The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1883-12-29
THE BRIDGE QUESTION.
Opinion Of Judge Gilbert.
That the Towns OF Ottawa and South
Ottawa Have the Right to Build
the Bridge.

whether the towns OF Ottawa and Sout
Ottawa are authorized by law to build
new bridge across the Illinois river at o
tawa to replace the one built by the Hi
nois River Bridge Company and wh,c
has now become 50 out of repair as to en-
danger the safety of the public In answe
TO this question submit the followin
epinion:
Section 81 of the Road and Bridge Ac
of 1883 provides that bridges over stream
which divide towns or counties y
shall be built and repaired at the expens
Of such towns or counties" Substantial.
tho same provision existed in prevlou
road and bridge acts AS the Illinois rly
cr IS stream dividing the towns OF Ottaw'
and South Ottawa there can be no ques
non that those towns have the power t
build bridge over it, but, iDasmuch N
the bridge nOw maintained is within TIT
limits OF the city OF Ottawa, doubts have
been expressed as to whether the towns II
question can legally rebuild it.
1t will be observed that the statutory
provision above quoted does not IN ltsel
limit the power or the duty of towns to the
building OF such hridges rs are wholly
without the limits OF city, but on The
contrary the letter of the law makes it thu
duty of the towns to build and maintain
bridges over streams which divide them
without regard 10 whether such bridges
may be within or without the limits OF d
city Hence it follows that the towns have
The power to build the bridge 10 question
unless there are ether statutory provisions
by which the on, under consideration Is
limited or controlled. The only provisions
which are claimed to limit the powers of
the towns to the building of bridge, that
are wholly without the limits of city, arc
the sections oil the act IN relation to cities,
villages and towns, which vest cities with
power to lay out, open and improve
streets, and TO construct and keep in repair
bridges, vladucts, tunnels, &c, and regu-
late The use thereof, and the provisions of
The Road and Bridge Act which prescribe
the method OF distribution and expenditure
Of road and bridge taxes. From the Tor
mer the argument has been advanced that
the burden of building bridges within Its
limits is cast upon the city and that to per.
NIT the towns to build bridge within the
city would sanction the assumption by the
towns Of liability which the law has cast
upon the city and an interference by the
towns with the duties and powers of the
city in relation to It's streets. From the
latter ii is claimed that the directions given
FOR the distribution anu expenditure of the
road and bridge tax are inconsistent with
legislative intention that u township
should expend any portion thereof within
the limits OF a city.
To properly understand the nature of the
question under consideration it ID neces-
sary that we should have clear appreben
sion Of what is meant by the power and
duty Of II city to builG bridges and open
streets. Perhaps no clearer statement of
tbs law In that respect can be found than
that given by the Supreme Court in the
case of The CITY Of Joliet vs.. Perley, 35 ILL.,
SO, where the court say:
"The legal obligation of a city to repair
highways, streets, sidewalks and bridges
within Its corporate limits, Is one volunta-
@rily assumed by It's corporate authorities and
relates to such as are opened, or construct.
led, or allowed to be opened or constructed
under Its authority and those which Its Of.
Ulcers assume control over for that purpose.
~ settles are under & political obligation
Ito open such streets and build such market
''houses as the convenience Of the communi-
'ty requires; but courts cannot compel the
performance OF such duties, or hold them
Irresponsible for their performance,
So IN the case in hand 1t must be said
that although the city of Ottawa may have
power to build bridge across the illinois
river, and although, If the finances of the
city justify it, there may be political OBJ
legation on its part toto 30; yet, it 1t ex.
ercises that power. it must do so volunta-
rily and not by reason of any legal obllga-
ton in respect thereto which can be en-
forced by the courts.
On the other hand the towns of Ottawa
and South Ottawa have the power to build
bridge across the stream which divides
them, and, if public convenience requires
and the finances of the towns Justify it,,
they are under political obligation to
build 1t, and yet that obligation cannot be
enforced unless it has been voluntarily as
sumed.
IL cannot be SAID that the city OF Ottawa
has ever voluntarily assumed the obllca.
ton to build the bridge in question. While
ithas expended some money upon it by
way of repairs, 1t has done so not for the
purpose of expressing an intention to as
sumo Its management. and control, but
simply for the purpose OF protecting the
public from injury, after its abandonment
by the towns. The towns, on the contrary,
by their purchase of the bridge from the
Illinois River Bridge Company, aud by
their contrac. to keep 1t IN repair, with
which for several wears they com nI,ed