Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-07-12
COURT DECISIONS.
DIGESTED BY W. B. MARTIN
EXCLUSIVELY FOR
ViRClNlAN.Pl
Notes of Cases Recently Decided
Which Are of Interest to
Our People.
TREvETT V. PRISON Asso.

supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
June il, 1900.
y RIPARIAN OWNER HAS THE
RIGHT TO HAVE THE STREAM
COME TO HIM IN IT'S NATURAL
PURITY. HE CAN RECOVER
DAMAGES If THE WATER IS
RENDERED IMPURE BY THE
OWNER OF LAND ABOVE HIM
WHO DRAINS BATH TUBS, ETC.
INTO THE STREAM.
The plaintiff in his declaration stated
mat ne was the owner of land in the
county OF lienrico upon which he and
ms family reside and carry on Il dairy
anu butter business. in addition To or
ulnary farming operations. keeping Il
large number of COWS, which renders
u supply OF pure water essential; that
The water for the use OF the stock is
supplied by stream which was pure
anu uncontaminated ana without pol
luton of any kind, and that the milk
ana butter from the COWS which drink
the water was free from any objection
or odor. and commanded the highest
price on the market: that the defendant
in error, the Prison Association of
Virginia, became the owner of a certain
tract OF land upon said stream above
the land of the plaintiff. so that the
water which passed through the plain
tif'S land and was used by his stock
and family came through the defend
ants lands; that the defendant estab-
liShcd upon its land a school for the
confinement of youthful criminals
known as the Laurel Industrial
school and erected thereon numerous
buildings for their uccommoda ton
and collected and quartercd therein
several hundred persons and furnished
the buildings with wash-tubs, bath
tuDs, urinals. and closets without the
consent of the plaintiff and against
his protest. and emptied the refuse
water, urine. and eXcrement thercfrom
INTO the stream and thereby polluted
The natural and pure water of the
stream on plaintiffs lands below, and
by reason thereof broke up and de-
Stroyed his dairy bdsiness. seriously
injured the health Of his family. i'm
paired the hcalthfuncss of his home,
ana greatly leSsencd the value of his;
property in the public estimation and
reduced it's salable value in the mar
lIct.
y demurrer to this declaration was
sustained and plaintiff appealed.
The court says:
The great principle upon which the
law rests is that, every man must use
MS own property so as not to injure
that OF another. If It is true. as urged
by counsel for defendant in error that
The operation of this principle is quail
flied by another maxim founded in
natural law. that he who exercises only
his own legal rights Injuries no one
The motive. good or bad, which innu-
enced the action complained of is gen
orally OF no importance whatever, for
1t is we'll stated by an eminent writer
upon this subject that. whatever one
has right to do another can have no
right to complain of. If. therefore, a
lawful act is done in an unlawful man
ner, though another may be injured by
1t, the law affords no remedy. 1t is
damnum absque injuria.
AS was said by the court in NIerri-
field V. Worcester: "CultiVating and
fertilizing the lands bordering on the
stream. and in which are it's sources,
their occupation by farm houses and
other crcctions. will unavoidahly
cause impurities to be carried into the
stream. AS the lands are subdivided
and their occupation and use become
multifarious. these causes will be rem
dcred more operative, and their effects
more pcrceptible. The water may thus
be rendered unfit for many uses for
which Ii had before been suitable; but
so Ear as that condition rcSiiilS-a+,l.-
from reasonable Use of the stream i'm
accordance with the common right. the
lower riparian proprietor has no rem
edy
When the population becomes dense,
and towns or villages gather along it's
banks, the stream naturally and neces-