Charleston Road

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Knox, J.

— We will consider the exceptions to this proceeding in the order in which they stand.

1. “ The court erred in appointing the fourth jury, after two juries had reported against the road.”

This is not true in point of fact. The first view reported in favor of the road. The review against it, the re-review reported that a road was necessary, but not 'on the ground in which the original view had located it, but failed to designate the location approved of by them. The fourth, or re-re-review, was a mere ¡continuation of the third view, which had in…