Brophy v. Marble

118 Mass. 548, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 431
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 22, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 118 Mass. 548 (Brophy v. Marble) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brophy v. Marble, 118 Mass. 548, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 431 (Mass. 1875).

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

The St. of 1869, c. 152, § 1, authorized the mayor and aldermen to appoint one or more persons to be inspectors of petroleum, and to “ fix their compensation, to be paid by persons requiring their services under the provisions of this statute.” This authorizes the exaction of fees from such persons, only for the purpose of compensating the inspector, and not for the benefit of the city treasury — differing in this respect from the statutes under which Boston v. Schaffer, 9 Pick. 415, was decided.

The order of the mayor and aldermen of June, 1872, authorizing the inspector to-collect certain fees from such persons, conformed to the statute. But the orders of March, 1873, and January, 1874, appointing the first assistant engineer to be inspector of petroleum, and giving him a salary of $1200, and requiring him to pay all fees into the city treasury, by thus prescribing a new way of compensating the inspector, necessarily superseded and repealed the former order, so far as his compensation was concerned; and as the mayor and aldermen had no power to exact fees for any other purpose, the provision for the payment of fees into the city treasury was void, and the inspector is not authorized by any order of the mayor and aldermen to recover fees from the defendants for services since the order of March, 1873, took effect.

Being a public officer for whose compensation provision is made by law, the plaintiff cannot recover anything for official services except as so provided, even if he performed such services at the defendants’ request. Andrews v United States, 2 Story, 202. [552]*552Converse v. United States, 21 How. 463. Hatch v. Mann, It Wend. 44. Evans v Trenton, 4 Zab. 764. Pool v. Boston, 5 Cush. 219. IVety Maven Northampton Co. v. Hayden, 117 Mass. 433. Gen. Sts. c. 163, § 22. Exceptions overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Donohue v. Police Commissioner of Baltimore City
298 A.2d 437 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1973)
Driscoll v. City of Medford
103 N.E.2d 712 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1952)
Hartley v. Inhabitants of Granville
216 Mass. 38 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1913)
Riopel v. City of Worcester
99 N.E. 478 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1912)
Coggeshall v. Conner
1912 OK 21 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
Studley v. Ballard
47 N.E. 1000 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1897)
Sullivan v. Utah & Northern Railway Co.
28 P. 307 (Montana Supreme Court, 1891)
Baldwin v. Kouns
81 Ala. 272 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1886)
Palys v. Jewett
32 N.J. Eq. 302 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
118 Mass. 548, 1875 Mass. LEXIS 431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brophy-v-marble-mass-1875.