EMINENT DOMAIN.
A pipe line company for conveying oil is a common carrier bound to receive and transport for all persons alike, all goods entrusted to its care, and is not in any sense, or at any time, an agent for the per son committing oil to its care ; Giffin v. Pipe Lines, 172 Pa. 580, 33 Atl. 578.
Pipe lines between the states are "common Bouv.-163 carriers" and under the control of the inter state commerce commission. They may across an interstate stream without state au ' thority if the United States permits ; Hub bard v. Fort, 188 Fed. 987. A statute of Oklahoma prohibiting foreign corporations from building pipe lines across highways and transporting natural gas to points out side the state was held unconstitutional as an interference with interstate commerce and a deprivation of property without due process of law ; West v. Gas Co., 221 U. S. 229, 31 Sup. Ct. 564, 55 L. Ed. 716, 35 L. R.
A. (N. S.) 1193. The Hepburn act subjecting such companies to the interstate commerce act is not unconstitutional; Pipe Line Cases, 234 U. S. 548, 34 Sup. Ct. 956, 58 L. Ed. —.
A pipe line for the transportation of oil is not rendered a nuisance by the mere fact that its presence enhances the rates of in surance in the neighborhood; Benton v. Eliz abeth, 61 N. J. L. 411, 39 Atl. 683, 906.
A pipe line is held to create an addi tional servitude on a country highway but not on city or borough streets; Sterling's Appeal, 111 Pa. 35, 2 Atl. 105, 56 Am. Rep. 246 ; McDevitt v. Gas Co., 160 Pa. 372, 28 Atl. 948. The company may remove its pipes and abandon its easement ; Clements v. Phila delphia Co., 184 Pa. 28, 38 Atl. 1090, 39 L. R. A. 532.
See Bryan, Nat. Gas; GAS ; On..