The Minneapolis journal., 1903-01-16

which gives it an apparent value it did not other
wise have this is not an irrebuttable presump-
and and circumstances. ire @ &c Connected Connected Herewith. -
Lovely, J..
St. Paul Crooks Go Up.
William Fay and r. c. Evans, two st.
Paul crooks convicted of swindling a
stranger in a three card monte game, lose
their appeal, and must serve sentences,
Fay for four years and Evans for Ave.
The cases were appealed separately, and
the syllabi read as follows:
State Of Minnesota Respondent, vs William
Fay, indicted with others, Appellant:
civil cases, are commonly declared to be within,
the discretion OF the trial court and subject to
review only for an abuse of this discretion. A
verbal statements of counsel that it Is neces-
sary, or upon the mere suspicion that absent
witnesses may be needed at the trial. A SUBJ
stantial reason for continuance must be prop
Second-ueld. That there was no abuse Of the
motion for continuance made at the beginning Of
the trial Of criminal :orfense f<
court properly denied q motion for ! new trial
based upon the cdaim that counsel were sur
prised by the testimony Of one of the witnesses
for the state, and also upon the ground OF newly
discovered evidence.
Order affirmed. Collins, j.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs.. S. G. Evans,
Fir.t-.The words Of one person engaged in the
1884. Sec. 65e5), although not In the presence
Of other participants but leading up to and being
a part Of the offense itself, are competent
against all of the parties.
second--The court below charged the jury that
the trial was not an oratorical contest between
the eloquent counsel engaged therein, and that
the JURORS were not sitting to determine which
as9est maS the ot
portion Of the charge was not erroneous. Per-
sci should not be allowed to control a verdict,
taken to do 30 in temperate, impartial and con
ThirdEcertain consisnnents Of error consid-
'Fourth-HeId, That the testimony in behalf
Of the state in this case was ample to support a
verdict .4staeaa Of guilty. ... Collins. J,
Saloon Guests Must BE Protected.
Saloon keepers who admit patrons t
sleep in their place Of business are bound
to use reasonable care for their safety
even to protecting them against pract1ca
jokes On the night Of Feb 10, 1902
Thomas Curran spent all his money IN the
saloon Of Skaren & Olson at East Crane
Forks. His poverty and the lnertla
caused by his liberal potations led him II
curl up in chair for the night. Abou
1880 4 third party IN the saloon poured
alcohol on his feet and set f1re*to It, burn
org Of the saloon, claiming that the bar
tender should have protected him. HI
got a. verdict Of 500, and this Is sus
tanned. The syllabus says:
/ Thomas Curran, respondent, vs.. Peter Olso
and Knute r.. skaren, copartners as skaren
| , Tie plaintir was injured in the saloon Of tn
Sot Wnss ns he seeg Rfeg
@ on fire. % This is an action to recover damage
| for injuries caused thereby. Held;
First-That the defendants We're bound to Us
iawless persons whom they permitted to be
secondMThe evidence sustains the verdict t
the effect that the defendants were guilty {
negligence in the premtss and that the plainti
order afirmed. i, Start, 9. J.
- Land Case Settled.
In Hanson VS.. Rice, in which Congress
man Volstead and Lyndon A. Smith wer
pitted against each other, the forme
lieutenant governor wins, and new trl;
is granted. The case Is a controversy bf
tween owners Of land next to Swan LAX
in Kandiyohl county. The lower cou
held that where the meander line was IL
correct, the land between it and the lax
should be divided on east and west line
, The supreme court holds that from II
meander = line each owners bounda1
should run converging toward the cent
Of the lake, to give each owner riparis
rights j.. : -.s.,... w. .>.x. 49,.
This case will be precedent for other
and is also important from the fact tn
the court assumes this land to be priva
property, and not government lapd,
decided by the land office in a simll
case. The syllabus says: .2 ~. .-ea
john Hanson ct al. respondents, vs.. Albert
Rice ct al, defendants; Albert d. Rice ct a
appellants. ,> -s-. III W n- -.
F1rst-Where the neander line of an inlan
meandered, navgable lake is not boundary Ii
| Of the fractional lots or tracts of land abutti
thereon. the title Of contiguous owners exten
to all lands between such line and the shore
the lake. precisely as though it were the res,
e OF accretions or relictions and the beundarl
Of adjoining tracts, as to land beyond the mea
der line. are fixed by extending their side lint
on a detected course, from their intersecti
with the meander line, toward point in t
center of the lake. ~ 2zl p
Second-Where there is variance between t
meander line established by the surveyors
shown by the official plat Of the survey, and t
s. field notes. the former controls
Order reversed and new trial granted.
, 4 .E.sas.U BROWN, r.