United States Statutes at Large/Volume 5/25th Congress/3rd Session/Chapter 75

←

United States Statutes at Large, Volume 5
United States Congress

Public Acts of the Twenty-Fifth Congress, Third Session, Chapter 75

→

3848757United States Statutes at Large, Volume 5 — Public Acts of the Twenty-Fifth Congress, Third Session, Chapter 75United States Congress

March 3, 1839.

[Obsolete.]

Chap. LXXV.—An Act to authorize the Secretary of the Navy to purchase a tract of land belonging to the heirs of John Harris, deceased, being within the limits of the navy yard in Charlestown, Massachusetts.^[1]

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,Sec. Navy to purchase certain lands in Charlestown. That the Secretary of the Navy be and he hereby is authorized and required to purchase certain lands situated within the limits of the navy yard in Charlestown, in the State of Massachusetts, said land being the property of the heirs of John Harris, late of said Charlestown, deceased.

Appraisers to be selected.Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the price and value of said land may be fairly and justly estimated, the Secretary of the Navy is hereby authorized to agree with said heirs in selecting and choosing three disinterested, discreet, suitable men, who, after being sworn, and having fully examined said land, shall estimate and appraise the same:Proviso. Provided, It can be purchased for a reasonable sum.

Good and sufficient deed to be given to the United States.Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That, when the appraisal shall be made known to the Secretary aforesaid, and a good and sufficient deed of the same land shall be tendered or given to the United States by the said heirs, then the Secretary of the Navy shall pay said heirs the amount of said appraisal, being the consideration for the premises, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.

Approved, March 3, 1839.

↑ Certain streets were laid out by the town of Charlestown, Massachusetts; and the proceedings relative to the same were afterwards confirmed by an act of the Legislature. The streets passed over the land of John Harris; and he afterwards received a compensation from the town for taking the land occupied by the streets. In 1800, the United States, under the authority of an act of the Legislature of Massachusetts, 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 ascertained and determined by a jury proceeding under a law authorizing the same, and the amount of the valuation paid to Mr. Harris by the United States. The jury did not appraise the land on which the streets were laid out. One lot of ground was appraised “with the appurtenances.” This action was instituted by the heirs 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 commandant of the navy yard.

By the Court. The term “appurtenances,” in common parlance, and in legal acceptation, 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 of the plaintiffs to the freehold of the streets is not barred by the first section of the act of the Legislature of Massachusetts of 30th October, 1781.

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 discontinuance of the highway, the soil and freehold revert to the owner of the land. Harris and others v. Elliott, 10 Peters, 25.

[p365-1] Certain streets were laid out by the town of Charlestown, Massachusetts; and the proceedings relative to the same were afterwards confirmed by an act of the Legislature. The streets passed over the land of John Harris; and he afterwards received a compensation from the town for taking the land occupied by the streets. In 1800, the United States, under the authority of an act of the Legislature of Massachusetts, 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 ascertained and determined by a jury proceeding under a law authorizing the same, and the amount of the valuation paid to Mr. Harris by the United States. The jury did not appraise the land on which the streets were laid out. One lot of ground was appraised “with the appurtenances.” This action was instituted by the heirs 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 commandant of the navy yard.

By the Court. The term “appurtenances,” in common parlance, and in legal acceptation, 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 of the plaintiffs to the freehold of the streets is not barred by the first section of the act of the Legislature of Massachusetts of 30th October, 1781.

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 discontinuance of the highway, the soil and freehold revert to the owner of the land. Harris and others v. Elliott, 10 Peters, 25.

[1]