St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-06-30

made by Remington are to be considered
as made under the agreement; that when
ever Remington paid off mortgage, lien or
title. the sum paid was to be considered a
loan. 1t seems to us, however, great
stretch to say that Remington, having
exceeded the limit of advances mentioned
in the agreement, from the fact that he did
in self-defense acquire liens, ETC., to an
amount far exceeding any expectation OF
either King or himself, it is to be in
ferred that all these advances were made In
pursuance of the agreement, in subServience
only to Kings interest.
King claims that whatever Remington
paid for outstanding titles must now be
considered as additional loans to himself.
We contend that the agreement does not
bear any such construction; that it would
be straining the language beyond any rea-
sonabIe limit. Even if Remington should
be held to the utmost limit OF obligation
which is claimed by the plaintiffs, we hold
that these relations were changed and dis
solved by the assignment of all OF Kings
property in bankruptcy. 1t must be pre-
sumed that King knew, in 1875,
WHAT LAND HE OWNED
in Hennepin county, while Remington
didnOt. 1t must also be presumed that they
both knew what lands were described in
the deeds of June, 1875. Therefore, King
must have known that these deeds did not
embrace all his lands in Hennepin county.
1t is scarcely allowable for King to ask
the court, after all these years,
to make contract or mortgage from INN 10
Remington for over two hundred acres,
which he claims to be worth several thous-
and dollars per acre, and decree that Rem
ington shall account for it because OF Kings
own intended deceit, or careleSSnesS, 1t was
not put in as security. tits passing strange
that at the beginning of his suit the dis
coyery was not made Of any omissions.
Nearly all of this land, which is claimed
to have been accidentally omitted, was
heavily encountered Subject TO these liens
they were sold in bankruptcy to Remlng-
ton, who purchased all of Kings right and
equity in them. Subsequently these liens
and mortgages were fOreclOSed and ITEM
ington became the,owner of all the rights,
titles and interests under such foreclosure.
This is the property which the plaintiff now
asks the court to bring within the scope OF
the mortgage to Remington.
Here followed lengthy discussion OF the
doctrines of equity with reference TO the
reformation of deeds, Judge Shaw arguing
that under the rules of evidence in similar
cases, the plaintiffs have failed to make pro-
vision for the reformation Of the mortgage.
AN IMPORTANT POINT.
Oct. 81, 1877, King was petitioned into
bankruptcy by his creditors, an assignee
was appointed and schedules of liabilities
and assets filed. Nov. 80, 1877, the register
in bankruptcy transferred to the assignee, j.
G. Whitney, the entire estate OF w. 5.
King. On that day all the right, title and
interest, and equity of redemption and
Fright to redeem" Of W. S. King passed
from him and became vested in j. G. Whit
ney. Feb. A, 1879. Mr.. King obtained dis
charge from his liabilities, which included
$500, 900 which was owing Remington ON
the day of the filing of his petition, and
$3.50, 900 of other debts, which were also
liens upon the property. We must look
upon Mr.. King as having on the 31st day
of October, 1877, disposed of his entire Title
in this property, and it is clear that the
relation of debtor and creditor could no
longer exist between Remington and King.
If Kings obligation was discharged, King
is no longer the debtor of Remington.
After some further elaboration upon this
point, the court ordered adjournment until
$50 this morning.
THE DISTINGUISHED COUNSEL .-s
employed, the prominence, and the Dvast
amount of gilt-edged Minneapolis real
estate, continues to make the case subject
of interest, and the attendance of specta-
tors was quite large, few of whom
could have had an understanding of Judge
Shaws argument. The judge read his
brief rapidly, stopping occasionally to ex-
patiate upon some point and made many
references to rulings and decisions. 1t is
expected that he will not conclude before
tonight. He will be followed by Hon.
Eugene Wilson for the plaintiffs. Senator
Herman and A. L. Lee, for the defense, and
Senator VOORHEES, and n. B. Bryant, for the
plaintiffs, will also speak, but the order has
not been arranged. The arguments are
certain to occupy the entire week.