Per curiam
This action lies for any overflowing of the Plaintiff’s land, the maxim being, you must so use your own, as not to prejudice another’s properly ; but the action may be con- ' tinned from time to time, del the Defendant, is compelled to abate tho nuisance $ every continuance thereof after apre-*577ceding action, being considered as a new erection — the first action is .regarded as a trial of the question, whether a nuisance ..r no! — therefore it is not proper, in the first instance, to give exemplary damages, but such only as will compensate for actual loss, as killing the timber or overflowing a field, so as to prevent a crop being made upon it, and the like. But where the abating the nui-sanee will restore the lands to the same value, and use as before the nuisance, and no real loss lias been as yet sustained, the damages should he small; but if after this the nuisance should be continued, and a new action brought, then the damages should be so exemplary as to compel an abatement of the nuisance. There was a verdict for the Plaintiff, and six-pence damages.
Note — Vide - v. Deberry, and the note thereto, ante 248.