Schoff v. Upper Connecticut River & Lake Improvement Co.
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
From Cobs Circuit Court. Petition, setting forth that,[by an act of the legislature of this state, approved July 1,1863, James M. Hilliard and others were made a body corporate by the name of the Upper Connecticut River and Lake Improvement Company, with the right to erect and maintain across said river and upon said lake such dams, piers, and other arrangements for holding and distributing water as might facilitate the rafting, driving, and securing lumber upon said river…
Read the full summary
From Cobs Circuit Court. Petition, setting forth that,[by an act of the legislature of this state, approved July 1,1863, James M. Hilliard and others were made a body corporate by the name of the Upper Connecticut River and Lake Improvement Company, with the right to erect and maintain across said river and upon said lake such dams, piers, and other arrangements for holding and distributing water as might facilitate the rafting, driving, and securing lumber upon said river and lake ; that said company, under and by virtue of said charter, have built and maintained, and still do maintain, a…
1Opinion of the Court
FROM COOS CIRCUIT COURT. By ch. 2805 of the Pamphlet Laws, approved July 1, 1863, the defendants were made a corporation, with power to remove boulders, rocks, and other obstructions from, and enlarge the channel of, Connecticut river and lake, and to erect and maintain dams, piers, and booms to facilitate rafting, driving, floating, and securing lumber upon said river and lake anywhere within the chartered limits mentioned in the act, which were defined to extend from the inlet of the first Connecticut lake in Pittsburg, to a point opposite Smith's factory in Stewartstown. Said corporation…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Griffin v. BartlettSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1875
- Curtice v. ThompsonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1849
- Huntress v. EffinghamSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1845