Dunbar

By the Court,

The action is brought against the defendants, in their corporate capacity, to recover the value of a building and its contents, which were blown up during the fire of December, 1849. The Alcalde, acting under the advice and in concert with several .members of the Ayuntamiento, gave orders for blowing up the building, and such orders were carried into execution at a time, when, according to the finding of the referees, the destruction of the building by fire was not *356 inevitable. It was admitted, on tbe hearing before the referees, “ that the blowing up of Mr. Dunbar’s house was the act of “ the defendants.” I shall, therefore, consider it as such.

From the view I take of the case, it is unnecessary to consider whether overruling necessity would form an excuse for the grievance complained of, or whether the action, had it been brought against the members of the Ayuntamiento personally, could have been sustained.

It is by no means clear, that the destruction of the plaintiff’s building can be considered as a taking of private property for public use, within the meaning of that clause of the constitution, which prohibits such taking without just compensation.…