St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-01-12
SAINT PAUL.
SUPREME COURT SYLLABI.
Trust Companies as Guardians for the
Insane or Imbecile.
CHANGED A SCHOOL SITE.
individuals Benefited by a Sewer Sys-
tenn Must Pay Their Assessments
Partnership Liabilities.

pany VS.. Franklin Beebe ct al, appel
lants.
The appeal raised the validity Of the
- law of 1888, allowing the incorporation
of trust companies. 1t was an action by
plaintiff, as guardian of Robert Cham
bers. an insane person, upon the bond
Of his former guardian, to recover
money due his estate. The vital point
was as to the conStitutionality OF the
provisions of san Act to Authorize the
Organization of Annuity, Safe De-
post, and Trust Companies" Gen
eral Laws 1888, chap. II, sec.
z, granting to such corporations
power to act as trustee or
guardian of the estate of any lunatic OF
imbecile, and authorizing any court to
appoint such corporation as trustee.
Appellants claimed that the Legislature
had no power to grant any corporation
power to act in such a capacity. 1t was
in derogation of the common law, con-
flicted with prior statutes and was I'M
polite The court held that none OF
these considerations were involved as to
the validity of the act.
Syll.bus-The provisions of General
Laws 1888, chapter 107 can act
to authorize the organization of
annuity. safe deposit and trust com
panies"), granting to such corporations
power to act as guardians of the estates
of insane persons, held valid and order
affirmed.
Judge Vanderburgh took no part in
this case.
City of Winona, appellant. VS.. School
District No. 50, respondent.
The decision in this appeal eStab-
fishes precedent affecting school prop
erty in the state. An act passed in 1887
allowed the city of Winona to extend
its limits so as to embrace School Dis
trict No. 50, which had erected school
house. The act contained no express
provision changing the limits of the
school district, and none as to the diSpo-
sition of the school property. The Ques-
ton arose as to which-the district or
the city-shOuld the school house be-
long? The lower court held that it was
not the property of the city, and this is
affirmed by the supreme court. The opin-
ion says that no general rule will work
well in cases of this kind, adding:
t'While it may be true, as matter of
law, that school district cannot con-
tinue to use for school purposes school
house which, upon a change of bounda-
ries, ceases to be within itSlimits, it may
be equally true, as matter of
fact, that it cannot, on account
of its location, be used for that purpose
by the corporation to which it is an
neXed, and therefore all it can do with
it, if it gets it, is to sell it and use the
proceeds in erecting one more suitably
located. If this be done, it can as well
be done by the old district, which would
ordinarily have the most equitable claim
to it,"
Syllabus-Special Laws 1878, chapter
155, entitled ian Act for the Establish
ment of Public Schools in the City of
Winona," established school system,
not for the territory then within the city
limits, but for the city of WinOna,
whether enlarged or diminished in area
by future legislation. Hence that part
of the territory of the defendant school
district which was annexed to the city,
Special Laws 1887, chapter 5, became
part of it for school as we'll as other
municipal purposes, and ceased to be a
part of defendant.
The act of 1887 referred to is not re-
pugnant to section 81. article of the
constitution of the state, because the
matter of the CHI nge in the boundaries
of school districts is not mentioned in
the title. If part OF territory of a
municipal corporation is separated from
it by annexation to another, or by its
erection into new corporation, unless
some other provision is made in the act
authorizing the separation, the old cor
pOration Gt not having been aboliShed)
remains subject to all its liabilities and
retains all its property, including that
which, upon the change of boundaries
happens to fall within the limits of the
"a Ind ont q
W. T. Sherwood ct al, petitioners, VS..
Judge District Court, st. Louis County.
and Board of Public Works, re-
SpOndentS.
Several months ago the board of pub
lie works built q sewer on First avenue
west to carry off both surface water and
small stream known as Clark House
creek, which in its natural course ran
irregularly towards Lake Superior in
the same general course as First avenue
west, crossing several lots, among them
being some owned by William I. Sher-
wood & Co. In assessing benefits &C
cruing to property from the improve
ment, the board assessed uniform sum
on each lot whose surface water would
be drained into the sewer, and in addi-
ton to this ALI extra amount on each lot
through which the natural course of the
stream ran, on the ground that they
were benefited that much extra by the
sewer. To this Sherwood d Co. inter-
posed an objection, and the court held
that the turning of the stream into the
sewer was not separate and indie
pendent enterprise, but part OF and
Incidental to the main purpose of the
proper drainage of that part of the city.
yllabuS-Certiorar will lie to review
The action of the district court in con.
1irming special assessment by the
board of public works of the city of Du-
luth to defray the expense of local
improvement. It's charter authorizes
the city of Duluth to construct sewers
and to levy assessments therefor upon
the property to be benefited by such i'm
provement. Held, that while this would
not authorize the levy of an assessment
to defray the expense of diverfing a
stream from its natural course into a
sewer, undertaken as an independent
enterprise, and not as a part OF SyS-
TEN of public drainage. yet if, in the
Judgment of the municipal authorities,
the proper drainage of the city for the
preservation of health and the protec-
ton of property required that small
stream running through the city should
be diverted from its natural course and
carried off in sewer. and if, combining
themselves TO this one controlling pur
pose of public drainage, they should
construct public sewer of sufficient
capacity to carry off both surface water
and the waters of the stream, this would
be within the legitimate exercise of the
authority to construct sewers; and il
the property relieved by the sewer Of
the waters of the stream thereby re
ceive greater benefit than the adjacent
property, which was relieved only OF
ordinary surface water, the assessment
against it may be correspondence
greater. Order affirmed.
w. E. Sterling, respondent, VS.. Fred
erick Book ct al, appellants.
Sylabus-If written contract not re