# Brown v. Road Commissioners

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · May 23, 1917 · 173 N.C. 598

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809030

## Case

- **Full name:** J. G. BROWN Et Als. v. ROAD COMMISSIONERS OF NORTH COVE TOWNSHIP Et Als.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** May 23, 1917
- **Citations:** 173 N.C. 598; 92 S.E. 502; 1917 N.C. LEXIS 352
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by AileN
- **Judges:** Beown, Ailen
- **Cited by:** 32 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809030

## Opinion text

AileN, J.,
dissenting: The act of the General Assembly now before us was ratified on 28 February, 1917, after the amendment of 1916 became a part of the Constitution of the State.
It provides for the issue of bonds in the sum of $50,000 for Hoad purposes” in North Cove Township in McDowell County, and this term “road purposes” is comprehensive enough to include “the laying out, opening, altering, maintaining, or discontinuing highways.”
If the money to be raised by the sale of bonds provided for in the act cannot be used for one of these purposes, how can it be expended ?
And still the amendment to the Constitution says that “The General Assembly shall not pass any local, private or special act or resolution . . . authorizing the laying out, opening, altering, maintaining, or discontinuing of highways. . . . Any local, private, or special act or resolution passed in violation of the provision of this section shall be void.”
It seems to me the act is in direct conflict with the amendment, and, in the language of the Constitution, is void.
This construction of the amendment, which, as I see it, is the only one that can be maintained, does not “deprive the General Assembly of the power absolutely necessary to aid counties and townships in the construction and repair of their public roads,” as there is express provision in the amendment, now section 29 of article II of the Constitution, that “The General Assembly shall have power to pass general laws regulating matters set out in this section,” and in obedience thereto the General Assembly at its last session passed an act (eh. 284, Laws 1917), under which any county, township, or road district may issue bonds for road purposes whenever a majority of the voters desire it.
The General Assembly evidently thought, as the power to pass special acts was withdrawn, it was well to substitute the safeguard of a popular vote in the place of the special approval of the General Assembly.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809030. Public record. Not legal advice.