City of Lawrence v. Comm'rs of Pub. Works

• Decision Date: 05 June 1946
• Citation: 319 Mass. 700,67 N.E.2d 482
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
• Parties: CITY OF LAWRENCE v. COMMISSIONERS OF PUBLIC WORKS.

319 Mass. 700

67 N.E.2d 482

CITY OF LAWRENCE

v.COMMISSIONERS OF PUBLIC WORKS.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Essex.

June 5, 1946.

Certiorari by the City of Lawrence against the Commissioners of Public Works to quash respondents' action in granting a license to the Colonial Beacon Oil Company to lay and maintain a pipe line. From an adverse judgment, petitioner appeals.

Affirmed.Appeal from Superior Court, Essex County; F. Forte, Judge.

Before FIELD, C. J., and DOLAN, RONAN, and WILKINS, JJ.

J. P. Kane, City Solicitor, of Lawrence, for petitioner.

R. Clapp, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

WILKINS, Justice.

This is a petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the action of the department of public works in granting a license under G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 91, §§ 12 and 18, to the Colonial Beacon Oil Company to lay and maintain a four inch steel pipe line in the Merrimack River in the towns of Andover and Dracut. From a final judgment unfavorable to it the petitioner appeals. G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 213, § 1, inserted by St.1943, c. 374, § 4.

The return shows that on September 28, 1945, the petition of the Colonial Beacon Oil Company (hereinafter called the company) for a license to lay and maintain the pipe was filed with the department, which gave notice of a hearing thereon not only to the towns of Andover and Dracut, which was all that was required by G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 91, § 18, but also to other municipalities, including the city of Lawrence (hereinafter called the city), and by publication in newspapers. See Lawrence v. Commissioners of Public Works, 318 Mass. 520, 522, 62 N.E.2d 850. A hearing was duly held before the department at which evidence was introduced by the oil company, by the city, and by others, and various persons were recorded in favor of or in opposition to the granting of the license. On November 20, 1945, there was issued a license, signed by the commissioner and the two associate commissioners constituting the department. A complete stenographic transcript of the hearing before the department and the exhibits introduced at the hearing are included in the return.

It was open to the city to contend in the court below that the evidence was as matter of law insufficient to warrant the action of the department. G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 249, § 4, as amended by St.1943, c. 374, § 1. And the same contention is now open in this court upon appeal, ‘subject to’ the provisions of G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 214, §§ 19, 22-28, as amended, relative to appeals in equity suits. G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 213, § 1D, inserted by St.1943, c. 374, § 4. Murphy v. Third District Court of Eastern Middlesex, 316 Mass. 663, 667, 56 N.E.2d 467. There is thus made applicable to the case at bar the familiar equity rule that it is our duty to decide the case according to our own judgment, to draw our own inferences, and ourselves to find facts, which may be contrary to those previously found where we are convinced that they are plainly wrong. Lowell Bar Association v. Loeb, 315 Mass. 176, 178, 52 N.E.2d 27, and cases cited. Shattuck v. Wood Memorial Home, Inc., Mass., 66 N.E.2d 568, and cases cited.

The river at the point in question is five hundred five feet wide, and it is proposed to bury the pipe at least two feet below the bed of the river in a location about five miles above the intake works of the water supply of the city. It is planned to use the pipe line for kerosene, gasoline, domestic heating oil and diesel oil, which are finished oil products. No crude oil is to be carried. In the winter of 1943-1944 the company, after a study as to the best method to move petroleum from the coast to its inland distribution points, decided to proceed with a project comprising a six inch pipe line from Everett to Waltham and thence to West Boylston and a four inch pipe line from Waltham to Dracut. The company obtained the approval of the Department of the Interior and of the Office of Defense Transportation, received priorities for materials from the War Production District Commission' to pass District Commission' to pass under the metropolitan park system, secured a permit from the department of public works to proceed up the Concord turn-pike about four miles, obtained permission to cross various lands from the department of mental health, Massachusetts State College, certain departments of the Federal government, and the municipalities of Everett, Cambridge, Arlington, Belmont, Medford, Lexington, Waltham, Burlington, Billerica, Tewksbury, and Dracut, and was given permission by the department of public works and the War Department to cross the Malden, Mystic, and Merrimack ¹ rivers, and by the department of public works to cross the Shawsheen River. The departmentof public health on November 13, 1944, notified the city that in its opinion if its recommendations were carried into effect the construction of the pipe line in the location then proposed and tested and maintained as proposed would not constitute a hazard to the city's water supply. On October 9, 1945, the department of public health voted to the same effect with reference to the location now under consideration, and so advised the department of public works. The pipe line has been completed to Waltham, connecting with another line, and from Waltham to Tewksbury except for a distance in Lexington, and is in operation from Everett to West Boylston. The area in the vicinity of Dracut, Lowell, and Andover is now served by trucks by way of Haverhill. A pipe line is a modern, efficient way of transporting petroleum products from a refinery to centers of distribution. Its advantages include economy and the elimination of large trucks on highways. This method of transportation is in the best interests of the communities.

It is not necessary to set out in detail the methods by which the pipe is to be laid and maintained. It is enough to say that the evidence presented was ample to warrant a finding that it would be much more than merely adequate to guard against breaks. The department could have accepted as true expert testimony that the crossing had been designed to prevent, in...