Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

right of way by prescription, an adverse user must be shown for a required length of time, and to establish it by dedication, an acceptance by the proper public officials. The principles controlling the expenditure of public moneys upon highways and streets, as the division is commonly made, depends upon the fact of whether a certain way is either a street or a highways65 as coming within the classification and division either made by law or by court decision in a particular locality.

§ 424. Opening or construction of a highway or street.

The right to open or construct a public street or highway if belonging to public corporations of whatever grade will depend upon either a general or a specific grant of authority, a general grant of authority as found in the general laws of the state establishing the right and prescribing the manner in which such public ways shall be opened and used by the publics or a spe

V.

218, 46 N. W. 992; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Survant, 96 Ky. 197; Reed Inhabitants of Northfield, 30 Mass. (13 Pick.) 94; Hobart v. Fiymouth County, 100 Mass. 159; Mayberry v. Inhabitants of Standish, 56 Me. 342; Bice v. Town of Walcott, 64 Minn. 459, 67 N. W. 360; North Hempstead Highway Com'rs v. Queens County, 17 Wend. (N. Y.) 9; Smith v. Slemons, 78 Tenn. (10 Lea) 31. See post, sections on acquirement of public property by prescription.

864 Brown v. Hines, 16 Ind. App. 1; McHenry v. Selvage, 18 Ky. L. R. 473, 35 S. W. 645; Board of Council of Danville v. Fiscal Ct., 21 Ky. L. R. 196, 51 S. W. 157, withdraw ing opinion in 20 Ky. L. R. 1495, 49 S. W. 458; Cascade County v. City of Great Falls, 18 Mont. 537; Columbia & P. S. R. Co. v. City of Seattle, 6 Wash. 332; City of Milwaukee v. Davis, 6 Wis. 377.

865 In re Woolsey, 95 N. Y. 135; Race v. State, 43 Tex. Cr. R. 438,

66 S. W. 560. See Town of Wardsboro v. Town of Jamaica, 59 Vt. 514, 9 Atl. 11, as to division of expenses and maintenance of a highway between two towns.

866 People v. Lake County Sup'rs, 33 Cal. 487; Bequette v. Patterson, 104 Cal. 282; Salem & H. Turnpike Co. v. Lyme, 18 Conn. 451; Keech v. People, 22 Ill. 478; McClure v. Franklin County Com'rs, 124 Ind. 154, 24 N. E. 741; Gibbons v. Copper, 67 Ind. 81; Higham v. Warner, 69 Ind. 549; Johnson v. Wells County Com'rs, 107 Ind. 15; People v. Village of Brighton, 20 Mich. 57; Shue v. Highway Com'rs of Richmond, 41 Mich. 638. The opening of a highway should be determined on its own merits without reference to the opening or discontinuance of other roads.

De Lapp v. Beckwith, 114 Mich. 394, 72 N. W. 237; People v. Richmond County Sup'rs, 20 N. Y. 252; In re Central Park Com'rs, 51 Barb. (N. Y.) 277; In re Lexington Ave.,

cific grant of authority as found in a special law where such legislation is permitted or in the charter of a particular municipal organization. 867 Where the latter authority exists it does not partake of the nature of a contract but may be repealed or trans

63 How. Pr. (N. Y.) 462; In re Board of St. Opening & Imp. of N. Y., 111 N. Y. 581; Foster v. Wood County Com'rs, 9 Ohio St. 540; Maxwell v. Tillamook County, 20 Or. 495, 26 Pac. 803. Special legislation relative to the construction of a wagon road when in violation of a constitutional provision is invalid. In re Road in Borough of Verona (Pa.) 12 Atl. 456; Millcreek Tp. v. Reed, 29 Pa. 195. The opening of a public highway considered a proceeding in rem. Smith v. Pennington County, 2 S. D. 14; Hydes Ferry Turnpike Co. V. Davidson -County, 91 Tenn. 291, 18 S. W. 626; Painter v. St. Clair, 98 Va. 85, 34 S. E. 989; Lewis County v. Hays, 1 Wash. T. 109; State v. Hogue, 71 Wis. 384, 36 N. W. 860.

867 City of Hannibal v. Campbell, 30 C. C. A. 63, 86 Fed. 297; Himmelmann v. Hoadley, 44 Cal. 213. The legislature may confirm an insufficient establishment of a highway by a board of supervisors. See, also, Fair v. Buss, 117 Iowa, 164, 90 N. W. 527; Onderdonk v. City & County of San Francisco, 75 Cal. 534; Cohen v. City of Alameda, 124 Cal. 504; Byrne v. Drain, 127 Cal. 663; Inhabitants of Berlin v. Inhabitants of New Britain, 9 Conn. 175; Banks V. Borough of Greenwich (Conn.) 15 Atl. 738; Hough v. City of Bridgeport, 57 Conn. 290; City Council of Augusta v. Murphey, 79 Ga. 101; Curry v. Town of Mt. Sterling, 15 Ill. 320; Dewey v. City of Des Moines, 101 Iowa, 416; City of

re

Lowell v. Hadley, 49 Mass. (8 Metc.) 180; Bean v. Inhabitants of Hyde Park, 143 Mass. 245, 9 N. E. 638; Attorney General v. Old Colony & N. R. Co., 94 Mass. (12 Allen) 404; Butchers' Slaughtering & Melting Ass'n v. City of Boston, 139 Mass. 290; Dorman v. City Council of Lewiston, 81 Me. 411; In re Powers, 29 Mich. 504; Paul v. City of Detroit, 32 Mich. 108; White v. City of Saginaw, 67 Mich. 33; Scotten v. City of Detroit, 106 Mich. 564; In Independence Ave. Boulevard, 128 Mo. 272, 30 S. W. 773; Town of Rye v. Rockingham County, 68 N. H. 268; Bowker v. Wright, 54 N. J. Law, 130, 23 Atl. 116; Lenly v. Inhabitants of West Hoboken, 54 N. J. Law, 508, 24 Atl. 477; Wirth v. Jersey City, 56 N. J. Law, 216, 27 Atl. 1065, construing Jersey City charter, § 41; Pancoast v. Troth, 34 N. J. Law, 377, construing charter provisions of the city of Bordentown; In re Public Road, 54 N. J. Law, 539; In re Fowler, 53 N. Y. 60; In re Gilroy, 43 App. Div. 359, 60 N. Y. Supp. 200, affirmed in 164 N. Y. 576, 58 N. E. 1087; Rider v. Stryker, 63 N. Y. 136; In re Common Council of Brooklyn, 73 N. Y. 179; In re East Grant St., 121 Pa. 596; In re Ruan St., 132 Pa. 257, 7 L. R. A. 193; Dorrance v. Dorranceton Borough, 181 Pa. 164; Borough of Verona v. Allegheny Valley R. Co., 187 Pa. 358; Town of Ilwaco v. Ilwaco R. & Nav. Co., 17 Wash. 652. See, also, subject fully treated in sections post, relating to the ac

ferred by the legislature at pleasure.868 In exercising the authority, whatever its source, the fundamental principle must not be forgotten that there is a taking of private property for public use. 869 That this be constitutional, compensation must be secured to the owner of the property taken,870 and all provisions prescribing the manner of "taking" must be strictly followed.871 Laws involving a "taking" of private property for public uses are not liberally construed.8T2

quirement of public property by em- lace v. Karlenowefski, 19 Barb. (N. inent domain.

868 Metropolitan Exhibition Co. v. Newton, 51 Hun, 639, 4 N. Y. Supp. 593; Keyport Com'rs v. Cherry, 51 N. J. Law, 417, 18 Otl. 299. "If power to lay streets is conferred by a special charter incorporating a town, the general authority of the court of common pleas for laying roads in the townships of the state is excluded." Wilson v. Inhabitants of Trenton, 55 N. J. Law, 220, 26 Atl. 83. In re South Chester Road, 80 Pa. 370. The question of repeal is one of fact.

869 Ex parte Martin, 13 Ark. 198; Lake Merced Water Co. v. Cowles, 31 Cal. 215; Todd v. Austin, 34 Conn. 78; O'Hara v. Lexington & O. R. Co., 31 Ky. (1 Dana) 232; Spring v. Russell, 7 Me. (7 Greenl.) 273; Cooper v. Williams, 4 Ohio, 253. See, also, City of Waterbury v. Platt, 75 Conn. 387, 9 Mun. Corp. Cas. 536, and cases cited.

870 Fulton County v. Amorous, 89 Ga. 614; Burcky v. Town of Lake, 30 Ill. App. 23; Culbertson & Blair Packing & Provision Co. v. City of Chicago, 111 Ill. 651; Kern v. Isgrigg, 132 Ind. 4, 31 N. E. 455.

Guckien v. Rothrock, 137 Ind. 355, 37 N. E. 17. A reassessment for a gravel road without notice to the land owners affected is void. Wal

Y.) 118; In re Town of East Hampton, 21 App. Div. 623, 47 N. Y. Supp. 269; Wagner v. Salzburg Tp., 132 Pa. 636; Seymour v. State, 19 Wis. 240.

Compensation necessary.

McCann

v. Sierra County, 7 Cal. 121; Colton v. Rossi, 9 Cal. 595; Powers v. Armstrong, 19 Ga. 427; Evansville & C. R. Co. v. Dick, Ind. 433; Hamilton v. Annapolis & E. R. R. Co., 1 Md. Ch. 107; Connecticut River R. Co. v. Franklin County Com'rs, 127 Mass. 50; Donnaher v. State, 16 Miss. (8 Smedes & M.) 649; Ash v. Cummings, 50 N. H. 591; In re Hamilton Ave., 14 Barb. (N. Y.) 405; Sterling's Appeal, 111 Pa. 35; Norris v. City of Waco, 57 Tex. 635.

871 Huey v. Richardson, 2 Har. (Del.) 206; Gillinwater v. Mississippi & A. R. Co., 13 Ill. 1; Green v. Green, 34 Ill. 320; Todemier v. Aspinwall, 43 Ill. 401; Whittaker v. Gutheridge, 52 Ill. App. 460.

Highway Com'rs v. People, 61 Ill. App. 634. A delay in filing for three years a final order on the laying out of a highway is fatal to its legality. Phipps v. State, 7 Blackf. (Ind.) 512; Neff v. Smith, 91 Iowa, 87, 58 N. W. 1072; Morris Canal & Banking Co. v. Central R. Co., 16 N. J. Eq. (1 C. E. Green) 419.

872 Murphy v. De Groot, 44 Cal.

(a) Cost of construction or opening. The necessary funds for the opening or construction of a public highway are raised through the exercise of the taxing or revenue producing power of the state, and generally, in the case of a street, by a special assessment upon property benefited;873 and, in the case of a highway, the levy of a general tax; 874 the raising and collection of the funds and its disbursement876 will be governed by the principles controlling the state in the exercise of this power.877

51; Southern Pac. R. Co. v. Wilson, 49 Cal. 396; Spring Valley Water Works v. San Mateo Water Works, 64 Cal. 123; Occum Co. v. A. & W. Sprague Mfg. Co., 35 Conn. 496; Chicago & N. W. R. Co. v. City of Chicago, 132 Ill. 372; Durant v. Jersey City, 25 N. J. Law (1 Dutch.) 309; New York & H. R. Co. v. Kip, 46 N. Y. 546, 7 Am. Rep. 385.

873 Bauman v. Ross, 167 U. S. 548; Dougherty v. Miller, 36 Cal. 83; Goodwillie v. City of Lake View (11.) 21 N. E. 817; Goodrich v. Winchester & D. Turnpike Co., 26 Ind. 119; Manor v. Jay County Com'rs (Ind.) 34 N. E. 959; Broadway Baptist Church v. McAtee, 71 Ky. (8 Bush) 508.

Semel v. Gould, 12 La. Ann. 225. Property of the United States is held not subject to taxation for such purposes. Howe v. Aroostook County Com'rs, 46 Me. 332; Woodbridge v. City of Detroit, 8 Mich. 274; Clay v. City of Grand Rapids, 60 Mich. 451. The cost of constructing a main sewer cannot be assessed upon abutting property by calling the sewer a street, the expense of the construction of a street being so assessable but not a sewer. Brown v. City of Saginaw, 107 Mich. 643, 65 N. W. 601; Kansas City v. Baird, 98 Mo. 215; Foster v. Wood County Com'rs, 9 Ohio St. 540; City of Philadelphia v. Dibeler (Pa.) 23

Atl. 567. See Chap. VI, subd. II, on Special Assessments, §§ 337 et seq., ante.

874 Nichols v. City of Bridgeport, 23 Conn. 189; Thorn v. Washington County Com'rs, 14 Minn. 233 (Gil. 171); Webster v. Alton, 29 N. H. (9 Fost.) 369; In re Twenty-Sixth St., 12 Wend. (N. Y.) 203; McMasters v. Com., 3 Watts (Pa.) 292; Town of Pomfret v. Town of Hartford, 42 Vt. 134. The liability of one town to contribute to the cost and maintenance of bridges in another depends entirely upon statutory provisions and can be imposed only in the manner and to the extent authorized.

875 Tennant v. Crocker, 85 Mich. 328; Thornton v. City of Clinton, 148 Mo. 648.

876 Dupont v. City of Pittsburgh, 69 Fed. 13; Wiegel v. Pulaski County, 61 Ark. 74. A contract for the construction of a public highway is void without an appropriation having been first made. Priet v. Reis, 93 Cal. 85; Manor V. Jay County Com'rs (Ind.) 34 N. E. 959; Lyon v. City of Grand Rapids, 30 Mich. 253; Michigan Land & Iron Co. v. L'Anse Tp., 63 Mich. 700; Lumber Tp. v. Cameron County, 134 Pa. 105, 19 Atl. 498; Childs v. Brown Tp., 40 Pa. 332.

877 See §§ 302 et seq., and 338 et seq., supra.

(b) Time and manner of opening. The legislature in granting to a subordinate public corporation the power to establish and maintain highways exercises and delegates a governmental function;878 a power which in its exercise is not ministerial or clerical in its character but which calls for the exercise of judgment and discretion, and therefore, when delegated to a particular municipal body, a reference or delegation by it to its own subordinate agencies is not authorized.879 The other rule of law also holds that the original delegated body has full power to act within the authority as granted,sso and this applies both to the

878 City of Waterloo v. Union Mill Co., 72 Iowa, 437. "The city is but an instrument for the exercise of the authority of the state, and its municipal powers in establishing and maintaining a street are exercised in the discharge of governmental functions. The statute of limitations therefore will not run to defeat the exercise of its governmental authority." Brimmer v. City of Boston, 102 Mass. 19; Trustees of Belfast Academy v. Salmond, 11 Me. 109; Backus v. Lebanon, 11 N. H. 19.

879 Gregory v. City of Bridgeport, 52 Conn. 40; Brown v. Robertson, 123 Ill. 631, affirming 23 Ill. App. 461. This rule will not compel the performance of each act necessary in the opening of a highway; the performance of mechanical duties may be properly delegated. But see Dorman v. City Council of Lewiston, 81 Me. 411, where it is held that a city council having the exclusive power and authority to lay out any new street or public highway can refer a petition for the establishment of a new street to a committee of its own body for investigation and report, such report being a matter of final consideration by the council. Hydes v. Joyes, 67 Ky. (4 Abb. Corp. Vol. II-7.

Bush) 464; City of Monroe v. Johnson, 106 La. 350, 30 So. 840.

Gold v.

880 Atwood v. Partree, 56 Conn. 80, 14 Atl. 85. The same rule applies also to discretionary authority for the repair of highways. Clark v. Town of Middlebury, 47 Conn. 331; Osborn v. Sutton, 108 Ind. 443, 9 N. E. 410; Stipp v. Claman, 123 Ind. 532, 24 N. E. 131; Switzerland County Com'rs v. Reeves, 148 Ind. 467, 46 N. E. 995. The rule applies in spite of mere irregularities and errors in the proceedings. Pittsburgh, C., C. & St. L. R. Co., 153 Ind. 232; Strahan v. Town of Malvern, 77 Iowa, 454; In re Inhabitants of Belfast, 52 Me. 529; National Docks R. Co. v. Jersey City, 55 N. J. Law, 194, 26 Atl. 145; Matthiessen & Wiechers Sugar Refining Co. v. Jersey City, 26 N. J. Eq. (11 C. E. Green) 247; New Jersey Southern R. Co. v. Chandler, 65 N. J. Law, 173, 46 Atl. 732. The authority of officials to act is limited strictly to territory within their jurisdiction. Freeman v. Price, 63 N. J. Law, 151.

People V. Richmond County Sup'rs, 20 N. Y. 252; In re Depart ment of Public Parks, 85 N. Y. 459. Officials must act strictly within their powers as granted. In re

« AnteriorContinuar »