St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-05-25
A DAY OF ARGUMENTS.
Nearly Six Hours Devoted to the King
Remington Land Suit in the Su-
preme Court.
Hon. Cushman K. Davis, in Behalf Of
Innes, Closes the Case for the
Appellants.
Col. Kings Side Opened by Hon.
Eugene NJ. Wilson in Four
Hour Speech.
-
Much Legal Lore Let Loose at the
Supreme Bench--To Close
To-Day.
King VS.. Remington.

King VS.. RemingtO
Col. w. S. King of Minneapolis sat in
the supreme court room, near the desk
where Clerk Nichols keeps the records. for
nearly six hours yesterday, while the argu-
mentS in the great suit over his property
was going on. Beside the attorneys imme-
diately interested i'll the case there was
quite sprinkling of young lawyers
present. Col. r. S. InneS and Louis
table where their attorneys sat
all day. Attorney General Hahn
and his deputy, Martin. were present a
large part of the day. The arguments were
from eloquent attorneys and well crowded
with legal lore, and as entertaining for!the
most part to the ordinary listener as a
chapter of Blackstone or Kent. Hon. c. K.
DaviSSpoke for the appellant. He repre-
scented Mr.. lines particularly. He wound
up the argument on this side OF the
the case, rs Mr.. Herman, who is the attor-
hey looking after Mr.. Remingtons particu-
lar interests made no argument 1t
MI Davis began his argument and
it was five minutes past noon when he
ended. He made many citations, and
though his brief lay before him on pile
of legal books. he practically spoke
without notes. In beginning his argument
he reviewed somewhat the connection
OF MIR. InneS With the land deals,
and brought forward the following points
OF law for consideration of the court:
Ex-Gov. DAVIS ARGUMENT.
BY his purchase at the sale by the as
signee in bankruptcy, Remington became the
absolute owner Of the properly, so bought by
him freed from any trust, obligation or mort
gage relation, if any such ever existed. All
of the titles or equities which King had ever
possessed had vested in his assignee, and were
by such sale vested in Remington. and were,
as to the respondents. absolutely extin-
guished by the Sale the assignee'S deed and
the confirmation by the court. That all of
Mr.. Kings titles, equities, rights Of action or
redemption with regard to this property had
passed from him and become vested in Whit
ney, his assignee, has not only thus been
declared By positive statutes, but the rela-
tfons of bankrupt to his property in like
cases have been settled by many decisions. Not
only do the entire estate and all equities or
rights of action or redemption pass to his
assignee, but the law recognizes contingent
interest or legal expectancy in the bankrupt.
Up to the time when Mr.. King was adjudi-
Gated bankrupt, Remington had not used
or disposed of any of his property. Nor had
he any possession of it until after the adjudi-
cation. Had he so used or disposed of it be-
fore. the right of action to cali him to account
as a trustee was vested in Whitney, the
assignee. Such right actually existed in
Whitney, if in anybody, when these actions
were brought and SO remained for u long
time after.
The deed to Mrs. King in 1874 and the con-
veyances to Remington in 1875 were contriv-
ences calculated to hinder, delay and defraud
credi tors, against the prohibition of the laws
of Minnesota, and to operate i'll fraud of the
bankrupt act Such was their necessary and
inevitable result. The same is true of the
transactions concerning the purchase by
Remington at the sale by the assignee In
bankruptcy. This arrangement was void on
many grounds. 1t was not in
1t was not procured by any fraud upon King.
Not only the statute OF fraud but that of uses
and trust prohibited it. 1t was in fraud of
the bankrupt act and it should not be ad-
judged to be specifically performed. That it
was not in writing is conceded. That it was
never made valid by any act of past per-
formance is inferentialiy found by the dis
trct court.Ii And as to fraud the court finds:
Nor does there thus appear to have been
any present wrong or fraud on the part of
the defendant in making snch purchase as
would constitute him u trustee in respect to
the property purchased. This case
is sone where one of two par
ties in equal fault has secured
the fruits of an unlawful transaction, and
his confederate seeks to enforce that agree
ment as against the assignee.
The agreement asserted by plaintiff is
contrary to public policy and is void. 1t is
void as against the statutes of fraud and is
void as against the policy of the bankrupt
act In either case it tended to hinder,
DELAY md DEFRAUD
creditors, and tended particularly to thwart
the policy of the bankrupt act. Under such
circumstances, if the relation OF mortgagor
and mortgage or of trust is at
tempted to be created in an effort
to perpetrate fraud of this character the
alleged transaction is not Il mortgage mol
is there any trust. 1t will also be observed
that the question of the jurisdiction of the
federal court was raised. The undersigned
insist in these cases that the courts of Mime
sofa have no jurisdiction to give relief sought
by plaintiffs in these actions. To do so will
bring in question and overture in a collateral
action and place in review the proceedings
and judgments of another court of complete
jurisdiction anu that, too, in proceeding in
: law, based upon an actual taking possession
Of property by that court has in the exercise
of its undoubted jurisdiction actually adj
judged that the particular property be sold
by its officers who did sell it, and which sale
. was confirmed by the court. More than all
; this, that court was federal
court admnisterin; the federal statutes
of bankruptcy. Its jurisdiction was exclus-
i've, and its proceedings are unquestionable
by any state court. From the moment Of the
enactment by the United States of general
bankrupt law, all state authority, legislative
or judicial ceases. There is no ground for
relief against Menage, or any person claim
ing under him, even if the relations of Rem
fngton were as asserted in the complaint. 1t
must be carefully borne in mind that the
question under examination is one of priority
merely, and not of the rights obtained by a
Donna fide purchase for value. But
there is further objection to the
claim of Mrs. King which vitiates her title
from its beginning, namely: King, when he
caused the lands to be conveyed to her, was,
deeply indebted: the consideration for the
lands was paid by him and she never paid
any consideration therefor. 1t was, there
fore, conveyance void as against creditors
on the very face of the transaction. The
purchaser at the sale of the assignee is en-
titled to avoid such deed. 1t, therefore,
plainly appears as a conclusive inference of
law, from the transaction ITSELF that this
conveyance to Mrs. King was in fraud of the
policy of the bankrupt law and of the stat
uteS of Minnesota, and that Whitney could
have successfully attacked it as such
assignee. AS to the Quit claim
deeds of 1877 and of Oct. Is, 1879, the general
principles by which the court Is guided in
such cases are settled. A person who seeks
10 rectify q deed on the ground of mistake
must establish in the cIearest manner that
the alleged intention to which he desires it to
be made conformable continued in the minds
of all parties down to the time of its execu-
ton, and must also be able to show exactly
and precisely the form to which the deed
should be brought. The order denying new
trial should be reversed and the case re-
manded to the district court, directing that
court to deny the plaintiffs any relief and to
adjudge the defendants the relief prayed for
in their answers.
MIR. KINGS SIDE OPENED.
Although it was noon when Mr. Davis
concluded, Hon. Eugene NJ. Wilson opened
the case for Mr.. King, respondent, before
the court took recess, which occurred a
half-hour later until 2 o'clock. Mr.. Wilson
submitted a long brief, the joint conclusions
of himself and the other Minneapolis attor-
neys on this side of the case, namely,
Ripley & Morrison and John B. Atwater,
the latter three making no argument
Mr.. Wilson's argument was characterized
by attorneys present as being concise,
learned and especially well put, and when
he ceased speaking at little after
o'clock, after more than three hours con-
secutive work, he was congratulated by
Mr.. Bryant of Boston, one of the able
counsel in attendance, on his presentation
of the case while hIuff RiII Ripp efonpod