St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-05-26

GIVEN TO THE COURT.
Arguments Completed by the Able Ooun-
sci in the King Remington
Land Suit.
More Eloquent and Learned Even IMAM
on Previous Days, We're the
Arguments
A Most Finished Argument by MI
n. B. Bryant of Boston Tor
Mr.. King.
The Decision to Be n Landmark III
the History of Equity Cases
in America.
Tbe ARGUMENTS Endeed.

Sentation of the case, which was SUBMITTED
TO the court at 5 o'clock. The day was
more interesting one for the average spec
tator with little knowledge OF the law IMAM
the previous days, for while the arguments
We're elaborate from a legal point, they
also went more into the personality OF the
case. The counsel that held the attention
of the Judges were eminent, the speakers
being the Hon. Eugene NJ. WILSON,, the
Hon. John Van WORMS. the
Hon. n. b. Bryant, Senator kernan'
the Hon. c. X. Davis and the Hon. Gordon
Z. Cole. Mr.. Wilson spoke Tor an nour'
making presentation on Dehal1 OF caro-
line NJ. King. He was followed by MI.
Van Voorhis in 4 speech OF TWO hours
nearly. The able counsel speaks very
quietly, and in matter OF fact SORT OF way.
without hesitation and without nights ol
rhetoric. In marked contrast with MS style
is that of Mr.. Bryant. He was said by
some of the attorneys to be the most pol
ished speaker that has appeared III the SUI
preme court room for some time. He stood
erect. one hand behind him most of the
time and the other alternately holding
his brief and making gesture
His use of words was choice, his
style polished. his gesture graceful
and his enuncation distinct and forclole.
He spoke two hours by the clock. Senator
Herman, who appeared as the special
representative of Philo Remington followed
him for thirty minutes. He too spoke
with vigor and with polish that was
noticeable. EX-Gov. Davis spoke for the
same length of time. answering some OF
the arguments of the respondents counsel.
Hon. Gordon Z. Cole spoke but Tor a few
minutes, and the great case was given to
the five judges that make up the supreme
court.
THE ARGUMENTS.
Mr.. Wilson, for Mrs. King argued that
her case was substantially the same as
that of her husband, i'll the essential par
ticulars. Mr.. Va Worries had one Of
the longest briefs on record, embracing 24S
printed pages of the ordinary size of paper
book He submitted the following points:
The general conclusions of the court below
involves a finding in favor of the plaintiff on
all material questsons, though such finding
be not expressed in terms.
The judgment of the district court is inter-
locutory and not final. The appeal from the
order denying motion for new trial can only
be heard on the questions of law involved.
Remington is q trustee and his purchase
at the bankrupt sale of the lands in contro-
versy, and the conveyance to him of the
omitted lands, were in his character as
trustee, ard he must account for them as
such, aud is governed by all the rules which
govern trustees.
The plaintiff in his reply regarding the
purchase by Remington ut the assignee's
sale, alleges that the sale was made to
Remington, under an agreement made by
Qim with the plaintiff, to purchase the
property, and hold it in trust for him, and
that the land was purchased for nominal
sum by said Remington under the agreement
upon the trial, and found as fact by the
court.
If King had any interest whatever in his
estate, it was derfectly legal and competent
for him to arrange with Remington to protect
It from sacrifice.
LOUISE. Menage is not a bona fide pur-
chaser of any of the lands in controversy.
1t is claimed by the appellants council,
that the agreement between King and r em-
lngton, by which the latter made the purchase
at the bankruptcy sale is void, as in fraud
of creditors, and King and Remington stand
in pari delicto. The answers to this sugges-
ton and every part of it are complete and
conclusive.
The question Of jurisdiction was not raised
at the trial and cannot be raised on appeal
1t is claimed by appellants counsel that
Col. King is estopped from setting up his
claims by reason OF his laches. That he
knew and saw what was being done and made
the briefs, The saw beautiful city of subur-
ban homesteads spring upon this property
and sounded no note of warning" The facts
claimed are the product of fertile, imagin-
alton. We can afford to postpone our tears
for the grantees of Menage, until he gra-
ciously permits US to know something about
them.
All these points were eXhaustively treated
and hundreds of citations given
MIR. BRYANT'S REMARKS.
After a brief introduction Mr.. BRYANT
said:
The records will show some 200 objections
to evidence in the court below. The records
will show that the defense based their hopes
OF winning on a suppression of evidence.
But the door was opened, the evidence adj
United, and the result is a series of findings
that will for all time distinguish this case as
the most remarkable on record. When the
supreme court shall have read these findings
it will find such a case as has never before
appeared in the history of legal doings
No case was ever heard where so many tech
nical objections were made so purely desti-
tute OF any moral merit, and where the equi-
ties were so apparent and notable. l ask
the court to examine all the objections, and
then decide if there is one of them that will
stand law or recommend itself to the decent
moralities of the world. Law and morality,
common honesty among men, demand an ac-
counting. Philo Remington's claim was
paid, his every claim was satisfied, but no
settlement has ever been made, but when the
property was become valuable, amounting
up in the millions, it was divided up between
Louis +. Menage, Robert S. lines and Mrs.
Remington. Philo Remington claims that
the conveyance was in error, and he claims
that the deeds should have been reformed.
and they were so reformed as to bring
them within the law. The discovery of
the error came nine years after thew were
1o1ad 10 or1d yuoS r,oo do huro
it is claimed by the defense that the case is
theirs under the statute of fraud. That state
ment involves paradox. The claim is made
that when King voluntarily made that cor
rection court of law would have COM
PEELED him to have made by legal process, the
transaction is void-a claim repugnant to
common law and common morals. For the
honor of the court, and for the honor of our
profession, be it said that in no court has
such claim ever been upheld and when this
is done, it will require no modern Juyenal to
write a satire upon modern morals.
Philo Remington, from the time when he
accepted that contract, became trustee He
owed duty to Col. King, who became a bepe-
fciary and in the single statement that an
obligation to an estate, or to its beneficiary
is the differential mark between trustee and
the holder of a cestius que trust lies the Who'll
principle which governs this case in relation
to the question of trusteeship. 1t was the
intention of Philo Remington until q recent
date to give the accounting asked for and
the facts and records will show this pretty
conclusively.
The transactions in which King and
Remington were parties were then gone over
at some length.
During bankruptcy the title to an estate IS
In the law. English and American courts
huve so held, with the immediate holder sim
ply representing the majesty of the law. If
there were recognized fiduciary relations ex-
lstlng and recognized prior to the bankrupt
sale, then the S25 was sim ply an advance
under these relations of so much money; the
action was simply for King, and Remington
was acting in direct fulfillment of a Duty.
Inc agreement between King and Remington
was sound, validand, is recognized. The sig.
n1hcant fact in this case is that no counsel
has dared to deny the truth of this agreement.
lnnes swore, after being hard pressed. that,
when he made that agreement with King. he
intended to take from King any and ali his
title. Remington is on record in letter to
Mrs. King aS saying, in 1881, that the title is
still in ktag.
MI. Bryant, in closing. said that the de-
cision of the court in this case would at.
tnnff1 In off -, ~