The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1902-04-17

9th,xl900, Bridgman as attorney for
C g Ok, decided to EN-. Remer 900 acres
OF the Valentine land, and from the
records and the evidence it appears
that Remer decided to Frank Zins of
st. Cloud $50 acres of this land, and
there by hangs a tale. Bridgman died
insN5ovember of the year 1900 and soon
after Cook died. The case against de-
PENDANTS was started by 10. Mills
who who's IS executor of the estate and is
acting for the heirs. The deed from
Cook to Remer has mysteriously dis
appeared in some manner and the rec
ords ssof the Register of deeds office
were brought into court and offered as
evidence to show the transaction.
Page 5l2 of the books of deeds was
offered in evidence by attorneys for
Remer and zins, and Register OF Deeds
CHAPMAN and his deputy, Richard.
Chapman were put on the stand and
stated that the record was what it pur-
ported to be on it's face. The register
OF deeds had stated that he always
compared all documents after they had
been recorded in his office. He was
unable to swear to having verified the
Cook-Remer deed in any manner that
would enable him to state specifically
that he personally knew the record in
his office to be an absolutely correct
copy. The testimony of his deputy
was Substantially the same, the ihstru-
ment taking it's course along with all
the other instruments filed. There
was. considerab bic technical sparring
by the attorneys for ground on which
to stand. The Judge failed to see
hoWsthe records as testified to would
afford any tangible proof of the validity
of the original document, but he finally
allowed the record to be admitted in
evidence for what it was worth, stating
thatit was not worth much.
The testimony of Attorney Kent of
Milaca and Remer was to the effect
that Remer and Bridgman were lin
Kent's Office in Milaca one day quite a
while prior to the contamination of the
transaction in question, and that they
had with them map of the lands that
are said to have been conveyed by
Bridgman to Remer. Kent was in
structed TO- make out the body of the
deed, filling in the numerous descrip-
tons. Kent testified that he did so,
and the deed was given to Bridgman.
This was the last Kent saw of the deed,
until lit was sent to him from Strand
Rapids by Remer. Mr.. Kent did not
remember what kind of a blank he
used, and on being asked by Attorney
Taylor if the covenant section in the
deed was the same as that in the rec
ord that was offered in evidence, Kent
said he did not know.
E. N. Remer testified to having gone
to St. Cloud where he met his brother
by appointment who loaned him $500
and with enough cash to make 81, 200
went in company with John Williams
to the home of Bridgman and paid the
latter the money and got the deed to
the property in question. Mr.. Will
Jams testified to having gone with
Remer to the home of Bird gman and
he saw the two men sit down to table
and count over the money, Remer re-
ceiving the deed and leaving shortly
thereafter with Williams who stated
that Remer showed him the deed in a
general way and remarked in SELF
satisfying way of the deal. Remer
testified that he sent the deed to his
brother in Minneapolis who kept it
for some time. In course of time Re-
mer found Zins who loaned him $500 to
pay taxes on the land. Remer in the
course of the transactions gave Zins
the deed to $50 acres spoken of. In
the meantime Remer went to Grand
Rapids, Mimi, and took the deeds and
check along with him. He sent them
to Attorney Kent of Milaca with in
structions to have him go to Princeton
and pay the taxes on the land. In
company with Zins Kent came to
Princeton in March, 1901 and had the
deeds recorded. Kent in his testimony
stated that he mailed the Cook-Remer
deed back to Remer at Grand Rapids,
and that is the last ever seen of the
mysterious document which Judge
Searle inquired for early in the hear
ing, and was informed by Mr.. Taylor
that they had made repeated requests
from defendants for the deed, but that
same could not be produced, and the
testimony of Remer and Kent was
offered to show that the missing deed
was no longer in existence.
Mr.. Locke, a notary and attorney of
St. Cloud, testified to the fact that Mr..
Bridgman came to Locke's Office and