Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1893-12-15
BATCH OF DECISIONS,
Four Decisions In Important Cases
Handed Down To-Day in the
Supreme Court.
One in the Case of 0randin vs.. La
Bar, appeared From Trail
County.
Another From Ransom County nj
General 1nterest-syllabus of
tho Decisions. .
Supreme Court Decisions.

SA0 4'0CI6lOU0. .
Supreme Court Decisions.
To-day has been quite a field day in
announcing decisions of the supreme
court, no LEGS than four being handed
down.
The old case of Grandin va. LeBar, up
from Trail county, wherein last May
the Judgment Of the lower court was re-
versed and that court directed to dismiss
the case, in which a re-argument was
ordered, was modified as to the former
order so as to order a new trial and not
dismiss the matter absolutely. This case
IS one that has excited considerable in
terest as it involves the question of the
legal title to the indemnity lands of the
Northern Pacific Railroad company,
where their selection has not been ap-
proved by the secretary Of the interior.
During the reign of Andrew Jackson,
Sparks as commissioner of the general
land office he issued an order that the
indemnity lands of the company should
be thrown open to settlement on all
tracts that had not been patented to the
company. Acting on this order LaBar
offered his presumption filing on a
quarter section of the Grandin farm, in
Trail county, to the local land office in
Fargo. The officers declined to receive
the same and from their decision he ap-
pealed to Washington. During the
tendency of the appeal Grandin insti-
tuted proceedings in ejectment claiming
TO be the owner in fee by reason of q
deed from the Northern Pacific road.
Judgment was entered for'the plaintiffs
in the trial court and LaBar appealed,
and the ruling on the appeal was as fol-
lows:
Courts are without jurisdiction to declare
the rights of parties to certain real estate
while the title to such real estate remains
in the United States and a contest is pend
ing in the interior department between one
of parties litigant and the grantor of
the other to test their claims to the land.
Until the title passes from the United
'SllVCS CACINSlSC Jul lSuICClull " uClctllkuC
the rights of adverse claimants to such
land rests in that department of govern.
ment charged by law with the disposal of
the public lands.
The granst of lands by congress to the
Northern Pacific Railroad company did not
vest in said company upon the definite loca-
ton of its line, title to any lands within
what is known as the indemnity belt. Nor
does the selection Of such lands by the COM
'panywithout the approval or sanction of the
secretary of the interior in some manner
expressed, pass any title to the railroad
company, but such selection so far segre-
gates the land selected from the public do
main that any party subsequently seeking
to acquire rights therein takes the same
subject to the ultimate decision OF the in
terror department as to the legality OF such
selection,
A rehearing was ordered and on re-
argument the decision of the trial
court is reversed, the court to that ex-
tent modifying its first order. In this
connection it may be of interest to state
that a short time ago Secretary Smith,
of the Interior Department, reversed
the decision of the officers of the Fargo
land office and instructed them to re-
ceive LaBar's filing.
Reeves & Go. vs.. Corrigan and Maddox
was appealed from Ransom county,
wherein the defendants received a YER
dict in their favor. This is reversed and
the district court directed to enter judg-
ment for the plaintiff as asked in the
complaint. L. W. Gammons and Steele
T. Reefs for plaintiff and appellant;
Rourke & Allen for defendants and re-
s~pondents. Opinion by Wallin, j. The
following syllabus is filed:
Plaintiff, a corporation was engaged in
the manufacture of farm machinery at
Columbus, Indiana, and w. and Il. were
plaintiffs agents for the sale of machinery
at Lisbon, ID. T. The defendants negoti-
ated with plaintiff, through SAID agents,
for the purchase of certain straw stacker,
and signed and delivered to such agents a
written order directing that such straw
stacker be forwarded from plaintiffs place
Of business and delivered to th~edefendants
at a time stated in the order, at Lisbon,
d. T. The terms of the proposed pur-
chase included the price and terms of pay
ment, were embraced in the order with
othel stipulations, including a warranty of
the machine coupled with a right to res
cind ana return the machine, etc. Pursu-
ant to such order and in due time the
plaintiff forwarded the straw stacker and
delivered it to the defendante at Lisbon.
In an action for the purchase price defend
ants denied the purchase and set up all al:
legged oral agreement,with plaintiff. through
said agents, whereby the defendants took
possession of the straw stacker on trial
only, but did not purchase the same. The
trial court instructed the jury as follows:
When the machine came and before Messrs'
Maddox and Corrigan took the machine
they had the power or the option, Mt the
time, to say to these plaintiffs we
will not take the machine on the terms OF
the written Order-we have concluded not
to take the machine on those terms They
had a right to rectify the terms of the pur-
chase. They had a right to refuse to take
the machine at ALL" Held, that such i'll
structi0n was error. Whether the order
was or was not a contract of sale or
whether or not the title would pass after
the dnlivarv nf tha nrdnr aud aCcoDt0nCe,