Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1902-12-05
SEVEN RESCRIPTS.
Matters Upon Which the Law
Court Has Passed.
4 Hancock Case Against the Maine
Central Railroad.
Decisions Of interest to Both Lawyers
and the Public.

celved by Clerk of Courts Choate in
cases which were before the law court:
Hancock county-Thomas NJ. Nichol-
son VS.. Maine Central Railroad Co.
Rescript by Whitehouse, j.
1t is the opinion of the court. that
the recorded location of the Bucksport
and Bangor Railroad in 1873. is a SUBJ
stantlal and sufficient compliance with
the requirements of the statute in
force at that time. This location was
unquestionably filed with the county
commissioners within the time and
substantially according to the descrip-
tion in the charter" and this identi-
cal location is distinctly shown by the
express terms of the recorded certifi-
cate of the clerk of courts appended to
the record of the location to have been
approved by the county commission
ers and ordered to be recorded, March
Is, 1873" as of the January Adj. Term,
1879 No reason has been assigned
for impeaching the clerks record or
questioning the accuracy of the date
of that record. The location itself,
when originally filed, may have been
without date and in that condition APP
proved and recorded, March IS, 1873;
and it is not improbable that when the
absence of the date was subsequently
discovered the deficiency was supplied
as of that time, and the entry of April
z. 1873" made upon the record without
observing the date of the record in the
clerks certificate. But however this
discrepancy in the dates may have
been occasioned, the fact remains that
| the location spread upon the pages of
the county commissioners records was
| approved and recorded. March IS. 1873.
There is no suggestion of the existence
| Of any different location to which the
| clerks certificate of approval could
possibly relate. 1t is immaterial
whether this location bore any date or
not when originally filed. 1t must have
| been filed before it was approved by
| the county commissioners, and the
1 subsequent insertion of an erroneous
date by mistake cannot change the fact
that this particular location of the de-
PENDANTS railroad in the county of
Hancock was filed, approved and re-
| corded long prior to Dec. 81, 1874, the
time fixed in the amended charter. And
| this was all the law required.
| If the presidents communication ac-
cOmpanying the act of filing the loca-
ton, stating that he was acting by au-
thOrity of the board of directors of the
railroad company, is not sufficient evil
dence of his authority, the acquiescence
of that and subsequent boards in this
act of the president, for period of
nearly 80 years must be accepted as
| satisfactory evidence of their apprOba-
| ton and ratification of it. 1t is not
open to the plaintiff to make this OBJ
| lection.
The board of county commissioners
is Il court having recording officer
| whose duty 1t is to register its DEGREES.
| and the attestatiOn of the clerk is all
that is necessary to give validity to
the record of its transactions and juds-
ments. The record was legally and
properly made. There is no law re-
quiring the signatures of the members
of the board to be subscribed to their
judgments or appended to their rec
ords.
The ruling of the presiding justice
that the location as filed" Is INSULT
cient must accordingly be held erro-
neous. Whether any part of the right
of way secured by this location over
the land now owned by the plaintiff
has been voluntarily abandoned by the
defendant company, is question not
now before the court.
Exceptions sustained.
| Reed, Dec. 4. 1902.