The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-12-21

grand jury OF the county OF Ramsey
upon a complaint under the provisions
of the Laws 1901, chapter PIG, charging
him with wilfully emitting to support his
wife. Upon a consideration of the evil
preliminary hearing on the charge, held,
that it conclusively appears that if he IL
guilty of any crime it was committed
in the county OF Hennepin, hence the
jurisdiction in the premises Relator
discharged. Start, Z. j.
State of Minnesota, respondent, vs.
Frank Swanson, appellant.
visions of the Laws of 1887, chapter 6,
the high license law, for selling intoXi-
eating liquors without a license in the
village of Cannon Falls. although the
village was organized by a special act
which gave to the village council excln-
sive jurisdiction of the LIQUOR traffic and
licenses for the sale OF Intoxicating
liquors within the village Order az
frmed. Start, c. j.
The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance.
Company, respondent, vs. The Rochcs-
ter German Insurance Company OF New
York, appellant
policy, total loss is to be ascertained IS
to the date of the occurrence, and is de-
termined by the following tests:
A building is not a total loss, unless it
no substantial part of portion OF it above
the foundation remains in place capable
of being safely utilized In restoring. the
building to the condition in which IT
was before the fire.
! The words total loss" when applied
to a building. mean totally DESTROYED as
though some portion of them remain
standing, are unsafe to use for the plr
pose of rebuilding and would have to be
torn down and new building erected
throughout.
There can be no total loss of build
ing so long as the remnant of the struc-
ture LEI, standing above the foundation
is reasonably and safely adapted for Use
upon which to restore the building TO
the condition in which it was immediate
ly before the fire; and whether it is 40
adapted depends upon the question
| whether a reasonably prudent owner of
| a building uninsured desiring such Il
structure as the one in question was be-
| store the building utilize such standing
remnant as such basis. If he would,
then the loss is not total. Rules applet,
| and held error to refuse instructions in
| substance embodying these prime pies
| 2. A cold storage plant was insured
under the following description: -Four
| story basement brick building. with com
| position roof, and brick engine and
| boiler house attached, including steam,
heating and hosting apparatus steam,
| brine, water and gas pipe fixtures, and
all other permanent fixtures occupied for
warehouse purposes. The engine house
| consisted of a small one-story brick
| structure attached to the main building,
and the whole considere@ and operated as
| house was bat slightly damaged by The
| fire, under the tests above gwen tie
| question of total loss must be applied 20
| the structure as whole.
g. The wall at enc end OF the b1tid5pS
had been bolted to similar one of an
adjoining brick building, thereby max nS
double wall Held that as bearing
| upon the question of total loss, 1t was
| proper to show that the double wall re-
naming was not suitable to be utilized,
! in place, in restoring both buildings. In
such case the insured could not claim the
entire benefit of the remaining double
wall.
| 4. The evidence did not show conciu-
/ siveiy that the loss was total. Order re-
versed and new trial granted.
Lewis. J.
| Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance
| cun1pany. respondent VS. The st. Paul
Cold Storage Warehouse company ct al,
! defendants, and Sun Insurance Office,
appellant; Northwestern Mutual Life
Insurance company, respondent VS.. Ag-
ricultural Company of WatertoWn, New
York, ct al. appellants.
l. Imam action to determine the ques
| tionaef total loss in case of damage to
| building by fire. the rule adopted in the
Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance
et mpany V. The Rochester German In
| surance company, of Rochester, n. Y,
| is accepted as applied.
g In applying such test it was proper
! to receive evidence of the value of the
remaining parts of the buildings. the cost
| OF repairing the same, and the total cost
of reconstruction.
3. II was not error to direct the jury
! to view the premises under consideration
as no substantial change appeared to
! have taken place at the time of the trial,
i but it was error to instruct the jury that
! in determining the question of total loss
] they might consider the knowledge gain
ed thereby. Order reversed and new trial
! granted. Lewis, j.
/ In re Proce edings to lay out a certain
| street in the village of Hartland; Min
/ neapolis & st. Louis Railroad company,
| appellant, vS. Village of Hartland, re-
| Spondent.
/. In proceedings by municipal authori-
ties to condemn land for a public street,
| the burden of proof upon the question
as to the propriety and necessity of the
/ proposed street is upon the municipal
! ty.
2 Where the proposed street extends
! over and across railroad right of way
| or depot grounds, the burden to show
| that if so extended, it will essentially
| impair and destroy the use of such right
of way for railway purposes is upon
the railway company.
| s. Though the statutes require in such
| proceedings the landowner to be deslg-
| mated as plaintiff, and the municipality
| as Qe1GQQdnI, llic VI plOOI upO-i
/ the issues mentioned is not thereby
| changed.
4. Authority on the part of munich
| patty to extend a public street or high
] way over and across a railroad right of
way is implied from the general grant
! of power to lay out and establish streets
| and highways.
5. Such authority is not implied, how
/ ever. nor does it exist when the use of
| the right of way for railway purposes
| will be thereby essentially impaired or
| destroyed: in which event express legis-
lative authority to so extend a street is
| necessary.
6. The determination Of the municipal
| authorities in proceedings to lay out and
| open a street over and across the right of