Louisiana capitolian., 1880-08-24
THE PUBLIC ROADS.


A correspondent Of tho Clinton Watch
man has this TO say upon the subject Of
public ROAD work. II is timely, aud
will PEI haps settle tho minds Of some
who are az yet undecided, II not Oh
strOperous:
'l'l'is Is the season for working the
roads. Tho recent rains have made It
IN easy task this year. Now, we say let
every man do his duty, Road Overseer
and all, and II our public roads are not
made good, let tho District Attorney
and the Court do their duty, for once
let us have good roads in all parts Of
the parish.
I'VE say make all persons subject to
road duty work.
"The law is plain and strong enough,
aud we believe the Court will enforce IL
strictly. A few days siuce we were in
formed that there are u large number
of persons in this parish who never
have worked the roads refusing to do
80 upon the ground that there is no
law to compel them to do so. IL such is
their plea, we say to them be not de-
ceived. Listen to the Police Jury law
on that subject, and whosoever upon
such notice Chat is, the verbal notice
given by the Road Overseer) after one
days notification in writing, shall re.
fuse or neglect to perform road duty as
required, shall be subject to fine Of
not less than $l0 nor more than $50, or
imprisonment in the parish Jail not less
than ten nor more than twenty days.
"Lot each Road Overseer see that all
wise and stubborn persons receive this
notice in writing and then present the
matter to our District Attorney or Grand
jury at our next term of Court.
ut has been decided by our Supreme
Court that the Police Jury has the right
TO mako laws in regard to working tho
public roads. We quote ono decision in
full, which is good and covers the
points:
"The defendant was summoned to
work on the roads Of ST. Martin parish
and having refused, incurred 6ne Of
one dollar q day for each day he failed
to Oboy the summons. The Overseer Of
the road sued him for four dollars, the
fine for as many days Of delinquency.
The defendant pleaded q general denial
and the unconstitutionality Of the tax
levied on him. and there was Judgment
IN his favor. The Justice Of the Peace
has furnished written reasons for judg-
ment, which begin by properly reciting
that the action is for the recovery Of 81,
for failing to work the road, or fine, 70,
having refused to work tho road, but
concludes by ruling that the ordipan &C
of the Police Jury imposing fine leviea
a tax, and is therefore unconstitution
all '7hc Justice is IN error. Police Juriee
are authorized to pass all ordinances
relative to roads, and TO impose suct
fines and penalties to enforce them, q,
they may think proper, and that these
fines may DO enforced by ordinary pro
cess in the name of tho Police Jury.
"'The Police Jury of St. Martin passed
al ordinance requiring persons between
certain ages to work on public roads
and imposed fine Of one dollar o da,
for each day of failure to work whel
required. Tho defendant incurred th,
penalty imposed by tile ordinance
after having been duly summoned an,
he must pay for his dereliction of public
duty.
"One Of our surest tests of the civilli
zation of a country is the condition 0
the Public roads, years ago, at the ter
nination Of that period, when abl
bodied men we're needed elsewhere, thai
at home, there was good reason for i'm
passible roads, but there is none now
why those who are liable TO road duty
should be made to contribute part q
their time and labor to relieving th
country from the reproach Of bavin
highways, which are danger to th
traveller and an obstruction to tLos
who transport produce over then
1t is ordered, adjudged and decreed; tia
the Judgment of the Justice of til
Peace is avoided and reversed; aud it
further decreed that there be iudgme en-
in favor of tho Parish of St, Marti,