About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Samuel D. Harris and others v. Jesse D. Elliott U.S. 25 (1836)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0098 and id is 1 raw text is: JANJARY TERM 1836. SAMUEL D. HARRIS AND OTHERS V. JESSE ). ELLIOTT. Certain streets were laid out by the town of'Charlestown, Masrahusetts, and thb proceedings relative to the same were afterwards confirmed by an act of the legis- lature. The streets passed over the land of John Harris, and he afterwards re- ceived a compensation from the town for taking the land occupied 'by the streets. In 1800, the Uniied States, under the authority of an act of the legislature of Mas- sachusetts, purchased of Mr. Harris several parcels of land, now occupied as a navy yard, and in- 1801. By an arrangement between the town of Charlestown and the United States, the streets, so far as they were within the limits of the navy yard, were closed up, and have ever since been discontinued; and have been used( as a part of the navy yard. The agent of the United States and Mr. Harris, not agreeing as to the value of the land taken for the navy yard, the value was ascer- tained and determined by a jury proceeding unde a law authorizing the same, and the amount of the valuation paid to Mr. Harris by the United States. The jur did not appraise the land on which the streets were laid out. One lot o grgund was appraised with the appurtenances. This action Was instituted by te heas of Mr. Harris claiming to be paid the value of the land on which the streets had been laid out, but which had been discontinued. The defendant was the con mandant of the navy yard. By the Court. The term appurtenances, in common parlance, and in legal acccept- ation, is used to signify something appertaining to another thing as principal,.and which passes as incident to the principal thing. Land cannot be appurtenant to land. The soil and freehold of the streets did not pass to the United States, under and by virtue of the term appurtenances. The right o' the plaintiffs to the freehold of the streets is not barred by the first sec- tion of the act of the legislature of Massachusetts of 30tb October 1830. The law in Massachusetts is well settled, that where a mere easement is taken fOr a public highway, the soil and freehold remain in the owner of the land, encumbered only with the easement ; and that upon the discont4nuance of the high' ay, the soil and freehold revert to the owner of the land. It has been repeatedly ruled in this court, that thd whole case cannot be brought here, under the act of 1802, upon such a general question. Thti act provides only for biringing up in this manner specific questions, upon which the judges in the circuit court may be opposed in opinion. ON a certificate of division b.tween the judges of the circuit iourt of the United States foriAhe district of Massachusetts. Thiswas an action of trespass quare clausumfregit, institated in the circuit court of the United States at October term 1883, against the defendant, Jesse D Elliott, the commandant of the United States navy yard at Charlestown, Massachusetts; in VOL. X.-D

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most