St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-04-02

ton, the detention of said logs at
said booms and unusually low water
in the st. Louis river during
the years 1882 and 1888 have
each supplemented the other in delaying said
logs.
18th. There are certain rapids within the
limits mentioned in said act known as Grand
Rapids, out of which the defendants have
blasted and removed certain rock making
better channel for the passage of logs, but it
was entirely feasible and practicable to float
logs over said rapids in their natural state.
18th. The defendants claim the right to
charge, and do charge and collect, and
threaten to charge and collect by detention
and sale of logs forty-fVe cents per thousand
for all logs passing through their said works
whether assorted and delivered to their own
ers or allowed to pass down the river in
common mass without being assorted and
delivered to their several owners; and the
plaintiffs and others are deferred thereby and
by the hindrance and delay occasioned by
said booms and piers from cutting and float
ing to the sawmills at Duluth, large quantities
of logs which but for said distractions and
charges would at the present time, and from
time to time be so cut and fioated to market.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
That the plaintiffs are not entitled to the
relief demanded and the defendants are en-
titled to judgment against the plaintiffs for
their costs and disbursements. Judgment
ordered accordingly.
MEMORANDUM.
I have no difficulty in reaching the con-
clusion that the st. Louis river is a public
highway and under the protection OF both
the 'enabling act'' and of section 2, art. 2,
of the constitution of the state. The principal
value of the stream as a highway being for
the floating of logs, which necessarily be-
come commingled, 1 think the legislature
may, Notwithstanding the enabling act and
constitutional limit by law, designate points
on the river where all logs may be detained
a reasonable length of time to allow those
desiring to manufacture or market
at such point to assert out OF the
general mass their logs and may authorize
corporation to cause the stoppage OF all logs,
and may assert to each owner who desires
his logs to be assorted at such point, and
charge a reasonable sum for such service.
do not believe the legislature has the
power to levy any toll on logs simply per-
mitted to pass through such works, and l
find no case except the Duluth Lumber com
pany case that goes to any such extent, and
that case is certainly not well considered.
1 do not think the ''proposed'' works would
be any improvement on those now in opera
ton, but do believe the capacity of the works
can be greatly increased without altering the
general plan of them.
I think the proper place to settle the mat
ter of tolls is in an action at law.
The works being lawful so far as they go,
don't think a court of equity will undertake to
compel defendant to enlarge them or improve
their construction, if for no other reason be-
cause the works will not operate themselves,
and the court will not undertake to see that
they were always or at any time properly
manned and worked. O.P.STEARNs, Judge.
COUNTY t OF RAMSEY. ss
I, Charles o. Lovejoy, Clerk of the District
Court of the County of Carlton do hereby
certify that I have compared the foregoing
with the original on file in my Office, and
that it is true and correct copy Of the same
and Of the whole thereof
Witness my hand and official seal at
Thomson in said county, this Goth day of
March, A. D. 1884.
CHARLES o. LovEJoY, Clerk.
BY II. H. HAWKINS, Deputy Clerk.