The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-06-12


behalf for long time, and during the
course of the difficulty a question
arose as to the provision for payment
OF The fees. The case was appealed to
the supreme court, a number of papers
being involved therein, and the result
was the decisionb filed in the supreme
court yesterday. The syllab of the
decisions are as folloWs
Andrew STEVENSON, :. appellant, vs. Board of
spondent.
/. Where a sheriff has in his hands for
service several wrftS against different per-
sons for different causes and makes service
Oh TWO or more writs in the course Of one
Tip ne is entitled to charge full mileage on
each writ so served
z. General Statutes 1884, section 6021 reads
as follows: Any officer or other person re-
1uslng TO deliver copy of any order, warrant,
process or other authority by which he de-
ea,ns any person, to any one who demands
sucn copy and tenders the fees therefor, shall
roTIeI 900 to- the person so detained"
.Held' that sherif3s fees for serving copies
oI pehch warrants upon persons named as de-
Iehoants therein were not legally chargeable
against the county under this provision of
the statute. Buck, j.
CITY OF Tower, appellant, VS.. Tower and Sou
can street Railway Company and Arthur H.
STraSSweller, receiver, etc, respondents
l. Inc city OF Tower through its common
council, granted to a street railway its sue
eessors and assigns, the right and privileges
~ ~, constructing, maintaining and operating a
llne or street railways on any and all of it's
streets and public highways for period OF
twenty years, the cars on said railway to be
propelled by horses, mules, steam, electric or
passengers and freight The grant was made
upon various conditions. The twelfth section
OF the ordinance reads follows: This
d nnne is granted upon condition that the
company faithfully fulfill the requirements
neTein expressed, and should the company
Iali therein or wilfuliy abandon such road
anu neglect or refuse to operate it, then this
Irahchise to become null and void. Said
company agree that they will forfeit said road
to the city of Tower in one year after said
o9Inpany ceases to operate said road
Inc railway company became insolvent, and
neglected and ceased to operate the road
Tor more than one year. Held, that the word
road as used in said section Of the ordi-
nance has the same import as if it read rail
road
2 Held, also that the word forfeiture" as
used In said ordinance did not signify non
enforcdble penalty nor hquidated damages, but
authorizes the court upon default of the con-
dltlons or the grant to declare in a proper
action an absolute forfeiture of the railway
franchises, including rails, ties, roadbed and
things granted.
3. Railway franchises and grants are usual
ly made for the benefit of the public, and
Where such public interests involved in
the Things and conditions granted and 1T is
impossible or impracticable to recover COM
pensaton when the conditions are broken by
the grantee, and the facts clearly appear the
declarations of the courts deny the cor
porate franchises and things forfeited, if the
grant SO provides. Order reversed
Buck, j.
Marguerite Anderson, plaintiff appellant, VS..
Minnesota Loan and Trust Company, de-
PENDANT, rspondent; c. w. Burdic, inter-
Yenor, appellant; National German-American
Bank, intervenor, appellant.
Held upon the facts found (the tenth find
ing being mere conclusion of law, that
as between the mortgagors and the second
mortgage, the latter continued to be mort
gage in possession until the expiration of the
period II redemption from the foreclosure of
the first mortgage; and that as such he was
entitled Subject to the rights of the first
mortgages under the agreement of July, 1894
to apply the rents and profits to the salts
faction OF his mortgage until it was reduced
to $40 900.
Inasmuch as under no circumstances would
the rents and profits be sufficient to reduce
p the second mortgage to that sum, and as
the plaintiff (the assignee Of the mortgagors
interest IN the rents and proflts) has no in
terest In the mortgaged premises and is not
liable for any Of the membranes ON them,
she is not in position to object to the terms
OF the accounting for the rents and profits
as allowed and adjusted by the trial court.
The second mortgage obtained a judg-
ment and decree of foreclosure which, how
ever, was void by reason OF want of due
service of the summons. He assigned as
collateral security to the intervening bank
this Judgment and decree and all right title
ana interest which he had therein and in
and to debts therein described and in and
to the mortgaged premises which might be
acquired by said decree and In and to the
proceeds of any sale hereunder
Held that, notwithstanding the invalidity of
the judgment of foreclosure, this operated
as an assignment of the mortgage and debt
secured thereby, and OF the rents and profits
to which he was entitled, as mortgage in
possession, security for the payment of
his mortgage.
Also that the bank did not waive or re-
lease this assignment by subsequently bring
ing suit on the debt, as security for which
the assignment was made, and serving
garnishee summons on the party in posses
sion Of the rents and profits.
Judgment reversed and Judgment ordered
in favor of the ntervenor, the National Ger
man. American bank Buck j.
Sherman E. Day, respondent, VS.. Max Ebert
ct al, appellants.
Held, that the appellant, having failed to
made any assignment of errors, as required
by Rule 9 of this court, the order appealed
from is affirmed.