The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-10-26
RIGHTS Of 4 WITNESS
THEY ARE PASSED UPON IN A DE-
CIsION BY THE SUPREME
COURT
GRAND JURY CONDEMNS JAIL
1t Is Held to BE Unsafe, and Imme-
date Repairs Are Recom-
mended by the In
QuisitOrs.

Several decisions were handed down by
the supreme court yesterday In the case
of the Pipestone County Bank, of Pipe
stone City, respondent, VS.. Albert L.
Ward and Charlotte Ward, his wife, ap-
pellants, in which the order of the lower
court was reversed, the facts are as fol-
lows:
Defendant Hansberg owned a mill at
Pipestone. which he sold to Defendant
Ward He received $1,000 cash. Hans
berg and wife then executed to the Mar
tin County bank their notes in the sum
Of $4,000 and a mortgage to seure the
same. The property was then conveyed
to Ward, subject to the mortgage In
the action commenced 1t developed that
Defendant Hansberg transferred the
mortgage as collateral security for $1,000.
Following is the syllabus:
In an action to foreclose a mortgage
which had been assigned to plaintiff as
collateral security, such assignor is
party for whose immediate benefit the
action is prosecuted, and he may be call
ed for cross eXamina ton under G. 8. 1894
section $3.50. Order reversed.
Lewis. ].
In the matter of the applicatin of the
Minneapolis & st. Louis railroad, for
the appointment of commissioners to con-
denim certain lands in Martin county,
Minnesota. Minneapolis & st. Louis Rail-
road Company appellant, VS.. Erick Olson
and Ingrin Olson. Following is the syl-
labus:
In condemnation proceedings In fur
therance of a proposed extension of its
road by a railroad company organized
under the laws of this state, with the
power to exercise the, right Of eminent
domain, the limits of the proposed extern
sion not being included within its charter
or articles of Incorporation, section 2749
g. s. 1894, applies, and compliance with
ic Tf@0n 70 7fnr- i1,zs an
ton of the subject matter In such pro-
ceedingS.
Such fact being shown, the court may
. modify its order appointing commissions
ers by vacating the same and denying the
application. Order affirmed.
Lewis, ].
In the case of Germania Bank of Min
neapoiis, respondent, VS.. c. G. Osborne.
appellant. order was reversed and a new
trial granted.
Following is the syllabus:
IN an action upon promiSsory note
to which a counter claim was pleaded, to
the effect that the note was given in pur-
suance of parol agreement for the sale
of certificates of bank stock by piaintiff
to defendant, upon the condition that de-
to plaintiff in consideration Of the sur
render of the note; held, that parol testI
mony Of such contract was admissible,
and did not tend to change the terms of
the note. Order reversed and a new trial
eranteo. Lewis J.
In the case of Solomon B. Taylor, re-
spondent, VS.. City Of Mankato appellant.
in which order was affirmed yesterday,
the syllabus is as follows:
One who. while travelling along a public
thoroughfare in the suburbs of a city, on
a dark night. with knowledge of a defect
in the. sidewalk, leaves the road and
takes the walk and is injured by falling
into the opening which he IS trying to
avoid. is not, as a matter Of law, guilty
of contributory negligence. Order affirm
co. Lewis, J.
w. E. ingalls,. appellant, VS.. Nels Holm
gren, respondent. Opinion, per curtain.
A verdict having been returned for de-
fendant In the court below, plaintiff
moved for new trial on two grounds:
First-That the verdict of the jury was
not justified by the evidence, and is con
trary to law
Second-For errors in law occurring at
the trial. and excepted to by the plain
tin. The motion for new trial was de-
MED and plaintiff appealed
The only assignment Of error is as fol-
lows: The court erred in refusing plain
tilt new trial. Order affirmed