jects," although it is the right to travel upon a highway by all the world and not the exercise of the right which makes the way a highway.73 Its character is not determined by the number of persons who actually use it for passage; if it is open, it is immaterial that but few individuals are in a position to make use of it,75 or that one person is most benefited by it;70 and its character as a highway is not affected even by the fact that it furnishes access or egress to but a single property owner.77 The term "public highway" is a tautological expression,78 since a highway is a passage, road, or street, which every citizen has a right to use, and is therefore necessarily public.80

79

Practical passage.81 The word "highway" im

25 LRA 640.

82

ports a practicable passage.8 It is a contradiction in terms to speak of an impassable highway.83 However, the size of the way is immaterial.84 Whether the term "highway" may properly be applied to a mere cul de sac is a question on which the authorities differ.85

The mode of its creation 86 does not of itself determine its character. 87-92

The ownership of a highway 93 is immaterial in determining its character as such;94 in legal contemplation it may be a highway, whether it is one owned by a private corporation or one owned by the government,9 96 or a governmental corporation.97 Nature.98 A highway is regarded as an ease

Co., 143 N. Y. 133, 140, 38 NE 202, 78. Walton v. St. Louis, etc., R.
Co., 67 Mo. 56, 57 [quot St. Louis v.
[c] The public includes strangers Bell Place Realty Co., 259 Mo. 126,
as well as inhabitants of the district 134, 168 SW 721]; Jenkins v. Chi-
where the way exists. Mobile, etc.,cago, etc., R. Co., 27 Mo. A. 578, 583;
R. Co. v. Davis, 130 Ill. 146, 150, 22 Gray V. Dallas Terminal R., etc.,
NE 850; Lynch v. Rutland, 66 Vt. Co., 13 Tex. Civ. A. 158, 36 SW 352,
570, 573, 29 A 1015; Slicer v. Hyde 357.
[a]
Park, 55 Vt. 481, 482.
"Public.". (1) "The use of
the word 'public' seems quite as
likely to have been used to broaden
rather than to restrict the word
highway,' so as to include all ways
used by public right for pubiic
travel." Weirich v. State, 140 Wis.
98, 121 NW 652, 654, 22 LRANS 1221,
17 AnnCas 802. (2) "The word 'pub-
ic' adds nothing to the meaning of
the word 'highway.'" St. Louis v.
Bell Place Realty Co., 259 Mo. 126,
134, 168 SW 721.

[d] Ways of necessity are not public highways. U. S. v. Rindge, 208 Fed. 611, 618.

72. Southern R. Co. v. Combs, 124 Ga. 1004, 1006, 53 SE 508; Davis v. New York, 14 N. Y. 506, 67 AmD 186 [rev 9 N. Y. Super. 663, 12 NYLeg Obs 17]; Liekens v. Staten Island Midland R. Co., 64 App. Div. 327, 329, 72 NYS 162.

[a] "The king's highway' is defined in English law to be a public passage for the king and his subjects, and from thence its name is derived; and the test whether a road is entitled to that designation is to inquire whether it be common to all the people." Davis v. New York, 14 N. Y. 506, 515, 87 AmD 186. 73. In re New York, 135 N. Y. 253, 260, 31 NE 1043, 31 AmSR 825; Tise V. Whitaker-Harvey Co., 144 N. C. 507, 57 SE 210, 211; Public Utilities Commn. v. Jones, 54 Utah 111, 179 P 745, 746.

[a] "A public highway." St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v. Smith, 41 Okl. 163, 165, 137 P 714.

74. Tise v. Whitaker-Harvey Co., 144 N. C. 507, 57 SE 210, 211.

75. Ind. Washington Ice Co. v. Lay, 103 Ind. 48, 2 NE 222.

Iowa. Bankhead V. Brown. Iowa 540.

25

Kan.-Johnson County v. Minnear, 72 Kan. 326, 83 P 828, 829 (recognizing rule).

N. H.-Proctor v. Andover, 42 N.
H. 348: Clark v. Boston, etc., R. Co.,
24 N. H. 114; Metcalf v. Bingham, 3
N. H. 459.

N. C.-Tise V. Whitaker-Harvey
Co., 144 N. C. 507, 57 SE 210, 211.
S. C.-Witter v. Harvey, 12 S. C.
L. 67, 10 AmD 650 (recognizing
rule).

Tex.-Decker V. Menard County, (Civ. A.) 25 SW 727. See also Galveston, etc., R. Co. v. Baudat, 21 Tex. Civ. A. 236, 241. 51 SW 541.

[a] "Public highway."-Small v. Binford, 41 Ind. A. 440, 83 NE 507, 510, 84 NE 19.

76. Galveston, etc., R. Co. V. Baudat, 18 Tex. Civ. A. 595, 600, 45 SW 939.

77. Southern R. Co. v. Combs, 124 Ga. 1004, 53 SE 508; Pagels v. Oaks, 64 Iowa 198, 19 NW 905; Johnson v. Clayton County, 61 Iowa 89, 15 NW 856; Lewis v. Washington, 5 Gratt. (46 Va.) 265; Lazzell v. Garlow, 44 W. Va. 466, 30 SE 171; Varner v. Martin, 21 W. Va. 534. But see Richards v. Wolf, 82 Iowa 358, 47 NW 1044, 31 AmSR 501 (where the object of a proposed highway was to make an outlet for a property owner who had already access to one highway, it was held that the second way must be considered as a private way and not a highway).

95

[g] A way to the encumbrance of which any person may set up a defensible claim or right is not a "public highway." It follows of necessity that such a claim or right cannot ripen into title as against the public by mere lapse of time or long continued assertion. Lacy v. Oskaloosa, 143 Iowa 704, 121 NW 542, 545, 31 LRANS 853.

79. See supra text and notes 12, 71.

80.

Walton v. St. Louis, etc., R. Co., 67 Mo. 56, 58; Jenkins v. Chicago, etc., R. Co., 27 Mo. A. 578, 583. 81. Adaptability to public use as element in establishment by prescription see infra § 5.

82. Manigault v. Ward, 123 Fed. 707, 713 [aff 199 U. S. 473, 26 SCt 127, 50 L. ed. 274]; Armstrong v. St. Louis, 3 Mo. A. 151, 157; Grand Trunk Pac. R. Co. v. Vincent, 2 Alta. L. 393, 403. See Peo. v. Kingman,

"To be a public highway, it must have a terminus, a quo the public can enter it, and a terminus ad quem they can leave it." Manigault v. Ward, supra.

[a] "Where the place is closed at both ends there can be no doubt that there can not be a highway." Grand Trunk Pac. R. Co. v. Vincent, 2 Alta. L. 393, 403.

[b] "Public highway" defined.-
(1) A highway open and public for
the passage of every person without
any toll or other imposition. Brad-24 N. Y. 559, 566.
shaw v. Rodgers, 20 Johns. (N. Y.)
103, 105. (2) "One established by
public authority, and kept in order
by the public, under the direction of
the law." State v. Purify, 86 N. C.
681, 682. (3) "One under the con-
trol and kept up by the public."
Kennedy V. Williams, 87 N. C. 6
[quot McDade v. State, 95 Ala. 28, 11
S 375, 376 (quot Bellview Cemetery
Co. v. McEvers, 174 Ala. 457, 57 S
375, 376; Lewman v. Andrews, 129
Ala. 170, 29 S 692, 693; Harper v.
State, 109 Ala. 66, 68, 19 S 901)].
(4) "One used generally by the pub-
lic for twenty years, and over which
the public authorities have exerted
control, and for the reparation of
which they are responsible." State
v. Purify, 86 N. C. 681, 682.

[c] "The terms 'public highway'
(1) are most general in their mean-
ing, and include all kinds of thor-
oughfares in which the public have a
right of way or passage." Parsons
v. San Francisco, 23 Cal. 462, 463
[quot St. Louis v. Bell Place Realty
Co., 259 Mo. 126, 134, 168 SW 721].
(2) "When used in its proper sense
it includes all public traveled ways,
whether in county or town." St.
Louis v. Bell Place Realty Co., 259
Mo. 126, 134, 168 SW 721.

[d] "A public highway,' as contradistinguished from private highway, is one under the control and kept by the public; dedicated for that purpose by the owner; used by the public for 20 years, or, established in a regular proceeding for that purpose." Dunn v. Gunn, 149 Ala. 583, 593, 42 S 686.

83. Armstrong v. St. Louis, 3 Mo. A. 151, 157.

84. Tise v. Whitaker-Harvey Co., 144 N. C. 507, 57 SE 210, 211.

85. See Cul de sac 17 C. J. p 391 note 74 [a]. See also infra § 5. 86. Modes of establishing highways see infra §§ 2-197.

87-92. 1 Elliott Roads & Str. § 3 [quot Public Utilities Commn. V. Jones, 54 Utah 111, 179 P 745, 746].

[a] Limited by statute.-"Highways are only such as are laid out in the mode prescribed therefor by statute or as have been used as such for public travel thereon other than travel to and from a toll bridge or ferry for 20 years.' Pub. St. 1901 c 67 8 1 [quot O'Neil v. Walpole, 74 N. H. 197, 66 A 119, 120].

93. Title to highways see infra § 257.

94. Public Utilities Commn. V. Jones, 54 Utah 111, 179 P 745, 746. 95. 1 Elliott Roads & Str. § 3 [quot Public Utilities Commn. V. Jones, 54 Utah 111, 179 P 745, 746].

[a] "A road does not cease to be a highway by being subjected to the control of a turnpike or plank road corporation, this being considered as a method of keeping it in pair, and of taxing the travel upon it for that purpose." Davis v. New York, 14 N. Y. 506, 516, 67 AmD 186.

re

96. 1 Elliott Roads & Str. § 3 [quot Public Utilities Commn. V. Jones, 54 Utah 111, 179 P 745, 746].

[e] "A public highway, as distinguished from a private road, is one which is open to the travel of the public." St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v. Smith, 41 Okl. 163, 165, 137 P 714. [f] "Public highways' are arteries of communication and of intertraffic in the commodities of the country. The means to accomplish 97. 1 Elliott Roads & Str. § 3 these purposes change with the ad- [quot Public Utilities Commn. V. vance of civilization." State v. Jones, 54 Utah 111, 179 P 745, Kansas Natural Gas, etc., Co., 71 746]. Kan. 508, 509, 80 P 962, 114 AmSR 98. Title to highways and rights 507. thereon see infra §§ 257-267.

ment 99 of perpetual character, and therefore a freehold estate, or incorporeal hereditament.3

Town way. Under the system of public ways prevalent in some jurisdictions, a highway is a public way leading from town to town, or place to place, in contradistinction to private ways for the use of the inhabitants of a particular town. The distinction between highways, technically so called, and town ways or private ways, consists in the fact that the former are laid out and may be altered or discontinued by the authorities having jurisdiction throughout the county, while the latter are laid out and may be altered or discontinued by the selectmen with the approval of the town.5 In other respects they are alike, and equally parts of the system of public ways. In common acceptation, however, the term "highway" means a public way, and includes a town way. In some jurisdictions, when

99. Smith v. San Luis Obispo, 95 Cal. 463, 469, 30 P 591; Newton v. New York, etc.. R. Co., 72 Conn, 420, 44 A 813, 815; Peck v. Smith, 1 Conn. 103, 132, 6 AmD 216; Taylor V. Pierce, 174 Ill. 9, 11, 50 NE 1109; Crete v. Hewes, 168 Ill. 330, 332, 48 NE 36; Chaplin v. Highway Comrs., 126 Ill. 264, 271, 18 NE 765; Sweet v. Perkins, 115 App. Div. 784, 101 NYS 163, 165; Adams v. Rivers, 11 Barb. 390; Kelsey v. King, 32 HowPr (N. Y.) 39, 44; Whitbeck v. Cook, 15 Johns. (N. Y.) 483, 490, 8 AmD 272; Jackson v. Hathaway, 15 Johns. (N. Y.) 447, 452, 8 AmD 263.

[a] A highway taken by the power of eminent domain is merely a public way, the fee remaining in the landowner. Varney v. Manchester, 58 N. H. 430, 432, 40 AmR 592.

1. Taylor v. Pierce, 174 Ill. 9, 11, 50 NE 1109; Crete v. Hewes, 168 Ill. 330, 332, 48 NE 36; Chaplin v. Highway Comrs., 126 Ill. 264, 271, 18 NE 765.

2. Taylor v. Pierce. 174 Ill. 9, 50 NE 1109; Crete v. Hewes, 168 Ill. 330, 332, 48 NE 36; Chaplin v. Highway Comrs., 126 Ill. 264, 271, 18 NE 765.

3. Cox v. Louisville, etc., R. Co., 48 Ind. 178, 182.

4. Waterford V. Oxford County, 59 Me. 450, 452; Harding v. Medway, 10 Metc. (Mass.) 465, 469; Com. v. Newbury, 2 Pick. (Mass.) 51. 56; Com. v. Charleston, 1 Pick. (Mass.) 180, 188, 11 AmD 161.

5. Butcher's Slaughtering, etc., Assoc. v. Boston, 139 Mass. 290, 291, 30 NE 94; Denham v. Bristol County, 108 Mass. 202, 205; Flagg v. Flagg, 16 Gray (Mass.) 175. 179: Valentine v. Boston, 22 Pick. (Mass.) 75, 80, 33 AmD 711.

[a] In New York under the colonial laws a country road was one which belonged to the country, and was under the direct charge of the country, as distinguished from the owners of the towns and manors; and it was a necessary line of communication between sparsely settled communities, and it was for the better Taying out, repairing, and préserving the public and general highways within the colony that the legislation as to such roads was adopted. Townsend v. Brookhaven, 97 App. Div. 316, 327, 89 NYS 982.

6. Butchers' Slaughtering, etc., Assoc. v. Boston, 139 Mass. 290, 291, 30 NE 94; Denham v. Bristol County, 108 Mass. 202, 205; Flagg v. Flagg, 16 Gray (Mass.) 175, 179; Valentine v. Boston, 22 Pick. (Mass.) 75, 80, 33 AmD 711. And see Davis v. Smith, 130 Mass. 113.

the term is used in a statute, its import is restricted to county roads or county ways, unless its connection should require some different construction. In other jurisdictions, however, the term is given its ordinary meaning 10 unless it appears that the legislature used it in its narrower sense.1

11

16

Road.12 The word "road" applies generally to highways; 13 a highway is a road, but a road is not necessarily a highway.14 Commonly in legal acceptation the term "road" is regarded as synonymous with "highway." 15 In its broadest sense the term "road" is synonymous with "way,' although the latter word is more generic;17 and thus applies to any place set apart and appropriated, either de jure or de facto, for the purpose of free passage, whether by public authority or by the general license or permission of the owners of the land,18

stone v. Worcester County, 108 Mass.
68; Harding v. Medway. 10 Metc.
(Mass.) 465, 469; Com. v. Hubbard,
24 Pick. (Mass.) 98; Com. v. Charles-
ton, 1 Pick. (Mass.) 180, 188, 11
AmD 161.

8. Wells v. York County, 79 Me.
522, 528, 11 A 417; Waterford V.
Oxford County, 59 Me. 450, 452;
Cleaves v. Jordan, 34 Me. 9, 12. See
Illinois Cent. R. Co. V. State, 71
Miss. 253, 14 S 459.

9. Cleaves v. Jordan, 34 Me. 9,
12.
10. Janvrin V. Poole, 181 Mass.
463, 464, 63 NE 1066; Harding v.
Medway, 10 Metc. (Mass.) 465, 469;
Com. v. Hubbard, 24 Pick. (Mass.)
98, 101; Jones v. Andover, 6 Pick.
(Mass.) 59, 61.

11. Boston, etc., R. Co. v. Boston,
140 Mass. 87, 88, 2 NE 943; Jones
v. Andover, 6 Pick. (Mass.) 59, 61.

12. See Pent Roads [30 Cyc 1379]; Private Roads [32 Cyc 363]; Turnpikes and Toll Roads [38 Cyc 361].

13. Stokes V. Scott County, 10 Iowa 166, 175 [quot Chamberlain v. Iowa Tel. Co., 119 Iowa 619, 93 NW 596, 598]; Kister v. Reeser, 98 Pa. 1, 4, 42 AmR 608.

14. Styles v. Victoria, 8 B. C. 406, 409.

15. U. S.-Abbott v. Duluth. 104
Fed. 833. 837 [aff 117 Fed. 137, 55
CCA 153].

Ala. Jefferson County v. State, 172
Ala. 138, 54 S 757. 759.

Jordan, 1 Tex. A. Civ. Cas. § 859. Wis.-Bogie v. Waupun, 75 Wis. 1, 4, 43 NW 667, 6 LRA 59.

B. C.-Styles v. Victoria, 8 B. C. 406, 414.

16. Cal.-Wood v. Truckee Turnp. Co., 24 Cal. 474, 487.

Mo.-State v. Hackman, 270 Mo. 658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc]. Nev.-Chollar-Potosi Min. Co. V. Kennedy, 3 Nev. 361, 93 AmD 409.

Tex. International, etc., R. Co. v. Jordan, 1 Tex. A. Civ. Cas. § 859. Va.-Terry v. McClung, 104 Va. 599, 602, 52 SE 355.

[a] "Road" and "way" interchangeable. Phillips V. Connellsville, etc., R. Co., 247 Pa. 560, 93 A 603.

17. Kister v. Reeser, 98 Pa. 1, 4, 42 AmR 608.

18. Com. v. Gammons, 23 Pick. (Mass.) 201, 202; State v. Hackman, 270 Mo. 658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc]; International, etc., R. Co. v. Jordan, 1 Tex. A. Civ. Cas. § 859; Hart v. Red Cedar, 63 Wis. 634, 638, 24 NW 410.

[a] Other definitions.—(1) "A highway, hence any similar passage for travel public or private." Century D. [quot Northwestern Tel. Exch. Co. v. Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140, 154, 83 NW 527, 86 NW 69, 53 LRA 175]. (2) "An open way or public passage." Imperial D. [quot St. Vincent Tp. v. Greenfield, 12 Önt. 297, 305]. (3) "An open way or Ind.-Aurora v. West, 9 Ind. 74, 76. public passage, as between one town, Iowa.-East Boyer Tel. Co. v. Vail, city, or place and another." Wor129 NW 298, 299; Newton v. Jasper cester D. [quot Best v. Birmingham, County, 135 Iowa 27, 112 NW 167. 16 Ala. A. 631, 632, 80 S 695; Os168, 124 AmSR 256; Nichols v. Chi-borne v. Mecklenburg County, 82 N. cago, etc., R. Co., 125 Iowa 236, 238, 100 NW 1115. Md.-Horner v. State, 49 Md. 277, "An open way or public passage

280.

Mass.-Clark V. Hull. 184 Mass.
164, 166, 68 NE 60; Holbrook v. Mc-
Bride, 4 Gray 215; Stedman v. South-
bridge, 17 Pick. 162, 164.
Minn. Northwestern Tel. Exch.
Co. v. Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140, 154,
83 NW 527, 86 NW 69, 71, 53 LRA
175.

Mo.-State v. Hackman, 270 Mo.
658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc];
State v. Taylor, 224 Mo. 393, 123
SW 892.

Nebr.-Peo. V. Buffalo County,
Nebr. 150, 158.

N. H.-Morgan v. Palmer, 48 N. H.
336, 337.

C. 400, 402]. To like effect In re
Sewer St., 8 Pa. Co. 226, 228. (4)

ground appropriated for public
travel." Webster D. [quot Man-
chester v. Hartford, 30 Conn. 118,
120]. (5) "An open way or public
passage; it is ground appropriated
for travel, forming a communication
between one city or town and an-
other." Hutson v. New York. 7 N.
Y. Super. 289, 312 [aff 9 N. Y. 163,
59 AmD 526]. (6) "A passage
ground appropriated to public
travel." 1 Elliott Roads & Str. pp 4,
5 [quot State y. Street, 117 Ala. 203,
4268, 23 S 807]. (7) "A passage
through the country for the use of
the people." Horner v. State, 49
Md. 277, 286 [cit Bouvier L. D.].
(8) "A public passage, open to all
the people." Holthouse L. D.; Jacob
L. D.; Tomlin L. D. [all quot Bailey
v. Com., 78 Va. 19, 21]. (9) A "pub-
lic thoroughfare." Aurora v. West,
9 Ind. 74, 76. (10) "A public way
for passage or travel." Century D.
[quot Northwestern Tel. Exch. Co.
v. Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140, 154, 83
NW 527, 86 NW 69, 53 LRA 175].
(11) A "right of passage in the pub-
lic."
Leavitt v. Towle, 8 N. H. 96,

N. J.-Vantilburgh v. Shann, 24
N. J. L. 740.

N. Y.-Brace v. New York Cent.
R. Co., 27 N. Y. 269; Fowler v.
Lansing, 9 Johns. 349, 350.

Or. Heiple v. East Portland, 13
Or. 97, 103. 8 P 907.

Pa. Phillips v. Connellsville, etc.,
R. Co., 247 Pa. 560, 93 A 603; Res-
publica V. Arnold, 3 Yeates 417,

7. Wells v. York County, 79 Me. 522, 528, 11 A 417; Cleaves v. Jordan. 34 Me. 9, 12; Clark v. Hull, 184 421. Mass. 164, 166, 68 NE 60; Black- Tex.-International, etc., R. Co. v.

com

and also to private ways.19 It is now
monly used as denoting a public way in the country
other than the street of a town or a city.20 Although
the term "road" has no fixed meaning in the law,21
and the scope to be given to the term depends upon
the context in which it appears,2
22 in its popular
sense it is a generic term 23 for all kinds of ways,24

31

and thus it may include alleys,25 bridges,26 bridle path,27 carriage ways, 28 driftways, 29 footpaths,30 footways, highways, 2 lanes,33 railroads,34 sidewalks,35 and streets.3 36 However, in a narrower sense the term may not include alleys,37 railroads,3 streets.39 The word "road," as used generally, is uniformly applied to public roads, 40 unless where

97. (12) "A strip of ground ap- 24. U. S.-Washington County v.
propriated for travel, forming a line Williams, 111 Fed. 801, 809, 19 CCA
of communication between different 621.
places." Century D. [quot North- Ga.-Griffin v. Sanborn, 127 Ga. 17,
western Tel. Exch. Co. v. Minneap-56 SE 71.
olis, supra]. (13) "A track for Ind. Strange v. Grant County, 173
travel forming a communication be- Ind. 640, 91 NE 242, 247.
tween one city, town, or place and Me.-Windham V. Cumberland
another." Webster D. [quot Best v. County, 26 Me. 406, 409.
Birmingham, 16 Ala. A. 631, 632, 80 Mass.-Clark
S 695; Osborne V. Mecklenburg 164, 68 NE 60.
County, 82 N. C. 400, 402].
Mo.-State V. Hackman, 270, Mo.
658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc].

[b] Necessity of actual user.-A "road" is a way actually used in passing from one place to another. A mere survey or location of a route for a road is not a road. Brooks v. Morrill, 92 Me. 172, 176, 42 A 357.

19. Jaquith v. Richardson, 8 Metc. (Mass.) 213, 215; State v. Hackman, 270 Mo. 658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc]; Kister v. Reeser, 98 Pa. 1, 4, 42 AmR 608.

20. 1 Elliott Roads & Str. § 7 [quot Mushbaugh v. East Peoria, 260 I. 27, 31, 102 NE 1027]; In re Sewer St., 8 Pa. Co. 226, 228.

V. Hull, 184 Mass.

See Reg. v. Worthing, etc., Turnp. Road, 3 E. & B. 989, 77 ECL 989, 1006, 118 Reprint 1412.

25. U. S.-Abbott v. Duluth, 104
Fed. 833, 837 [aff 117 Fed. 137, 55
CCA 153].

Iowa.-East Boyer Tel. Co. v. Vail,
129 NW 298, 299; Chamberlain v.
Iowa Tel. Co., 119 Iowa 619, 621, 93
NW 596.

Minn. Northwestern Tel. Exch.
Co. v. Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140, 154,
83 NW 527, 86 NW 69, 71, 53 LRA
175.

Mo.-State v. Hackman, 270 Mo.
658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc].
Wis.-State v. Sheboygen, 111 Wis.

And see Alley 2 C. J. p 1150.
[a] "County road."-Chrisman v.
Brandes, 137 Iowa 433, 112 NW 833,
835.
26. Chamberlain v. Iowa Tel. Co.,
119 Iowa 619, 621, 93 NW 596. And
see Bridges § 2.

com

"We do not mean to be understood as holding that a street is not, in one sense, a road, being a highway in a city or town for the pas-23, 33, 86 NW 657. sage of the public from one portion of a city, etc., to another portion of it. In this sense, it is a road in a city. . The words street and road are frequently used as synonymous expressions, and are used interchangeably to convey the same meaning. And yet they are [a] "Road" and "bridge" often employed to designate spe- pared.-St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v. Peo., cially what is commonly understood 200 111. 365, 65 NE 716. by each word, as it is generally separately applied. No one would 602, 52 SE 355. call a highway in the country a street, or in an application to lay out a highway in the country, would 28. International, etc., R. Co. v. ask to have a street laid out be- Jordan, 1 Tex. A. Civ. Cas. § 859; tween one town or place and another Terry v. McClung, 104 Va. 599, 602, town or place. And the converse of 52 SE 355. And see Carriageway 9 this is true as indicating what is C. J. p 1295. commonly understood when the purpose is to lay out or establish a street in a city." In re Sewer St., supra.

27. Terry v. McClung, 104 Va. 599,

"Bridle road" defined see 9 C. J. p 499.

38

Pa-Kister v. Reeser, 98 Pa. 1, 4, 42 AmR €08.

Tex. International, etc., R. Co. v. Jordan, 1 Tex. A. Civ. Cas. § 859; Wis.-State v. Sheboygen, 111 Wis. 23, 33, 86 NW 657.

34. Washington County V. Williams, 111 Fed. 801, 809, 49 CCA 621. 35. Manchester v. Hartford, 30 Conn. 118, 120.

36. U. S.-Abbott v. Duluth, 104 Fed. 833, 837 [aff 117 Fed. 137, 55 CCA 153].

Conn.-Manchester v. Hartford, 30' Conn, 118, 120.

Iowa.-East Boyer Tel. Co. v. Vail, 129 NW 298; Chamberlain v. Iowa Tel. Co., 119 Iowa 619, 621, 93 NW 596; Stokes v. Scott County, 10 Iowa 166, 175; Dis. op. Dubuque County v. Dubuque, etc., R. Co., 4 Greene 1, 14, 15.

Minn. Northwestern Tel. Exch. Co. v. Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140, 154, 83 NW 527. 86 NW 69, 53 LRA 175. Mo.-State v. Hackman, 270 Mo. 658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc]. Nebr.-Follmer v. Nuckolls County,

6

Nebr. 204. 209; Peo. V. Buffalo County, 4 Nebr. 150, 158.

Pa.--Kister v. Reeser, 98 Pa. 1, 4, 42_AmR_608.

Tex.-International, etc., R. Co. v. Jordan, 1 Tex. A. Civ. Cas. § 859. Wis. State v. Sheboygen, 111 Wis. 23, 33, 86 NW 657.

[a] "The term 'public road' is sufficient in its scope to include 'city street."'" State V. Hackman, 270 Mo. 658, 670, 195 SW 706.

[b] "County road."-Chrisman v. Brandes, 137 Iowa 433, 112 NW 833,

29. Terry v. McClung, 104 Va. 835. 599, 602, 52 SE 355.

30. Derby County v. Urban Dist., [1896] A. C. 315. See Dennis v. Good, 83 J. P. 110.

[a] In all the old acts the word "path" is used as synonymous with the word "road." Singleton v. Road Comrs., 11 S. C. L. 526, 527.

21. Griffin v. Sanborn, 127 Ga. 17, 56 SE 71; Southern R. Co. v. Combs, 124 Ga. 1004, 53 SE 508. See Chollar-Potosi Min. Co. v. Kennedy, 3 Nev. 361, 93 AmD 409. [a] Loose use of terms.-An ex- 31. International, etc., R. Co. v. amination of the authorities will Jordan, 1 Tex. A. Civ. Cas. § 859; show that the terms "street," "ave- Terry v. McClung, 104 Va. 599. 602, nue," "road," "public road," "county52 SE 355. And See Kister v. Reeser, road," etc., are used loosely and in- 98 Pa. 1, 4, 42 AmR 608. discriminately in legislation and ju- 32. Conn.-Manchester V. Hartdicial decisions relating to public ford, 30 Conn. 118, 120. highways, and little reliance can be Iowa.-Chamberlain V. Iowa Tel. placed on the particular term used Co., 119 Iowa 619, 621, 93 NW 596; to describe any given way. Undoubt-Stokes v. Scott County, 10 Iowa 166, edly the term "street" or "avenue" 175; Dis. op. Dubuque County V. commonly applies to a public high- Dubuque, etc., R. Co., 4 Greene 1, way in a village, town, or city, and the term "road" to suburban highways. But there may be roads in a city or town and streets and avenues in the country. Murphy v. King County, 45 Wash. 587, 591, 88 P

14.

Mo.-Statc v. Hackman, 270 Mo. 658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc]. Nebr.-Follmer v. Nuckolls County, 6 Nebr. 204, 209; Peo. V. Buffalo County, 4 Nebr. 150, 158.

Pa. Kister v. Reeser, 98 Pa. 1, 4,

1115.
22. Griffin v. Sanborn, 127 Ga. 17,42 AmR 608.
56 SE 71; Southern R. Co. v. Combs, 33. U. S.-Abbott v. Duluth, 104
124 Ga. 1004, 53 SE 508; State v. Fed. 833, 837 [aff 117 Fed. 137, 55
Hackman, 270 Mo. 658, 195 SW CCA 153].
706.
Conn.-Manchester v. Hartford, 30
Conn. 118, 120.

23. Washington County V. Williams, 111 Fed. 801, 809, 49 CCA 621; Griffin v. Sanborn, 127 Ga. 17, 56 SE 71; Chamberlain v. Iowa Tel. Co., 119 Iowa 619, 621, 93 NW 596; Stokes V. Scott County, 10 Iowa 166, 175; State v. Hackman, 270 Mo. 658, 669, 195 SW 706 [quot Cyc].

[29 C. J.-24]

Iowa.--Chamberlain V. Jowa Tel. Co., 119 Iowa 619, 623, 93 NW 596; Stokes v. Scott County. 10 Iowa 166, 175; Dis. op. Dubuque County v. Dubuque, etc., R. Co., & Greene 1, 14, 15.

Minn. - Northwestern Tel. Exch.

[c] "Public road." Rodgers v. Bradshaw, 20 Johns. (N. Y.) 735, 742.

37. Nebraska Tel. Co. v. Western Independent Long Distance Tel. Co., 86 Nebr. 772, 776, 95 NW 18. [a] "Public road." Tennessee, etc., R. Co. v. Adams, 3 Head (Tenn.) 596, 598.

38. State v. Wapello County, 13 Iowa 388.

39. Jefferson County v. State, 172 Ala. 138, 54 S 757 [quot Best v. Birmingham, 16 Ala. A. 631, 632]: Nebraska Tel. Co. v. Western Independent Long Distance Tel. Co., 68 Nebr. 772, 776, 95 NW 18; Carter v. Rahway, 55 N. J. L. 177, 178, 26 A 96 [aff 57 N. J. L. 196, 30 A 8631; In re Woolsey, 95 N. Y. 135, 138; Vanderkar v. Rensselaer, etc., R. Co., 13 Barb. (N. Y.) 390, 391. [a] Public road." Tennessee, etc., R. Co. v. Adams, 3 Head (Tenn.) 596, 598.

the diminutive "private" is added thereto.11

Public road.42 A public road is a way established and adopted by proper authority for the use of the public, and over which every person has a right to pass, and to use for all purposes of travel or transportation to which it is adapted and devoted.43 Whether a road is public depends in a measure on the particular facts;44 thus it must, of physical necessity, be so situated and connected as to be accessible to the public;45 but it does not depend on its length,46 nor upon the place to which it leads, nor the number of people who use it; it is enough that the public have actual access to the road, whether by a mere neighborhood or settlement road,50 or by some established public highway. It is immaterial that one person may be most benefited by it.52

51

49

47

State road and county road. The terms "state road" and "county road" seem to have no precise technical meaning.53 In some statutes they are used

merely to distinguish "highways" created directly by the legislature and those erected by the county authorities under general laws;54 but a better supported view is that any public road lying wholly within one county is a county road,55 while a state road extends through or into several counties.56

66

66

Other words or terms construed. Other words or terms relating to highways have received the construction of the courts, including "an act concerning highways," 57 "any state, county or township highway,' 58 five miles of highway,' 959 "highway of Baltimore city," o "highways, established roads and ways, 7 61 "highways in a town," 62 laid cut," 63 laid out and established agreeably to law," 84 "laying out, ,"65 "open public highway,"' 66 "road de facto, 67 street, avenue, or highway,' "territorial road," 69 "the order made' or 'the authority granted,' ,"70 "to open," 71 and "turnout road." 72

II. ESTABLISHMENT
[BY EDWARD C. ELLSBREE]

1968

[2] A. In General. A highway may be estab- by statute or statutory proceedings in the exercise lished either by prescription, user, or recognition,73 of the right of eminent domain, or by dedication

41. Phillips v. Connellsville, etc., [e] "Public highway" and "pubR. Co., 247 Pa. 560, 564, 93 A 603. lic road" not synonymous-Johnson 42. See Private Roads [32 Cyc 366]. v. State, 1 Ga. A. 195, 198, 58 SE 265. 43. Cincinnati R. Co. v. Com., 80 44. Bradford V. Moseley, (Tex. Ky. 137, 138. See also Morgan v. Commn. A.) 223 SW 171, 173. Livingston, 6 Mart. (La.) 19, 120; 45. Trammell V. Bradford, 198 Newell v. Bassett, 33 N. J. L. 26, 28 Ala. 513, 73 S 894; In re Schuykill ("any part of a highway"); Burke v. River Road, 19 Pa. Super. 376, 377. Jackson County Ct., 70 W. Va. 174, 73 SE 304, 305.

[a] "Both termini of a road must be in a public highway or [a] Other definitions.—(1) "A public place in order for the road to way through the State, or from be a public road." Fanning v. Strotown to town." Singleton v. Road man, 113 S. C. 495, 498, 101 SE 861. Comrs., 11 S. C. L. 526, 527. (2) "A 46. Bradford V. Moseley, (Tex. road dedicated to, and kept up by Commn. A.) 223 SW 171, 173; Deckthe public, as contra-distinguished er v. Menard County, (Tex. Civ. A.) from private ways or neighborhood 25 SW 727, 728. roads, which are not so kept up." Mills v. State, 20 Ala. 86, 88 [quot McDade v. State, 95 Ala. 28, 11 S 375, 376]. (3) A road open and public for the passage of every person without any toll or other imposition. Bradshaw V. Rodgers, 20

Johns. (N. Y.) 103, 105.

[b] Restricted to rural highways. "Whatever may be the usage in other jurisdictions, we think it safe to say that in this state the term 'public roads' is commonly understood and recognized to apply exclusively to rural highways. It is thus understood and used by the people of the state generally, and it is doubtful whether, in the ordinary affairs of life and common conversation, it is ever used or understood to convey the idea of a street or alley of a city or village. This is a matter of common knowledge, and of which this court must take judicial notice. There is nothing in the act itself, nor in the legislative history of the state, that suggests that the legislature used the term in any other sense than that in which it is commonly used by the people of the state.

The statutes of the state were before the legislature when the act was passed. In those relating to cities and villages the term 'public roads' never occurs, while in those relating to rural highways it is invariably used, save in some cases where the term 'highway' is used as its equivalent." Nebraska Tel. Co. V. Western Independent Long Distance Tel. Co., 68 Nebr. 772, 776, 95 NW 18. [cl "Public path" synonymous. Singleton v. Road Comrs., 11 S. C. L. 526, 527.

[d] "Public highway" and "public road" equivalent.-District No. 1 Drain. Comrs. v. Cerro Gordo, 217 Ill. 488, 75 NE 516.

47. Bradford V. Moseley, (Tex. Commn. A.) 223 SW 171, 173; Decker v. Menard County, (Tex. Civ. A.) 25 SW 727.

49. Trammell V. Bradford,
Ala. 513, 73 S 894, 895.
50. Trammell V. Bradford,
Ala. 513, 73 S 894, 895.

Wis.-Jensen v. Polk County, 47 Wis. 298, 2 NW 320.

"What is known in some sections as a state road is a highway laid out by the direct authority of the state, generally between distant places and through different counties, to supply a want felt by a large district of country. which because of the diversity of interests the local authorities are not always willing to supply." Cowley County v. Johnson, 76 Kan 65, 68, 30 P 805.

[a] "Highway" equivalent to "state road."-Chamberlain V Towa Tel. Co., 119 Iowa 619, 621, 93 NW 596.

57. Findling v. Foster, 170 Ind. 325, 81 NE 480.

58. Houlton v. Carpenter, 29 Ind. A. 643, 64 NE 939, 940.

48. Bradford V. Moseley, (Tex. Commn. A.) 223 SW 171, 173; Decker v. Menard County, (Tex. Civ. A.) 25 SW 727. 198 59. Peo. v. Selkirk, 180 N. Y. 401. 405, 73 NE 248 (" 'five miles of 198 highway' is but describing five miles of land held in the form of a road"). 51. Trammell V. 198 60. Patapsco Electric Co. v. BalAla. 513, 73 S 894, 895. timore, 110 Md. 306. 72 A 1039, 1041. 52. Bradford V. Moseley. (Tex. 61. Goforth V. Southern R. Co., Commn. A.) 223 SW 171, 174: Gal-144 N. C. 569, 57 SE 209. veston, etc., R. Co. v. Baudat. 18 Tex. Civ. A. 595, 45 SW 939, 941. 42 A 239, 240. 53. Cowley County v. Johnson, 76 Kan. 65, 68, 30 P 805.

Bradford,

54. State v. Hayden, 32 Wis. 663, 673.

55. Cowley County v. Johnson, 76 Kan. 65. 68, 30 P 805; State v. Wood County, 17 Oh. 184, 186.

[a] "Highway" equivalent to "county road."-Chamberlain v. Iowa Tel. Co., 119 Iowa 619, 621, 93 NW 596.

[b] In Quebec, where one side of a road runs along the boundary line between two local municipalities, although such road is wholly situated in one of them, it is a county road. Walsh v. St. Anicet Parish, 25 Que. Super. 319, 320.

56. Kan.-Topeka v. Russam, 30 Kan. 550, 2 P 669; State v. Shawnee County, 28 Kan. 431.

62. Drew v. Cotton, 68 N. H. 22,

63. Heppes Co. V. Chicago, 260 Ill. 506. 512, 103 NE 455.

64. Morriss v. Cassaday, 78 Tex. 515, 518, 15 SW 102.

65. Heppes Co. v. Chicago, 260 Ill. 506, 512, 103 NE 455.

66. Bridgman v. Hardwick, 67 Vt. 132, 31 A 33, 34.

67. Locke v. St. Paul, etc., R. Co., 15 Minn. 350. 68. In re New York Cent., etc., R. Co., 200 N. Y. 121, 93 NE 515. 69.

673.

70.

State v. Hayden, 32 Wis. 663,

Cowley County v. Johnson, 76 Kan. 65, 30 P 805.

71. Cowley County v. Johnson, 76 Kan. 65, 69, 30 P 805 ("The expression 'to open,' as applied to a street or road, is used almost indifferently to express two very different processes the act of establishing or creating a highway, and that of actually putting in shape for travel one already having a legal existence"). 72. McDade v. State, 95 Ala. 28,

Mich-Davies v. Saginaw County, 89 Mich, 295, 50 NW 862; Pearsall v. Eaton County, 74 Mich. 558, 42 NW 77, 4 LRA 193; Delta Lumber Co. v. Wayne County, 71 Mich, 572, 40 NW 1; Pearsall v. Eaton County, 71 Mich. 438, 39 NW 578; Davis v. On-11 S 375. 376. tonagon County, 64 Mich. 404. 31 NW 73. See infra § 3. 405; Peo. v. Ingham County, 20 Mich. 74. Ala.-Thrasher v. Burr, 202 95. Ala. 307, 80 S 372; Bellview CemeMinn.-State V. Macdonald, 26 tery Co. v. McEvers, 174 Ala. 457, 57

S 375; Cross v. State. 147 Ala. 125, | Establishment of street or alley by | 52 AmR 513. 41 S 875; Harper v. State, 109 Ala. prescription see Municipal Corpo

rations [28 Cyc 835].
"Prescription" defined see [31 Cyc
1165].

User as evidence of:

Acceptance of dedication see
cation $75, 76.

Dedication see Dedication § 116. 81. State v. Kansas City, etc., R. Co., 45 Iowa 139; Riley v. Buchanan, 116 Ky. 625. 76 SW 527, 25 KyL 863. 63 LRA 642; Donahue v. New York, 112 N. Y. 142, 19 NE 419, 2 LRA 576; Clements v. West Troy, 10 HowPr (N. Y.) 199.

82. Ala.-Western R. Co. v. Alabama, etc., R. Co., 96 Ala. 272, 11 S 483, 485, 17 LRA 474; Rosser V. Bunn, 66 Ala. 89.

Ill. Thorworth v. Scheets, 269 Ill. 573, 110 NE 42; Chicago v. Borden, 190 111, 430, 60 NE 915; Warren v. Jacksonville, 15 Ill. 236, 58 AmD

Iowa. State v. Kansas City, etc.,
R. Co., 45 Iowa 139.

Kan. Meade v. Topeka, 75 Kan.
61, 88 P 574.

Ky-Riley v. Buchanan, 116 Ky.
625, 76 SW 527, 25 KyL 863, 63 LRA
642; Louisville, etc.. R. Co. v. Bailey,
SW 336, 33 KyL 179; Wright v.
Willis, 63 SW 991. 23 KyL 565.
V. Monongalia Me.-State v. Wilson, 42 Me. 9.
Mass.-Com. v. Coupe, 128 Mass.

N. J.-Prudden v. Lindsley, 29 N.
J. Eq. 615.

N. Y.-Donahue v. New York, 112
N. Y. 142, 19 NE 419, 2 LRA 576;
Clements v. West Troy, 10 HowPr
199.

N. C.-State v. Hunter, 27 N. C.
369. 44 AmD 41.

Pa.-Diehl v. Chambersburg, etc.,
St. R. Co., 17 Pa. Dist. 961.
S. C.-Smith v. Kinard, 20 S. C.
L. 642 note.
Tenn.-Saunders V. Simpson,
Tenn. 382, 37 SW 195.
Tex-Austin v. Hall, 93 Tex. 591,
57 SW 563; Porter v. Johnson, (Civ.
A.) 151 SW 599; Evans v. Scott, 37
Tex. Civ. A. 373, 83 SW 874.
Presumption of lost grant see Ad-caster County, 84 Nebr. 654, 121 NW
verse Possession $$ 650-655.

83. State v. Kansas City, etc., R. Co., 45 Iowa 139; Thomas v. Ford, 63 Md. 346. 52 AmR 513; Smith v. Nofsinger, 86 Nebr. 834, 126 NW 659; Reg. v. Good, 1 N. B. 35.

84. U. S.-Hicks v. Fish, 12 F.
Cas. No. 6.459, 4 Mason 310.
Ala.-Rosser v. Bunn, 66 Ala. 89.
Ark.-Waring V. Little Rock,
Ark. 408, 36 SW 24.
Conn.--Brownell
Conn. 107.

Ill. Thorworth v. Scheets, 269 Ill. "No matter whether it be estab-573, 110 NE 42. lished by prescription, or by dedi- Ind. Houlton V. Carpenter, 29 cation, or under the right of emi- Ind. A. 643. 64 NE 939. nent domain, it is a highway if there Iowa. State v. Mitchell, 58 Iowa is a general right to use it for 567. 12 NW 598. travel." Elliott Roads and Str. (2d ed) § 3 [quot Cleveland, etc., R. Co. v. Christie, supra]; Houlton v. Carpenter, 29 Ind. A. 643. 64 NE 939]. 79. Hutchinson v. State, 8 Ga. A. 684. 70 SE 63.