The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1897-05-06
OWNER HAS RIGHTS.

OWNER HAS RIGHTS.
Judge Webber has made himself
quite clear on one point of land own
ership in the Torrens-Parsons case
last Thursday morning. His ruling
was on motion of the defense to dis
miss the case after the prosecution
had rested. It appears that the de-
Tense moved for the dismissal on the
ground that Mr.. Torrens had no right
on the land at the time he entered up
on the same for the purpose of seed
ing it.
It will be remembered that Mr.. Tor
rens purchased the land from party
represented here by w. E. Baker.
That party secured ownership by vir-
tue of q foreclosure of q mortgage Civ
en- by Parsons and wife. The time
for redemption had expired, or had
nearly expired, when Mr.. Torrens and
his brother, having some money to in
vest, decided to purchase the tract.
After the time for expiration had ex-
pired, or rather in the spring of last
year, Mr.. Torrens, with employees en-
tered on the land for the purpose of
seeding the same. Parsons protested
against the procedure and Torrens
protested against Parsons protest.
Mr.. Torrens seeded and afterwards
harvested the crop. After several acts
in replevin and more or less trouble
on the farm between Parsons and Tor
rens and Mrs. Parsons Torrens secur-
ed the grain, giving a bond for the
amount.
The motion to dismiss the case was
made Wednesday afternoon. Judge
Webber took the motion under advise
ment until Thursday morning. At
the opening of court that morning the
Judge announced that while Mr.. Tor
rens had no right to use force, in case
he did so, yet, as the owner of the
land, he had certain rights, and the
court was bound to respect the rights
He thought his actions in seeding the
land we're within the rules of the de-
cisions handed down by the Supreme
Court. He read from several decisions,
one or more from the Supreme Courts
of other States, and then one from the
Supreme Court of this State, sustain
ing his position, and holding that the
owner of the land is to be protected in
cases of the kind. Judge Webber
granted the defense an exception to
his ruling and if the case goes to the
Supreme Court that body will have
another knotty problem to decide.
The case went to jury about 4:3O
o'clock Thursday afternoon, and the
jury was out about 20 minutes before
rap was heard at the door of the
jury room and an announcement was
made that the jury was ready to re-
port. The twelve filed in and handed
their verdict to the court. It was for
the plaintiff, Mr.. Torrens, and grant
ed him judgment for the full amount
asked for, over $3.50, or the grain al
ready in his possession by replevin
proceedings. The jury was unani-
nous on the first ballot, a remarkable
occurrence in cases of the kind, and
more so when it is stated that a jury
at the January term could not agree
on the same case. It was a big vic.
tory for Baldwin & Patterson and E
E. Harriott, who took the case for Mr.
Torrens, shortly after the trouble com.
menced. Mr.. Patterson took a per.
sonal interest in the case and when the
attorneys for Mr.. Parsons thought
that Mr.. Torrens would never get in
to court he had his case briefed 81
that he was almost certain to win
The case may 60 to the Supreme
Court.
There is some one in almost every
neighboOrhood who is subject to attack.