The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-08-19
OPINION ON
ROADS AND
HIGHWAYS
Attorney General RObbertS
Lays Down the Law
ACT FAILS TO DEFINE
Power to Open and Lay Out
Roads Is Intended,

Guthrie, o. T, Aug. 18.-Attorney Cen
eral J. c. Roberts today handed down
an opinion on the construction of roads
ana highways. The opinion, in fuI. is
as follows:
Guthrie, o. T. Aug. Is, 1903.
Hon. Emory \. Foster, County Attorney,
Chandler, O. T.
Dear Sir:-The question presented by
your letter of The 10Th inst, re ative to
the power of the board OF county commits
sioners. under chapter % OF the laws Of
1888 TO let a contract for a road or hign-
way TO be built in any township ia the
county that may see tit IS one Of con-
siderable difficulty. have noted With
considerable care the provisions of tic
resisting statutes upon tie powers of TIE
various officers with refer,nCe to the
building and maintaining of roads ard
have also noticed the strength OF your
argument contained in the lettTe above
referred TO.
1t is certainly true that the act of 1903
has failed to define dearly the extent
and exact limitations OF the power of
boards of county commissioners over
roads and highways. And this indefinite
ness is made more complete by the fact
that the 1893 law repeals the act Of 1899
which did attempt to define with some
particularly the duties of these boards
in the respect in question here. 1t is also
true that section one Of 1863 law. makes
township trustees supervisors OF all roads
within their townships and specifically
defines. their duties as such. They are
empowered to employ labor. buy material
and surerintend the building, grading and
construction of all roads and bridges
within their townships. Compensation for
this work is allowed by this section. The
powers and duties Of the road overseers
is also defined in fairly specific language
and compensation provided for them for
this work. But the fact that township
trustees and road overseers are charged
with the duty of looking after roads
within their RESPECTIVE districts and are
empowered TO hire labor and buy material
Tor the construction and maintenance of
the roads. need rot prevent Us from con-
ceiving that the legislature could if II
saw fit, place the same duties and the
same powers upon other officers or
boards. The presumptiop,f OF course,
would be that the losieIature did not n
te-a 70 r,Is cs--Jhe same duties upon two
distinct boards or officers. but where
they have done so in unquestfonable
language then there is no escape from
holding that both. have the power grant
ed by the legislature and the fact that
the powers of one officer are duplicated
by the powers OF another would be no
reason for Withholding the powers of
either one or the other. There is nothing
in the language used in section l OF the
1893 act which would convey the IDEA
that it was the intention of the legisla-
ture to make the powers therein con
ferred upon township trustees exclusively
1t is simply a grant Of authority. This
grant of authority. in my judgement is
net inconsistent with similar grant &C
authority TO the boards OF courty COM
missioners. The latter might well be-
charged with the supervision of al roads.
generally throughout the county while
the township trustee could have consist
emily the same powers cnaned TO his par
ticular tOwnshoip and have charge solely
Of the roads within that township and
have charee of the expenditure of the
special township taxes provided by sec
tion Of the 1893 law under the direction
of the township board
If srant of authority TO the boards
of county commissioners 10 look after
the maintenance and construction of
roads can be found in our statutes do