Morris tribune. [volume] (Morris, Minn.) 1880-2000, 1892-10-12

ss-szs=sS=sss fz7sxzzzzzxsxss,-ase sssssa..u
to its constitutional features. The
supreme court, in well considered
decision, held the law valid 90 to the
features in question and ordered its
observance by the railway company.
AndEstriously Spread Falsshseds.
Ill informed and malicious persons
have spared no pains in spreading the
falsehood that the supreme court of this
state, with view to protecting the
interests of railroads, declared that law
unconstitutional; and have thereby ore
ated, no doubt, no little prejudice
against the court by such means; and
this prejadice has been strengthened by
the fact that the law has been adjudged,
by another tribunal, as invalid and in.
operative. When the railway company
had been defeated in the state court
they took an appeal therefrom to the
United States supreme court, whore
they succeeded in having the action Of
the state court reversed. The supreme
court OF Minnesota, in the milk rate
case" decision, distinctly affirmed the
power Of the legislature to fix rates for
freights carried by railway companies
within the state. No court has ever
gone further in restraining railway COM
panies.
The Usurer's Euemy.
The body Of laws designed for the
protection of the money borrower
against uSurious interest, has received
invaluable support from the supreme
court. Many lenders, in fact, have not
been at all modest in their criticisms
upon the character of construction
placed upon this class of legislation by
that court. However harsh the legisla-
tion has been, the supreme court has
never faltered in sustaining it.
About Insurance Cases.
In 1889, a law was passed providing
for the adoption by the insurance COM
missioner of what is known as the
standard policy" of insurance. The
purpose Of this legislation was to have o
uniform insurance policy, the terms and
conditions of which might be clearly
understood. The law provided that this
policy should be the only one in use by
the insurance companies doing business
in this state, and the terms and condi-
tions OF that policy were made binding
upon boil. .>trties.
The in sl.'a,Ico commissioner, within
the time prescribed by law, and as he
Was requ:.n.t to do, adopted the
form of ;@,;Gy in which appears
provisio.: to the effect that ths
insured il case Of loss was re-
quired to furnish certificate by
magistrate or notary public (not inter-
ested in the claim as creditor
or otherwise or one related to the in
sured) living near the place of fire, stat
ing that he has examined the circum-
stances and believes the insured has
honestly sustained loss to the amount
that such magistrate or notary public
shall certify" The policy furthermore
thai mo suit Or action on the
policy for the recovery of any claim
shall be sustained in any court of law or
equity, until after full compliance by
the insured with ali the foregoing re-
quirements.
A loss occarring III one of the counties
of this state, under very suspicious Cir
the St. Paul Fire and |
Marine Insurance company, by whom |
the risk had been taken, refused to pay |
she loss, and, as the best defense in view |
of all the facts, decided to insist upon |
the observation of the provision of the |
policy in question,
Application was made to a magistrate
by the assured, es required by the |
policy, but the magistrate refused to
certify that he believed the insured had
honestly sustained loss, and the assured
was unable, therefore, to comply with
the requirements of the law.
The insured was, therefore, required
10 order to succeed in his &C.
ton against the insurance company,
to have the provision of the policy de-
clared void, and the suit was conducted
with that end in view.
The supreme court, in its decision,
held that, THE furnishing of this GER
ifcate, if required, is condition prece-
dent to the right of the insured to re-
cover, and that his inability to furnish
It, because Of the refusal of the magis-
trate or notary public, for any cause
whatever to give 1t, will not relieve or
excuse him from performance of the
condition." The court further said,
that, while the doctrine that such
stipulations are valid and constitute a
condition precedent to the insured's
right to recover, is unquestionably
sound in principle, yet, as they operate
aarshly in practice, they have, in some
states, been expressly or implicitly pro-
aibited by statutes regulating the form
IF policies. But there is no room in this
state for holding such conditions void or
for they have been incorpo-
'assd into the Minnesota standard pol
cy by the insurance commissioner under
he authority vested by him in law"
The Legislature to Blame. (:
It will be seen therefore that whatever
cause for criticism may attach to the
acts OF the case, they should be aimed
}. the legislature rather than the court.