Wood v. City of Haverhill

55 N.E. 381, 174 Mass. 578, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 983
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided November 29, 1899·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Morton, J.

A reasonable vacation without thereby subjecting the city to additional expense might well have been regarded by the city council as calculated to promote the health and efficiency of the police force, and, if so, we think that it was within the power of the city council to adopt the order which it did. It would come fairly within the authority conferred on cities and towns to make such reasonable provisions as they should deem conducive to their welfare “ for directing and managing the prudential affairs, preserving the peace and good order, and maintaining the internal police thereof.” Pub. Sts. c. 27, § 15; c. 28, § 2. It would also come within the power conferred on the mayor and aldermen of Haverhill to make such regulations for the government of the police department not inconsistent with law as they deem proper. St. 1894, c. 480. Malcolm v. Boston, 173 Mass. 312. Bill dismissed.

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

Wood v. City of Haverhill, 55 N.E. 381, 174 Mass. 578, 1899 Mass. LEXIS 983 (Mass. 1899).

55 N.E. 381 (Wood v. City of Haverhill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cotter v. City of Chelsea
108 N.E.2d 47 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1952)
Mayor of Holyoke v. Chief of Police of Holyoke
103 N.E.2d 255 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1952)
Quinlan v. City of Cambridge
68 N.E.2d 11 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1946)
Averell v. City of Newburyport
241 Mass. 333 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1922)
Whittaker v. City of Salem
216 Mass. 483 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1914)