122 BINNEY'S CASE.

grounds, this subject of the plaintiff's complaint might be, at once,
dismissed as utterly without foundation.

But, the plaintiff contends, that these rights have not only been
reserved to him by this law, but have been secured to him, as
against The Potomac Company, and those claiming under them,
as a monopoly; which, it is alleged, is about to be irreparably
depreciated or destroyed, by means of the dam proposed to be
erected by the defendants, by enabling them to create mill sites,
which they may hereafter sell, and cause to be improved, with
the leave, hereafter to be obtained, from the legislature; or, that
by increasing the volume of water in the canal, they will be
enabled to multiply the number of its wastes, and thereby add to
the number of mill-sites created, in depreciation, and to the ruin of
the plaintiff's monopoly.

It would seem to be a sufficient answer to this cause of com-
plaint to say, that it is founded upon an assumption, that certain
remote and contingent events are now approaching, and must
happen, in consequence of the erection of this dam by the defend-
ants; but which, it is obvious, may in fact never come to pass, or
certainly not in the injurious manner complained of. The first of
these events, thus referred to, is, that although the defendants have
now no manner of right to create mill-sites, or to use the water of
the canal for any other purposes than navigation; yet, that, if they
are allowed to erect this dam, and prepare for such an use of its
waters, some future legislature may be induced to suffer them to
do so to the ruin of the plaintiff's rights. This may happen.
But this court is bound, in due respect to the legislature, to pre-
sume, that they will, by no act of theirs, authorise, or sanction
injustice, or deprive any one of his property, unless it be for the
public good; nor even then without due compensation. (I)

As to the multiplication of wastes from the canal of these defend-
ants, for the sinister purpose of selling them as mill-sites, it would
appear to be enough to say, that the act incorporating the defend-
ants, declares, that the water of only such wastes shall be sold as

(l) The power has been since granted to sell surplus water for mills, &c., so that
such sales do not diminish the water in the bed of the river to the injury of the
water rights of any individual and so that no part of any such surplus shall be ap-
plied any where within the state of Maryland, to the manufacture of any description
of grain. Therefore the water power of the canal, within the District of Columbia,
may now be disposed of for all manufacturing purposes, 1832, ch. 291; Acts of Con-
gress 3 March, 1837, ch. 51.