844  (1888);  Joues  v.  Williamsburg,  97  Va.  722,  34  S.  E.  883,  47  L.  R.  A.
294   (1900).
Contra  :  Cochrane  v.  Frostburg,  81  Mtl.  54,  31  Atl.  703,  27  L.  R.  A.  728,
48  Am.  St.  Rep.  479  (1895).
As  to  statutory  liability  for  damage  done  by  mobs,  see  Darlington  v.  Mayor,
etc..  31  N.  Y.  164,  88  Am.  Dec.  248  (18()5)  ;  Chicago  v.  Manhattan  Cement
Co.,  178  111.  372,  53  N.  E.  68,  45  L.  R.  A.  848,  69  Am.  St.  Rep.  321  (1899).
5  2  Only  a  portion  of  the  opinion  of  Cooley,  C.  J.,  is  printed.
348  RELIEF  AGAINST  ADMINISTRATIVE  ACTION.  (Part    2

result  of  cutting  the  sewer,  the  plaintiff  claims,  was  to  collect  and
throw  large  quantities  of  water  upon  his  premises  which  other-
wise would  not  have  flowed  upon  them;  and  it  is  for  an  injury
thereby  caused  that  he  sues.  The  evidence  offered  on  the  part  of  the
plaintiff  tended  to  establish  the  case  he  declared  upon ;  but  the  court
instructed  the  jury  that,  though  they  should  find  the  facts  to  be
as  the  plaintiff  claimed,  they  must  still  return  a  verdict  for  the  de-
fendant. The  ground  of  this  decision,  as  we  understand  it,  was  that
the  city,  in  ordering  the  construction  of  the  sewer  and  in  constructing
it,  was  acting  in  the  exercise  of  its  legislative  and  discretionary
authority,  and  was  consequently  exempt  from  any  liability  to  persons
who  might  happen  to  be  injured.  That  is  the  ground  that  is  assumed
by  counsel  for  the  city  in  this  court,  and  it  is  supposed  to  be  the
ground  on  which  the  case  was  decided  in  the  court  below.
