The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1860-12-07

Tue OOuCG Will IuccL AZ GuC COuIO IOOm IL
the Capitol. We learn that some OF tie
causes are of considerable importance. The
"Three Years Redemption Law" which
Judge Nelson decided was unconstitutional
in which decision Judge Palmer acquiesced
will be reviewed and finally determined, in
the case of Hayward vs.. Judd. We learn
also that Mr.. Bigelow has two cases in.
volving the vexed question of surplus
money upon mortgage SALE" which was de-
termined at the July term in the case o
Bidwell vs.. Whitney. The Court not being
a unit in the decision at that time, these
cases will be presented in the light of re-
hearing. The following is the calendar:
l. Dana & White, plaintiffs in error, vs.. The
Bank of st. Paul, defendants in error. W. h.
Peckham for plaintiffs; William Hollinshead for
defendant.
2. E. H. &H. R. Filly ct al, appellants, vs..
s. N. Register ct al; respondents. D. Cooper
& w. H. Burt for appellants, Thompson & Van
derburgh for respondents.
3. Carson & Eaton, appellants, VS.. Orrin
Smith ct al, respondents. Berry & Waterman
for appellants; Sergeant Window for respon.
dents.
4. Morton s. Townsend, appellant, vs. D. H.
Kendall, for A. J, Tillotson, respondent. Ser
geant & Franklin for appellant; Waterman,
Norton & Mitchell for respondent.
5. Daniel Rohrer, plaintiff in error, vs.. Or.
lando b. Terrell, assignee, &C., defendant in
error. Smith & Gilman for plaintiff; Allis l.
PeCkham for defendant.
6. Wilson G. Morrison ct al, plaintiffs in er-
6ofon6ont in
Smith q Gilman for plaintiff, Allis Il Peckham
for defendant,
IN. J. T. Dana and T. M. Broome, admins.
traitors, plaintiffs in error, vs.. George W. Far
ringtOn ct ur. defendant IN error. Allis u Peck.
ham for plaintiffs; II. j. Horn for respondent.
s. The State of Minnesota VS.. Charles Dunn
phey. Allis & Peckham for defendant.
8. William L. Banning, appellant, VS.. James
M. Winslow. respondent. q. ]. Horn for ap-
pellant; George A. Nourse for respondent.
10. William L Banning, appellant, VS.. The Min.
nesota & Pacific R. R. Co., respondents. II. ].
Horn for appellant; George A. Nourse for re-
spOndents.
IL. Joseph M. Marshall, plaintiff iu error, vs.
Henry w. Hart ct al. defendants in error. II.
J. Horn for plaintiff; W. H. Peckham for de.
PENDANTS.
IL. John A. Lockwood, appellant, VS.. Sine
on P. Folsom, respondent. II. j. Horn, for
appellant; John B. Brisbin for respondent.
Is, Leonard W. Kip, appellant, vs.. D. O.
Fullerton, respondent. w. A. German, Smith
Gilman for appellant; j. u c. D. Gilfillan for
respondent.
IA. Charles s. Washburne, plaintiff in error,
vs.. J. B. Lufkin ct AL, implicated, defendants in
error. George A. Nourse for plaintiff; Sanborn
g. Lund for defendants.
Is. j. B. Brisbin ct AL, plaintiff in error, VS..
Newhall q johnson, defendants in error. Bris.
bin, Spencer 4 Green for plaintiffs. D. Newell
for defendant
l6. John McCarty appellant, VS.. Isaac Van
Etten. respondent. D. Newell for appellant;
Van Etten for respondent.
II. Same parties and counsel.
Is. Maria T. Hayward, eXecutriX, &C., plain
tiffs in error, VS.. Henry B. Judd. defendant in
error. VIM. Sprigg Hall for Plaintiff; Van Et-
ten and and Officer for defendant.
10. Christopher Beeht, appellant. VS.: d. s.
Harris, ct al, respondents. D. Cooper for ap-
pellant; Van Etten and Officer for respondents.
20. Alexander Pace, appellant, vs.. Jonathan
Chadderdon, respondent, George Bradley for
appellant; a. G. Chatfeld for respondent.
Il. Geo. M. Rathbun, appellant, VS.. Joseph
Moody, respondent. George Bradley, Geo. L..
& E. A. Otis for appellant; A. q. Chatfield for
respondent.
~. Derby & Day, appellants, VS.. G. NJ. Gal
lup, respondent. Allis and Peckham for ap-
pellents; G. L. & E. A. Otis and N. E. Ames
for respondent
%. Martin Drew, ct al. plaintiffs in error, vs..
Wood, Bacon Il Co., ct AL, defendants in error:
Smith g. Gilman for plaintiffs; VIM. Hollinshead
for defendants.
"a. Stephen Denoyer. ct al, imp, appellants,
vs.. Mcdonald, Geissc & Co., respondents. VIM.
Hollinshead for appellants; Brisbrin u Bigelow
for respondents.
Is. Cooper Il Lamby, plaintiffs in error, VS..
Richard Reany, defendant in error. Sanborn d
Lund for plaintiffs; George Magruder for de-
PENDANT.
26. Emory A. Weller, plaintiff in error, vs..
The City of St. Paul, defendant in error. San.
born & Lund for plaintiff; S. R. Bond and b. j.
Horn for defendant.
q. G. Chopard Son, plaintiffs in error, VS..
T. w. Bsyard & Co., defendants in error. San
born Il Lund for plaintiffs; j. u G. D. Gilfllan
for defendants.
%. John W. Banker, plaintiff in error, VS..
Geo. w. Brent, defendant in error. II. R. Bige-
low for plaintiff; Sanborn & Lnnd and w.
Sprigg Hall for defendant.
20. William F. Potter, plaintiff in error, VS..
Luke Marvin, ct al, defendants in error. d. K.
Bigelow for plaintiff; Smith u Gilman and J. B.
Brisbin for defendants.
80. The Pennsylvania Insurance Company Of
Pittsburg. appellant, VS.. Edward Murphy, ct
AL, respondents. Brisbin Il Bigelow for appel
lants; Cornell, Denman L. Morgan for respond
ents.
81. The Etns Insurance Company, plaintiffs
in error. VS., NJ. Frost Co., defendants in er.
ror. c. T. Cotton and J. G. Il G. D. Gilfllan
for plaintiff in error; Murray & King for defend
ants in error.
80. Philip G. Benson, plaintiff in error. vs..
The State of Minnesota, defendant In error.
Thomas Cowan for plaintiff.
80. W. C. Morrison, plaintiff in error, vs.. The
City of St. Paul and Ira Bidwell, defendants in
error. Brisbin, Spencer, and Green for plain
tiff; s. R. Bond and h. ]. Horn, for defendant
in error.