Grand Trunk Ry. of Canada v. Bd. of Com'rs of Cumberland County
| Decision Date | 29 November 1895 |
| Citation | 88 Me. 225,33 A. 988 |
| Parties | GRAND TRUNK RY. OF CANADA v. BOARD OF COM'RS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
(Official.)
Petition by the Grand Trunk Railway of Canada against the board of county commissioners of Cumberland county for certiorari. Writ awarded.
A. A. Strout and C. A. Hight, for petitioners.
C. A. True, Co. Atty., for respondents.
On the 14th day of February, 1893, the municipal officers of Pownal presented to the county commissioners of Cumberland county a petition based on section 34 of chapter 51 of the Revised Statutes, representing that public safety required the maintenance of gates across a highway in that town, at its intersection with the Grand Trunk Railway, and asking for a decision upon the reasonableness of such request. The petition was entered at a term of the court of county commissioners holden on the 21st day of February, 1893. A hearing thereon was had on the 5th day of April, 1893, and on the 5th day of June, following, the county commissioners adjudged and decided that a flagman at the crossing in question was necessary for the public safety, and ordered the railway company to station a flagman there.
The railroad company now prays for a writ of certiorari, alleging as cause for error, inter alia, that the county commissioners, at the time of rendering this decision, on the 5th day of June, 1893, had no jurisdiction of the subject-matter embraced in their adjudication, and that they acted entirely without authority of law.
It is not in controversy that when the original petition was presented, and at the time the hearing thereon was held, on the 5th day of April, the county commissioners had jurisdiction of the subject-matter by virtue of section 34, c. 51, of the Revised Statutes, above cited. But that section was amended by chapter 205 of the Public Laws of 1893, by the substitution of the word "railroad" for the word "county," in the fifth line thereof. Thus jurisdiction of the subject-matter embraced in these proceedings was taken from the county commissioners, and conferred upon the railroad commissioners, without any saving clause respecting proceedings then pending. This amendatory act of 1893 took effect on the 28th day of April, after the hearing on the petition in question before the county commissioners, but prior to their decision, on the 5th day of June.
It is a well-established and familiar rule of law that, whenever the jurisdiction of a tribunal over...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dickinson v. Maine Public Service Co.
...commissioners for the location of a way from the effect of a change in the statute. Like results were reached in Railway v. County Commissioners, (1895) 88 Me. 225, 33 A. 988 and Belfast v. Fogler, (1880) 71 Me. 403. In the instant case the rights of petitioners had not jelled. Even under H......
-
Oxford County Agr. Soc. v. School Administrative Dist. No. 17
...rendered, or final relief granted, before the amendatory act went into effect, it cannot be after.' Grand Trunk Railway of Canada v. County Commissioners, 88 Me. 225, 227, 33 A. 988, see Peirce v. Bangor, In Kennebec Water District v. City of Waterville, 96 Me. 234, 246, 52 A. 774, 779, the......
-
City of Burlington v. Burlington Traction Co.
...101 U.S. 433; Gurnee v. County of Patrick, 137 U.S. 141; Grand Trunk Railway of Canada v. Board of County Commissioners, 88 Me. 225: 33 A. 988; v. County Commissioners, 63 Me. 27. If the railroad commissioners had jurisdiction of the subject matter of said application at the time it was fil......
-
Rines v. City of Portland
...v. Fogler, 71 Me. 403; Stetson v. Commissioners, 72 Me. 17; Counce v. Persons Unknown, 76 Me. 548; Grand Trunk Railway of Canada v. County Com'rs of Cumberland Co., 88 Me. 225, 33 Atl. 988. The distinction may be illustrated in this way: If the city of Portland neglects to pay the damages a......