Haliburton v. Inhabitants of Frankfort
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
This was an action of assumpsit for a yoke .of oxen, sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendants. The cause was tried on the general issue before Thatcher, J., at the sittings here after June term, 1815. The evidence at the trial was, in substance, as follows: In the early part of September, 1814, there being then an open war between the United States of America- and Great Britain, a detach ment of the British army and navy took possession of the-town of Castine,…
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit for a yoke .of oxen, sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendants. The cause was tried on the general issue before Thatcher, J., at the sittings here after June term, 1815. The evidence at the trial was, in substance, as follows: In the early part of September, 1814, there being then an open war between the United States of America- and Great Britain, a detach ment of the British army and navy took possession of the-town of Castine, lying at the entrance of Penobscot River; and having the command of the river, they exacted certain contributions- of…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
However meritorious the plaintiff’s claim may be, and whatever obligations may rest upon the inhabitants, in honor and equity, to pay him for property advanced to purchase the safety of the whole, we are not able to perceive any legal principle upon which his action can be maintained. There was no contract by the inhabitants, nor by any person authorized to make one for them. The selectmen acted in their individual capacity; the transaction being wholly out of the sphere of their official duty.
It may be doubted whether, if a vote had been passed in a regular town meeting, to nay for the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Webster County v. TaylorSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
- Weeks v. Inhabitants of NeedhamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- State ex rel. Wildman v. KiddWisconsin Supreme Court · 1885