Commonwealth v. Fitzgerald
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Indictment for burning, on September 3, 1894, at Springfield, “ a certain bridge, to wit, the old toll bridge, so called, extending from West Springfield to Springfield, in said county of Hampden, over the Connecticut River, the property of the county of Hampden.” At the trial in the Superior Court, before Braley, J., the jury returned a verdict of guilty; and the defendant alleged exceptions, which appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
The bridge in question was originally a toll bridge. By St. 1872, c. 131, § 1, it was laid out as a public highway, and the care and superintendence of it were given by § 4 to the city council of Springfield and the selectmen of West Springfield. Commissioners were appointed who awarded the proprietors thirty thousand dollars “ as damages for the laying out of said bridge, piers and abutments, and way as a public highway, and for the land, toll-house, and all the appurtenances.” Of this sum, fifteen thousand dollars was apportioned to the county of Hampden, and was duly paid by it. Ten…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Denham v. County CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Town of Troy v. Cheshire Rail RoadSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1851
- Shirk v. Board of CommissionersIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Bidelman v. . State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Cheshire v. Adams & Cheshire Reservoir Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Commonwealth v. KiernanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1964
- Browne v. TurnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- McHugh v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899