Minneapolis Gas-Light Co. v. City of Minneapolis

• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: GILFILLAN
• Citation: Minneapolis Gas-Light Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 36 Minn. 159, 30 N.W. 450 (Minn. 1886)
• Decision Date: 09 December 1886
• Parties: MINNEAPOLIS GAS-LIGHT CO. v CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS.

36 Minn. 159

30 N.W. 450

MINNEAPOLIS GAS-LIGHT CO.vCITY OF MINNEAPOLIS.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

December 9, 1886.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

The city charter authorized the city council, by ordinances, “to erect lamps, and to provide for lighting of the city,” and “to create, alter, and extend lamp-districts.” Held, that the power so conferred requires the exercise of judgment and discretion, and cannot be delegated to a committee of the council, so that the determination of the committee will be final, either as to establishing new lamps, or discontinuing those already established. MITCHELL, J., dissenting.

Appeal from a judgment of the district court, Hennepin county.

Benton & Roberts, for respondent, Minneapolis Gas-light Co.

Judson N. Cross, for appellant, City of Minneapolis.

GILFILLAN, C. J.

May 1, 1879, the parties entered into a contract by which the plaintiff agreed to light, and keep lighted, for the term of two years, all the public street-lamps in the city of Minneapolis, then connected, and which during said term might be connected, with the street mains of the plaintiff, or any extension thereof, the city agreeing to pay therefor certain prices per month, graduated according to the numbers lighted. The contract contained this stipulation: “It is further understood and agreed this contract shall continue in force, so far as to determine the terms on which said party of the first part [the plaintiff] shall perform services for the said city, until changed by new contract, or by arbitration, as heretofore provided for.” The ordinance authorizing the company to lay mains in the streets provided that it should furnish gas to the city whenever and wherever required, etc., the prices to be fixed by arbitration, if the parties could not agree. Under this, it was for the city to determine where and when street-lamps should be lighted by the gas company; and it is not denied that, having been required to light designated lamps, the company might continue lighting them until ordered by the city to discontinue such lighting, and would be entitled to compensation therefor; and we understand the clause we have quoted from the contract to have been intended to regulate such compensation during any interval that might elapse between the end of the term in the contract and the fixing of a rate, either by a new contract or by arbitration, and the parties seem to have so construed it; for, without any new contract or arbitration, the city continued to pay according to the terms of the contract, until June 14, 1883.

At a meeting of the city council on that day, this motion was made and adopted: “That the committee on gas be instructed to designate the lampposts at present used for lighting the streets with gas which can be dispensed with by reason of adopting electric lights, and cause the city clerk to notify the Minneapolis Gas-light Company that the city will dispense with the use of gas at said posts.” The committee on gas designated 91 lamps, (of about 310 then in use,) and caused the city clerk to give notice of such action to the company. At a meeting of the council of June 27, 1883, the committee reported to the council what lamps they had designated, pursuant to the instruction of June 14th, and recommended that the proper officers be directed to notify the company thereof. The report was amended by striking out two of the lamps designated, and then adopted by the council. Of what took place at this meeting no notice was given the company. The proceedings at this meeting are suggestive that it was not understood that the designation by the committee would be final, either on the city or the company. At any rate, the company did not regard the designation...