Majority
p. 189The People, ex relat. Macey and others, against The Hillsdale and Chatham Turnpike Company.
Headnote
If a turnpike company open a road through the land of a person without making him aWoodsworth, attorney-general,
moved for a rule,
p. 190
that the defendants show cause, by the next term, why an information in the nature of a quo warranto, should not be filed against them. He read affidavits, stating, that the road had been opened through the land of the complainants, and used, without any, offer having been made to them to agree, upon the compensation, and without having the damages ascertained according to law.
compensation pursuant to the direction of the act, the court will not at the relation of the party complaining, grant an information in .the nature of a quo warranto, against the company, but leave the party injured to his remedy in the usual course of the common law.
E. Williams, contra.
If the defendants have not followed the directions of the act relative to the compensation to be made to the owners of the land, through which the road had been made, they are trespassers, and the complainants have adequate, remedy in the usual course of the common law. The public are no way interested in the controversy or complaint, and that is a sufficient reason for not granting this extraordinary remedy.
Rule refused.