See act approved March 27, 1897, relating to granting of franchises for construction of roads for bicycles and other horseless vehicles, in this volume, post.

See duties of treasurer with reference to public school teachers' annuity fund, in act approved March 29, 1897, in this volume, post.

County officers, including supervisors, are required to make and keep an inventory of county property. See act approved February 9, 1897, in this volume, post.

Supervisors are authorized to appoint commissioners of horticulture. See act of March 31, 1897, in this volume, post.

Duties of supervisors with reference to claims of laborers and material men for labor, etc., on public buildings. Act of March 27, 1897, in this volume, post.

As to granting said road and other franchises see act of March 19, 1897, amending the act of March 23, 1893, in this volume, post.

Duties of supervisors in formation of districts for drainage of agricultural and other lands. Act of March 31, 1897, in this volume, post.

See an act fixing the minimum rate of wages on public work. Act of March 9, 1897, in this volume, post.

Supervisors must appropriate money for holding primary elections, and in some instances act in place of election commissioners. See sections 30, 31 of act of March 13, 1897, in this volume, post.

To protect and preserve river banks.

41. To provide by ordinance for the organization and government of districts, to protect and preserve the banks of rivers and streams and lands lying contiguous thereto from injury by overflow or the washing thereof, and to provide for the improvements of said rivers and streams, and prevent the obstruction thereof, and to provide for the assess ment, levy, and collections within such districts of a tax therefor.

The origin of this subdivision is doubtless. section 4085, Political Code, and section 54 of the county government acts of 1883, 1891, 1893. Prior to the present, however, the special authority to "provide by ordinance for the organization and government of districts," was not included, nor the provision for taxation by districts. The act of March 10, 1891, [Stats. p. 30] concerning levee districts and the confining innavigable running streams was repealed by act of 1893. [Stats. p. 111.] Section 4085 Political Code was repealed by the

same act.

An act entitled "An act to amend an act to provide for the formation of protection districts in the various counties of this state, for the improvement and rectification of channels of innavigable streams and water courses, etc., approved March 27, 1895, enlarging the discre tion of boards of supervisors," passed by the legislature of 1896-7 was approved March 27, 1897, and took effect immediately. It will be found in this volume, post.

Notes to section 25.

SUBDIVISION 1: A board of county supervisors, under its power to supervise the official conduct of all county officers may direct prosecutions for delinquencies, may employ an expert to examine the books and accounts of county officers. Harris v. Gibbons, 114 Cal. 420.

It must be presumed that the legislature intended the county government act of 1893 to comply with the constitutional requirements, to provide for the election of county officers by a uniform law, applicable to all the counties of the state, and that the act should be operative throughout the state. Hale v. McGetti

gan, 114 Cal. 120.

SUBDIVISION 4: While this act was pending in the legislature there was also pending another act commonly referred to as the "Clark road law," which was designed to vest the control of county road matters almost exclusively in the hands of road district trustees. Both acts were passed and both received executive approval on the 1st day of April. It is believed that the proviso, "unless otherwise provided by law," was inserted in subdivisions 4 and 37 of section 25 of this act in view of the probability of the passage and approval of the so-called Clark road law, and that it was the intention of the legislature to take from the supervisors and vest in road district trustees under the Clark act, the control of county roads and highways. The Clark act is contained elsewhere in this volume.

The general statements, grouping and to some extent defining the power of the board, cannot be held to place the board above the procedure elsewhere prescribed, which often very materially limits the jurisdiction and power apparently conferred by the general language of subdivision 4, section 25, act of 1889. The beginning of the section says the power is to be exercised under such restrictions and limitations as are prescribed by law. [As to establishing toll roads reference is had to sections 2779, 2789 and succeeding sections Political Code; also Civil Code sections 512 et seq. Toll roads are public roads.

Blood v. Woods, 95 Cal. 85.

In condemnation proceedings for a "private road," the court must find separately the value of the land sought to be condemned, and the improvements thereon, the damages to the remaining land by reason of the severance, and the benefits which will accrue to the remaining land by reason of opening the road. Otherwise the judgment of condemnation is void. Butte County v. Boydston, 64 Cai. 110.

Navigable streams of the state are public highways, and any unauthorized obstruction placed therein by any individual is a public nuisance. People v. Gold Run D. & M. Co., 66 Cal. 139; Political Code section 2348.

The value of the land sought to be condemned should be determined, as of the date when the summons issued. And

Under section 1241 of the Code of Civil Procedure, before any steps can be taken in the

courts for the condemnation of private property for road purposes, the board of supervisors must determine the "necessity" of the use, its public character, the route and termini of the road, the land necessary therefor, and the apparent ownership thereof. And

Section 1248 of the Code of Civil Procedure, providing the mode of ascertaining damages, requires the value of the land to be taken, and all improvements thereon pertaining to the realty to be valued, but does not require the improvements to be assessed separately from the land. And

The act of February 28, 1883, revising the road law did not abrogate existing road districts. Tehama County v. Bryan, 68 Cal. 67.

The acquisition of a right of way by prescription is not affected by the fact that the adverse users occasionally, when the ground was soft, turned out of the way at a certain point, and made several distinct tracks there. And

A right of way of necessity may be acquired over the land of another, although the road to which the way leads is not a county road, but a mere by-road open to the public. Cheney v. O'Brien, 69 Cal. 200.

A county is under no common law obligation to keep roads and bridges in repair. Even when the legislature enjoins upon corporations of this character the duty to make and repair roads, streets or bridges, and confers the power to levy taxes therefor, the general tenor of the decisions is to treat this as a public and not a