St. Paul daily globe., 1895-11-19
RAMSEY COUNTY COURT
SUSTAINED IN THE CASE OF THE
CITY AGAINST THE MAN.
IT0BA.
SALTWATER WATER COMPANY
Wins IN Appeal In Its Case
Against Alexander Simpson
Various Syllubf.

the supreme court yesterday, all
written by Justice Collins. A case of
interest is that of the city against
the st. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba
Railway company, in which the de-
cision of the lower court is affirmed,
the court holding that the railroad
company is not required to build the
bridge over its railway tracks at
Burr and Grove streets. This sylla-
bus of the case follows:
State ex rel City of ST. Paul, appel
liant, VS.. st. Paul, Minneapolis &
Manitoba Railway Company, re-
SpOn6entS.
Syllabus-Held, from certain town
plats introduced in evidence on the
incompleteness and defective execu-
ton, were not statutory plats, the in
tention of the owners of the land plat
ted to dedicate to public use as streets
what is now known as Grove street, IN
the city of st. Paul, across certain
valley, and also to dedicate what is
known as Burr street, from the west
bank of this valley to where 1t would
intersect said Grove street, clearly ap-
pears, and further that such plating
amounted to an offer to dedicate which
may be and has been accepted by the
authorities of said city.
In a mandamus proceeding to compel
certain railway companies to build
bridge over their railway tracks where
they cross these streets in the valley,
the court found that the streets could
not be improved by filing without ac-
quiring land for slopes outside of the
street liness or by building high retain
ing walls along these lines, and this
would be more expensive than bridg-
ing. And further, that the propriety,
necessity and expediency of bridging
these streets arose from natural con-
ditions, the topography of the ground
on each side of the valley, and not
from the laying of the tracks or their
frequent use by respondents. Held,
that the findings were supported by
the evidence, and justified the conclu-
sion of law that no obligation rested
upon the respondents to build the
bridge.
Order affirmed. Collins, J.
Other cases are:
A. L. Newton, appellant, VS.. Highland
Improvement Company, respondent.
Syllabus-A certain contract whereby
the plaintiff in this action agreed with
defendant ''to cut, grub and remove or
burn" certain timber upon part of a
townsite "as directed by defendants
general mana GER for a stated sum per
acre, payments to be made as work
progresses on estimates, reSeTVing Is
per cent until final work is completed"
construed.
Held, that from the foregoing pro-
vision in regard to payment on esti-
mates as the work progresses, the law
implies that said estimates should be
property and reaso sonably made, at prop
er and reasonable intervals as the work
progresses, and at PLAINTIFFS request.
If defendant refused to make esti-'
mates at the time, or times, of plain
tiff's requests, made in accordance
with what it implied, as above stated,
nd tn 10 re hn 10 G
justified in refusing to complete the
contract.
Held, as against an objection first
made at the trial that the complaint
failed to state a cause of action, that
an allegation that plaintiff duly de-
manded that estimates and payments
be had and made is equivalent to an
allegation that such demands were
properly and reasonably made.
Held, that these estimates might be
made by defendant.
The phrase in the contract whereby
plaintiff agreed ito cut, grub and re-
move or burn the timber as directed"
by defendants general manager did not
confer upon plaintiff the arbitrary and
unqualified right to burn all material
without regard to circumstances, nor
did it authorize defendants manager
to arbitrarily order that all be re-
moved, the latter method being much
more expensive. If there existed good
and substantial reasons why certain of
the material should be removed. in
stead of burned, the manager had the
right to seasonably direct that this be
done.
Order reversed. Collins, J.
st. Paul Barrel Company, respondent,
VS.. Minneapolis Distilling Company
ct al, defendants; Andrew Tharlson
ct al, appellants.
Articles of defendant corporation con-
strued Held that it was not organized
for the purpose of carrying on an eX-
clusively manufacturing business, and,
as consequence, that it's stockholders
are liable for its debts to the amount
of their stock. Order affirmed,
Collins, ].
Thomas B. Trafton, appellant, VS.. Eliza
o. Cornell, respondent.
A notice Of foreclosure of mortgage
upon real property under a power was
regular upon its face, and it was there
in stated that there is claimed to be
due and is due and unpaid upon the
mortgage debt at the date of this no.
due was for an installment of interest.
tice the sum of ten dollars" AS mat
ter of fact, the amount so stated to be
Held, that 1t twas not necessary to
claimed to be due was for such Install
-ie--' Collins, ].
| Alexander Simpson, respondent, VS..
| Saltwater Water Company, appel
| liant.
| Where an owner Of land in possession
| thereof consents to and authorizes the
| erection thereon by a third party of a
| structure which creates or constitutes
a nuisance he is liable for the conse-
quences as if he had erected the struc-
| ture himself
But, held, that part Of the charge of
! the court below was erroneous, because
| inapplicable to the facts or because an
| erroneous application could be made OF
| it. Order reversed. Collins, J.
George N. Blexrud, respondent, VS..
| Samuel Kuster, appellant.
| On an examination of the evidence in
this case it is held that it was in