Quinn v. Middlesex Electric Light Co.
| Decision Date | 04 September 1885 |
| Citation | 140 Mass. 109,3 N.E. 204 |
| Parties | Hugh Quinn v. Middlesex Electric Light Company |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Tort for a nuisance, namely, the maintenance and use of steam-engines, boilers, and machinery for generating electricity for lighting purposes at the defendant's works on Middle Street in Lowell, and within five hundred feet of the plaintiff's dwelling-house. Writ dated April 24, 1884.
At the trial in the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., the defendant justified under a license granted to the Lowell Electric Light Corporation on March 20, 1883, being the same license set forth in the preceding case.
The plaintiff, in addition to the points taken in the preceding case, contended that the license was not valid, because fourteen days' notice of the time and place for the consideration of the application therefor had not been given as required by the Pub. Sts. c. 102, § 41. It appeared that the application, and the order of the board of aldermen fixing a time and place for a hearing, were published in a Lowell newspaper on March 1, 2, and 3, 1883, and that a hearing was had thereon on March 13, 1883, which was the time appointed, at which hearing the plaintiff was present, and objected to the granting of the license, but made no objection to the insufficiency of the notice.
The plaintiff further contended, that the defendant had no authority to act under the license granted to the Lowell Electric Light Corporation. It appeared that in September 1883, the last-named corporation sold and conveyed the real estate and personal property owned and occupied by it on Middle Street to the defendant company, by a bill of sale of the personal property in common form, and by a deed of the real estate, together with its privileges and appurtenances. There was no sale, transfer, or assignment of said license, except what passed by the sale of said real and personal estate. After the above conveyance the Lowell Electric Light Corporation retired from business.
The plaintiff further contended, that the defendant had no authority, under the license, to run more than one steam-engine. It appeared that three engines were run, under the following circumstances. The Lowell Electric Light Corporation erected a double-cylinder Corliss engine, whose capacity, when fully completed, would be two hundred and fifty horse-power. Before the purchase by the defendant, only one cylinder was attached, and the then capacity of the engine was one hundred and twenty-five horse-power. After said purchase, as the defendant required more power, it began negotiations in respect to the furnishing of the other cylinder, so that when completed the engine would be a regular double-cylinder Corliss engine; a letter was written to the manufacturers, stating that such additional cylinder was wanted, to be completed and attached as early as Christmas of said year; but, as the manufacturers were unable to do this, nothing further was done about the matter until the following March, when the cylinder was finally ordered and put in after the date of the plaintiff's writ. During...
To continue reading
Request your trial