Connecticut western news., 1886-11-24
LITCHFIELD COUNTY COURT
 HOUSE. '

postponed the court house question un- til their annual meeting at Hartford next January. This action under the circumstances was prudent to say the least and will doubtless be generally approved by their constituents. The question Is an important one, affecting as it does tue whole county and n,t merely particular locality, and an op- portunity will now be afforded to give the whole matter careful and thought full consideration.
 The real question Is, Where does pub lie convenience and necessity require the court house to be located? This has raised incidentally two other questions; 1st, What title has the county to the old site? and 2d, Ought the county to min gle its funds with those of the town of Litchfeld Tn putting up building to bs used both as court house and town hall and thus become joint tenants in its ownership? I beg leave to say word on each of these questions and l will speak of them in reversed order.
 First, then, ought the county to enter into such a partnership or deal, in which the town of Litchfeld will hold the winning hand? and second, is it policy to do SO? Here two questions suggest themselves: 1. Have the county com missioners authority in law to thus use the county funds? and 2d, Is 1t policy to thus use them? The legal authority, to say the least, Is very doubtful. The county commissioners and the county representatives as we'll in this matter, have no authority except what is con- ferred upon them by the legislature, either expressly or by necessary impli- cation. Where or how is the authority thus conferred upon them to make the county 8 joint tenant with town in the purchase or ownership of real estate or in the erection of public building? The policy of the matter is still more doubtful. It places valuable property of the county in great measure at the AClCy ndu COutlOl LII a tONU, dull tlc location could never be changed with out forfeiting the building and all the money invested in it. It effectually an chors the court house in Litchfeld for all time to come under the penalty of forfeiture. This would probably suit Litchfeld, if 1t is not her object, and she would probably laugh in her sleeve at the stupendous folly and imbecility. The officials who could consent to such thing or even to seriously think of it ought to be put under conservators.
 2. In regard to the title to the old site. I understand that this site was purchased in 1892 by Moses Seymour and others and the same year they gave the county lease for the same, condi- tioned that 1t should be used only for court house purposes. The county ac- cspted the lease and occupied the prem ises under 1t, permitting the town of Litchfeld, in consideration of certain sums advanced by the town to build o1 remodel the court house, to use part of 1t for town pur- poses. This was clearly breach oi the condition of the lease, but 1t seems the lessors did not choose to take advan. tage of it and the matter has run along until the present time. It is now claim ed by Litchfeld, I understand, that be- cause the lessors did not re-enter fol breach of condition, their title is gone they are barred by the statute of limi tations-and the town of Litchfeld vir tually owns the site. This is certainly extraordinary if 1t IS law and 1t behooveS land owners to look after their titles especially If their land is occupied by persons who went into possession as tenants. The only interest Litchfeld could have had in the old court house property was in the building, towards which she had contributed small sums of money. That is burned up. What interest or right can she have now? Sup pose the lessors should take possession of the lot today and LitchheId should bring an action to recover her rights. what could she recover? Sic naiqIt re. core1' some of tle dsles ote He old 5mlaing, but nothing more.
 The claim of adverse possession to be good must be founded upon the fact that Litchfeld has held the possession of this property for 15 years and up, wards, adversely to the title of the les sors, amounting, as Senator Staub would say, to disseisia. Has she so held it? ] venture to say that such an idea has never entered the mind of citizen o- Litchfeld from the landing of tho Pilgrim Fathers until this question came up. And venture to say further that were the question submitted to jury today there could not be found { particle of evidence which would war rant them in finding as matter of fact that for 15 years or for 15 minutes, the possession of tho town of Litchfeld o this property has been adverse. This claim of adverse possession, If such { claim be seriously made, is simply pre- Posterous.
 Now one of three things is certain l. That the county holds this property under this lease, subject to the condi ton which prevents them from using il or permitting 1t to be used for any otke1 than court house purposes, or, 9 Thal fbo town of TitebfiaIl I,oIJc !; by adverse possession, or, 3 That the title is involved ir .l..,hI n,,l n,,,ol,,,Lo;rI.r