Sioux County pioneer. (Fort Yates, Sioux County, N.D.) 1914-1929, 1916-10-06
Petition Not Legal
Attorneys Opinion
Petition for Changing County Seat 60
Selfri9gc Rejected by County Board
on Advice Of Attorney

At tne meeting OF tlp DOarn Ol
county commissioners held this week
petition bearing in the neishbor-
hood Of $50 signers was presented
praying that the question OF chang
ing the county seat from Fort Yates
to Selfridge be submitted to the
voters Of the county at the general
election in November.
The petition was referred to the
states attorney for an opinion as to
legality. After examining the petit
ton and the law on the subject of
county seat removal States Attor-
ney johnson rendered an opinion
that the petition was misleading
and illegal for the reason that there
is no provision made in the statute
for changing a county seat. There
is provision made for relocation Of
county seat which requires only a
majority vote. There is also pro-
vision for removal Of county seat
which requires a two-third vote.
Sioux county was created under an
act which gave the governor the
power to designate the county seat,
and the supreme court has held
that in a county organized under
the law under which Sioux county
was created the county seat location
designated by the governor is per-
manent one. The question Of chang
ing the county seat location then is
a matter of removal, and should so
be stated in the petition, according
the opinion Of the states attorney
which is given below:
THE ATTORNEYS OPINION
October 3, 1916.
To the Honorable Board of County
Commissioners of Sioux County.
Sirs:
J have your request Of this date
asking for an opinion as to the le-
gality Of certain petition signed by
Lincoln Winters and others, asking
for the submission to the voters of
Sioux County, the question Of
changing the cotinty seat from Fort
Yates to Se]fridge. Replying will
say that l am Of the opinion that
the petition does not fulfill the re-
quirements of the statute for such
cases for the following reason:
Following the case Of State ex rel
Ahern VS.. Anders, 30 n. D., 572,
which was heard on the LIST day of
June, 1915, and in which case the
facts are the same as that Of Sioux
county, the court held that to all
intents and purposes that county
seat fixed by the proclamation Of
the governor, as was the case in
Sioux county, that it was to all in
tents and purposes the permanent
county seat, and the county seat
could only be changed by either re-
moval or relocation. In this pc
tition the petitioners have asked not
to remove the county seat or re-
locate it. They have simply asked
to change it from Fort Yates to Self
ridge.
In my opinion the word CHANGE
is too indefinite and upon its inter-
probation considerable litigation
could easily arise, especially when
taken in connection with the rest of
the petition, where the petitions al
lege that the county seat at Fort
Yates is a temporary county seat.
I do not see what the auditor
would have to guide himself by in
preparing the ballot for this quest
ion as the petition most certainly
does not comply with the statue in
asking for removal of the county
seat nor does it ask for the re-loca-
ton Of the county seat
Under the above circumstances, |
believe the best thing for the board
would be to reject the petition, the
matter CAN then Immediately be
taken into court and a decision OBJ
tained so that the auditor would
know what to do in the matter, this
L l..