The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-12-06
BAD DAYS FOR ST. LOUIS
DUIUTH'S COUNTY IS HAVING
TROUBLES OF MANY
KINDS
TAX LAW DECLARED INVALID
Bill Passed Four Years Ago for
the Especial Benefit of That
County Is Now
Ruled Out.


County Is Now
Ruled Out.
Right on the heels of the decision OF
the supreme court of the United States
in re the Anderson law for the taxation
Of railroad lands, which will cost St
Louis county alone $4,000 per annH1n,
the supreme court of the state yesterday
administered another body blow 10 that
county in a decision which invalide.tes
the law passed by the legislature of 1887
to stimulate the payment of taxes on
property where the taxes we're deiln-
quent.
Although a general law, in terms, st.
Louis county was the chief center OIL
it's operation, and was passed to relieve
the payment of penalties and interest ON
taxes on cut-oVer timber lands and other
waste acreage in counties where the
tax rate was above 80 mills.
The law permitted redemption of such
land, if done before June 1, 1898, by pay
, ment of taxes minus all accumulated
penalties and interests or redemption
any time within three years from that
| date by payment of but per cent on tie
| original amount of the taxes due. 70
legally hold the large acreage which
was redeemed under this law it will now
| be necessary for owners to pay large
/
The syllabus is:
Duluth Banking Company, respondent,
VS.. Mart B. Koon ct al, appellants.
Oh. 290, L. 1S97-An act for the enforce
| ment Of the collection of delinquent taxes
in counties in which certain conditions
existed at the time therein specified-is
repugnant to the constitution, because it
| is special legislation as to the affairs Of
counties and does not operate uniformly
throughout the state Judgment re-
| versed. Collins, J.
Other decisions yesterday are:
| Tolerton & Stets0n Co, respondent, VS..
Albert Barck, appellant.
A written guaranty considered and
construed. Order affirmed. Collins, j.
Oliver K Earle, respondent, VS.. Albert
Johnson, Appellant
/. A person chosen as an appraiser
for the purpose of determining the value
of leased real property that such ap
praisement may furnish basis of valuation
for the amount of ground rent TO be paid
therefor, is 10 all intent and purposes a
common-law arbitrator. He is amena-
BILE to, and as chosen arbitrator can
the provisions of G. S. 1894, Sec. $3.50
2. One who uses language as follows,
of and concerning such an appraiser CT
arbitrator: II want to say that if I had
not been sold out in the Benz appraise-
ment, they would never have got 1t for
$650 a front foot, but they bought up
my appraiser and the thing was got by
fraud was sold cut" And also, 81
did not watch my appraiser. They got
hold of my appraiser and he sold me
cut, and the whole thing was got by
fraud and was dishonest and [ can prove
il. l know it and can prove it. My man
Earle was bought by the other side and
sold me out, and / can prove it, charges
such appraisers Or arbitrators with the
&C mmission Of a crime. Such words are
slanderous per Sc.
3. Certain points made by counsel in
l reference to the charge Of the court dis
posed of.
| for the sum of $1,500, held not excessive
under the circumstances appearing in the
case. Order affirmed. Collins j.
William H Wilcox, appellant. VS. MI
:. tual Fire Insurance Company Of Min
nesota, appellant.
= l. An assignment of error that tn,
court below erred in grant ng plaintiff
motion for new trial. is as specific as
d it can well be made and is sufficient
n z When an insurance policy is made
II payable, in case of loss, to a certain D r
: son named therein "as his interest MAJ
g appear the burden of proof is u1oi
d such person to show his right, title or IN
k interest in and to the mortgaged proper
: ty, in case Of its destruction by fire AM
controversy with the insurance com
y pany.
a a g. If such person is the NOR: gags
u named in mortgage upon real propert,
Il covered by the policy, he is not entitle
s to recover on the policy by virtue of tn
: mortgage alone, for loss which has oc
s CURED to insured personal property, al
# though the same may have been up6n III
!, real estate when insured and when de
- stroyed. If as a matter of fact tia
y which upon the face Of the poll Y az
3 pears to have been personal property
IS was part of the real property, it is in
vs. cumbent upon the mortgage to show i
4. Held, in the case at bar that plain
tiff wholly failed to establish his right
recover except as to the amount men
toned in the first item in the policy, an
for that reason the court erred in grant
ing plaintiffs motion for new trial.
= 5. Held, further, that if the new tris
was granted on account of an error {
law or fact prejudicial to plaintiff an
s. not referred to by the counsel for dc
" PENDANT it was the duty of plaintiff
ut counsel to point out the error. Order re
Versed Collins, ].
o, Martin ]. Hughes, admin 'strator Of I'll
l. estate of James c. O Brien, deceased
respondent, VS.. Patrick Meehan an
n James Meehan, co-partners as P. &
as Meehan, appellants.
is AS the trial of this action which Wa
ed brought to recover q balance alleged
be due upon an agreement to pay IL
d. reasonable value of certain pine t!nb
sold by plaintiffs intsstate to defendan
the court at the close of its charge il
structed the jury as follows: He tai
ing into consideration all the circun
stances in the case appearing upon II
nc trial. as part of the evidence in the cas-
''and remembering that you are to col
s1oer probabilities and circumstances
~ part OF the evidence in deciding this cas-
3l L SuDfl5lJ II 10 you.
he he Held that it was error to instruct
er the language above quoted and tn;
We taking INTO consideration the form
" this instruction and the fact that it W;
of given at the end of the charge it me
le have been prejudicial to defendants. o
le- der reversed and a new trial granted.
Collins, J.
Henry Krause, appellant VS.. Christie
Krause Jr ct al, defendants; Christie
&C. Krause Jr, as administrator of the {
IL tate of Charles Krause, deceased, ga
tn, nishee, respondents.
'es When an administra tor has in
la, hands funds belonging to the estate,
er, may pay them over to the party en-
w. tied thereto as heir at law, without
nd order of the probate court, and If SUI
Id, payment be made in good faith he is n
liable and cannot be held as a gaTnish
of the party to whom payment has be-
made prior to the commencement of t
garnishment proceedings. Order afftrme
lily Collins, j
IRE Charles D. Hart, respondent, VS.. City
lur Minneapolis, appellant.
,es l. Certain provisions of the charter
Minneapolis, section 5, sub-chapter Z, a
section 20 of sub-chapter 3, chapter
Special Laws of 1884, as amended in IS
&C. section 20. construed and held that it
az competent for the city council to fix t
a salary of an assistant engineer of t
at at fire department by resolution, instead
'ns q Held, that the complainant here
states cause of action. Order aff1rme
Collins, j
uit F. j. Taylor, respondent, VS.. Red La
ON Falls Lumber Company, appellants.
m Per curiem Graham VS. Conrad,
lgs MINI. 40 followed, and appeal dismisse
er. -Esz---
o---,. - - -,