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

such contract, and that such con-
tract had no binding effect on the cor
poration referred to. At a meeting of
the stockholders of the St. Paul Opera
House company, held Sept. go, 1888. it
refused to ratify the contract. When
she was notified of this she withdrew
from the contract, rescinded the same
and demanded return of the
$1,000, since which she has had
no negotiations on the subject. The
opera house company refused and does
still refuse to return the $1,000. Mary
A. Crabtree. states in her complaint that
under the statute of frauds the con-
tract is null and void, as neither E. E.
Davidson nor Andrew Delaney, who
subscribed to the contract, was author
lied by. the opera house company to do
so. She also claims that at the time the
contract was made the representatives
of the company falsely represented to
Lolita that it owned half interest in
the bill boards and bill-posting business.
Relying on these statements, she exc
cuted the contract and paid the $1,000:
that the opera house company has no
interest in the bill-posting business,
without which the rest of the property
is comparatively valueless. Sept.2S. 1888.
Lolita Nj. Crabtree rendered performance
of her part of the contract, being willing
and anxious to do so. Sept. 81 the opera
house company sent her deed, and the
following day notified her that they
were unable to perform the contract as
related to bill boards. She returned the
deed, as it was not in accordance with
the terms of the contract. Mary A.
Crabtree further alleges that the opera
house company never had good,
marketable title to the easements in the
Grand and Court blocks, nor to the box
and managers offices and stairway to
the gallery. Under the Will of the late
w. +. Davidson, who was owner III Zee
of the Grand and Court blocks, with all
the easements therein, which will was
dated May 25, 1887, or one day before
Mr.. Dayidson's death, the title
of the opera house company to
the easements mentioned is based
on deed from the executors of the
estate of the late w. f. Davidson to the
company, granting them these ease
mentS in consideration of the sum of
500, which 500, Mrs. Crabtree claims,
was never paid, nor any portion of 1t,
and the deed was never recorded in the
office of the register of deeds in Ramsey
county nor anywhere else. Further
more she claims that under the will the
executors had no power to convey the
property. Again, she claims that the
right of way to Fourth street has been
seriously injured by the action of the
company in granting the Economy
Steam Heat company the privilege of
erecting an iron smokeStack in the mid
die of the twelve-foot right of way,
which was done in January, 1883. On
January 81, 1889, while the de-
PENDANT corporation, was still in posses
sion of the property the whole was de-
stroyed by fire, through the negligence
and carlessneSS of the opera house
company. II has therefore become i'm
possible for it to carry out the contract
with Lolita. Mary A. Crabtree, who
has bought the $1,000 claim for S.. 1877,
therefore demands Judgment for the
same with interest and costs. Filed
with this complaint are certified copies
OF the agreement of sale; the resolution
of the opera house company, ratifylng
the contract, except as to the bill
boards; the deed presented to and re-
fused by Lolita: the will of W. f. David
son; the indenture between the eX-
ecutors of the estate and the opera
house company, granting to the latter
the right of way and easements for
800: the transfer of the $1,000 claim to
Mary A. Crabtree, made in Shelby
county, Tennessee.