to make the park attractive and educational to those whose tastes are being formed, and whose love of beauty is being cultivated.” When once it is conceded that a use is public, the courts have no control over the character of the estate or easement to be taken for the purpose. The constitution of Illinois provides, indeed, that when a railroad company condemns a right-of-way the fee shall remain in the former owner; but, subject to that restriction as to these particular corporations, the legislature has unlimited power to specify the nature, extent, and duration of the estate that shall be taken for any public use. Having the right to authorize the taking of an absolute title, it could direct the appropriation of any lesser interest, and could confer upon public bodies power to condemn the right to restrict the use and improvement of property contiguous to public grounds. It does not appear, however, that the present statutes of Illinois do confer upon municipalities any express power to condemn such easements over lands contiguous to a street, boulevard, park or other public place. In the legislation under which the West Chicago Park Commissioners were incorporated and organized, there were sections expressly directing the park commissioners to impose building lines upon property adjacent to the parks and boulevards authorized thereby, and in the condemnation proceedings compensation was to be included for this burden. The West Park board, however, never undertook to avail itself of these extensive powers, which were limited to the acquisition of the original parks and boulevards authorized by the act. It might be argued that the city, under its present authority to establish and enlarge parks, boulevards, and streets, could condemn such easements directly, or that it could condemn a wide strip for a new street or land contiguous to an old street, and, by the familiar device of a stipulation entered of record in the condemnation suit, limit the appropriation to a restricted control of the use of the property. The latter method, if lawful, would be clumsy and inadequate, and additional legislation would be desirable to enable public authorities effectively to acquire, under the power of eminent domain, a qualified jurisdiction or control over property of which the exclusive use is not taken.