Case Name: Inhabitants of Hermon, Pet'rs for Certiorari, versus County Commissioners of Penobscot
Court: Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Maine
Decision Date: 1855
Citations: 39 Me. 583
Docket Number: 
Parties: † Inhabitants of Hermon, Pet’rs for Certiorari, versus County Commissioners of Penobscot.
Judges: 
Reporter: Maine Reports
Volume: 39
Pages: 583–584

Head Matter:
† Inhabitants of Hermon, Pet’rs for Certiorari, versus County Commissioners of Penobscot.
Tho County Commissioners are authorized by law to lay out a way wholly within the limits of a town.
ON Pacts agueed.
Petition for the writ of certiorari.
A road was laid out and established by the County Commissioners of Penobscot in the town of Hermon, on a petition to them for that purpose.
Two county roads had previously been established and opened through that town, and this connected the one with the other.
It was agreed that if the Commissioners had power to lay out this road as a county road, then the petition to be dismissed, otherwise the prayer thereof to be granted, and the costs to be also determined by the Court.
A. W. Paine, for respondents,
cited I Mass. 162; New Vineyard v. Somerset, 15 Maine, 21; Harkness v. County Commissioners, 26 Maine, 353 and 406,
A. Sanborn, for petitioners,
cited R. S., c. 25, § 32; 31 Maine, 361; At. & St. Law. R. R. Co. v. Co. Com., 28 Maine, 118.

Opinion:
Tenney, J.
— This is a petition for a writ of certiorari to the respondents to certify their record, touching the lpcation of a way, as a county road in the town of Her won, that the same record may be quashed.
Several supposed ei'rors on the record are relied upon in the petition. Rut all are founded in the alleged want of jurisdiction in the County Commissioners to locate and establish a way, in one town alone, on an original petition presented to them.
This is the case of a way wholly in the town of Hermon, but it connects two county roads with each other, which are of considerable extent, reaching from the city of Bangor to the town of Carmel, and which we may suppose are much used by the public.
The question involved does not differ materially from those presented to this Court, in the cases cited for the respondents, in which it has been held, that the Commissioners did not exceed their jurisdiction, and the writ was denied.
¥e see no reason for reversing those decisions, and the writ is denied, and the petition dismissed with costs for the respondents.