The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1898-01-21
TO BE ARGUED NEXT WEEK
LAND ON WHICH ST. PAUL IS
BUILT IN LITIGATION.
A RALEIGH ATTORNEY IS EMPLOYED
Col. John w. Hinsdale Gives the History Of
the Case and the Facts Involved in IT,
The Lana Was Mexican War
Pension Grant.

Col. John w. Hinsdale was yesterday
asked for some information concerning
the case of Elizabeth Wetzel ct al. VS..
The Minnesota Railway Transfer Com
pany ct AL, now pending in the Supreme
court of the United States, which in
wolves more perhaps than any other
case upon the docket of that court.
Col. Hinsdale said that ne expected
to have argued the. case in the Supreme
court yesterday, but he received a tele-
gram from the clerk, Informing him that
it had been postponed till next week.
The facts of the case are these: The
Act of Congress of 1S47, donated to
certain soldiers in the Mexican war, 160
acres of land each. and an the event of
their death, the land warrant was to be
issued to the widow and children. Under
this law, the widow of Geo. w. Remsen,
a soldier in the Mexican war, received
for herself and her five minor children,
ranging from q to 16 years old respec-
lively, a warrant for 1t0 acres of land.
The Act of Congress provided, that lin
the event of the children being minors,
the legally constituted guardian of such
minor children shall, upon being duly
authorized by the Orphans or other
court having probate jurisdiction, have
power to sell or dispose of such land
warrant for the benefit of those inter
ested." The widow of the soldier, Rem
sen, had herself appointed guardian of
the minor heirs by the Orphans Court
in Philadelphia, and sold the warrant to
one Taylor, without obtaining any au-
thority to do so. Thereupon Taylor To-
Gated his land warrant upon 160 acres
OF land, on which a portion of the city
of st. Paul, Mimi, is now built, and sold
1T to the present claimants. They bought
with notice of the infirmity of their
title, as shown by the public records.
which they should have examined. The
land is now worth three millfon dollars.
The minor children knew nothing of
the issuance of the land warrant, or of
its sale, or of its location, until 1890,
when they heard OF it through some
parties from the west, and afterwards
through their own attorney, who had
examined into the matter. They there
upon filed a bill in equity in the United
States Circuit court in Minnesota, to
hare the present holders of the property
declared trustees for their benefit.
The main defence, which is set up by
the defendants, is that the plaintiffs
have been guilty of laches in not assert
ing their rights at an earlier day, and
that although the plaintiffs had no ac-
fual knowledge of the Mexican Soldier
Land Bounty Act, or of the fact that a
land warrant had been issued Hereunder
or that it had been sold, or that it had
been located IN Minnesota, they are pre-
stunned in law to have had knowledge of
the said act, and are guilty of laches in
not investigating all of these matters as
soon as they became of age, and prompt
~ appealing to the courts. The plain
tiffs say that they are pot to blame for
not knowing of the existence of the said
act of Congress, of which not one person
in thousand knew, and that they are
not guilty OF laches for not investigating
matter of which they did not have the
slightest knowledge or information, and
TO which they held absolutely no clue.
There are other points in the case, but
this is the pivotal question; and if the
court shall hold that the minors have
not been in fault by reason of the delay
in bringing the suit, which delay they
could not possibly have avoided, the
court will award to them the land in
controversy.
Col. Hinsdale has made an exhaustive
examination of the questions involved.
and the authorities bearing upon them,
and gives it as his opinion that the
Plaintiffs, for whom he appears, have a
good case, and that they will be success
full.