BRIDGES. 



the apace over which th bridge give* a passage. A county bridge, or. 

 mother word*.* bridge which the county i* bound to repair, i* usually 

 dennod to b - common and public building over a river or water 

 flowing in a channel more or MM definite ; whether inch river or 

 channel i. occasionally dry or not." Thi* is evidently a very loot* 

 definition, fur it doe* not preMrib* the width of the river or the nature 

 of iu channel ; but it seems clear that a county bridge mutt pan over 

 a water, at the county would certainly not be bound to repair a bridge 

 erected across a rarine, or over an ancient road created by a new road, 

 baring no reference to water. A county bridge may be either a foot, 

 hone, or carriage bridge. A prirate bridge w any bridge which doe* 

 not answer the description of a county bridge or a public highway. It 

 i* subject to no other law* than the general law* of property. 



The liability to repair a county bridge depend* either on the common 

 law or on the ctatute law. By the common law the expense of main- 

 taining both county bridge* and highway* i* to be defrayed by the 

 public, thi* having been part of the trinoda neceasita* to which every 

 man's eeUto wa* formerly subject [TKIXODA NKCEMITAH.] But the 

 burdrn of repair of county bridge* i* thrown on the whole county, 

 that of highway* on the inhabitant* of the pariah wherein such high- 

 way* lie. Prim* facie, therefore, by the common law the whole county 

 i* liable to repair a county bridge; but they may rebut thi* pre- 

 sumptive liability by showing that for aome reason or other the burden 

 ha* neen shifted from them on another. They may cither show that 

 a hundred, or a | arUh, or some other known portion of a county ia by 

 custom chargeable with the repair of a bridge erected within it ; or 

 that some person, individual or corporate, i* liable to that expense. 

 In the case of private individual*, such liability may depend either on 

 tenure, that is, by reason that they and those whose e*tate* they have 

 in the land* or tenement* are liable in respect thereof; or on pre- 

 scription. In the case of corporate bodies, on prescription only. 

 With regard to corporate bodies, Lord Coke says, " If a bishop or 

 prior, Ac. hath at once or twice of almes repaired a bridge it bindeth 

 not (and yet i* evidence against him, until he prove the contrary) ; 

 but if time out of mind they and their predecessors have repaired it of 

 almes, this shall bind them to it." (3 ' Inst.' 700.) Any bridge 

 answering the definition above given of a county bridge may become 

 a charge upon the county even though not originally built by the 

 county; ai, for instance, if it be built by the crown or a private 

 individual : but not every bridge which answers the above definition is 

 therefore chargeable to the county for repair, unless it be also used by 

 and useful to the public. The public use and benefit seem to be the 

 criterion : and if a private individual build a bridge of any sort, which 

 is principally for hi* own benefit and only collaterally of benefit to 

 other*, he will be liable to the repair, and not the public : but where 

 the public derive the principal benefit, they must sustain the burden 

 of repairing it, on the ground that it would greatly discourage public- 

 spirited persons from erecting useful bridge* if they were ever after to 

 be burdened with the costs of repair. The county are even liable to 

 the repair of a public bridge erected by commissioners under an act of 

 parliament, even though the commissioners are empowered to raise 

 toll* in order to nipport it, or though other funds are provided for the 

 repairs ; unless there be a special provision for exonerating them from 

 the common law liability, or transferring it to other*. This common 

 law liability of a county to repair a public bridge i* *o strong, that 

 although it has been erected and constantly repaired by trustees under 

 an act of parliament, and although there are fund* for the repairs, the 

 county are still liable to it. And where trustees under a turnpike act 

 build a bridge acme* a stream, where a culvert would hare been suffi- 

 cient, but a bridge wa* better for the public, it wa* held that the 

 county oould not refuse to repair such bridge on the ground that it 

 wa* not absolutely necessary. 



The first statute on this subject is the 22 Henry VIII. c. 5, called 

 ' the Statute of Bridge*.' This statute is merely in affirmance of the 

 common law. In course of time, owing to the indistinctness of the 

 principle on which public bridges were divided into county bridges 

 and highways, it wa* found expedient to pat* an act to clear up the 

 doubt* and difficulties arising from this principle. In order, therefore, 

 to ascertain more clearly the description of bridge* hereafter to be 

 erected, which inhabitant* of counties shall and may be bound or liable 

 to repair and intin it i* enacted by stat. 43 Ueo. III. c. 69, *. 5, 

 that no bridge hereafter to be erected in any county at the expense of 

 any individual or private person, body politic or corporate, shall be 

 deemed to be a county bridge, unless it shall be erected in a substantial 

 and commodious manner under the direction or to the satisfaction of 

 the county surveyor, or person appointed by the justices of the peace 

 at quarter simioos to superintend and inspect the work. This act 

 applie* only to bridge* newly built, and not to those repaired or 

 widened. 



It wa* found In very early time* that many practical difficulties 

 arose from the indistinctness of the common law a* to the precise 

 limits of a bridge that is to say, as to th* precise point where it 

 oeased to be a bridge and began to be a highway ; and no* versa. This 

 iadutinctaess gar* rise to many dispute* about th* liability to repair, 

 and it wa* found expedient to enact, by stat. 22 Henry VIII. c. 5,1 9, 

 that ucli part and portion of the highways a* lie next adjoining to the 

 ead* f any bridge* witbin this realm, dintant from any of the said 

 and* \ij the tpaoe of SOU feet, be made, repaired, and amended as often 



BRIEF. 



Mi 



a* need shall require ; and that the justice* of the peace should act 

 Mayintlng the repair* of such highways a* they were empowered to 

 act respecting the bridge* themselves. The effect of this statute wa* 

 merely to limit or fix the length of road which the county was to 

 repair at 800 fort. By the common law the county was bound to 



' every county bridge, but the length 

 passing of the above statute. 



repair the roadway at the end of ei 



wa* not precisely determined till the 



But this liability of the county hai 



ity of the county has been very much narrowed by the 

 stat. 546 Will IV. ,-. 5n, 1:1 (the General Highway Act), which, 

 with respect to bridge* to be built after the 2<Hh of March, 1836, 

 enacts, " that if any bridge shall hereafter be built, which bridge shall 

 )>e liable by law to be repaired by and at the expense of any county. 

 or part of any county, then and in such case all highway* leading to, 

 passing over, and next adjoining to such bridge shall be from time to 

 time repaired by the parah, person, or body politic or corporate, or 

 trustees of a turnpike road, who were by law, before the erection of 

 the said bridge, bound to repair the said highways : provided, never- 

 theless, that nothing herein contained shall extend to exonerate any 

 county or part of any county from repairing the walls, banks or 

 fence* of the raised causeways and raised approaches to any wok 

 bridge or the land arches thereto." 



Till late yean no persons could be compelled to build or to con- 

 tribute to the building of any new bridge, except by act of parliament; 

 and even when the county was bound to repair a bridge, it was not 

 therefore bound to widen it. Nor could the inhabitants of a county 

 by their own authority change the situation of a bridge. But by the 

 stats. 14 Oeo. II. c. 33, 1, and 43 Oeo. III. c. 59, 2, the justices in 

 quarter-sessions are enabled to compel the county to widen or change 

 the situation of old bridges, or build new ones. (See also 54 Oeo. III. 

 c. 90, which extends some of the provisions of those statutes.) 



The 13 and 14 Viet. c. 64, provide* that certain bridge* which have 

 been included within the boundaries of cities or boroughs, shall be 

 repaired and maintained under the dole control of the council of such 

 cities or boroughs. 



The Railway Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (849 Viet. c. 20), 

 contains various provisions as to the erection and maintenance of 

 bridges over and under railways. 



With respect to the appointment of surveyors of county bridges, 

 their duties and powers, and the modes in which Buch powers are to be 

 exercised, see stats. 22 Hen. VIII. c. 5, 4; 43 Oeo. III.c. 69 (coupled 

 with stet. 546 Will. IV. c. 60); 64 Geo. III. c. 90; 65 Geo. III. c. 

 1 43. The provisions of these statutes are very numerous. 



For the mode of taxing and collecting the moneys necessary for the 

 repairs of bridges and the highways at the ends thereof, tee stat 22 

 Hen. VIII. c. 5 ; Anne 1, stat. 1, c. 18; 12 Geo. II. c. 20; 62 Qeo. 

 III.c. 110; 65 Geo. III. c. 143. 



By the 4 & 5 Viet. c. 49, the justice* at quarter-sossions may borrow 

 money for repairing county bridges on the credit of the county rate. 



In case of non-repair or nuisances, either to bridges or highways, th* 

 mode* of prosecution are the same : namely, by criminal information, 

 presentment, or indictment Generally speaking, iin action cannot be 

 maintained against the county by an individual for the non-repair of a 

 county bridge, unless in some cases of special damage accruing to such 

 individual from the non-repair. 



A criminal information is very rarely resorted to, and only in case* 

 of either very aggravated neglect or where there seems to be little 

 chance of obtaining justice by preferring an indictment 



The presentment of a public bridge for non -repairs, Ac. may by 

 common law be before the Queen's Bench or at the Assize*. By the 

 stat. 22 Hen. VIII. o. 5, g 1, presentments may be made before the 

 justices in general sessions, and they may proceed therein in the same 

 manner as the judge* of the Queen's Bench were iu the habit of doing, 

 " or as it should seem by their directions to be necessary and con- 

 venient for the speedy amendment of such bridges." See also for 

 minor regulations respecting presentment*, 1 Anne, SPSS. 1, o. 18; 

 12 Geo. II. o. 29, g 13 ; 65 Geo. III. c. 148, 5. 



The indictment of a county bridge is subject to the same rules an 

 any other indictment And though the whole county be liable to the 

 repairs, any particular inhabitant of a county, or tenant of land charged 

 to the repairs of a bridge, may be made defendant to an indictment for 

 not repairing it, and be liable to pay the whole fine stsessnd by the 

 court for the default of repairs, and shall be put to hi* remedy at law 

 for a contribution from those who are bound to pay proportionable 

 share in the charge. 



The malicious destruction or damaging of public bridge* i* said to be 

 punishable a* a misdemeanour at common law, since it is a nuisance to 

 all the king's subject*. By 7 * 8 Ueo. IV. c. 80, | IS. it is enacted, 

 " that if any person shall unlawfully and maliciously pull down or in 

 any wise destroy any public bridge, or do any injury with intent and 

 so a* thereby to render such bridge, or any part thereof, dangerous or 

 impaatable, every luch offender shall be guilty of felony. 



(For further information see Lord Coke'* Second Intl. ; Burn's 

 Jiutitt; Russell On Orim*. For the law of bridges, viewed as high- 

 ways, see WATS.) 



UKIEF (in law), an abridged relation of the fact* of a litigated cat* 

 with a reference to the points of law or evidence supposed to be 

 applicable to them, drawn up for the instruction of the advocate who 

 i* to conduct th* proceedings in court. Briefs vary in their particular 



