Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-10-03
THE COURTS.
Supreme Court

oAioiAe"ho DeluS present., pIOcceueo Will Lue
call of cases as follows:
l. Place Bass, appellant VS.. Oliver Anderson
and ID. II. b. Bagge, respondent.
2. Information of A. E. Meigs relator, VS.
Lafayette French, respondent; the State OF
Minnesota, ex rel.
8. Robert M. Addison, relator, VS.. James w.
Williams and L. Webster, respondents.
4. Albert Armstrong, appellant, vs.. the
board of county commissioners for Ramsey
county, respondent.
D. Roger s. Munger and Rish A. Gray, re-
spondents, VS.. John d. Howard, appellant.
o. In the matter of the appeal of Elliot
Walker sand A. j. Walker, heirs Of Versal J.
Walker, deceased, from the report of commits.
sioners OF probate court of Hennepin county
allowing claim of Susan P. Walker, admins
tratrix of the estate of V. J. Walker, deceased.
q. Angelique Mathew and Oliver Mathew
her husband, respondents, VS.. Michael Young
Nicholas Young and Susannah Young, appel
lants.
8. In the matter of the information of An
drew Wilson, relator, VS.. John w. Arctander
respondent.
9. In the matter of the information of A. F.
Nordln, relator, VS.. John w. Arctander, re.
spondent.
10. In the matter of the information OF
John A. >. Bornsta, relator, VS.. John w. Arc
lander. respondent.
IL. Adloph Graffmiller, relator, VS.. the City
of Northfeld, respondent.
IL. In the matter of the application to sus.
pend Q. N. Enos. an attorney of this caurt,
from practice, ETC., by r. A. Murray, petitioner.
Ii. State of Minnesota on the relation of the
Minnesota Midland railway company, relator,
VS.. the Town of Roscoe, respondent.
IA. State of Minnesota on the relation of
the Minnesota Midland railway company, re.
lator, VS. the Town of Highland. respondent.
Is. The State of Minnesota on the relation
OF ID. Il. Morgan, relator VS.. George w. Hand,
as county auditor of Fillmore county, MINI e.
sofa, respondent
16. State of Minnesota on the relation of the
Minnesota Midland Railway company, relator,
vs.. the town Of West Albany, respondent.
II. The State Of Minnesota relator, VS.. An
drew M. Weller, respondent.
IL. The State of Minnesota, relator, VS..
Granville Sharpe, respondent.
10. Robert w. Cummings, respondent, VS..
Perry Long, appellant.
20. d. d. Eyre, L. J. Eyre and F. W. Oliver,
copartners, as Eyre Bros. & Oliver, respondents,
VS.. Ignatius Donnelly, appellant.
II. Lemuel ID. Strong, appellant, VS.. Thorn
w. Sprague, G. d. Baker, and Hiram Shippey,
respondents.
~. D. B. Coleman, appellant, VS.. B. A.
ONeill and L. E. Pierce, respondents.
%. The city of Winona, respondent, vs.. the
Minnesota Railway Construction company, ap-
pellant.
"a. Nels T. Langmoe, respondent, VS.. Ten
mis- S. Slingerland, appellant.
rs. Michael Lambert, respondent, VS.. Ten
mis- s. Slingerland, appellant
26. Edmund Rice. Horace Thompson Sam
uel ). Illden, trustees, respondents VS.. The st.
Paul & Pacific Railroad Co., the First Division
of the st. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co., Geo. L..
Becker, William G.. Moorehead, and Geo. T. M.
Davis, trustees, Martin Farrant, Peter s. LIE
Clair, John d. Gray, Augustus Moores, Chas.
Haywood, James G.. CARTRIDGE, Frank l..
Honore ct al.
81. Horace Thompson and Samuel j. Tilden,
as trustees, respondents, VS.. the First Division
of the st. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co., Geo. l..
Becker, William G.. Moorehead, Henry Hale
and James e. Southworth, as trustees, ct
ais.
%. Horace Thompson and George T. M.
Davis trustees, respondents, VS.. the st. Paul
y Pacific Railroad Co., the First Division of the
st. Paul q Pacific Railroad Co., Geo. T.. Becker,
and William G. Moorehead, trustees. and
others, appellants.
20. Edmund Rice, Horace Thompson, and
Samuel j. Tilden, trustees, respondents, VS.. the
First Division of the st. Paul & Pacific Rail-
road Co., Geo. L.. Becker, William G. Moore
head, Henry Hale, and James E. Southworth
as trustees, ct ais, appellants.
81. Ole Simonson, respondent, VS.. Horace
Thompson Edmund Rice, and John S. Kenne-
dy, appellants.
81. Mary L. Hall, executlix and John J.
Cole, executrix of John M. Hall deceased, ap-
pellants VS.. j. Page Mumford, respondent.
81. Fanny s. Wilder and Amherst 81. Wild
er, her husband, respondents, VS.. Franklin De
Cou. and William Corliss, and William G. Sar-
gent, appellants.
33. Tams Bixbp. respondent, VS.. George
Wilkinson, appellant.
"a. Anna r. Geer, respondent, VS.. Sidney
II. Smith, sheriff of Wabasha county, Mimi,
and j. F. Rogers, deputy sheriff of said county
nf Wah ach oh A P,,r1 o+%
and Charles Knapp, appellants.
80. A. II. Reed and Joseph Richardson, CO
partners as A. Fl. Reed & Co., appellants, VS..
Mary E. Pixley and Norman Pixley, respond
ents.
So. Levi Butler, Orlando @. Merriam, Jas.
). Lane, and Leonidas Lane partners, doing
business under the firm name as l.. Butler &
Co., respondents, VS.. Chas. White, sheriff of
Cottonwood county, appellant.
81 Alvina Semrou, respondent, VS.. Julius
Semrou, appellant.
38. Cecilia A. Williams, George 81. Will
liams, respondents VS.. Gardner Stewart, Sarah
P. Stewart, David r.. Rand and James MCGEE.
appellants.
80. E. M. Titterud respondent, VS.. Charles
Ripley, appellant
40. Eliza D. r. Brown Emma A. Brown and
Maria r. Bushnell; respondents, vs.. Isaac At
water appellant
Al. William D. Richardson, respondent, VS..
Frank Reynolds, appellant.
AZ. Robert A. Hurst, assignee of bank
ruptcy of Chas. Halves and Almon Stores
partners, Halves & Stores, respondents, VS.
d. Marston and D. w. Marston, partners, as
Marston & Co., appellants
43. Russell Blakeley, respondent, VS.. VIM.
G. Lie Due and franklin r. Smith, appellants.
A. The State of Wisconsin, respondent VS.
Louis r. Torinus. ]. Edwin Staples, William
A. Bronson and Martin Mower, appellants.
45. Byron Porter, respondent, VS.. Lorer
Fletcher and Chas. M. Loring. appellants.
46. The State of Minnesota, respondent, VS.
John Schmail, appellant.
~. The State Of Minnesota, respondent, VS.
John Schmail, appellant.
49,. Charles German, appellant, VS.. Timoth,
J. Sheehan, respondent.
40. The st. Paul, Saltwater and Taylor
Falls Railroad company. appellant, VS.. Thu
First Division of the ST. Paul & Pacific Railroad
Co., John S. Kennedy, Horace Thompson anc
Edmund Rice, mortgages in possession, ii
trust for the mortgage bondholders Of the de
cihc Railroad company, respondents.
50. In the matter of the appeal of Eliza A
butcher from the Judgment of the probate
court of Ramsey county. upon her accountin.
as administrators of the estate of Gilber
| butcher, deceased.
81. The st. Paul. Saltwater and Taylors
Falls Railroad company, respondent, vs. Mar,
Greve, appellant.
So. Peter Yost, respondent, VS.. The Board o
County Commissioners of the county of Scott
appellants.
| So. The Red Wing Hotel company, respond
ent, VS.. John Frederick and John Heck, appel
lants.
81. John Chadwick, appellant, VS.. VIM D
Cornish, administrator Of the estate of Mari
Hendricks, deceased, respondent.
So Timothy Ryan, appellant, VS.. N. F. b
Krans, Rudolph Latte and Eugene THEM
respondents.
56. Rufus J. Baldwin and the State Ma
tional Bank of Minneapolis, respondent, VS.
Thomas H. Garfield, appellant.
| 81. Rufus j. Baldwin and the State Nationa
Bank Of Minneapolis, respondent, VS.. Thoma
81. Garfield, appellant.
| So. Rufus j. Baldwin and the State Nationa
Bank of Minneapolis, respondent VS.. Thoma