§ 962. Governmental duties; maintenance of government. The organization of an established form of government is a purely governmental duty and no liability can arise in respect to acts which have this for their purpose.52 Damages cannot be recovered, therefore, for injuries committed by tax officers while in the performance of their duty 53 or for any act done in connection with the levy and the collection of general taxes.54 In respect to the levy and the collection of local assessments or taxes in some cases, a different rule has been applied, for these are imposed for the purpose of constructing some local improvement in furtherance of a local, private or proprietary duty.55 The rule of nonliability also applies to the condition or erection of public buildings.50 City is liable for damage to oyster beds occasioned by discharge of sewage. Vanderslice v. City of Philadelphia, 103 Pa. 102; Owens v. City of Lancaster, 182 Pa. 257, 37 Atl. 858; Pomroy v. Granger, 18 R. I. 624, 29 Atl. 690; City of San Antonio v. Mackey's Estate, 22 Tex. Civ. App. 145, 54 S. W. 33; Winchell v. City of Waukesha, 110 Wis. 101, 85 N. W. 668. A city has no greater right to pollute a navigable stream than an individual, in the absence of legislative authority. See, also, Fahey v. Town of Harvard, 62 Ill. 28. 52 Wallace v. Town of Norman, 9 Okl. 339, 60 Pac. 108, 48 L. R. A. 620. The rule also applies to a failure to take efficient means for the protection of certain classes of residents; negroes for example. McAndrews v. Hamilton County, 105 Tenn. 399, 58 S. W. 483. See, also, note 19 L. R. A. 452, 43 L. R. A. 435. 53 State v. Fish, 4 Nev. 216; Bank of the Commonwealth v. City of New York, 43 N. Y. 184; Bates v. Village of Rutland, 62 Vt. 178, 20 Atl. 278, 9 L. R. A. 363. 54 Sherbourne v. Yuba County, 21 Cal. 113; Pitkin County Com'rs v. Ball, 22 Colo. 125, 43 Pac. 1000; Estep v. Keokuk County, 18 Iowa, 199; Crafts v. Inhabitants of Elliotsville, 47 Me. 141; Snow v. Inhabitants of Brunswick, 71 Me. 580; Inhabitants of Liberty v. Hurd, 74 Me. 101; Dunbar v. City of Boston, 112 Mass. 75; Lorillard v. Town of Monroe, 11 N. Y. (1 Kern.) 392; De Grauw v. Queen's County Sup'rs, 13 Hun (N. Y.) 381; Everson v. City of Syracuse, 100 N. Y. 577; Hopkins v. Town of Elmore, 49 Vt. 176; Thomas v. Town of Grafton, 34 W. Va. 282, 12 S. E. 478; Wallace v. City of Menasha, 48 Wis. 79. But see Teall v. City of Syracuse, 120 N. Y. 184, 24 N. E. 450. 55 Gould v. City of Atlanta, 60 Ga. 164; Williams v. Village of Dunkirk, 3 Lans. (N. Y.) 44; Howell v. City of Buffalo, 15 N. Y. 512; Durkee v. City of Kenosha, 59 Wis. 123. 56 City of El Paso v. Causey, 1 Ill. App. 531; Hollenbeck v. Winne § 963. The public safety. In respect to the duty of organized government to provide for the safety of property or life, the only dependence of those within its jurisdiction is the efficient maintenance of agencies or provisions having this for their purpose, for public corporations are not liable for the acts or failure to act of their officers or agents in the performance of this duty.57 There can be no liability for an exercise of or a failure to exercise the police power. 58 Fire department. Under this rule a public corporation is not ordinarily liable for injuries resulting from its failure to protect property from destruction by fire 50 or for damages to or caused bago County, 95 Ill. 148; Vigo Co. Com'rs v. Daily, 132 Ind. 73, 31 N. E. 531; Kincaid v. Hardin County, 53 Iowa, 430; Sheppard v. Pulaski County, 13 Ky. L. R. 672, 18 S. W. 15; McNeil v. City of Boston, 178 Mass. 326, 59 N. E. 810; Larrabee v. Inhabitants of Peabody, 128 Mass. 561; Worden v. City of New Bedford, 131 Mass. 23. But if a room in a public building is left for a hire to private persons, the city will be responsible for its safe condition. See, also, Little v. City of Holyoke, 177 Mass. 114, 58 N. E. 170, 52 L. R. A. 417. Dosdall v. Olmsted County, 30 Minn. 96; Miller v. City of St. Paul, 38 Minn. 134, 36 N. W. 271; Snider v. City of St. Paul, 51 Minn. 466, 53 N. W. 763, 18 L. R. A. 151; Miller v. City of Minneapolis, 75 Minn. 131, 77 N. W. 788; Cunningham v. City of St. Louis, 96 Mo. 53, 8 S. W. 787; Eastman v. Meredith, 36 N. H. 284. 57 Kansas City v. Lemen (C. C. A.) 57 Fed. 905; Mead v. City of New Haven, 40 Conn. 72. Not liable for negligence of inspector of steam boiler. Green v. Eden, 24 Ind. App. 583, 56 N. E. 240. 59 58 Easterly v. Town of Irwin, 99 Iowa, 694; Howe v. City of New Orleans, 12 La. Ann. 481; Betham v. City of Philadelphia, 196 Pa. 302, 46 Atl. 448; Stinnett v. City of Sherman (Tex. Civ. App.) 43 S. W. 847; Bolton v. Vellines, 94 Va. 393. 59 City of New York v. Workman (C. C. A.) 67 Fed. 347; Wright v. City of Augusta, 78 Ga. 241; Robinson v. City of Evansville, 87 Ind. 334; Patch v. City of Covington, 56 Ky. (17 B. Mon.) 722; Davis v. City of Lebanon, 22 Ky. L. R. 384, 57 S. W. 471; Planters' Oil Mill v. Monroe Water-works & Light Co., 52 La. Ann. 1243, 27 So. 684; Hafford v. City of New Bedford, 82 Mass. 297; Tainter v. City of Worcester, 123 Mass. 311; Heller v. City of Sedalia, 53 Mo. 159; Smith v. City of Rochester, 76 N. Y. 506; Walter v. Meader, 75 App. Div. 612, 77 N. Y. Supp. 407; Springfield F. & Marine Ins. Co. v. Village of Keeseville, 148 N. Y. 46, 42 N. E. 405, 30 L. R. A. 660, reversing 80 Hun, 162, 29 N. Y. Supp. 1130; Wheeler v. City of Cincinnati, 19 Ohio St. 19; Frederick v. City of Columbus, 58 Ohio St. 538, 51 N. E. 35; Irvine v. City of Chattanooga, 101 Tenn. 291, by any of the agencies employed by it for this purpose." The rule of nonliability also applies where the duty of furnishing a supply of water has been assumed under contract or otherwise by private persons engaged in the business of furnishing water not only for private but also public uses.61 47 S. W. 419; Butterworth v. Henrietta, 25 Tex. Civ. App. 467, 61 S. W. 975; Terry v. City of Richmond, 94 Va. 537, 38 L. R. A. 834; Mendel v. City of Wheeling, 28 W. Va. 233; Hayes v. City of Oshkosh, 33 Wis. 314. See, also, note 23 L. R. A. 146, 30 L. R. A. 661. But see Len zen v. City of New Braunfels, 13 Tex. Civ. App. 335, 35 S. W. 341. 60 Howard v. City & County of San Francisco, 51 Cal. 52; Jewett v. City of New Haven, 38 Conn. 368; Saunders v. City of Ft. Madison, 111 Iowa, 102, 82 N. W. 428; Greenwood v. City of Louisville, 76 Ky. (13 Bush) 226; Burrill v. City of Augusta, 78 Me. 118; Pettingell V. City of Chelsea, 161 Mass. 368, 37 N. E. 380, 24 L. R. A. 426; Fisher v. City of Boston, 104 Mass. 87; Dolloff v. Inhabitants of Ayer, 162 Mass. 569, 39 N. E. 191; Grube v. City of St. Paul, 34 Minn. 402; Alexander v. City of Vicksburg, 68 Miss. 564, 10 So. 62; Gillespie v City of Lincoln, 35 Neb. 34, 52 N. W. 811, 16 L. R. A. 349; Edgerly v. City of Concord, 62 N. H. 8; Wild v. City of Paterson, 47 N. J. Law, 406; Kies v. City of Erie, 135 Pa. 144, 19 Atl. 942; Dodge v. Granger, 17 R. I. 664, 24 Atl. 100, 15 L. R. A. 781; Shanewerk v. City of Ft. Worth, 11 Tex. Civ. App. 271, 32 S. W. 918; Lawson v. City of Seattle, 6 Wash. 184, 33 Pac. 347. But see Newcomb v. Boston Protective Dept., 146 Mass. 596, 16 N. E. 555. The rule does not apply to a private corporation organized for the purpose of protecting insured property from fire. Wagner v. City of Portland, 40 Or. 389, 69 Pac. 985, 67 Pac. 300. The rule of maritime law which holds the owner of a vessel liable for injuries inflicted through negligence in its navigation rests upon the fact of ownership, not on the rela tion of master and servant, and the principle which exempts a city from liability for negligent acts of its firemen does not apply and the public corporation may be held responsible to the extent of the value of the tug or fire vessel. See the following cases: Workman v. City of New York, 63 Fed. 298; Thomp son Nav. Co. v. City of Chicago, 79 Fed. 984. The city is liable in personam for injuries caused to a vessel by the negligence of a fire tug. Henderson v. City of Cleveland, 93 Fed. 844. 01 Boston Safe-Deposit & Trust Co. v. Salem Water Co., 94 Fed. 238; Nickerson v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co., 46 Conn. 25, Bush v. Artesian Hot & Cold Water Co., 4 Idaho, 618, 43 Pac. 69; Fitch v. Seymour Water Co., 139 Ind. 214, 37 N. E. 982; Becker v. Keokuk Water-works, 79 Iowa, 419, 44 N. W. 694; Van Horn v. City of Des Moines, 63 Iowa, 447; Mott v. Cherryvale Water & Mfg. Co., 48 Kan. 12, 15 L. R. A. 375; Owensboro Water Co. v. Duncan's Adm'x, 17 § 964. Destruction of property by mob. Although it is the duty of organized government to protect property and life within its jurisdiction, yet it is not a legal one and the rule also obtains that no redress can be had for the destruction of property or of life by riotous assemblages or mobs unless this duty is expressly and clearly imposed by statute.62 Ky. L. R. 755, 32 S. W. 478. Nonliability result of special contract provision. Sandusky V. Central City, 22 Ky. L. R. 669, 58 S. W. 516; Howsmon v. Trenton Water Co., 24 Mo. 304, 24 S. W. 784; Phoenix Insurance Co. v. Trenton Water Co., 42 Mo. App. 118; Eaton v. Fairbury Water-works Co., 37 Neb. 546, 56 N. W. 201, 21 L. R. A. 653; Blackburn v. Reilly, 47 N. J. Law, 290, 1 Atl. 27; Gerli v. Poidebard Silk Manufacturing Co., 57 N. J. Law, 432, 31 Atl. 401, 30 L. R. A. 61; Wainwright v. Queens County Water Co., 78 Hun, 146, 28 N. Y. Supp. 987; Black v. City of Columbia, 19 S. C. 412; Foster v. Lookout Water Co., 71 Tenn. (3 Lea) 42; House v. Houston Water-works Co., 88 Tex. 233, 31 S. W. 179, 28 L. R. A. 532; Britton v. Green Bay & Ft. H. Water-works Co., 81 Wis. 48, 51 N. W. 84; Green v. Ashland Water Co., 101 Wis. 258, 43 L. R. A. 117. But see Bienville Water Supply Co. v. City of Mobile, 112 Ala. 260, 20 So. 742, 33 L. R. A. 59; Paducah Lumber Co. v. Paducah Water Supply Co., 11 Ky. L. R. 738, 12 S. W. 554, 13 S. W. 249. Special contract provision. Graves County Water & Light Co. v. Ligon, 23 Ky. L. R. 2149, 66 S. W. 725; Light, Heat & Water Co. v. City of Jackson, 73 Miss. 598, 19 So. 771; Middlesex Water Co. v. Knappmann Whiting Co., 64 N. J. Law, 240, 45 Atl. 692, 49 L. R. A. 572. Liability imposed by special contract, following Public Schools of Trenton v. Bennett, 27 N. J. Law (3 Dutch) 513; Gorrell v. Greensboro Water Supply Co., 124 N. C. 328, 32 S. E. 720, 46 L. R. A. 513. Special contract creating liability. 62 Louisiana v. City of New Orleans, 109 U. S. 285; Hart v. City of Bridgeport, 13 Blatchf. 289, Fed. Cas. No. 6,149; City of New Orleans v. Abbagnato (C. C. A.) 62 Fed. 240, 26 L. R. A. 329; Clear Lake Water-works v. Lake Co., 45 Cal. 90; Wing Chung v. City of Los Angeles, 47 Cal. 531. To recover, parties whose property is destroyed by mob, having knowledge of an impending danger, must use due diligence to notify mayor or sheriff of the threatened danger to their property. They cannot recover if they instigate or participate in a riot. Spring Valley Coal Co. v. City of Spring Valley, 96 Ill. App. 230, 65 Ill. App. 571. It is not the duty of an owner of property to employ armed men to defend his property against a mob in order to recover, under Ill. Laws 1887, p. 239, which provides for the indemnification of the owners of property for damages occasioned by mobs and riots. City of Chicago v. Manhattan Cement Co., 178 Ill. 372, 53 N. E. 68, 45 L. R. A. 848. The obligations assumed in paying for property destroyed by mob under statutory The reasons for the adoption of such salutory laws are principally two, namely, first, an application in a modified way of the contract theory of the state. An individual not a member of society possesses the right to protect with all the means at his disposal and to the best of his ability his property and the lives of himself and family. Upon becoming a member of organized government, he surrenders this right to that government which is to protect his rights in this respect in return for his support. The contract duty, therefore, rests upon the state to protect the lives and property of all within its jurisdiction or, if it fails in this respect, it should assume a pecuniary responsibility. The other reason for the adoption of these statutes is that the enforcement of the law and the protection of property and life is one of the main purposes of a vigorous government of civilized people and nothing can lead to a more efficient performance of these duties than the imposition of a local and pecuniary liability upon those who fail to properly perform them.64 liability is not an indebtedness unconstitutional under constitution, art. 9, §§ 9 and 10. Adams v. City of Salina, 58 Kan. 246, 48 Pac. 918; Prather v. City of Lexington, 52 Ky. (13 B. Mon.) 559; Fortunich v. City of New Orleans, 14 La. Ann. 115; Folsom v. City of New Orleans, 28 La. Ann. 936; Brightman v. Inhabitants of Bristol, 65 Me. 426; City of Baltimore v. Poultney, 25 Md. 107; May v. City of Anaconda, 26 Mont. 140, 66 Pac. 759; Chadbourne v. Town of New Castle, 48 N. H. 196; Palmer v. City of Concord, 48 N. H. 211; Newberry v. City of New York, 31 N. Y. Super. Ct. (1 Sweeny) 369; Loomis v. Oneida County Sup'rs, 6 Lans. (N. Y.) 269; Blodgett v. City of Syracuse, 36 Barb. (N. Y.) 526; Sarles v. City of New York, 47 Barb. (N. Y.) 447; Western College of Homeopathic Medicine v. City of Cleveland, 12 Ohio St. 375; Fordyce v. Godman, 63 20 Ohio St. 1; Champaign County Com'rs v. Church, 62 Ohio St. 318, 57 N. E. 50, 48 L. R. A. 738; Caldwell v. Cuyahoga County Com'rs, 62 Ohio St. 318, 57 N. E. 50, 48 L. R. A. 738; Brown v. Orangeburg County, 55 S. C. 45, 32 S. E. 764, 44 L. R. A. 734; Aron v. City of Wausau, 98 Wis. 592, 74 N. W. 354, 40 L. R. A. 733. See, also, notes 24 L. R. A. 592, 26 L. R. A. 332, 40 L. R. A. 733, and 48 L. R. A. 620. 63 City of Chicago v. Chicago League Ball Club, 196 Ill. 54, 63 N. E. 695, reversing 97 Ill. App. 637. The owner of property used by public authorities in the quelling of a riot is not entitled to compensation. Luke v. City of Brooklyn, 43 Barb. (N. Y.) 54; Allegheny County v. Gibson, 90 Pa. 397. 64 Pennsylvania Co. v. City of Chicago, 81 Fed. 317, Ill. Rev. St. 1895, c. 38, § 256a, making a city liable for loss of property arising from mobs and riots, is valid. |