Montour American. (Danville, Pa.) 1866-1920, 1907-11-14
OLD RIVER ROAD
BOBS UP AGAIN

| the report oIIV1eWerS, Wnlcn 1aVOTeu
vacating the road, was set aside by
the court. The other opinion related
to the road in5 Limestone township
where the proceedings were set
aside.'
III re application to vacate road in
Mauoning township and the borough
of Danville. Opinion of the court sur
exceptions to report of viewers.
'The petitioners, inhabitants of the
townships of Mahoning and the bor-
ough of Danville on the 26th day of
May, 1902, presented their petition to
the court setting forth.s'' that public
road has long since been laid out be-
ginning at point in the public road
leading from the borough of North
umberland to the borough of Danv1lle
at or near the residence of Gilbert
| West. then running in an easterly
course to and along the Susquehanna
river to the southern part of the boI-
ough of Danville.
"That by reason of a flood in the
usquehannayriver foccurring on or
about the third day of March, A. d.
1902, the greater portion of the above
described road has been washed away
and wholly destroyed and that the said
road startingsat point at its inter
seotionss nsswit ithstheralley leading from it
| to the western end OF West Mahoning
street at or near the property OF estate
of Jesse Beaver, deceased, now occupi-
ed by Michael Etter to a point in pub
lie road leading from the said borough
Of Northumberland to the borough of
Danville, its starting point. as afore-
said, has thereby become useless, incon-
venient. and burdensome and its re-
pair and continuance is wholly iIn-
practicable and impossible. The petit
tioners further represent that by rea-
son of the existence of parallel road
leading from Northumberland to Dan
Vile said road has become useless, ex-
pensive, inconyenient and buTdensome
The petitioners, therefore, pray the
court to vacate that portion OF the
road as described above"
The court granted rule to show
cause whey viewers should not be ap-
pointed as prayed for. which rule was
made absolute December 81, 1904.
The report of the viewers stated
THAT we have viewed the said road
and have fully heard all parties inter
ested and have concluded and are of
the opinion that the said road has be-
come useless, inconvenient and burd-
ensome and ought, therefore, to be
vacated.
On September 90, 1905, exceptions
were filed to said report by the bor-
ough of Danville and the property
owners affected by the proposed vaea-
tion.
| yThe courts opinion states that from
careful reading of the order to the
viewers and the report of the viewers
/ it does not appear in what township
or county the road is situated. And
! further the termini OF the vacated road
are not definitely located. From all
! that appears in the order to or the
report of the viewers, where is the
residence of Gilbert West-in North
umberland or Montour county, in
Mahoning township or the borough of
| Danville? Where is the property of
the estate of Jesse Beaver, deceased,
now occupied by Michael Etter?"-
in the borough of Danville or the
township of Mahoning, in Montour
county or Northumberland county?
Further from the evidence taken in
support of the exceptions the court
finds that the road proposed to be vac
ated is needed by a considerable num-
ber of persons in the vicinity for pub
| lie use.
Road viewers derive their authority
under the law from the order of the
court. Where the order fails to state
in what county or township the road
is situate which it is proposed to vac
/ elt VI III Nudb COuIty VI w" hSh T.
| the termini of said road are situate
the proceedings must be set aside.
1.-The first, second. third, fifth, ninth
and tenth exceptions are sustained and
the report of viewers is accordingly
set aside this 9th day of November
1907. By the court,
CHARLES O. EVANS, P. ]. -
| In re road in Limestone township
the court rendered an opinion sur ex-
ceptions to report of viewers, sustain
ing exceptions five, six and eight.
The report of viewers shows that
George M. West served in the place
and stead of George H. West. George
M. West, the opinion states, was not
appointed reviewer and he therefore
had no right or authority to act or
serve as a reviewer.
1t has been held under the act of
May Q, 1899, that failure to give notice
to the supervisors of the view was
good cause for setting aside the report
of the viewers The act of March 2.
1905, provides that notice must be CIV
en- to the supervisors not only of the