Chandler v. City of Lawrence
| Decision Date | 21 January 1880 |
| Citation | 128 Mass. 213 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
| Parties | George W. Chandler & another v. City of Lawrence |
Argued November 6, 1879
Essex. Contract by the assignees in bankruptcy of the estate of Baldwin Coolidge to recover the salary due him as city engineer of the defendant, from July 21, 1875, to January 1 1877. Answer, a general denial. Trial in the Superior Court without a jury, before Pitman, J., who reported the case for the consideration of this court, in substance as follows:
In December 1873, an ordinance was passed by the city council of the defendant, creating the office of city engineer, section one of which was as follows: In January 1874, Coolidge was elected to that office, and the city council established the salary at $ 2000 a year. He accepted the office, was qualified, and discharged the duties of the office until July 1875, when, in consequence of an ordinance purporting to repeal all ordinances relating to or establishing the office of city engineer, he was notified to leave the office, which he did under protest. This ordinance bore the following indications of its passage:
Article 13 of the joint rules and orders of the city council of the defendant is as follows: "Every ordinance shall have as many readings in each board as the rules of each board require, after which the question shall be on passing the same to be enrolled, and it shall be sent to the other board for concurrence: and when such ordinance shall have passed to be enrolled in each board, the same shall be enrolled by the city clerk, or the clerk of the common council, and examined by a committee of the common council, and on being found by the committee to be correctly enrolled, the same shall be reported to the council, when the question shall be on passing the same to be ordained; and when said ordinance shall have so passed to be ordained, it shall be signed by the president of the common council, and sent to the other board, where a like examination shall be made by a committee of that board, and, if found to be correctly...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. City of New Bedford
...the one whose office is thus abolished ceases to be an officer and that his right to compensation ceases with his office. Chandler v. Lawrence, 128 Mass. 213, 215; Mayor of Cambridge v. Cambridge, 228 Mass. 249, 251, 117 N.E. 312;O'Neill v. Williams, 53 Cal.App. 1, 4, 199 P. 870;State v. Ma......
-
Commonwealth v. New York Cent. & H.R.r. Co.
... ... 453; Wheelock v. Lowell, 196 Mass. 220, 230, 81 ... N.E. 977, 124 Am. St. Rep. 543; Chandler v ... Lawrence, 128 Mass. 213; Holt v. Somerville, ... 127 Mass. 408, 411 ... ...
-
Cullen v. Mayor of City of Newton
...1897, c. 283, Section 14, vests ample power in the board of aldermen to create and abolish offices in the police department. Chandler v. Lawrence, 128 Mass. 213 . Donaghy Macy, 167 Mass. 178 . Williams v. New Bedford, 303 Mass. 213 . But the civil service laws, which in their present form a......
-
Bailen v. Bd. of Assessors of Chelsea
...St. 1889, c. 98. It was held that a removal without hearing was justified. See, also, Knowles v. Boston, 12 Gray, 339;Chandler v. Lawrence, 128 Mass. 213;Williams v. Gloucester, 148 Mass. 256, 19 N. E. 348. The statute under consideration gave to the board of aldermen a general power to app......