Inhabitants of Agawam v. County of Hampden

• Decision Date: 09 April 1881
• Citation: 130 Mass. 528
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
• Parties: Inhabitants of Agawam & another v. County of Hampden

130 Mass. 528

Inhabitants of Agawam & another v. County of Hampden

Supreme Court of Massachusetts

April 9, 1881

Argued October 7, 1880

Hampden.

Commissioners appointed nunc pro tunc.

G. D Robinson & E. B. Maynard, for the town of Agawam, and M P. Knowlton & T. M. Brown, for the city of Springfield, in addition to some of the cases cited in the opinion, cited Dwarris on Sts. (Potter's ed.) 417; Cooley Const. Lim. (4th ed.) 283, 460; Story on Const. U. S. § 1398; Dillon Mun. Corp. § 23; Baltimore & Susquehanna Railroad v. Nesbit, 10 How. 395; Bridgeport v. Housatonic Railroad, 15 Conn. 475; Guilford v. Chenango Supervisors, 3 Kernan 143; Philadelphia v. Field, 58 Penn. St. 320; Lycoming v. Union, 15 Penn. St. 166; Dunmore's appeal, 52 Penn. St. 374; Burns v. Clarion, 62 Penn. St. 422.

N. A. Leonard & G. Wells, for the respondent, further cited Brunswick v. Litchfield, 2 Greenl. 28; North Yarmouth v. Skillings, 45 Me. 133; Towle v. Eustern Railroad, 18 N.H. 547; Pembroke v. Epsom, 44 N.H. 113; Atkins v. Randolph, 31 Vt. 226; Wahlschlager v. Liberty, 23 Wis. 362; State v. Tappan, 29 Wis. 664; Hasbrouck v. Milwaukie, 13 Wis. 37; Jackson v. La Crosse, 13 Wis. 490.

Gray, C. J. Colt, J., absent.

OPINION

Gray, C. J.

By the St. of 1873, c. 200, the county commissioners of Hampden county were authorized to lay out and construct a highway and bridge across the Connecticut River between the city of Springfield and the town of Agawam, and to estimate and award damages thereby occasioned in the same manner as provided by the general laws in the case of laying out highways; and were directed, when such bridge and highway were completed, and the full cost thereof ascertained, including all land damages, to file a report of the fact, together with the amount of such cost, in the office of the clerk of this court; and the court, upon the application of the county commissioners or of any party interested, was to appoint a board of three commissioners to determine, after due notice to all the parties interested and a hearing, what cities and towns in the county of Hampden were or would be specially benefited by the laying out and construction of this bridge and highway, and what proportions of the cost aforesaid, and of the expenses of keeping the bridge in repair, should be paid by those cities and towns respectively; and their determination in writing, when reported to and accepted by the court and judgment entered thereon, was to be binding upon all the parties interested therein.

The bridge was accordingly built, and a report filed by the county commissioners, showing the cost thereof to have been $ 112,752.83; and, on their application, commissioners were appointed by this court, under the St. of 1873, c. 200, who, after notice to all the cities and towns in the county of Hampden, and hearing all of them desiring to be heard, determined that the town of Agawam should pay to the county of Hampden $ 39,463.50, being thirty-five per cent of that cost, and the city of Springfield should pay to the county $ 73,289.33, being sixty-five per cent thereof, and that said city and town should maintain and keep the bridge in repair, and pay the expenses thereof in the same proportions; and at September term 1879 that award was accepted and judgment rendered thereon.

The St. of 1880, c. 236, passed April 23, 1880, provides that, "at any time within six months from the passage hereof," this court, "upon the written application of the city of Springfield or town of Agawam, shall appoint" three commissioners to determine, after due notice to all parties interested and a hearing, the amount of special benefit that this city and town receive from the bridge constructed under the provisions of the St. of 1873, c. 200; and, if they find that such benefits do not equal the cost of the bridge as appearing in the report of the county commissioners on file, then to determine that the county of Hampden shall pay to said city and town the amount that each has paid, or become liable for, on account of the construction of the bridge, in excess of the benefit it receives therefrom; and that their determination, when reported in writing to and accepted by the court and judgment entered thereon, shall be binding upon all parties interested therein.

A petition having been presented to this court, within six months from the passage of the statute, by the town of Agawam and the city of Springfield, for the appointment of such commissioners, the county of Hampden objected that the statute was unconstitutional and void; and the question of its constitutionality was reserved for the determination of the full court, according to whose opinion thereon commissioners are to be appointed or the petition dismissed.

The counties, towns and cities, into which the Commonwealth is divided, are strictly public corporations, established for the convenient administration of government; their municipal powers and duties are not created and regulated by contract, express or implied, but by acts passed by the Legislature from time to time, according to its judgment of what the interests of the public require; and they have not the same rights to judicial trial and determination, in regard to the obligations imposed upon them, as other corporations and individuals have. Freeland v. Hastings, 10 Allen 570, 579, 580. Rawson v. Spencer, 113 Mass. 40, 45. Stone v. Charlestown, 114 Mass. 214, 223, 224. Coolidge v. Brookline, 114 Mass. 592, 596, 597. Hill v. Boston, 122 Mass. 344, 349, 355-357. Laramie v. Albany, 92 U.S. 307. Tippecanoe Commissioners v. Lucas, 93 U.S. 108, 114. New Orleans v. Clark, 95 U.S. 644, 654.

It is accordingly well settled that the Legislature may enact that a particular road or bridge shall be a public highway, or may direct it to be laid out as such by county commissioners, and, in either case, may order the cost thereof, including the compensation to be made to owners of land, or to corporations by which the way or bridge has been previously laid out as a turnpike or toll-bridge under a legislative charter, as well as the cost of maintaining it and keeping it in repair, to be paid, either by the Commonwealth, or by the counties, cities or towns in which it lies, or which may be determined, by commissioners appointed for the purpose by the courts, to be specially benefited thereby. Norwich v. County Commissioners, 13 Pick. 60. Attorney General v. Cambridge, 16 Gray 247. Hingham & Quincy Bridge v. Norfolk, 6 Allen 353. Salem Turnpike v. Essex, 100 Mass. 282. Haverhill Bridge v. County Commissioners, 103 Mass. 120. Carter v. Cambridge & Brookline Bridge, 104 Mass. 236. Scituate v. Weymouth, 108 Mass. 128. Northampton Bridge Case, 116 Mass. 442. Brayton v. Fall River, 124 Mass. 95.

In Attorney General v. Cambridge, this court upheld the validity of the St. of 1860, c. 95, by which a bridge, originally built under authority of the General Court of the Colony, and used for two hundred years as a public way, during which period the Legislature had from time to time imposed upon various towns the expenses of keeping it in repair, was authorized to be laid out by the county commissioners as a public highway, and maintained like other county ways, and some of the towns were released from the obligation to maintain it imposed by previous statutes.

In Scituate v. Weymouth, it was held that, after the Legislature had laid out a turnpike and toll-bridge as a public highway, and imposed the expenses of repairing and maintaining it upon such towns as commissioners appointed by this court should determine to be specially benefited, and the award of such commissioners, determining that seven towns named were so benefited, and should bear such expenses in certain proportions, had been accepted by the court, a subsequent Legislature might enact that such expenses for the future should be borne by such towns as commissioners appointed by the Governor should determine to be benefited; and that the award of commissioners so appointed, determining that the whole of such expenses for the future should be borne by three of those towns only, was valid.

The respondent nevertheless contends that, after a bridge has once been laid out and built, and the cost thereof assessed upon and paid by certain towns, under an award made by commissioners and accepted by this court, pursuant to an act of the Legislature, it is not within the power of a subsequent Legislature to provide for the reimbursement to those towns by another municipal corporation of the sums so paid, or any part thereof.

In support of this proposition, the respondent mainly relies on the case of Hampshire v. Franklin, 16 Mass. 76. That case arose in this way: By the St. of 1811, c. 61, passed June 24, and which took effect December 2, 1811, the county of Hampshire was divided, and the northerly part thereof made the county of Franklin; and it was enacted that the jurisdiction of this court held at Northampton in Hampshire should extend to both counties, and the jurors should be drawn from the two counties as before. After that statute took effect, actions arising in Franklin were accordingly tried at the court in Hampshire, jurors were drawn as aforesaid, and were paid out of the treasury of Hampshire, and the proportion of the amount so paid, chargeable upon and remaining due from Franklin, if that county was by law liable to pay the same, was the sum of $ 490.24, for the recovery of which the action was brought.

There was no provision, in the statute of 1811, requiring a division of the money in the treasury of Hampshire, or of debts and taxes due to that county, or a payment of any part thereof to the county of Franklin. But by the St. of 1812 c. 124, passed February 27, 1813, it was enacted...