Commonwealth v. Haydock
| Decision Date | 28 March 1934 |
| Citation | 286 Mass. 47,190 N.E. 37 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. HAYDOCK. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Exceptions from Superior Criminal Court, Suffolk County; E. E. Hobson, District Judge.
Horace D. Haydock was convicted of operating a motor vehicle in the City of Boston for carriage of passengers for hire without a license from the city counsel, and he brings exceptions.
Exceptions overruled, and judgment affirmed.
P. R. Rowen, Asst. Dist. Atty., of Boston, for the Commonwealth.
F. R. Walsh, of Boston, for defendant.
The defendant was found guilty upon a complaint which charged that, on August 30, 1933, the defendant did ‘operate a motor vehicle upon certain public ways in the City of Boston for the carriage of passengers for hire, in such a manner as to afford a means of transportation similar to that afforded by a railway company, by indiscriminately receiving and discharging passengers along the route on which said motor vehicle was then and there running and the said defendant while so operating said motor vehicle as aforesaid not having then and there first obtained a license for such operation from the City Council of said City of Boston, or any other licensing authority provided by law, the operation of said automobile as aforesaid, not coming within the exceptions of chapter 408 of the Acts of said Commonwealth passed A. D. 1931.’ The charge is, substantially, in the words of St. 1931, c. 408, § 1, inserted, as chapter 159A, § 1, in the tercentenary edition of the General Laws, which forbids such operation of a motor vehicle without first obtaining a license therefor from the city council. Section 15 of said chapter 159A imposes fine not exceeding $100, imprisonment for not more than two months in a house of correction, or both, as punishment for violation.
There was evidence that the defendant, holding a license, issued by the police commissioner of Boston pursuant to St. 1930, c. 392, as a driver of a hackney carriage, and driving a taxicab motor vehicle also licensed by the commissioner pursuant to said act, on the day alleged did acts which could properly be found to be the conduct alleged in the complaint; and that he did not hold any license from the city council. During the trial he filed a motion to quash the complaint, setting out twelve grounds, and at the close of the evidence he moved in writing that a verdict of not guilty be directed. These were denied.
The motion to quash was filed too late, G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 278, § 17, after the jury had been empanelled. There is no merit in any of the defendant's contentions. The defendant argues that exclusive authority with regard to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Blair v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co.
...Massachusetts Street Railway Co., 254 Mass. 28, 149 N.E. 628;Short Line, Inc., v. Quinn, 298 Mass. 360, 10 N.E.2d 112;Commonwealth v. Haydock, 286 Mass. 47, 190 N.E. 37. The usual operation of the vehicle as it proceeded along its designated route included the ordinary stops for the recepti......
-
Blair v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co.
...Street Railway v. Trustees of Eastern Massachusetts Street Railway, 254 Mass. 28. Short Line, Inc. v. Quinn, 298 Mass. 360 . Commonwealth v. Haydock, 286 Mass. 47 The usual operation of the vehicle as it proceeded along its designated route included the ordinary stops for the reception and ......
-
Rondina v. Employers' Liab. Assur. Corp.
... ... To provide insurance in accordance with and as required by chapter 346 of the Acts of 1925 of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and all acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto, and in addition To settle or to defend in the manner hereinafter set ... ...