Carroll v. Louisiana Highway Commission

I agree that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed, because the plaintiff, ai>pellant, virtually consented that his property should be taken for the public purpose of constructing the highway, without just or adequate compensation being first paid. But I am adverse to quoting, as if it were valid legislation, that part of section 27 of Act No. 95 of 1921 (Ex. Sess.), which declares that, when a road has been laid out by the highway commission and the contract has been let and work has begun, the owner of the land over which the projected road is to be constructed cannot demand that…