The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1902-07-12
for the contestant. Judgment aftirmed
Red Mems Rlqhts.


BEN way bin-ness ct AL RESPONDENTS VS.
Ezra EShelby ct al, appellants.
l. A tribal Indian, whether he be a
citizen or not, may maintain an action in
wrong committed outside the limits of his
reservation against his person or prop
erty.
2. The plaintiffs are tribal Indians liv-
ing on their reservation. They brought
an action in the district court Of the
county of Red Lake to recover the pos
session OF an undiSputed interest in a
section of land lying outside of any Indian
reservation, and which is in possession
of citizens of this state Held, that the
district court has jurisdiction of the sub
ject matter of the action and of the par
ties thereto. Writ and order discharged.
Start, c. J.
Must Be Voluntary.
State of Minnesota on the Relation of G.
Jennison, appellant, VS.. Joshua Rogers,
apoliS, respondent.
The board of education of the city of
Mime adopted certain rules. and
cent of the salaries of all teachers en-
ployed by the board should be deducted
and paid into a fund for the purpose Of
providing annuities for teachers becom-
ing 1ncapacitated by reason of long serv-
ice. When Teachers were employed by
the board they were required to enter
into contract conSenting that such per-
Centage of their salaries should be di-
verified by the board of education for the
purpose of establishing such fund Held,
that the act of the board in providing
for and in eXacting by contract such a
percentage of salaries was not authorized
by law and was void. Judgment affirmed.
Lewis, j.
Ruth L. Heminway ct al, respondent, vs.
Maud Miller, appellant.
In the absence of any direct proof of
marriage contract, marriage may be in
ferred from cohabitation as husband and
wife, but such presumption does not
arise unless the cohabitation is matrimo-
NAL.
A marriage contract will not be pre-
sumed from occasional admissions and
declaration, and from cohabitation Sc
Evidence examined and found to es-
tabllsh conclusively that no marriage
contract existed in this case, hence it
was error without prejudice to charge
the jury that there was evidence in the
case tending to show marriage by gen
eral reputation. 2P-.5 = "a
OF testimony reviewed and found to con-
tain no error. Judgment affirmed
Lewis, J.
Statute of Limitations.
The st. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba,
EEia aInayy o, Company, respondent, VS..
from exercising his legal remedy P by some
paramount authority the time during
counted against him in determining
whether the statute of limitations has
2. The law, in the absence. of some
specific provision TO the contrary, COM
mits, in the first instance, all matters af-
the United States and the adjustment of
all private claims thereto and grants
thereafter under congressional legislation
to the general land Office under the su-
pervision of the secretary of the interior
and while such matters are pending and
undetermined in such department the
courts have no Jurisdiction thereof.
B.. The plaintiff claimed title to the
land here in controversy by virtue 6 its
land grant. The defendant went into po-
session thereof and made application to
enter it as a homestead which was de-
MED and by successive appeals he kept
the matter in litigation in the land de-
test was decided in favor Of the plaintiff
Held that the time during which the
contest was thus pending is not to be
counted against the plaintiff in determin-
ing whether the statute of limitations
has barred its right to the land ard that
the defendant has not established title
thereto by adverse possession. Order af-
tirmed Start, c. ].
Lines of Boundary.
Security Land and Exploration Company,
appellant, VS.. G. A. Burns and Mary L.
Burns, respondents; Security Land and
Explorati9on /, Conf any, a7!ppellent. vs..
respondents.
1. A meander line is not, as a general
rule: boundary line, yet the boundaries
extended where they appear by the gov
eminent plat to abut on body of water
which in fact never existed at substantial
ly the place indicated on the plat. In
such exceptional cases the supposed
meander line will, if consistent with the
other calls and distances indicated on the
plat, mark the limits of the survey and
be held to be the boundary line Of the
land in delimits.
2. Rule applied and held upon the spe-
cial facts of this case that the trial court
correctly held that a line on a govern
ment plat purporting to be a meander
line was intended to be the boundary line
of the fractional lots here in question.
Judgment affirmed. Start, c. J.
Hilma Adele Widestrand, respondent, VS.
ClacS A. Widcstrand appellant.
In an action for limited divorce, evil
dence examined and found to support the
fpdiYo IF Ordar firm