of Appeals effectually disposed of all the objections which 

 had been raised against this act based on the theory that 

 no sufficient process of law was provided for. The Court 

 held that the procedure and the method to be taken were 

 matters within the discretion of the Legislature ; as long 

 as adequate notice and the substantial right to a hearing 

 were guaranteed, the act was constitutional. Moreover, 

 whatever objections of this character might have been 

 urged in the beginning against this act have lost all their 

 force from the action taken by the Commissioners, because 

 there can now be no question as to adequate notice and 

 the patience and fairness of the hearings which have been 

 granted to these claimants. 



We now come to the other question — the other pre- 

 requisite — aside from the due process of law. What is 

 that '( That just compensation shall be made to the citizen. 

 What is the meaning of this expression? Although we 

 find the words "just compensation" used in most of 

 our State constitutions, used in the Federal Constitu- 

 tion, and the constitution of the State of New York, in 

 some States we find other words, and, notably, in the State 

 of Massachusetts, the language is " reasonable compensa- 

 tion,' 1 so that it would seem that "just compensation'' 

 means "reasonable compensation." But, aside from any 

 constitutional construction, the Courts have told us in 

 many cases what this language means. Just compensation 

 means the fair market value — the fair market value in the 

 open market. And the Supreme Judicial Court of Massa- 

 chusetts, a year or two since, defined expressly the term 

 "market value." Market value, says that Court, means 

 the fair value of the property as between a man who 

 wants to purchase and one who wants to sell any ar- 

 ticle — not what could be obtained for it under peculiar 

 circumstances when a greater than its fair price 

 could be obtained — not its speculative value, not a 

 value obtained from the necessities of another. 

 The damages then must be measured by the market value of 

 the land at the time of the taking — not its value to the 

 petitioner on the one hand, nor to the respondent on the 

 other, not the value which it might have under different 



