Case Name: Alexander Wells vs. Alexander McLaughlin and others
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1848-12
Citations: 17 Ohio 99
Docket Number: 
Parties: Alexander Wells vs. Alexander McLaughlin and others.
Judges: 
Reporter: Cases decided in the supreme court of ohio : upon the circuit at the special sessions in Columbus
Volume: 17
Pages: 99–101

Head Matter:
Alexander Wells vs. Alexander McLaughlin and others.
The power conferred upon County Commissioners, lo lay out and establish county roads, authorizes them to locate a road within or through an incorporated town or city.
This is a Writ or Error, directed to the Court of Common Pleas of Columbiana County.
/ The original action was Trespass quare clausum fregit, ,'and the record shows these facts: The Commissioners of Columbiana county, established a road from the landing place at Wellsville, in that county, commencing at low water mark on the Ohio river, to intersect the State road to Cleveland, whose termini were within the same township, and within the town of Wellsville. In the location of the road, a portion of the property of the plaintiff was appropriated to the public use, and for the injury thus sustained, the action was brought.
The defendants, in addition to the general issue, pleaded in bar the proceeding of the Commissioners in establishing the road and ordering it to be opened. To this special, plea, the plaintiff replied, that the road was wholly within the limits of the town. To the replication the defendants interposed a demurrer which was sustained by the Court, and judgment thereupon rendered ,for the defendants.
To reverse this judgment this writ is prosecuted.
James Mason and Wadsworth &f Lee, for Plaintiff in Error.
Umhstaetter &f Stanton, and W. K. Upham, for Defendants.

Opinion:
Reed, J.
The question in this case is, have the County Commissioners the power to lay out and establish a road entirely within the limits of an incorporated town.
General power is conferred upon the Commissioners of the , ; county to lay out and establish roads within the limits of the county, in the mode-prescribed by law. See the' act for opening and regulating roads and highways, Swan's Stat. 796.
The power of the Commissioners is general, to be exercised or withheld by considerations of public utility.
All incorporated cities and towns are subject to the control of the. general laws of the State, unless specially exempted. There is nothing in the act incorporating the town of Wellsville, which limits the power of the County Commissioners to establish a county road through or within its corporate limits. It would be a little remarkable if all our county roads were compelled stop at or go around every incorporated town or city. True, all streets, lanes and alleys, in towns are, by statutes, declared public highways. But still, it is not left to the town authorities to decide, unless such power be expressly conferred, the streets and alleys of such town are all the roads which shall pass through its corporate limits. Roads arejjmatters of general and public concern, in which the whole community have an interest and a voice. The fact that corporate privileges are conferred upon the inhabitants of a city or town, does not exempt them from the operation of the general laws'of the land. A municipal corporation is no more exempt .from the operations of general laws than a private corporation.
But it is said that the County Commissioners could not establish the road in question, because it is not a county road ; and that it cannot be a county road because' it lies wholly within the corporate limits of the town of Wellsville ; that the county authorities can only establish roads for the county; township authorities for townships, and town authorities for- towns. Now it is not pretended that the county authorities can establish township roads or streets for an incorporated town. But this does not prove that the county authorities may not establish a county road through or within the limits of a tpwnship or incorporated town. Whether a road be a county road or not, does not depend upon its length ; but whether the County Commis sioners establish it as a county road ; and whether they should establish it or not depends upon considerations of public' utility of which the law has made them, the judges; subject only such control as is provided by law on appeal to the Courts. There could not be a better illustration of the remarks just made than the road under consideration ; it is a road connecting the public landing place, on the Ohio river, at Wellsville, with the State road leading to Cleveland.
That this road occupies a part of one of the streets of Wells-ville is a matter of no concern to this plaintiff.
The remarks that private property cannot be seized for public use without compensation, does not affect the question ; the Statute provides the mode of compensation, and the plaintiff has made his claim under the law.
The pleadings raised meet the single question whether the County Commissioners have power to establish a county road within or through the town of Wellsville.
We have decided that they can.
Judgment affirmed.