Fayette County herald. [volume] (Washington [Washington Court House], Fayette County, O. [Ohio]) 1860-1???, 1867-03-28
Communicated
TURNPIKE IMPROVEMENTS.


Mr.. EDITOR The projected turn.
pike improvements in our county
seem to occupy large share Of the
public thought, and well they might
for they involve a larger amount o.
taxation than was ever endured
here before for any such purposes,
and it behooves us all to think well
of what our duties are relative to
these vast Improvements; but more
especially SO, those who are ap-
pointed by the proper authorities as
the Arbitors or Judges Of the par
ticular lots Of lands to be assessed
for their construction, and the
amounts to be charged against each
tract or lot so designated, within the
limits Of two miles from each road
to be improved. Itappears that an
impression has gone abroad that it
was tile intention Of the law to as
sess for each road, only those lands
(which are included between two
lines drawn midway betwixt each
road to be improved. provided they
were within the limits Of two miles
from such road. Buta close scrn
tiny of the law shows clearly that
it was the intention Of the Legisla-
tiire that all lands within the two
mile limit thatare benefited by such
Improvements, should be assessed
for the same and q glance at the
map of our roads seems to bring
the same conviction, and shows the
utter impossibility Of nm equitable
distribution Of the assessment on
the flrst plan. So far as the ques-
stian OF assessment is concerned, i'll
Is Che emphatic duty Of the first
viewers appointed on such road, to
report list OF all lands (which lieI
within two miles OF said contem-
plated improvement8 that in their
opinion will be benefited thereby, |
and whether such lot is more or less
than half way between such road
and any other road is not subject to
their cognizance or Judgment, for
the very good reason that the law
makes no provision for il. And it
would appear very strange that the
hands along one side Of road to
tbe extent of two miles should be
assessed ON account Of benefit re-
sul4ing from their proximity to such !
road, while on the other side Of the
same road, no iands..wllich lie more
than one mile from the road are
benefited thereby, and therefore
cannot be assessed for such improve
ment.
The fact that they may be bene-
ilted by another road on the other
side, does not preclude the possibili.
ty of their being benefited by this
r0ad; and If they are, they ought to
he assessed. The power granted in
the first section of the law "to i'm
prove any State or County Road or
any part Of such Road,' coupled
with an assessment on lands to the
extent Of two miles on each side for
the construction Of the same, seems
10 recognize most emphat!cally the
that the average price or
sost Of each mile shall be paid by
an assessment on the lands adjaoent
.o that mile Of road. Hence, 1t IS
that we may assess 1880
,crcs of land on each side Of such
'oad for the construction Of each
nile Of such improvement The
of assessment as applied
o the Improvement Of the streets
81 villages and citiesls well known,
md is practically carried out in the
.heory that the benefit derived Is
'gniyaient to tho tax, and II seems
ho intention was to apply the same
nlmciple as far as practicable, TO
lie Improvement Of roads; hence
he necessity Of designating the OK
sr,s eg territory on each side Of the
-oad that should be assessed for
zach road, which would result IN
producing the same average amount
,f tax along each mile Of the road,
Bnt ifthe practice Of dividing the
aBds between each road is followed,
s In the case OF tke JeiiersonvilleI
md jamestown Roads, and the JEFF
,rsonville aud Prairie Roads, the
,esult is, that not mere than 320
,eres of land on each side Of each
nile flor u distance Of 8 miles from
Igashington) is left for assessment I
or les construction which would (
,ecessitate a tax on those lands to I
lnild their portion Of uge road,
10 81 80 per mere on an
average; which would be lessencd
,r relieved TO some extent By an as.
Icssment in lis favor at the county
lcat But in the apportIonment
lad on the Jeliersonyllle Road, II
xus found that the assessment on
hat portion of the road was less {
,n an average than The assessment 4
N lands similarly situated on the |
spper half Of the same road the {