Francis v. Boston & Roxbury Mill Corp.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was a complaint under the St. 1814, c. 39, establishing the Boston and Roxbury Mill Corporation. The complainant alleges, that on the 1st of January, 182C, the respondents erected and completed a dam from Charles Street in Boston to the upland at Sewall’s point in Brookline, so as effectually to exclude the tide water, and to form an empty basin of part of the space between the dam and Boston Neck; and that they erected and completed another dam from the first mentioned…
Read the full summary
This was a complaint under the St. 1814, c. 39, establishing the Boston and Roxbury Mill Corporation. The complainant alleges, that on the 1st of January, 182C, the respondents erected and completed a dam from Charles Street in Boston to the upland at Sewall’s point in Brookline, so as effectually to exclude the tide water, and to form an empty basin of part of the space between the dam and Boston Neck; and that they erected and completed another dam from the first mentioned dam to Gravelly Point, and continued it to the upland, by a road and dike, in such manner as to inclose the tide water…
1Opinion of the Court
Parker C. J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. The ... . . . principal question arising out of the pleadings m this case is, whether the deed set forth on oyer is a bar to the complaint for damages for flowing one part, and for keeping the water from another part, of the land described in the complaint.
The deed of Thorndike, Francis and Sears, after reciting the various acts and doings of the corporation and setting forth a consideration, releases and discharges the corporation from all claims, demands, actions, suits, &c., arising from cutting the canals and ditch, or making the road, dike…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cook v. StearnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Rerick v. KernSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1826
- Hepburn v. M'DowellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828