The Saint Paul globe., 1900-04-27
Trust IN LOVER COURTS
SUPREME COURT DEMONSTRATED
ITS FAITH IN SEVERAL DE-
CISIONS YESTERDAY
WHEAT TICKET EaUITIEs
They Figure Prominently in One of
the Cases Involving PrOmI-
nent Men in Cotton
wood County.

The supreme court found time yester-
day In addition to it's other troubles to
hand down five decisions each of which
affirmed the order OF the lower court.
Wright Barrett & Stilwell Company,
plaintiffs, VS. Harry p. Robinson ct al,
defendants; William George, as receiv-
er, respondent; Dispitch Printing Com
pany and John Wagener, as sheriff, ap-
pellants.
Syllabus-The court below made an or
der prohibiting and restraining sheriff
and the creditors from leyying an execu-
tion upon, and taking possession OF, GER
tain personal property claimed to be that
of the debtors, and alleged TO be in the
hands of receiver appointed by said
court in an action therein pending. The
order provided for the retention by the
receiver, who was to sell the property, of
part of the money derived from the sale
sufficient in amount to satisfy the eXecu-
ton with costs to await any steps which
the creditor might take to protect its
rights. The latter availed itself OF this
part of the order and Instituted an action
against the receiver to recover the money,
and then appealed from the order. The
receiver by order of the court retains
the money to await final determination
of the action which is stlll pending.
missed
2. As soon as a choice of alternative
remedies proffered by the law is made,
| and one of these is adopted the act it.
/
as regards the other remedies. The ap-
peal is dismissed Collins, ].
| In re estate James Tracy, deceased,
Mary A. Tracy, appellant, vs.. Minerva
Tracy, respondent.
Syllabus. If there be no child, nor
lawful issue of a deceased child living,
the statutory homestead of a deceased
person descended under the laws of this
state, General Statutes 1894, sections 1869,
441O, to a surviving husband or wife, free
from any testamentary- devise or other
disposition to which such survivor shall
! not have assented in writing and free
from all debts or claims upon the estate.
Z. Inc requirements of section 4472 as
10 making and filing written instrument
by a surviving husband or wife, in case
such survivor elects to renounce and to
refuse to accept the provisions made in a
! VIII are not applicable in a case where
there is no child nor the issue of a de-
ceased child surviving the testator. That
section is applicable in cases of parent
teStatOrS, only.
3. In the case at bar the testator was a.
married man, but his wife has never as
sented in writing TO the testamentary de-
wise. He died childless Nor did lawful
issue of deceased child survive him.
Whether the widow was bound to elect
within reasonable time as between the
statutory provisions and those made for
bar in the will is not decided, but it is
heIu that IN any event there was no i'm
proper delay on her Part in making an
election. -er.tss.l
4. 1t is also held that prior to making
such election the widow did not sin any
manner waive or abandon hes right to
the will.
8. Certain other points in the case dis
posed OF. order affirmed, Collins, j.
The Minneapolis Land Company. resDond-
ent, VS.. Carrie Z. Mcmillan appellant
SyHabus-1. Held, on the allegations in
the the answer, that the facts and circuln-
stances ti.erdn detailed and relied upon
as oeIenSe In an action upon pronais-
sorry notes, were insufficient to show that
SAID notes were executed and delivered
lnoer duress. Nor did they show that
lhey We're without consideration
:. II d ICrsOn has a right at law hie
Iofpearance to institute proceedings to
protect or enforce it is a valuable eoasfl-
eFaIloI Tor promise to pay. Judgment
'4i- Aii'"' -CollnS, j.
city of Crookston, respondent VS.. Board
oI county commissioners of Polk Coun-
ty, appellant. -i'
Syllabus-1 An act OF tho Iac,ielo 4,,o
creating municipal corpora ton aud
granting to 1T legislative judicial noiitn
tta1lng tg and other ordinary powers. en-
TiSions put one subject the separate pro-
VISIONS s, OF the act comforting these now
eLs generally, as well as in detail heino
erLply aaI parts of the whole and absoiuteiY
essential to make a whole
(. That provision of an raet Of tb III;
lature entitled "An Act to Arnend . sep1
Sonsohdate the Charter of the Civ ~
SrOoKston, 5. l.. 1885, chap. / snhcboI
~ sEG trca tO winch section requires the coun
~ treasurer TO pay over to the CITY treae
urer all interest and penalties which baWa
oeeA coIlected on account of taxes la1riaS
roro;y ror CITY purposes, and also all interest
!!oCelVeu thefeon from county denoSitar -
Ies, IS not open to the objection th..t -
| sec. q. Arl. ~,
3: The provision referred to-sec ,e
T0n
general tax laws relating To nenaItiee ~ .IiS =
nn1erest nnt collected on account of taSes
Order affirmed. CoIi;,e e'Aes'
Albert Latunek, respondent NO II
DaYles ct al, defendants: IT. r nav;ol
appellant - l. DdVIes,
.S3I SSyIlIlabus-1. An action for conversion
propertv m ~ie[e mere a,d mortgage who has taken
ol ol IorecIoslng a chattel mortgaae rafl,Coe pS<ae
~ ~ restore possession to q mortps GOV MI :
iaS +L ~ ~nlaue redemption in accordance VIII
'iie ProTlSlonS of G. S. 1884 sec 4 1S7 "A''i
Held, in the action at har tbot a.
| i'It ence was Suff1cIent to support find
IIle that the mortgagor paid to tha ,,ail,.t
al REQ elle sum due on the mortgage and
pSHSes incurred in the case and cIISto51,
oh o the property, or otherwise arisine fly
etni,' aiiuittgagee, and was also sufficient 10
| the converted T9ruice nrn as to the value of
ot;u deia' that the trial court did no4
a1uSe aande ITS discretion when it denied dee del
eenhis teEen IS, motion motion to set aside verdict
tanSh py ueIaut and to grant n 80,
1;a trial on the ground of accident or d new new
prise prise which ordinary prudence could Hupt nnt
nd nave guarded against. Judgment aft1rn,l I0e
Collins, j.
w; $; Jackson; respondent. VS.. Eric Sc
,s Sylia6us-l synt ~ Certain persons placed
Wheat IN grain warehouse owned and
| operated by one E., receiving s'Whaat %naf
dlcAets; at so,called, therefor In an acton
agathSt thS a third party, as for conversion
| OF TINS wheat, it is held that the <r0Il eWil
| dence o was abundant to support a tfndine I'm,
ina ti,ae as as between the Gepositors and E
LII naie ttansactions a5 were bailments of ihe
| wheat and not sales thereof. Ard os 'ne e
SSGidRseqqence Sid @ that title to the propert1 :,
After the wheat had been sbinroa
| by f., on defendants order and fo, 1il,pt5u I,I
]8eneht, ] these depositors demanded Of '17S r
| that ne return the wheat or rnola " noI. T.
yI,s