#### Reuben Coon, Plaintiff in Error, v. Mason County, Defendant in Error.

ERROR TO MASON.

The decision of the Circuit Court under the 38tli section of the Road Law in the Revised Statutes, is final.

The County Court of Mason county ordered a' road to be opened, and refused to allow the plaintiff in error any damages for crossing his land; from that decisioñ he appealed to the Circuit Court, which affirmed the order of the County Court. The plaintiff in error then prosecuted his writ pi error in this court.

The defendant in error moved to dismiss the cause from this court because the decision of the Circuit Court was final.

James Roberts, for Plaintiff in Erior.

Lyman Lacey, and Goudy & Waite, for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This proceeding was under the thirty-eighth section of the chapter entitled “ Roads,” (Rev. Laws, 1845, Sec. 38,) which provides that the decision of the Circuit Court shall be final. We are of the opinion that the legislature intended to prohibit the prosecution of a writ of error as well as an appeal.

The point made on this motion, was not considered by this court, in the cases of Hutchins v. De Witt County, 1 Gilm. R. 345, and The County of Sangamon v. Brown et al., 13 Ill. R. 207.

The motion is sustained.

Motion sustained.