Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1914-03-10
(Syllabus by the Court.)

~ (SyllaDuS ny the COurt.)
IN THE SUPREME COURT, .
., .s. STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
Moultrail County, a municipal cor
poration. plaintiff and appellant, VS..
George w. Wilson and lara J. VIII.
son, his wife, T.
During the election to determine
the location of the permanent county
seat of Mountrail county, George w.
Wilson offered the county and its Ell.
ectors that he would donate to the
county, if Stanley should be chosen
as such county seat, half a block of
land for court house purposes. Up
on Stanley being CHOSEN he decided
to the county a half block of land,
reciting in the deed that the same
was "to be used for court house and
other necessary county buildings and
that only" for which conveyance a
formal consideration Of one dollar
was paid by the county. At that time
a building used asa county Jail was
situated on that tract and is still
thereon and used for Jail purposes.
In 1912 the voters authorized bond.
ing for $4,000 for court house pur-
poses and bonds to that amount have
been sold and a contract entered
into for the erection Of a county
court house. Last September the
county commissioners determined by
resolution mat half a block vas in,
adequate in area as a site, ald en-.
tered into a contract with p. N. Tay-
lor of Stanley wherein he agreed to
convey to the county a 0ne.half block
tract as a gift. and furnish the mean
to procure by condemnation pro-
ceedings an additional o1e!half block
adjacent thereto. the county to thus
acquire a full block of land, free of
cost, to be used as a court house
site. Under this arrangement -!Tay-
Tor donated a one-half block, deciding
the same to the county, it accepting
title, and also delivered the county
his certified check to be used in pay
ment of the costs of this action and
the value of this action and the val
US of the property sought to be OBJ
tanned by this action in condemna.
ZION. The ounty commissioners the"
designated the Taylor tract as the
court house sits and entered into a
contract for the erection thereon OF
the court house. The land adjacent
thereto and sought to- he obtained
by these condemnation proceedings
belongs to Wilson the donor of the
first court house site adjudged in.
adequate by the commissioners. Viii
son defends, contending:
a. That the county was with.
out power to procure the Taylo,
tract and that the county's title tc
the same is void. ~ That the &C
ceptance of the Wilson tract, under
the clause contained in the deed
estopped the county from erecting &
court house at ony other place thar
upon the Wilson site. 60 That b,
using the Wilson site for Jail purpos
es the county had accepted same ant
it had become a court house site
~ That by failing to submit witt
the bonding proposition the question
of the purchase Of a site the count,
was without power to acquire anoth
err site. 90. That the county com
missi0ners are powerless to chong,
from one established court hous,
site to another until the voters o
the county, by a majority vote shall
have first authorized a sale Of til,
first site. () That the selection
by the board of n site exhaust
the power of the board to chang,
thercfrom by the selection Of q ncv
site.
HELD.
T. The county may acquire b,
gift any number of grounds as site
for county buildings, whether use,
forssuch purposes or not; and the &C
c%eptance of title to one side did no
bar it from accepting title to an
other site donated the county. eve
though both were inadequate for tn
purpose. j.
2. The county has not purchase
any site. but possesses two %inadequat
sites, both donated.
8. Sec. 24O6, r.. G. 1906 empow
ers the county to acquire ~ con
domination proceedings additions
ground adjacent to an inadequat
site to constitute an adequate an
suitable site for county buildings al