510 IOWA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



to justify an assessment of a railroad right of way running within a drainage 

 district, it is not necessary that the track, as well as the right of way, be 

 benefited by the drainage of the district. 



The district is established on the principle that it will promote the public 

 utility or be conducive to the public health, convenience or welfare, and this 

 is a matter entirely apart from the particular benefits that each particular 

 piece of land within the district will receive by the drainage. 



Under the drainage act the cost of the improvement becomes alien on the 

 lands of the district and is not a personal claim against the owner. Being a 

 lien, it runs with the land . As, however, under the law of this and many other 

 states, the right of way of a railroad can not be divided and sold in separate 

 parts and thereby taken from the railway as a whole, some special provision 

 was needed. The act, therefore, provides that the special assessments 

 against a railway shall be a debt due personally from the railway company, 

 and, unless the same is paid by the railway company as a special assessment, 

 it may be collected in the name of the county in any court having jurisdic- 

 tion. In connection with the subject of railroads, it may not be amiss to say 

 that in order to avoid and prevent delay and the getting out of iniunctions 

 and the resort of other methods of procedure, it is provided in section 47 of 

 the act that the failure to appeal from the order of the board of supervisors 

 of which complaint is made, shall be a waiver of any irregularity in the pro- 

 ceedings and the remedy provided for in the act shall exclude all other 

 remedies. That such limitations may properly be made a part of the act, is 

 abundantly sustained by the authorities. Cooley on Constitutional Limita- 

 tions, 815, and in note thereto, numerous authorities are cited, says, "If the 

 remedy is adequate and the party is allowed to pursue it, it is not unconsti- 

 tutional to limit the period in which he shall resort to it and to provide that 

 unless he shall take proceedings for assessment for damages within a special 

 time, all right thereto shall be barred." He further says, page 814, ' 'when 

 the State has provided a remedy by resort to which the party can have his 

 compensation assessed, adequate means are afforded for its satisfaction. " 



It is a fact open to all, that the best and most effective thing to be done 

 in order to get good roads, is to get rid of the surface water. It is obvious 

 that a system of drainage which the establishment of drainage districts in- 

 augurates, will do much for the betterment of roads and highways. Ac- 

 cordingly ample provision is m,ade in the drainage law for the exaction of 

 payment for benefits to the roads and highways. It is a matter open to 

 common observation that roads which, during a large part of the year, are 

 practically impassable could be made good and serviceable if only they were 

 drained. Frequently drainage could be readily had if permission could be 

 obtained to carry the surface water over and across adjoining lands. Section 

 44 of the drainage acts provides what steps shall be taken to obtain the . 

 right to carry such drainage over the lands of adjoining owners. In the 

 case of highways, there can be no question as to the constitutional right of 

 the township trustees to initiate the necessary condemnation proceedings, 

 for their acts in so doing have reference to the use of public highways and 

 such use is the most notorious public use that is known to the law. The 

 Supreme court of the State of Illinois in the case of Colfax Highway Com- 

 missioners vs. East Lake Fork Special Drainage District^ 21 N E. Rep. , 

 206, holds that "where the drainage of swampy or marshy ground will im- 



