The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1901-01-12
A. ROAD CASE OF INTEREST.
Objections 10 Proposed Road and A Legal
Battle.

About a year ago the opening Of road from
Westminster to the Bloom road. or rather Two
roads, forming one whole, was conceived, the
necessary publication of an intention TO apply
to the County Commissioners was made, and
in due time the application was made. A
part of the route of the proposed road is
through the Aims House farm. Objections to
the road were fled by Mrs. Elizabeth Gist and
others and by the Washington and Westmin-
ster Turnpike Company.
The objections to the road were heard by
the County Commissioners on Thursday of last
week, when the petitioners made motion to
dismiss them. No testimony was taken, and
1.-THE question was argued by Bond & Parke and
Jno. Milton Reifsnider for the petitioners and
by Guy w. Steele for the directors.
As stated last week, much interest is mani
tested in the controversy and large number
of people were in attendance at the hearing.
The Commissioners reserved their decision
until Monday In the meantime they con-
suited their counsel, William Fl. Thomas, as
to the law in reference TO granting a roadway
through the Aims House farm. Mr.. Thomas
gave them the following opinion in writing !:
Westminster, Md, January It'll, 1901.
To the County Commissioners of Carroll
County, Gentlemen -
Replying to your request, on the Bird inst,
for statement of the law touching the ques-
ton as to your right, upon proper application,
Ito open public road through the farm com
monty known as the "Alms House farm, L
beg to submit the following
The act of opening a public road by the
County Commissioners is the exercise by them
|of the right of eminent domain delegated to
them by the Legislature in cases where the
public convenience requires it.
The Legislature may authorize not only the
taking of private property but property already
devoted to public use. As to the latter, au-
|thority given by the Legislature must be either
lin expressed terms or by necessary implica-
|tion. This, however, is subject to the further
qualification, that even under a general au-
|thority property already devoted to public
use may be appropriated to another public use
as will not injure or interfere with the public
use to which the property is already devoted.
The property known as the Aims House
farm was purchased in pursuance of the act
of 1852, chapter 248, which authorized the
County Commissioners of Carroll County to
purchase a farm in said County containing not
more than $50 acres of land, ''for the purpose
of erecting buildings thereon, for the reception
and accommodation of the poor OF said Coun-
ty.r The County Commissioners having pur-
chased under said act larger farm than was
authorized by its terms, said purchase was
subsequently ratified by the act of 1858, chap
ter %, which authorized them to sell any por-
ton ofsaie farm when in their Judgment public
interest should require such sale. Under this
latter act am informed that the County Com
|missioners sold off of said farm all that, in
their judgment, was not required for the pur
poses stated in the first act.
Since the passage of the Acts aforemen-
tioned the Legislature has by successive legs-
1ation authorized the Court, aud by the Act
|pf 1900, chapter SOB, the County Commission
Iers of Carroll County, to commit to said Aims
House the luuatic or insane paupers of the
County.
The question, therefore, to be determined
|by you, in this connection, is whether the
opening of a public road through said farm
would seriously interfere or be inconsistent
3 With the public use of said farm as place
where the poor and the insane paupers of this
County are or may be taken care of.
! If, in your judgment, you find that the open
ing and use of said public road through said
farm would interfere with the use abovemen-
toned, to wit, as a place for the accommoda-
ton of the poor and the insane paupers of this
County, then, under the authorities cited be-
low, you would not be authorized to open
public road through said farm; if, on the other
hand, in your Judgment, the opening and use
of public road through said farm would not
seriously interfere with the uses aforesaid to
which the said property by legislative enact
ment has been devoted. then you would, under
the general authority given you to open roads,
be authorized, on the proper application, to
open public road through said farm.
As | stated on Thursday, | knoy of no case
in Maryland where the question before you
has been directly determined, but as instances
of the application of the rule above announced,
I cite for your consideration the following
cases
Evergreen Cemetery Association VS.. City of
New Haven, 81 Am. R., 643.
Wellington ct al. VS.. petitioners, 26 Am.
D., 621 (16 Pick. 81.
Boston Water Power Co. VS.. Boston, etc.,
r. Corp, % Pick. 800.
Yours respectfully,
w. Fl. THOMAS.
On Monday the Commissioners ovsrruled
the motion to dismiss the objections to the
Circuit Court The decision OF the Commits
sioners is as follows:
In the matter of the Public Road asked for
through the Aims House farm
Ordered this seventh day of January, 1901,
by the county commissioners or CafrOl
County, that the motion of the petitioners for
the above public road to dismiss the 3rd and
4th objections of Elizabeth Gist and others to
the opening of said road be overruled, it be-
ing our opinion and judgment that the open
ing of said public road through the Aims
House farm would not be right and proper, as
it would be inconsistent with the public uses
to which said Aims House property is already
devoted, and would seriously interfere with
the proper custody and control of the poor
and insane paupsrs of this County on said
property, and might seriously interfere with
the erection of the additional buildings on said
property that the rapid increase of the insane
paupers of this County NAV shortly require.
The motion to dismiss the additional objec
tom of said Elizabeth Gist and others to the
opening of said road is also overruled, it be-
ing admitted that there is no public road of
the width required by law leading from the
Aims House farm TO Westminster, and we be-
ing of the opinion that it would not be right
and proper to open public road that does
not end at public place or another public
road. JESSE LENNON,