Machias River Co. v. Pope
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions from the District Court, Hathaway, J. Assumpsit. The plaintiffs, as a corporation, were authorized to erect dams, sluice-ways and other improvements in the Machias river, to facilitate the driving of lumber, upon which they were to have right to a toll. The rate of the toll was to be proportionate to the sums expended in making the improvements.
Read the full summary
On Exceptions from the District Court, Hathaway, J. Assumpsit. The plaintiffs, as a corporation, were authorized to erect dams, sluice-ways and other improvements in the Machias river, to facilitate the driving of lumber, upon which they were to have right to a toll. The rate of the toll was to be proportionate to the sums expended in making the improvements. For the purpose of ascertaining the amount of such expenditures, the charter, § 11, required that the accounts should “ be audited” by the County Commissioners. There was an amendatory Act of 1846, which is sufficiently recited in the…
1Opinion of the CourtRice, J.
— This is assumpsit for toll on logs which the defendants run over certain dams and improvements made by the plaintiffs on the Machias River. The company was incorporated March 4th, 1840, and in 1846, July 30, an Act was passed additional to the original Act of incorporation.
The second section, of the original Act of incorporation, provides for levying a toll. The third section gives the company a lien on all logs that pass their works, as security for tolls, or the right to bring an action of assumpsit to collect the same.
Section eleven provides “ that for the purpose of ascertaining the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Callaghan v. BoyceArizona Supreme Court · 1915
- United States v. A. Bentley & Sons Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1923
- State Ex Rel. Heglar v. WheelerWashington Supreme Court · 1928