Thе record of this cause shows that on the 17th. •day of April, 1882, the appellants, Adam Shirk and others,
Did the circuit court err in dismissing thе appeal thereto from the board of commissioners? We are of opinion that this question must be answered in the negative. The appeal to the circuit court was attеmpted and intended to be taken from certain proceedings of the board of cоmmissioners, upon the petition of the appellees for the location and cоnstruction of a certain free gravel road, in accordance with the provisions of the act of March 3d, 1877. Such a petition is the first thing appearing in the record filed in this court, but it is not shown when it was presented to the county board, or, indeed, that it was ever so presented. In section 5772, R. S. 1881, it is provided that “From any decision of such commissioners there shall be allowed an appeal to the circuit court by any person aggrieved.” In the next section, 5773, it is рrovided that “ Such appeal shall be taken within thirty days after the time such decision was madе by the appellant filing with the county auditor a bond,” etc., “ to be approved by said auditоr,” etc. The record before us fails to show that any bond was filed by the appellants with and аpproved by the county auditor within thirty days after the decision was made, or at any time afterwards. In the next section, 5774, it is provided as follows: “ Within twenty days after the filing of such appeal bоnd, the auditor shall make out a complete transcript of the proceedings.of sаid board relating to the proceeding-
It is not shown in the recоrd of this cause that a complete transcript of the proceedings of the cоunty board, upon the appellees’ petition, was ever filed in the circuit court. On the contrary, it is clearly shown by the transcript there filed, which is set out in the record before us, that it wаs not a complete transcript of the proceedings of the board upon such petition. It purports on its face to be a transcript merely of the proceedings оf the board on the 15th day of March, 1882. We have already said that it does not appeаr from the record filed in this court when the appellees’ petition was presented tо the county board.; but the transcript filed in the circuit court shows that such petition was beforе the county board at its December term, 1881, and that some action was then had thereon. This transcript began as follows:
“ Come now William Truitt, engineer, and William A. McClellan, John Linville and Duncan Williаms, viewers, appointed at the regular December term of this board, and submit their report аs such engineer and viewers, as follows, to wit: (Here insert).”
The transcript does not contain the proceedings of the board at its “ regular December term,” and manifestly, therefore, it is nоt “a complete transcript of the proceedings of said board.”
In the absencе from the record of a complete transcript of the proceedings of the сounty board appealed from, and of any appeal bond, approved as aforesaid, by which an appeal is taken, we think the circuit court was justified in holding as it did, that thе appellants had not perfected their appeal in such manner as to give it jurisdiсtion thereof. We conclude, therefore, that the court committed no error in sustaining the appellees’ motion to dismiss such appeal. Shepherd v. Dodd,
Besides, the written report of the engineer and viewers, to which the appellants filed written exceptions, is not a part of the record. In the absence of this report, we must hold that the circuit court was authorized to dismiss the appeal, and that, in so doing, its ruling was not erroneous. Purviance v. Drover,
The judgment is affirmed, with costs.