|
Passage v. Travel
I am not sure "travel" is the way to go. Here are some cites concerning "Passage." I also look to freedom instead of rights.
"In the present case if it can be said that the state holds the easement to all the highways within its boundaries, which under our statutes cannot, we think, be upheld, still, if it does so hold, it is as the representative of the people, and in trust for the objects of their creation, viz., to enable the people to pass and repass over the such roads at will, and such easements are not held in the same right as the title of the state to lands which it has purchased." People v. County of Marin (1894), 103 Cal. 223, 231-232.
The ordinary traveler, whether on foot or in a vehicle passes to and fro along the streets, and his use and occupation thereof are temporary and shifting. The space he occupies one moment he abandons the next to be occupied by any other traveler. This use is common to all members of the public, and it is a use open equally to citizens of other states with those of the state in which the street is situate.
City of St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph Co. (1892), 148 U.S. 92, 37 L. Ed. 380, 13 S. Ct. 485.
The terms "public highway" are most general in their meaning, and include all kinds of thoroughfares in which the public have a right of way or passage.
Parsons v. The City and County of San Francisco (1863), 23 Cal. 426, 463.
the old common-law freedom of use of the king's highway has not been modified in this state by any positive enactment. So that it still remains the law that foot passengers have the right to use and traverse the highway at all its points, being chargeable only for the exercise of a due amount of care, which due amount of care, in its quantum, is governed by the circumstances attending the use which the pedestrian actually makes. Thus, in this state, even in populous streets of cities, pedestrians are not restricted to the crossings in traversing the street, but may cross it at any point. And the same is true of their right to walk along the roadbed of a highway.
Raymond v. Hill (1914), 168 Cal. 473, 482.
|