Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-01-16

! had introduced bill on the same sub.
! iect, which had been reported back 10y
/ the committee and was now before the
| house, to come up with the other bills
| He regarded the matter AZ IA very i'm
| portant one, and there is great divers
| ity of opinion rs to what is proper Ia
be done in the premises. Only three
out of five of the committee signed the
majority report. He no! ed the mo.
| ton To postpone would not prevail
| He wanted To get his bill in, and then
he was willing for the postponenent.
Nash-''The bin is not before the
| house, and we cannot do anything. 1t
is only a two days delay, and he could
from BeXar has bill on the subject 10
considered, there is ample time.n The
motion WAS agreed To.
White OF Burleson offered resolu-
ton inviting Hon. j. II. McComb OF
Montgomery. member of the Sixteenth
and Seventeenth legislatures, to a seat
within the bar of the house. Adopted.
Foster's.(o Limestone) bill, report
ed favorably by the committee, was
taken up. 1t is as followe:
The commissioners courts of the
several counties shall have full power,
and it shall be their duty to order the
laying out and opening of public
roads when necessary, aud to discon-
tinue or alter any road whenever II
shall be deemed expedient, as herein
after prescribed, provided that hereafter
no public road shall be altered or
changed excel for placing IL on better
ground and shortening the distance
from the point of beginning TO the
point of destination.
Foster explained that the law as it
now stands permits roads To be chang
ed by the commissioners court In the
interest of private parties, provided
that they put the road in as good con-
dilion as before. The law seemed 10
have bet II gotten up in the interest of
individuals, and the object of the bill
was to compel changes to be made, If
at all, in the interest OF the public.
The law as ii now is goes upon the
presumption that the individual only
Is interested. He thought the public
and every man that travels was inter
ested. The bill would not interfere
with any further legislation
upon the suiect of road law. He said
II ha,. been suggested that the word
"oru should be substituted for "and''
in the bill, so that changes could be
made If they placed the road on bett er
ground or shortened the distance. He
knew Of changes in his county where
the roads were not In as good condi-
ton as before. He knew OF no way To
prevent this, except by an express law
on the subject. II IA district law IL not
made. the longest road Will always be
considered the best when changes are
desired.
Patterson of Wise rnoyed TO amend
as had been suggested in the remarks
OF the gentleman from Limestone. He
thought there might be n case when u
road would became impossible, and
vet IT could not be changed unless IL
was at the same time chartered.
Stout of NavarroOpposed the amend
ment. lie thought IL would defeat the
objects of the bill If he amendment
was adopted, parties would 90 into the
commissioners courts asking for
changes, and prove that they We're
putting the roads on better ground,
while all the time they were getting
longer. Where there would be
one Gaze of necessity for u
change there would be dozen
changes made in the interest OF indi-
yidusls that would iengthen the roads;
Foster of Limestone said siiis ''sii
would not affect roads now III use.
We have constitutional amendment
providing for u roud and bridge taN,
and ii theroad become impossible they
can he worked and put In good condi-
tim. The amendment was lost n.y. a
vote OF thirly-nine ayes 70 fprty-nine