Childs v. Hillsborough Electric Light & Power Co.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Bill in Equity, by taxpayers of Hillsborough, to restrain the town and its officers from appropriating money to an unauthorized and illegal use. Pacts agreed.
Read the full summary
Bill in Equity, by taxpayers of Hillsborough, to restrain the town and its officers from appropriating money to an unauthorized and illegal use. Pacts agreed. At a special meeting of the inhabitants of the town, the following resolution was declared to be adopted: “ Resolved, that the selectmen be now authorized and directed to contract with the Hills-borough Electric Light and Power Company within ten days to relight our streets in the same manner as heretofore, covering the time from now to April 1, 1905, at a total cost to the town of thirteen dollars per lamp per annum; also to add lamps…
1Opinion of the CourtChase, J.
The town of Hillsborough has authority to enter into a contract for lighting its streets. P. S., c. 40, ss. 3, 4; Blood v. Electric Co., 68 N. H. 340, 341. The plaintiffs say the town did not lawfully exercise the authority because its vote was an attempt to raise and appropriate money, and, being taken without a ballot at a special meeting attended by less than half of the voters of the town, was not passed as required by the last clause of the following provision of the statutes: “Towns may, at any legal meeting, grant and vote such sums of money as they shall judge necessary to support…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Kendall v. GreenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1893
- Blood v. Manchester Electric Light Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1895
- Thompson v. EstySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1896
3Cited by2 opinions
- Frost v. HoarSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1932
- Bedford Chapter-Citizens for a Sound Economy v. School Administrative Unit 25-Bedford School DistrictSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2004