The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1865-08-04
Decisions Of the Supreme Court OF
Minnesota.


Minnesota.
The La Crosse e. ST.. Paul Packet Comp any,
Apt. VS. John Cunningham, Respt.
SYLLABUS.
In an application for certiorari to Justices
Court. the presentation OF the affidavit requlr-
ed by sec 124, chap. 80 of the Compiled Stat
utes. within twenty days after the rendition OF
the Judgment, is an essential requisite to the
authority of the Judge to allow the writ Of
certiorari.
The omission 10 state in the affidavit that the
application is made in good faith and not for
the purpose of delay, renders the affidavit SUBJ
stantially defective, and the judge has no au.
thority to allow the writ, nor is the affidavit
amendable.
Robert F. Crowell VS. Edward c. Lambert.
SYLLABUS.
The Supreme Court has authority TO issue
the writ of peremptory mandamus.
A County Auditor may act by deputy in the
canvass of votes.
Where, upon the canvass of votes cast at a
general election, G. was declared duly elected
10 the Office of Judge of Probate, received
certificate, qualified as by law required, and
made demand upon his predecessor Tor the
books of the Office. it appearing that Is. term
of Office had expired. Held, that upon the re-
fusal of L. to deliver up the records. c. was
entitled to peremptory writ of mandamus to
enforce the delivery.
The STATE of Minnesota ex rel, Betty Savage,
respondent, vs.. Conlett Hill, Appellant.
SYLLABUS.
An order OF the District Court setting aside
an order made by court commissioner in ha-
beas corpus proceeding discharging the relator,
is an appeaahe order.
Habeas corpus proceedings are within the
jurisdiction of Judge of the District Court at
Chambers. Under the constitution and laws, a
court commissioner has jurisdiction to grant
writ of habeas corpus returnable before him.
self, and proceed to the hearing and determin-
alton thereof when the lprisoner is detained
in the county in which he resides :;
and the court commissioner of one
county has like jurisdiction in leases where
the prisoner is detained in an adjoining
county, if it properly appears that there is no
grant the writ or if there be one, that he is alb.
sent, or for any cause be incapable of acting or
has refused to grant the writ
John R. Madison, plaintiff in error, VS. Bidwells
Exchange Bank, defendan: in error.
SYLLABUS.
j. B., ]. R. NJ and II. E. B. entered into a
banking partnership under the style of Bid.
wells Exchange Bank, subject to stipulation
ny WHICH y. II. NJ. was pelmltte0 70 Jake d uXeu
salary in lieu OF share OF the profits. j. X. N.
elected to take and did take the salary.
Held, That Notwithstanding the election, j.
B. and II. E. b. remain partners under the
the partnership articles, it was the duty of j.
r. N. to take charge Of all notes left with the
concern for collection.
By the neglect of j. r. NJ. to make demand
and give notice on note left by F. 81 NJ. for
collection, the endOrser, who was the only
solvent party to the note, was discharged.
Held, That ]. r. NJ. was liable to j. B. & H.
e. B., as Bidwells Exchange Bank, for the as
signees Of this neglect. At the time when the
endorser was so discharged. the Bank held a
note against +. & NJ of less amount than the
note left by F. & NJ. for collection. F. e. NJ
remained solvent for more than two years after
the note of the Bank against them became due.
but declined to pay the same on the ground
that they had q large claim against the bank
for the loss Of the note by the negligence of N.
Held, That the claims of F. & N. for dam
ages was proper counterclaim against the
note Of the bank against them.
The bank made q settlement with F. & NJ.
by surrerdering the note against F. & NJ. and
paying q certain amount of money, which was
less than the difference between the note of F.
& N. and the note held by the bank against F.
I'm.
Held. That the bank was entitled to recover
from j. r. NJ. the amount of the note surren-
dered and of the money paid.
German Land Association, vs.. Konstantin
Scholler.
SYLLABUS.
The German Land Association, being mere
voluntary association of persons unincorporat-
ed, has no legal capacity to take or hold real
property, nor can s6ch association be the ben
efciary of trust. A deed. therefore, to A. B.
c. in trust for such association is void.
F. 4. w. Davis, vs.. Allen Pierce ct al.
SYLLABUS.
The plaintiff having the legal title to tract
Of land on which there were two mortgages
purchased and took an assignment Of the first
The Judge who tried the cause below, found as
matter of fact that the plaintiff did not, in
taking the assignment of said mortgage, intend
either that it should be extinguished or
merged, or that it should not remain a valid
or first lien upon the premises therein de-
scribed, and also found that it was for the in
terest of the plaintiff that said mortgage should
remain lien. Held, That the estate or interest
thus purchased by the plaintiff did not merge
in the legal estate.