Griggs courier. (Cooperstown, Griggs Co., Dak. [N.D.]) 1885-1902, 1896-10-16

\ Il
OF the 45 cases appealed from another
district, "a of them have been affirmed
and Il of them reversed. That of the
IA cases appealed from another dis.
trict, 8 of them have been affirmed and
OF them reversed. That of the 2.
cases appealed from another district,
have been affirmed and Is reversed.
When the number of and the in.
tricate and constitutional cases which
have come before judges for trial and
decision are carefully considered since
statehood down to the present time, we
think Judge Rose has record OF
which he need not be ashamed and of
which he and the people of his district
may justly be proud.
10 show the unfairpess of this
gentleman towards Judge Rose and of
his Intention to deceive the people of
his judicial district, he placed in the
list of reversed cases in the article al
luded to the following cases, which he
must have known, should have been
placed in the list of affirmed cases,
but he saw an opportunity to deceive
the people and thought they would not
detect his deception until it was too
late to be corrected and he would have
accomplished his purpose.
The following is the list of cases re-
ferred to:
N. r. H. r. Co, vs, Co. Treasurer Of Morton Co.
. I" Z" Foster Co.
$ IS s. "Sutsman Co
IS $. Burleigh Co
I" 1" McLnin Co.
s. McGinnis, Stutsman Co.
'' - Co. Treasurer Of Benson Co.
The first five of the above cases
were brought by the Northern Pacific
Railroad Co.. to restrain the county
treasurers of the above named coun-
ties from selling. it's land for unpaid
taxes. The railroad company claimed
that it's land were exempt from tax
alton under the Gross Earnings law.
The several counties on the other
hand claimed that the lands of the
railroad company were taxable and
that they were not exempt from tax
alton under the Gross Earnings law
as that law was unconstitutional. The
several counties demurred to the COM
plant of the. railroad company and
upon the trials of the issues of law
raised by the demurrers viz: whether
the said law was constitutional or un-
constitutional, he deciding all the cases
in favor of the several counties and
against the railroad company by sus-
tanning the demurrers.
From the decision of Judge Rose in
each of these cases the railroad COM
pany took an appeal to the supreme
court, which was composed of Justice
Corliss, Judges Mcdonnell and
Winchester, district judges, who had
been called in to sit in these cases. in
place of Justices Bartholomew and
Wallin who were in ineligible to sit in
the cases, having been of counsel in
some of the cases, or similar ones, be.
fore they were elected supreme court
judges.
| The supreme court thus constituted
on Ian. 1, 1892, on the hearing of the
appeals in these cases. held that the
Gross Earnings law was constitution.
al, reversing the decision Of Judge
Rose in each of these cases which arc
reported in the I'd Vol. of N. D. Re.
ports, at page 80 to 397 inclusive.
and also reported in the Vol. u oi
North Western Reporter at pages 38b
1856 and 1871. After the supreme court
had held the Gross Earnings law con.
stitutional, reversing Judge Rose in
the first five cases, the last two OF the
above cases were brought before him
for trial and decision, and as it was
his duty under the law to follow the
decision and construction given to
said law by the supreme court, he de-
cided these two cases in favor of the
railroad company and against the
counties, contrary to his own Judge
ment of what the law was, but in ac-
cordance with what it was, rs then
construed by the supreme court.
These two cases are reported in Vol.
4 of North Dakota Reports at 81 to
sos inclusive, and also reported in 81
N. w. 1892.
After Judge Rose had decided these
two cases the United States Circuit
Court for this district, both the circui
judge Judge Caldwell) and the
district judge Judge Thomas) helt
that the Gross Earnings law unconsti