The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-01-24
LAWS ARE IN A TANGLE
ONE COMPREHENSIVE MEASURE
SHOULD BE ADOPTED.
Amos w. Butler and others Advocate
Discretion in Caring for De-
pendent Persons.

the association elected OHcerS, as IecOln-
mended by the nominating committee, as
follows: John NJ. Bloss, Muncie, presi-
dent; Bernard McAfee Mitchell. vice pres
ident Pearson Mendenhall, Indianapolis,
secretary, and Edison Sarber treasurer.
The executive committee appointed by the
president is composed of Frank c. Fish
beck, Terre Haute; E. NJ. Chaplin. War
saw; p. S. Sullivan, Peru. The legislative
committee is as follows: John Dansman.
Evansville; Bernard McAfee, Mitchell;
Isaac Phillips, Jeffersonville; James Stew
art, Madison; Smith r. Davis, North Sa-
lem; o. ID. Sanders, Middletown; Pearson
Mendenhall, Indianapolis; John NJ. Bloss,
Muncie; w. McReynolds, Cassville; Joseph
A. Beattie. Crown Point: Eli F. Coats.
Marion; Lewis Schermyer, Fort Wayne;
Charles Jackson, Kewanee.
AT the morning session papers were read
by P. S. Sullivan, on School Libraries"
B. l.. Blair. on Development of Township
System T.. II. Stradling, on bitches,
and by Attorney General Taylor on Good
Roads" In part, Mr.. Taylor spoke as
follows:
THE utter confusion now prevailing be-
tween the road laws of Indiana renders it
practically impossible, in the few minutes
allotted, to even digest the road laws of the
State. The remnants, more less obscure
and obsolete, of fully fifty road laws con-
stitute a Heterogeneous mass of frills ravel
ings and worn out bodies of road laws,
scattered all along from 1852 to the present
time. Each Legislature adds to the con-
fusion by enacting a whole group of laws
either amendatOry, supplemental or origi-
nal II is no wonder. therefore that town
ship officers and county officers, when they
get into the maze of road laws, become con-
fused and do not know which way to turn.
Inc fact is that the changing OF the road
laws have come to be so frequent that they
do not stand long enough for a kodak OPP
orator to get a snap shot at them before
they are repealed.
What ought TO be done is to have one
road law covering every question con-
nected with the laying out, construction,
maintenance and repair of, all township,
county and State roads, gravel. macadam-
lied, turnpike or dirt; covering also the
construction. repair and maintenance of
bridges; and then repeal all of the fifty
existing laws, and for once have plain
statute that anybody can read and under
stand, and let IL stand long enough so that
the people of the State can get used to it..
About the time that the farmers of the
State begin TO understand law, it is re-
pealed and new scheme is foisted on
FISH-LAW FARCE.
Look at the fish law. Two years ago an
act was passed encouraging the purchase
of seines by licensing them. They were to
be one hundred feet in length and were
used practically everywhere in the State.
/
the law 1886 senes were sold, pursuant to
statute. and were licensed, and the State
obtained the Fee and the purchasers of
! the SeineS paid for their expensive seines
AT the very next session of the Legisla-
ture this law was repealed, and, by statute,
not only the use, but the ownership or
having in possession of any one of these
thousands of seines that the State had lust
licensed two years before. was made a
penal offense. for the violation of which law
a fine of $500 and Imprisonment for sixty
days in the county Jail could be affixed
THE road laws in Indiana have met with
no less sudden reverses. Two years ago
the statute provided for a board Of turn
pike directors. to consist of the members
of the Board of County Commissioners. By
! that law the road supervisors were to have
entire charge of the repair of all the roads
in their respective road districts, under the
| direction of the board of turnpike direct ors
The road supervisors We're to buy the ma
! oversee and superintend the work and en-
| plOy the Ia 6orers, and to pay SIPS a day for
/ a man and $3.50 day for man with a team.
| The road supervisor was 10 receive $3.50 a
\ day. But the Legislature of 1901 repeats
! that law by implication and changes the
| whole scheme of the road law so far as
affects all gravel, macadam and free turn
! pike roads in the State
/ 1.-The act of March IL, 1901, is the latest
/ general law on the subject of the location,
/ construction and maintenance of free
/ gravel. stone. macadam or turnpike roads.
/ This law attempted to simplify. and does
| very greatly simplify, the laws on the sub
| iect of the construction and maintenance
| of roads The author was doubtless afraid
to repeal all of the laws and make a gen.
eraI law on the subject, lest it should fail
of passage.
this new law; that 1t is unsafe to attempt
| to construct any free gravel, stone or
| macadamized road or turnpike in Indiana
| on which bonds are to be issued without
| taking into account this law. The limit of
per cent: of the taxable property of the
| are constructed, under this law, they pass
under the control of the Board of County
Commissioners for their maintenance"
BRIDGE QUESTION.
Regarding the question of bridges the at
| torney general said:
Bridges are classified as: First. inter
| county bridges, those between two coun-
ties; second, intertownship bridges, those
| between two townships or a township that
! is on county boundary line; third. county
cities and towns. The statutes providing
for the construction of intercounty and in
| tertowhship bridges are clearly drawn and
| provide in what cases elections shall be
| held and appropriations made for the con-
| struction of such bridges where they are tC
| be constructed out of the county treasury
l shall discuss therefore, only the general
| section respecting the construction OF
bridges in the county, whether located out
| side of or within cities and towns ] refer
to Section ! of the act of 1857 and Section
| of the act of 1885.
Section l. above referred to. provides
! that Whenever. in the opinion of the Coun-
| " Commissioners. the public convenience
| shall require that a bridge shall be repaired
| or built over any water course they shall
I cause survey and estimate thereof to bt
| made and direct same to be created This
| applies 10 bridges generally.
Now. as to bridges within the cities and
| towns Section OF the act OF 1885 is CON
| trolling and reads as follows: All bridges
| the estimated cost of which shall exceed
| $500 to be built within the corporate limits
| of any city or town within this State. shall
| sioners in the same manner and paid out of
the same funds that other bridges without
| such corporate limits OF such city or town
| are By law built and paid for
| THE question rises: Can cities AND
| towns build bridges within their corpora Il
| limits Notwithstanding this provision2' In
the first place all bridges costing less thar
| $500 and located within cities and towns
/ must be built by the cities and towns
| while all bridges costing more than 500
| must be built by the Board of County Com.
| missioners unless the cities or towns see
proper TO build the bridges themselves
several cases decided that: First IL is IN,
primary duty Of he county to build al
bridges within cities and towns costing IL
excess Of $500: second, cities and town:
may build such bridges themselves, anC
third after such bridges are constructed
IL Is within the duty OF the cities and town.
10 keep them in rersir.
There is also what might be termed
township bridge provided for in the act o.
1888 This statute, as construed, provide.
that trustees have authority TO build al