St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-03-20

sence of knowledge on the subject, and
one member declared he would not
consider such question until proper
homage had been paid to the faithful
principal who had served so long and
Well.
WON BY THE WIDOW.
The Late DR.. j. III. Stewart Did
Not Make a Statutory Dedica-
ton of Land to White Bear Viii
lage.
The following decisions were handed
down yesterday in the supreme court:
Village of White Bear, appellant. VS..
Catherine S. Stewart, respondent.
Evidence in this case considered and
held to justify the finding of fact in the
court below. that there was no statutory
dedication, for the use of the public, OF
the premises in litigation. The vital
principle of a common law dedication of
land for public use is the intention,
which must be uneGuivOcally manifest
ed and clearly and satisfactorily appear.
Evidence examined and considered
upon this point. Held, that the court
below did not err in its finding that there
has been no dedication at common law
Of said premises. The acts and decla-
rations of the land owner indicating the
intent to dedicate must be unmistak-
able in their purpose and decisive in
their character. Wash. on Easements,
1S2. The order denying a new trial is
affirmed. COLLINS, j.
Frederick Hts, as administrator, etc.,
respondent, VS.. Chicago, Milwaukee
d st. Paul Railway Company, appel
liant.
The evidence in this action, brought
against railway company to recover
damages for causing, through negli-
gence, the death of plaintiff, intes-
tate, examined. and held to justify
verdict for said plaintiff. Certain al
legged errors concerning the refusal of
the trial court to permit an amendment
to the answer in regard to its refusal to
submit for the consideration of the
jurors, and for them to pass upon, spe-
cific findings of facts, as requested by
defendant, and various rulings upon the
admission or exclusion of evidence,
considered and disposed of. The
deceased cannot be charged with
negligence by failing to anticipate some
particularly negligent act of the train
men, as in this instance Gf the
plaintiffs witnesses and manifest re-
suits of the collision can be depended
UPON. The order refusing new trial
affirmed. COLLINS, j.
Michael MahoDey, appellant, VS.. A. ]
Finnigan ct al, respondents.
This is an appeal from Judgment
diSmisSing the action entered by order
of the court upon the pleadingS. The
action was brought under the statute
to determine the adverse claims of the
defendants to certain real estate. Both
parties. in their respective pleadings.
assert title in themselves derived from
the same source, one Abbott, the former
owner of the premises. The complaint
shows title in the plaintiff as purchaser
at statutory foreclosure sale in De-
cember, 1885, under mortgage exc
cuted to him and others in October,
1882, and then recorded. 1t is alleged
that no redemption was ever made of
the premises in controversy. The rule
that judgment only affects parties
a prioreS, applied. An agreement by
plaintiff to transfer to another all his
interest in the land which is the sub
Ject of the litigation, upon being paid
certain sum, which has not been paid,
does not constitute an executed trans
fer of such interest, SO as to Justify
no sufficient reason upon the face of the
pleadingS for dismissal of the action.
Judgment reversed.
DICKINSON. Judge.
Lewis P. Crevier, appellant, VS.. Kate c.
W. Stephen, respondent:
The evidence in this case, which was
brought to recover an amount of money
claimed to be due as commission for
fbnc In ne bot h.,
amlned, considered and held that the
trial court erred in directing the jury
to find verdict for the defendant.
LEGAL MISCELLANY.
Herman Taubert has filed suit against
the Springfield Fire and Marine InSur-
ance company to recover $500 as in
Surance and damages. He claims he
purchased 81 800 policy of the defend
ant in September. 1883. In October of
the same year his house and tannery,
located on Belvidere street, was de-
strOyed by fire, and the defendant re-
fuses to pay him the insurance.
LIN the case of Frank Ward vs.. John
Graft, an action for wages, the jury
rendered verdict of SIS for plaintiff.
A verdict of S247.14 was rendered for
the plaintiff IN the case of Charles A.
Moore VS.. j. II. johnson, in an action
on a promisSOry note.
The case of the st. louis River and
Dalles Insurance company against the
G. n. Nelson Lumber company, an &C
ton for $4,000 damages for injury done
to plaintiffs property by defendants
logs as they were allowed to float down
the st. Louis river, was OH trial by
Judge Villas yesterday.
In the case of Mary Ford ct al.against
the trustees of:Hamline university, et al,
an action to quiet title to the northeast
quarter of the southwest quarter of sec
ton IA, town %, range %, Judge Wilkin
files an order denying plaintiffs motion
for stipulation Of certain facts in the
case. etc.