Fisk v. City of Worcester

Decision Date09 December 1914
Citation219 Mass. 428,106 N.E. 1025
PartiesFISK et al. v. CITY OF WORCESTER.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
COUNSEL

Chas.

C. Milton and Frank L. Riley, both of Worcester, for plaintiffs.

E. H Vaughan, City Sol., and C. S. Anderson, Asst. City Sol., both of Worcester, for defendant.

OPINION

BRALEY J.

The plaintiffs' right of recovery depends upon whether under the provisions of the revised charter found in St. 1893, c 444, the mayor was authorized to execute in behalf of the city the contract in question. It is declared in section 2 that the government, general management and control of all the fiscal, prudential and municipal affairs of the city shall be vested in a single officer called the mayor, and in a body to be called the city council, except that control of the public schools shall be vested in a school committee. By section 23:

'The mayor shall be the chief executive officer of the city, and the executive powers of the city shall be vested in him and be exercised by him either personally or through the several officers and boards in their respective departments, under his general supervision and control.'

And by section 24:

'The mayor shall communicate to the city council such information and shall recommend such measures as, in his judgment, the interests of the city shall require; shall cause the laws, honest, efficient and economical conduct of the honest, efficent and economical conduct of the executive and administrative busines of the city, and the harmonious and concerted action of the different administrative and executive departments. The mayor may at any time summon heads of departments or subordinate officers for information, consultation, or advice upon the affairs of the city.'

The plaintiffs rely on these sections as having conferred upon him ample power, not merely of supervision, but to make and execute in behalf of the city all contracts necessary for the maintenance and efficiency of the several departments. But the scheme or framework of government is to be ascertained from all the provisions of the charter. The fire department for whose use the four automobile combination chemical and hose wagons were ordered, having been established under section 42, it is a department of the city and the board of engineers lawfully created by ordinance is an administrative board within the purview of section 40. Bowers v. Needham, 216 Mass. 422, 103 N.E. 906. By section 40 the several administrative boards and officers having charge of departments 'shall, within their respective departments, make and execute all necessary contracts, subject to the provisions of section eighteen of this act, employ all labor, purchase all materials and supplies, have charge of the construction, alteration and repair of all public buildings and works, have the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Fisk v. City of Worcester
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • 9 Diciembre 1914
    ...219 Mass. 428106 N.E. 1025FISK et al.v.CITY OF WORCESTER.Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Worcester.Dec. 9, Report from Supreme Judicial Court, Worcester County. Action by Harry G. Fish and another, trustees of the Knox Automobile Company, against the City of Worcester, to recover o......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT