The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-08-19
HOOPS Pills cure constipation 25 cents.

uooD's PILLs cure constipation. 8 cents.
not believe that the grant of authority
to the township trustees could be taken
10 be inconsistent Herewith
This grant of authority l believe ex-
lists to the fullest extent in boards of
county commissioners in this territory
and exists by virtue of running section
1405. Wilson's statutes. the portion Of
which applicable is quoted herewith:
Sec. l. To contract and repair bridges
and to open. lay out and vacate high
ways. and to condemn ortpurchase right
Of way for the same. etc"
Also section ;, article l, chapter % Of
the laws OF 1913.
.'sec. 8. the bo7rd of county commits
s.oners may levy z General read and
bridge tax on al taxahla property in
such county not 70 e~ceed six r-i,ls on The
dollar Of such ta1a5ie pro2erty and in
the discretion of the board Of county
commissioners in the building Ct the
reads and BRIDGES in any portion Of sach
county according TO the provisions of this
act
Board of county commissioners are
first given power by SECTION 1fo5 TO 10
cate and lay out highways and by the
above section ), are granted rhe power
TO e-pend ;he general fund as they see
fit subject alone 70 the provisions OF the
1893 act You say truly that the letting
Of contracts for bridges is hedged about
By the 1868 law with ? great many pre-
visions. but that these provisions apply
alone to bridges ard not to roads There
are. l believe. certain 'provis-ons Of this
act" which must be = followed in the
course Of construction Of roads. For in
stance, those contained in section 9 CT
the act but if there were none. 1 can
rot believe that that fact wouIi defeat
the power OF the board Of county COM
missioners to expend the fund. If there
we're TO limiting provisions in the act,
then the only limitation upon expenditure
Of the general road and b.iige fund
would be removed and instead of the
discretion of the board OF county COM
1rissioners in the expenditure of the fund
being limited by the provisions of the
act, then the discretion OF the board in
its expenditure would be absolute. This
language used in section 5 certainly must
be construed TO give the power to ex-
pend the road and br6ge fund as the
board of county commissioners sees fit.
provided that ie be used for the construc-
ton of roads and bridges within the
county of ,,neir jurisdiction.
Having the power to expcnd the money
Al tre,r discretion they certainly would
aave the power to say where, when and
in what manner it should be expended in
the construction Of roa6s and bridges ard
1t seems to me 10 follow as a necessary
incident TO this right of expending money
that they would have the right to let
a contract for thhe erection or main
tenance of any road anywhere within
the county limits. that the board saw
Ht. Section of the 1888 law empowers
the board of county commissioners TO
enter into agreement with township
boards whereby money may be appro
priated from the county road and bridge
fund for the purpose of constructing or
improving any road or bridge in said
township This again is not a grant of
power in expenditure of road and bridge
fund to the exclusion of all methods of
eXpending it. There still remains
board grant of power referred 10 in sec
ton that they may eNpend this money
as they, in their discretion, may deter
mine.
In short. it is my opinion that the
power to open and lay out roads. soupled
with the power TO oxpend the taxes ap-
propriated to the road and bridge fund
in the building of roads," carries with
it the power to do all things incidentally
necessary to the discharge of the main
power and am not inclined to the view
that since the legislature has not Item
lied the duties. that the duties must
therefore he considered not TO exist. but
rather that the failure to itemize leaves
the discretion unlimited as to time.
place ard manner or method. Any other
construction. would in my judgment be
an annulment of the language Of section
Of the act and would be holding that
money arising from this fund would not
be expended az the discretion of the
county commissioners in the building of
highways It is true that there is 10
provision made in the act for compensa-
ton To members of the board OF county
commissioners. but this failure must just
simply be taken as an indication that
the legislature desires a performance OF
this duty for the ordinary salary allowed
to them and did not intend that they
should have extra compensation for work
done upon highways.
Very respectfully.
J. c. ROBERTS, Attorney General.