The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1892-05-05
LIQUOR CASES.

y
Anna Davis to forfeit the title to the
two lots on which are the two saloons
in Worthington. AS this clause is in
oil Of the deeds made by this railroad
company from St. James through to
LeAars on the main line and on all of
the branch lines, and as much misap-
prehension is abroad about the facts
We have, this week, published the ar
9ument used before the Supreme Court
~ the Railroad company and the de-
cision of the Supreme Court. From
these two our readers will be enabled
to see just what the controversy is, and
how far the courts have sustained the
SonpBny. -..s~,. ~--~.
ARGUMENT
The condition In the deed from the Railroad
Company to Htghley Is as follows
''This conveyance is made and accepted on the
express condition, that Intoxicating liquors shall
never be sold or vended, as a beverage, to be
drunk on the premises; and If the same is done
habitually, with the knowledge and conselt Of
the owner this instrument shall be void.''
In mind that it Is not the mere sale OF liquors
that Is interiictetl. Under the condition the lot
may be devoted to the sole use Of selling liquors.
And liquors, if not sold as a beverage. may be
sold to be drunk on the premises. And liquors
may be sold as a beverage, to be drunk on the
premises. provided the same is not habituay
done. Many similar conditions passed upon by
the courts, prohibit the sale Of liquors, in any
quantity, for any purpose, and under any cir
cumstances. This does not. Commercial sales
arc not touched and the sale Of liquors on these
premises Is not touched.
1t Is the habitual sale OF Intoxicating liquors.
az a beverage. to be drunk on the premises
that Is interdictcd.
It's a business that is interdicted The busi-
ness forbi iden is that OF q ''tippling shop or
saloon. ," 1t Is true that the "habitual' sale of
liquors as "bcverage' and the d linking of the
same ION the premises" as it is bought. are the
foundation features Of the saloon or tipping
shop. bus 1t is also true that these are not the
only features, directly and certainly, connec ed
with the "busineSs" 1t is true, that il the
drinking on the premises vanishes the business
Of the saloon ordinarily, vanishcs. But it i, not
true that these Objectionable features OF the
saloon consist solely OF a person standing at the
bar In the act OF drinking the liz or. There are
many Objectionable, unpleasant harmful and
injurious features connected with the "busi-
ness" that do not depend on the fact that some
customer is actually engaged, with the bar ten
der, transactng businesS'' over the counter, by
buying and drinking. A soap factory, Il slaugh-
ter yard. the buying and shipping OF hides and
skins. are Objectionable, as neighDois, when
no business is actually going on, rs when it is in
full blast. The difference, any way is in the de-
gree only.
We, therefore, insist that. in constituting this
condition. and endeavoring to arrive 1T the In
tcntiOns' OF the parties. and "some good
reason for the insertion OF this condition in this
deed to Highley." We must not shut our eyes and
ears to everything connected with the 1'busf-
ness" Of habitual selling liquors on these lots.
asa beverage, anu the drinking of such liquors
OH the premises. as 4 beverage, save the bal e
pouring Of the liquor b. the genllemlnly bar
ten,'er, and the drinking of it by the equally
gentlemanly customer. We have the right to
tear down the blinds and to open the doors, and
to hear and to see all that goes On in the room,
not only While sales are actually being made
but during the times When there Is a lul in the
''busincss.' We may iollo" the customer to his
home. or to the pO ice court, or to the prison
We may inquire OF tn wife and of the child.
rem. We may inquire Of the home seeker why
lie did not settle down near the "business. -
We may inquire of the banker or the merchant
why his business was negle 1ted or why there
was shortage in his money We may follow the
railway empOye to his train and watch it until
we witness the wreck
The condition in the deed Is valid; and 1t runs
with the land and it affects its use and the pu-
pose to which it may be put; and on the breach
OF the condition, the instrument becomes absO-
lutely void.
Chapter As, Section As, of Gen. Stat 1878, was
in force when this deed was made It reads:
when any conditions annexed to a grant, or
conveyance of lands, are merely nominal, and
evince no intention OF actual and substantial
benefit to whom, or in whose favor they are to
be performed. they may be wholly disregarded; ;
and failure to perform the same shall. in no
case, operate as q forfeiture of the lands con-
veyed subject thereto.''
corresponding clause Is found in Chap 44,
Sec. As, and reads as follows;
when the conditions annexed to a power are
merely nominal, aud evincc no intention of ac-
tuai benefit to the party to whom, or in whose
favor they are to be performed, they NAV be
wholly disregarded in the execution of tho
power"
The word "evince'' is defined by Webster to
mean: ITO show in a clear manner; to p1ove
beyond any reasonable doubt; to manifest. "
Manifest when 1t occurs in a document, or
statute. is defined by the courts to mean:
Something that is apparent by an examination
OF the document; needing no evidence to make
1: more clear. That which is open, palpable, and
might add, fncOntrOvertible, 1t is SYNONYMOUS
with evident visible, plain, obvious to tile un-
ders anding from all examination OF the roll Or
document; Or at must only requiring a mathe-
fr. .fn;
In the matter of Hermtnce, II N. Y, 4Sl, 1885,
the court says: That the errors which are man
nest ana spoken OF in the statute, are not such
as have to De established byextrinsic evidence,
aside from the document.
\, The statute does not require that the condi.
tion, in order to be valid, should, on its face,
"save some actua! and substantial benefit to the
original grantor" The statute does not confne
this actual benefit to the increased value OF other
is very far from determining that the grantee
should not lose his title unless the nom per.
formsnce Of the condition violated some actual
and substantial benefit to the grantor-'
The instrument and the condition in it are free
from ambiguity, and are to be construed by the
court: Thus construed, there is but one ques-
on its face. show that it is 'merely nominal, -
and does the condition on its face clearly obvi-
tioly, and needing no evidence to make it more
clear, show that there was not an intention of
actua! and substantial benefit?
II the court can not say, from the condition it.
sell. that there was, plainly. and without ques-
tion. 70 intention that any actual or substantial
6snent sn31a No th or c"nid ever come from the full
must stand and be enforced.
tis the lack OF intention, shown on the face
of the instrument, that the statute declares
shall invalidate the condition.,
The intent or lack OF intent must be sought
for. as OF the time when the contract was made
All the evidence is: that the plaintiff was a
railroad corporation: that it owned and plated
the town site Of Worthlngton. and recorded such
plat in the Office Of the register Of deeds: that