Telegram-herald., 1886-04-30
COURT HOUSE SQUARE
Kent County Has no Title 10
Fulton Street Park.
lu0.E PiasISa'S DECISION REVERSED.
justice Campbell sno Judge Sherwood
0scids nat the CstI Owns the
North Ft4it u the SG4ars-
Judge Morse Oisseats.


3ss rendered Vbich legefsez The decision ~
Ia.ise PARISH GA lhs cass involving ths title
~ fultoa 81. lark AftsF rbe caso had been
peu.Eug n tfle superior court for more than
TO years Judge Parrish decided thas the
e0only Ibid the atle - the property u The
exclusion "a The esty and other claimants.
Ihe decision u the ,gpreuis curt Is - the
ELECT that TIE county has 10 tile " any
part ~ Ms square. aad a leaves TIE city
Sith a goo title ~ the north hall. While
lhs .ygth half Is claimed by the city o.
Georse r. Pantind As an heir. and BY the
sheldon and IilesoB heirs. BY the courtesy
Of Charles G. Hopkins. clerk Of the supreme
eourf the TSLDsEAa- -HEaALD Is enabled %
XIV, he decision Ia full this morning The
opinion is as follows.
Campbell, Chief uslice Those cases re-
ate 70 Ehe claim OF the county oi Kent 20
what Was originally known tie Court
House square IN Grand Rapids and the
bills we're died 10 quiet is title sgsinst the
city Il Dfsnd Rapids A. setting up owner
ship IN one half by title, absolute and ia the
other as possessed by dedication and against
bali As never lawfully dedicated % any use.
Ira oriel the claim OF the county Is claimed
o. have arisen out Of a location Of the cOun-
" seal Dy the territorial authority on this
square by desire or acquiescence OF the flrst
proprietor. and Is is subsequent recognition
Dv bis grantees Who plated and sold lands
recognizing the pablic purposes OF the
square.
The north half IS claimed by the city a.
4 tf... h.. .
plated lands and after the county had. as
the city insists, re.inquished such rights As
10 may have had. sold the property TO the
citv. The south half Is claimed by the city
by dedication % public uses. and against
both city and county Is claimed under the
original belsisrs, as not dedicated, or II dedi-
Gated relinquished.
The REIMBURSEMENT Is claimed To have
been made out by an official removal OF the
county seat from the square, and acquies-
ence ia It,
In The view We take of the case no good
purpose would De served by minute con-
sideratiOn % the circumstances of the Orlgi-
ual dedication The facts are clearly shown
I that instead OF a general location Of the
/ county seat in a town, village or other
7 pubic division, the square in question was
. chosen by territorial authority, and so
7 treated by the land owner. AT his success
I doubt promoted by II. The land was built
/ upon and actually aud openly used for the
I seat Of justice Tor many years, and 50
/ far a. the original liant owners and their
I successors were concerned it would no
d0Obt, have been perpetually continued so
/ without opposition had there been no dis
/ turbance from other sources.
/ From reasons which apparently sprang
/ from local jealousy and contention, action
A 81. af..F.r Il. al
/ whereby commissioners were again appoint
I sd by the state 10 establish the seat Of JUS
| tice Of The county. This they did upon an
other parcel Of lanG owned by Mr.. Kendall,
and the Governor made proclamation ac-
I cOrdingly. In October 1850, after that des-
/ iguaiion. the Super gisOrs took some steps 20
/ have the new ground. which Mr.. Kendall
bad decided. prepared, but seem 70 have had
some idea that they were not yet shut out
( from all control Of their own choice OF
I places, and accompanied this action with q
/ saving clause against any obligation to build
. on if.
During the succeeding session OF the
/ Legislature IN ls5l. when means OF com
I municaii0n seem % have been imperfect
7 the Board of supervisors supposed they had
/ prevailed on the Iegis ature TO remove the
I county sat 20 still another place offered, %
be given by George COggeshall, and took
+ acton depending on the fate of that meas
I me which came % nothing. \ strife arose
between the east aud west side, and a great
deal 0f dispute and counter action went on
7 but no one supposed the county seat had
I not been removed from the square now in
7 controversy In june, ts5l a motion was
4 made go remove the site or location for the
F county buildings TO the lands proposed 10
be de,ded 20 the County of Kent by Louis
Campau, and which is known as the north
half of the court house or public square
upon which the present court house
+ stands This Wa lost, out not from any
apparent doubt In regard 10 the necessity OF
some restoring action Il they desired O.
keep lt Iu October ISL, resolution was
adopted accepting a conveyance from
George Coggeshal and locating the site for
county buildings on the vest side Of Grand
River. as had before been done in contem-
p.atiou of getting suitable arrangements
with NJ Coggeshall and Mr.. Turner
in January. 1852. further resolutions were
passed 90 remove doubts concerning the
effect of the various removals on the titles
of 'ands before devoted 70 county purp0ses
Tie first III these resolutions declared that
Z the new removal bad vacated the former
f removal of the kendall lot. and directed q
Quit claim aud reconvevancc 70 M Kendall
F The second d rected a sale of the Olu court
. house on the square now in controversy
Tbs vas sold t0 Louis Campau. who owned
tie fee AMI this sale was approved and TIE
money appropriated 70 the expenses Of ths
new pail
I'm he latter part of the same year, 1852
Mr. Campau conveyed to the city the north
bali of The square for S50o with the right q
remove the OH court house lhe city bad
already claimed it "a a public ground dedi
Gated to such uses a. gave them control O
e. and this settlement vas the result of ar
arbitration. AZ this time or earlier The
whole square vas taken possession Of bv ths
city a. public grounds From that time %
this The city has claimed improved ans
20. sessed IL. although AZ one time claim
f1r pnbiic assessment seems 90 have beer
maize acaj0st the county. We have no
lieeu---f &c necessary % examine into thh
trans acfion for reasons Which vii appear
hereafter
pn several occasions since So The super
+ vi~urs have taken action ~ their meeting
on the question Of their rights over thl'
4 square The REPORTS wade have usually
been adverse % such rights. But nc meas
ares have ever heen taken - nuf hsck fh'
county sssf there. and these suits are th'
first legal measures begun 30 reclaim tb'
property although i'm ISL Al attempt "a
m 8de o. recover e by assuming p0ssessiof
and fencing it. wkteh wss ~ once resfstes
and the fence tsxen down hv fhe citf
These suits we're then brought
IN our opinion there are tT0 fafs -
ioetinus fo The present proceedings. ore
lnat -he eitY bss bad psaces6le contr0l fo'
ever thirty VearS and when the ball rss aiei
had hesn In nesriv thar ame II Is q.
3e0br rris thsi such oontrul might - entire
lr consistent With keeping is fsr the eonnt.
0r snv either iawf1. pubiic use ~ the cifV 1
plafea in Position - give police proferflor