Commonwealth v. Theberge
| Decision Date | 27 November 1918 |
| Citation | 121 N.E. 30,231 Mass. 386 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. THEBERGE. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Report from Superior Court, Bristol County; Robert F. Raymond, Judge.
A. Emile Theberge was convicted of violation of a regulation of the town of Dartmouth. On report to the Supreme Judicial Court. Verdict to stand.
Operator of jitney between cities, neither of which had accepted St. 1916, c. 293, authorizing licensing by cities and towns of motor vehicles carrying passengers for hire, who, without license from it, passed through a town which had accepted act and adopted regulation providing no person should engage in such business ‘through’ the town without first having obtained license, violated such regulation.
St. 1916, c. 293, conferring on cities and towns the power to license and regulate the transportation by motor vehicles of passengers for hire, is constitutional.
In adopting a regulation requiring a person carrying passengers for hire in a motor vehicle ‘through’ it, and not simply ‘within’ it, to procure license, a town did not exceed power given by St. 1916, c. 293, to license and regulate transportation of passengers for hire by motor vehicles.
Regulation of a town requiring persons carrying passengers through it for hire by motor vehicles to procure license at charge of $1, and to furnish bond for injuries in sum of $2,500, cannot be condemned as unreasonable exercise of power delegated by St. 1916, c. 293; no discrimination being made against nonresidents.
Regulation of town requiring persons transporting passengers for hire by motor vehicles through it to procure license at charge of $1, and to give bond, adopted pursuant to St. 1916, c. 293, is not in violation of St. 1909, c. 534, s 17, as excluding motor vehicles from any state highway.
The commonwealth, which has power to regulate the use of state highways, can delegate the administration of such powers to cities and towns which contribute towards their repair and maintenance, and, by St. 1917, c. 344, pt. 1, ss 17, 21, are given police jurisdiction over them.
Jos. T. Kenney, Dist. Atty., and Geo. H. Potter, Town Sol., both of New Bedford, for the Commonwealth.
D. R. Radovsky, of Fall River, for defendant.
In June, 1917, the town of Dartmouth duly accepted St. 1916, c. 293, which authorizes the licensing by cities and towns of motor vehicles carrying passengers for hire, and adopted regulations thereunder, section 1 of which is as follows:
‘No person shall engage in the business of transporting passengers for hire within or through the town of Dartmouth by means of any motor vehicle without first obtaining from the selectmen a license for each vehicle and the fee for such license shall be one dollar per annum; provided, however, that no such motor vehicle shall be operated as aforesaid until the licensee of the vehicle shall have deposited with the town treasurer security, as provided by law, by bond or otherwise in the sum of twenty-five hundred dollars.’
It appears from the agreed facts that on June 30, 1917, the defendant was the owner and operator of a ‘jitney,’ and carried passengers for hire between the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, running regularly. On his trips over the state highway he passed through the towns of Dartmouth and Westport, which lie between those cities, but did not solicit trade, or take on or let off passengers, within said towns. He had been granted a license to operate a ‘jitney’ in New Bedford and in Fall River, but neither city had accepted St. 1916, c. 293. He had not been licensed in the town of Dartmouth, and this complaint is for violation of the above regulation of that town. The trial judge refused to rule ‘that the defendant cannot be convicted upon the agreed facts,’ and after a verdict of guilty reported the case to this court.
[1][2][3] The facts unquestionably bring the upon cities and towns the power to under consideration. His contention is that the regulation is invalid. The constitutionality of the statute (St. 1916, c. 293) conferring upon cities and towns the power to license and regulate the transportation by motor vehicles of passengers for hire is no longer open to question. Com. v. Slocum, 230 Mass. 180, 119 N. E. 687, and cases cited. The only new element in the present case is the application of the by-law to persons transporting passengers for hire through the town, and not merely within it. Ordinarily municipalities, in regulating motor vehicles which run ‘between fixed and regular termini,’ will deal mostly with ‘jitneys' doing a local business. But section 2 of the statute provides that ‘nothing in this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Western Auto Transports, Inc. v. City of Cheyenne
... ... People, 85 N.Y. 75; ... Piolett v. Summers, 106 Pa. 95; Zinc Co. v ... Martin (Va.) 22 S.E. 869; Gates v. Commonwealth ... (Va.) 69 S.E. 520; 20 American Jurisprudence 659. Expert ... witnesses may state opinion based upon facts known to them, ... even though they ... limits within which it may, under statute, exercise its ... jurisdiction. Comm. v. Beck, 194 Mass. 14; 79 N.E ... 744, and Comm. v. Theberge, 231 Mass. 386, 121 N.E ... 30, for instance, are clearly distinguishable, in that ... express legislative authority existed, and further because ... ...
-
Opinion of the Justices to the Senate and the House of Representatives
...N.E.2d 566, and cases cited. See also Commonwealth v. Plaisted, 148 Mass. 375, 386-387, 19 N.E. 224, 2 L.R.A. 142; Commonwealth v. Theberge, 231 Mass. 386, 390, 121 N.E. 30; Mayor of Gloucester v. City Clerk of Gloucester, 327 Mass. 460, 464, 99 N.E.2d 452; Atherton v. Selectmen of Bourne, ......
-
Barrows v. Farnum's Stage Lines, Inc.
...termini change the nature of that particular business as being between those termini. That is settled in principle by Commonwealth v. Theberge, 231 Mass. 386, 121 N. E. 30, and New York,New Haven & Hartford Railroad v. Deister, 252 Mass. --, 148 N. E. 590. This is the meaning of the statute......
-
Commonwealth v. O'Neil
...of passengers for hire by motor vehicles. The decisions in Com. v. Slocum, 230 Mass. 180, 119 N. E. 687, and Com. v. Theberge, 231 Mass. 386, 121 N. E. 30, which arose under that statute, have no pertinency to the facts here disclosed. It is apparent from the analysis of the ordinance that ......