The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-10-07
FAIR HELEN WINS
MISS MAYEs' VICTORY is SUSTAINED
BY THE SUPREME
=" COURT. .
CALENDAR CALLED AND SET.
USUAL BUsTLE PERTAINING TO
THE OPENING DAY OF THE
TERM.
STATE HAS A LONG LIST TO TRY
And I'm the Main They Get Dates
That Are Comparatively
Early.

Fair Helen Hayes has won her case
against her traducer, Mrs. Ira Wad-
leigh, Of Minneapolis, and M. L. Cor
many, the lawyer who represented
Mrs. Wadleigh in her prosecutions of
the St. Paul stenographer. The judg-
ment of the lower court was affirmed
yesterday at the opening session of
the supreme court.
The day was a busy one for the
Judges, clerks and attorneys having
cases at bar. There were 297 cases on
the docket, and only small number
of these were continued over the term
to relieve the pressure. A few, how
ever, were disposed of as promptly as
was the Hayes case.
The case of the State of Minnesota,
ex rel. Cowien against Charles G. Mil
Ter ct al, Duluth cause. was submit
ted on briefs. this disposition being
agreeable to both sides.
The case of the State of Minnesota,
ex rel. Patrick Kelly, against Arthur
F. KiIbourne, superintendent of the
Rochester insane asylum, was dis
missed and stricken from the calendar.
A motion to affirm the decision of the
lower court in the suit Of the Village
of Wayzata against the Great Northern
Railway company will be made today
A motion to dismiss will be made to-
day in the case of the State against the
acknowledgements company, of Mime
apolis.
Motions to quash the writs OF GER
tiorari will be made today in the cases
of Butler and Abel against the city Of
Minneapolis. growing out of the chang
es' in street grades in East Minneapolis
due to the lowering Of the Great North
ern tracks.
The disposition of the st. Paul and
Minneapolis cases and other cases Of
general interest is as follows:
1, O.; Jane c. Bennett, appellant, vs.. City Of
Minneapolis, respondent. Continued.
g. Harlan P. Roberts, respondent vs.. James
4, Charles C. Smith. respondent, VS.. John
R. Lewis, appellant. Continued.
6. M. B. Hobart, respondent, VS.. c. X.
Sherburne, appellant. Oct. %.
s. George ]. Flint, appellant, VS.. Frank A.
Luhrs. respondent. Submitted on briefs.
1S: Henry H. Gregg. respondent, VS.. Robert
N. Whitacre, appellant. Affirmed.
IA. Thomas Kecugh ct al, respondents. vs.
City of St Paul, appellant Oct. 10.
Is. ]. A. Shea & Co., respondents, vs.. c.,
16. Boston Northwest Real Estate Com
pany VS.. George Benz, appellant. Oct. 10.
II. Ed s. Bean, assignee, respondent. vs.
Alfred Scheffer ct al, appellants. Oct. 10.
20. Mnna HOFFMAN. admins ratrix. re-
spondent VS.. Minnesota Odd Fellows Mutual
Benefit Society ct al, appellants. Oct. 16.
2tp22. j. c. Grant, assignee, VS.. Minneap-
Oils Brewing Company. Passed.
rs. E. J. McHenry ct al, appellants, VS..
II. f. Brown ct al, respondents. Oct. 21.
q. S. H. Seamans receiver. Wisconsin
Mutual Fire Insurance Company, appellant,
vs.. Chris ian Brothers Mill Company, re-
spondent. Oct. %
%. M. E. Smith, appellant, VS.. Twin City
Lime and Cement Company. respondent. Con-
tinued.
20. In re assignment of Lambert Bros.
Lambert ct al, vs. Scandinavian American
Bank OF st. Paul Oct. 20.
80. P. H. AAhilly, appellant, vs. st. P. &
D Railway, respondent. Oct 20.
81. Christian J. Hess, respondent, VS. Ad-