Bismarck weekly tribune., 1889-05-24
c01MzssI0xERs' PROCEEDINGS.

and approved, and on motion was referred
to Commissioners Healy to report upon at
next meeting.
An affidavit from Geo. H. Wentz, clerk of
Boyd township, to the effect that no spring
was received together with names of per-
sons whom they wished the county COM
missiOners to appoint as town officers for
the ensuing year. The same was referred
to the district attorney.
The district attorney presented the fol-
lowing report, which was accepted and
To the Board of County Commissioners Of
Burleigh county:
GENTLEMEN: Your chairman has re-
quested me to state my views regarding
the intent and meaning of Section Of
an act entitled can act providing for the
levy and collection of taxes upon property
of railroad companies in this territory
passed March Z, 1889.
In reply to such request beg leave to
say that the language Of section = above
referred to seems so clear and inequivOcal
as to require no explanation or interpreta-
tiOn. By the terms of section 8 above re-
ferred to the county of Burleigh would be
entitled to have and receive:
1. Its proportion of the 40 per cent. of
the tax paid by any company operating q
line of railroad within its boundaries, into
the territorial treasury and which is mem
toned in said section 6. Such proportion
to be ascertained by reference to the
number of miles of main track within the
county.
2. this county would also, under the
provisions of said act, be entitled to have
and receive its just proportion of 80 per
cent. of the entire amount of tax paid by
any such railroad company into the treas
ury, being the 30 per cent. last referred to
in Sec. 6, and such proportion would be as
certained and determined by reference
to the number OF acres OF surveyed and un-
pany in this county. The quantity Of sur
veyed and unsold lands belonging to such
railroad company could be readily ascer-
tanned by application to the railroad COM
pany or the register of deeds of this
county.
There seems to be no doubt of the right
OF this county: under the law mentioned, to
in the manner above mentioned and
whether such distribution would preserve
the equitable rights of those counties with
in the limits of the land grant to the
Northern Pacific railroad company through
which the railroad does not extend, need
not be in this connection considered, the
language of the act being so clear as to
intent of the legislature. That intent can
be readily ascertained by q reference to
the language of the act itself
JOHN G. HOLLEMBAEK,
District Attorney.
Bismarck. April 16. 1889.
The board proceeded to open the several
bids for the construction OF bridges as per
advertisement as follows:
]. P. Manhart, large bridges. 149 90
small bridges, each ch..................... 81 00
The Smith Bridge company, Toledo,
Ohio, one fifty foot iron span on stone
One 50 foot span, two So fest each and !
one Is foot span on stone Foundation ..S, 400 90
One 50 foot span, two 50 feet each and
one 18 foot span, on Iron ............ 3, $50 90
Same bridge on oak piles, everything fur :.
1. psnoison. the two larger bidses... sls g
\. MN Nelson, Sass ST.. Co.. larger bridges = "
Small bridges, each OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES. 1l6 %
d. ". Taylor & Sons. bridges at Rodgers l99 90
A. i. Bayne & Co., three wrought iron
bridges, three 20 foot spans on stone .
ahutment1 ...:.::........... l,100 OQ
Wm.e eRasnick, two large bridges, each. 287 Is
Small bridges. each ........... 19s s.
Il. r. Richholt and e. L. Ravson, two
large bridges, each ............... 100 00
Small bridges, each. $50 90
Alsx. Turnbull, small bridge: ........ 125 90
John Mckenzie, Long Lake BRIDGE. $40 00
Webb and Flynn. large bridges, each. Se7 0e
Small BRIDGE. ~ oe
The proposals for building of bridges
y