In Massachusetts, Section 4 of Chapter 50 of the revised laws provides that the owner of abutting land liable to assessment may at a certain stage of the proceedings give notice that he elects to surrender his land; in which event the board may, if it thinks expedient, take the whole parcel at its estimated value, and any part not required may be sold. A somewhat similar statute, authorizing an owner to convey to the city his entire property at its appraised value when part of it was taken for widening a street, was involved, and by implication sustained, in the case of _Dorgan_ v. _Boston_, 12 Allen, 223. Chapter 443 of the Massachusetts laws of 1904 sanctions the taking of remnants of parcels part of which are condemned for public improvement, and authorizes the city to sell any of such remnants subject to any building or other restrictions which the proper authorities may see fit to impose. The power to take the whole of a tract when part only is needed is limited to the case where the remnant after such taking would, from its size or shape, be unsuited for the erection of suitable and appropriate buildings, and where also the public convenience and necessity require such taking. There are provisions authorizing such remnants to be sold and united with adjacent property if the owner thereof consents; but the legislature refused to adopt the more radical plan, recommended by a committee, of uniting such remnants with the contiguous property, without the consent of the owner thereof, by condemning his land in order to incorporate the remnant with it and thus effect an advantageous sale. This act has never been tested in the courts, and it may be surmised that, in spite of the very liberal views of the Massachusetts courts, the fate of a proceeding under its provisions would be problematical, unless it could be made to appear that the “public convenience and necessity” actually did require such taking of entire tracts for the purpose of imposing upon the odd remnants some conditions and restrictions germane to the major improvement. Another statute, framed on somewhat similar lines, but also never submitted to a judicial test, is Section 10 of the Ohio Municipal Code, as amended in 1904. This section provides that all municipal corporations shall have power to appropriate real estate within their corporate limits for certain specific purposes, among which are the following: “For establishing esplanades, boulevards, parkways, park grounds and public reservations in, around and leading to public buildings, and for the purpose of reselling such land, with reservations in the deeds of such resale as to the future use of said lands so as so protect public buildings and their environs, and to preserve the view, appearance, light, air and usefulness of public grounds occupied by public buildings and esplanades and parkways leading thereto.”