Bismarck daily tribune., 1903-12-04

The following decisions have been
handed down by the supreme court:
Catherine Timmins, appellant, VS..
Peter Russell, respondent;
1. Before the owner of land who
has agreed to convey the same by
contract of sale specifying the man
ner in which the land shall be titled,
the number of acres to be sown to
wheat, that grantee shall pay the
taxes and providing that in case of
failure to perform the conditions by
defendant, plaintiff may elect to de
clare the contract cancelled and at
an end time being of the essence of
the contract, can cancel the contract
for noncompliance Herewith he must
proceed promptly to declare his cleo
ton to cancel on discovery of de
faults. and if he does not proceed
promptly to do so. he will be deemed
to have waived his right to insist that
the vendee has lost his rights in
with his contract.
9 Evidence in the case considered
and found to show waiver by vendor
of his right to cancel the contract.
(Syllabus by the Court)
Appeal from a judgment of the dis
trict court of Sargent county; Hon
John F. Cowan, Judge, sitting by re
quest.
Barnett & Reese, for appellant.
]. f. Bishop and Charles f. Wolf,
for respondent.
Affirmed Opinion by Morgan, j.
Appeal Dismissed.
The Bank of Park River, corpora
ton. respondent, VS.. The Town of
Norton, a civil municipal corporation,
appellant.
l. In money demand action. tes-
timony defendant moved for di-
rected verdict. which was denied.
Plaintiff then moved for a directed
verdict. The court then asked each
attorney individually do you stand
on your notion" Each responded
affirmatively. The court then dis
charged the jury and made findings
of fact and conclusions of law in fav-
or of plaintiff without objection by
either party. Held. that the attorneys
will be deemed to have consented to
a trial by the court and to the dis
charge of the jury.
.. The defendants attorney in the
case stated. moved for new trial, al
leging errors of law as grounds there
for. Held that such motion is no'
provided for in cases tried under sec
ton $780, Revised Codes, and tha'
an appeal from such order will not be
entertained.
2, On appeals in cases tried un
der section $500, supra, errors OF la"
occurring at the trial will not be re
viewed for the correction thereon. pu'
only in connection with a review OF
the facts on the merits.
(Syllabus by the Court)
Appeal from an order of the dis
trict court of Walsh county; Hon. w
S. Lauder judge, sitting by request
f. r. Sinkler for appellant
II. A. Libby, for respondent
Appeal dismissed Morgan. }.
Lower Court Reversed.
F. A. Patrick & Company, a cor
poration, appellant, VS.. The Crane
Forks Mercantile Company, corpor
alton, respondent.
Where goods are purchased by al
agent without disclosing his agency o
the name of his principal, the latte
may be held liable for the debt, whel
discovered.
The mortgage Of a stock OF genera
merchandise entered into contrac
with the mortgagor for the continua
tion OF the business, and embodie
the same in his chattel mortgage un
der the terms of the contract, IN
business was to be conducted by tn
mortgagor as the agent of the mort
gagee, and under the contract ne ma
authority, and it was his duty to max
purchases of goods to replenish tn
stock. The plaintiff sold and de'iV
cred goods to the mortgagor withou
knowledge of the existence of the con
tract. It is held, in an action to re
cover the purchase price of the good
SO sold from the defendant mor'
gagee. as an undisclosed prlncipa
that the trial court erred in grantln