
    State vs. Shrewsbury.
    Rutland,
    February, 1836
    The select men of a town have no power to discontinue a road, laid by the road commissioners, or a committee appointed by the legislature or supreme or county court.
    This was an indictment for not opening and making a certain road, laid by the road commissioners, described in said indictment. On the trial the defendant offered in evidence a copy of the record, showing a discontinuance of said road, by the select men of Shrewsbury ; to which evidence the attorney for the government objected, and the same was rejected by the court. To which decision of the court, the defendant excepted.
    Exceptions allowed and ordered to supreme court.
    
      Argument for plaintiff. — It is contended that the select men bad no authority to discontinue this road.
    By act of 1813, statute, p. 439, the select men of the several towns in this state were authorised and empowered to discontinue any road in their respective towns, &c. except such as have been laid by any committee appointed by one of the county courts in this state, or by act of the general assembly.
    By the act of 1827, pamphlet, p. 13, road commissioners were created with full powers, &c. and by the 10th section of that act, all former acts, coming within the purview of that act, were repealed.
    By this act the powers of the select men to discontinue roads laid by the road commissioners, were taken away.
    
      In Nov. 1831, this act was repealed by which the act of 1813 was again revived, but by a saving clause of this repealing act, the doings of the road commissioners were not to be affected. The select men, therefore, derived no power to discontinue roads laid by the road commissioners.
    
      The counsel for defendant grounded the defence on the statute qf 1813.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Williams. Cb. J.

The town of Shrewsbury are indicted for not opening a road, laid out by the road commissioners. On trial they offered to prove in defence, that the road had been discontinued by the select men of the town. The evidence was rejected by the county court, and we think the evidence was inadmissible. The select men have no authority to discontinue roads laid out by the road commissioners, a committee of the legislation, or a committee appointed by the supreme or county court.'

There must, therefore, be judgment on the verdict.  