Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. the Proprietors of the Warren Bridge

The case of Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. the Proprietors of the Warren Bridge pitted two Boston companies in a clash over tolls. Each firm owned a bridge spanning Boston's Charles River into Charlestown. The Charles River Bridge Company had received a charter in 1785 to operate its toll bridge. Over the years, the bridge had proved lucrative for its owners, which included, at different times, John Hancock and Harvard University. But by the 1820s, many Bostonians resented paying the toll, and they convinced the state to erect a free bridge over the Charles River. In 1828, Massachusetts granted a charter for this bridge, the Warren Bridge. Its operators would collect a toll for six years, to pay off building expenses, then open the bridge for free crossings.

The proprietors of the Charles River Bridge were understandably upset. Without its bridge monopoly, the company would lose revenue from the tolls. The company sued the proprietors of the Warren Bridge, seeking an injunction to stop construction of the new bridge. The Charles River Bridge Company argued that the state had violated the charter and thus the Contract Clause of the Constitution. The Massachusetts courts denied the injunction, and in 1831, the Supreme Court took up the case.

At that time, Chief Justice Marshall, with his sympathy toward the Contract Clause, was still on the bench. The Charles River Bridge Company hired Daniel Webster, who had successfully argued and won the Dartmouth case before Marshall a dozen years earlier. Now a U.S. senator from Massachusetts, Webster was one of the most prominent lawyers in the country. Fate, however, took away any advantage the appellants might have had entering their appeal. As various justices--including Marshall--fell ill or died, the case was continually postponed. It took six years before Charles River was finally decided.