Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Stanley I. Kutler/The Charles River Bridge Case. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 5 page analysis of the Kutler's book, Privilege and Creative Destruction: The Charles River Bridge Case. The writer demonstrates that this landmark case of the early nineteenth century has relevance for current day society. No additional sources cited.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_90river.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
relative to the rules of construction of statues, adopted under the US system of jurisprudence, but were initially derived from English common law. The case later went to the
US Supreme Court, where once again, its outcome was significant. In this fascinating look into the technicalities of the American law system,
Kutler demonstrates that while the ruling of the Massachusetts Supreme Court in this particular instance may not appear fair, at first glance, it adheres to a constructionists interpretations of law
that puts the welfare of the community ahead of the of the welfare of corporations?a trend that one might wish to see more often in modern jurisprudence. In the
year 1650, the legislature of Massachusetts granted the president of Harvard the right to run a ferry between Charlestown and Boston, crossing the Charles River. Under this grant, Harvard continued
to hold and run the ferry and received profits from it until 1758. In that same year, a petition was presented to the legislature by Thomas Russell, and others, who
described the inconvenience of transportation by ferry and the how the public welfare would be better served by a bridge. The legislature
granted the petition to build a bridge over the Charles River on March 9, 1785 and passed an act incorporating the construction company for the bridge as "The Proprietors of
the Charles River Bridge." Under this charter, this company was authorized to construct a bridge at the site used by Harvard for their ferry. They were granted the right to
charge tolls, but they also had to reimburse 200 pounds annually to Harvard for the lost revenue from their ferry. Their charter was originally for forty years from the date
...