was 22 feet in beigbt above all precedents, and swept away every bridge across tbe river for more tban 100 miles. It was doubtless tbe greatest flood in that and neighboring rivers since tbe Ice Age when tbe melting glaciers filled tbe valleys and dug tbe channels beneath them as beds for tbe present rivers.
Tbis is tbe only case which has come to tbis Court, and probably tbe only action that has been brought anywhere, to fasten upon any human agency responsibility for tbe destruction by waters without similar record in historic times.
"We think tbe judge properly held that' the defendant was in no wise responsible for the damage done to tbe plaintiff’s land.
Affirmed.
Document Info
Citation Numbers: 105 S.E. 422, 180 N.C. 622, 1920 N.C. LEXIS 147
Judges: Clark
Filed Date: 12/24/1920
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/11/2024