The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-05-08
LAST CHANGE GONE.
The Supreme Court Denies Herbert
Gallehugh's Motion for
New Trial.
The Indictment Against Timothy
Scanlon Is Held to Be
Valid.

".
murder In the second degree for shooting
Charles Collins. a colored cook at the
3 San Angelo hotel, is denied new trial
by the supreme court. The decision was
handed down to-day affirming the order
of the Hennepin county district court
Gallehugh will have to serve out his sem
tence at Saltwater. The syllabus of the
decision is follows:
State of Minnesota. respondent VS.. Herbert c.
Gtallehugh: appellant.
murder of 6. The homicidal act was admitted,
but excused upon the justification of sef,defense.
ton that 6. had grossly insulted his wife and
proposed to inaict personal .chastisement upon
Sign to take his life, he discovered that Re
him to believe that his own life was in danger:
and Killed 6. Testimony for the. defense re-
ssiyed which supported this claim There There va, Was
( was unarmed. that defendant was in no dan
ger Of sreVos bodily harm f from fo deceased dec
ipon this eoniict. held, that the verdict finding
Is g of IN pe e
sustain conviction in criminal case
the deceased he left the place of the homicide.
Shortly afterwards the police arrived upon the
ana wife hen 10
that the victim of the homicide had knife in
ton; this was excluded: held, that such nara
ton of past transaction was not part of the
Third-witnesses for the state who testified
that they had the homicide were asked on
rcbuttal for the purpose of impeachment whether
when asked who saw the shooting, by the police
officers upon their arrival Immediately thereafter.
one OF them had pointed to another person and
silent. Held. that this evidence was not
witnesses sought to be impeached. reasonably
tending to contradict their account of what they
had previously described concerning the homi-
ored man, whom it was claimed had insulted de-
in his behalf ie that he had not stated
that ''he would lieve kill black devil as
what he did say with reference thereto, in a con,
versation had With his wife on the afternoon
Who heard this this we're tp Permitted to
state that defendant did make the obnox ous
Il statement referred to: held that the omission Of
this evidence was proper rebuttal and tended to
show the intent of defendant
Fifth-Upon motion for trial affdavts
offered and receive to show that of
the Jurors had expressed hostile feelings to the
defendant which would have properly justified
were fully met and answered by the affidavit
of the juror himself which presented issue
its in n o of this
In favor of the state.
Order affirmed. Lovely. ].
Scanlon Must Stand Trial.
The Henepin county court is sustained
In refusing to quash the indictment of
Timothy Scanlon. who will have to stand
trial for the alleged larceny Of vouchers,
bills and other papers from the freight
office of the Minnea polls & st. Louis
company. The claim was made that the
items described in the indictment were
not personal property. The decision is by
Judge Collins. who says in the syllabus:
State Of Minnesota plaintiff, vs. Timothy NJ.
A .'receipted voucher may be the subject Of
larceny under the penal code of this state, state
Tax Sale Ruling.
An important tax decision is made in
a case coming up from Morrison county.
II 1t follows up the decision in the famous
Kipp case. In the Coates case decided
to-day the state bid in quarter section
of land under the 1899 law for $6O6 80
the full amount Of previous taxes. inter
est etc. Later under the statutes Of 1894
one forty was sold for s25.61 and the rest
of the land for $500. The original own
er then offered to redeem for that
amount. The county auditor refused tc
accept anything less than the total taa
charges. but the court ordered him tt
grant the certificate. The supreme cour
holds that altho the sale was made under
AZ a different statute from that settled II
the Kipp case, the same rule applies.
Father Is On Probation.
James c. Anderson will not get pos
session of his two children, Hazel ant
Is Annie, for at least two years. They will
+. remain during that time in the care 0
their uncle and aunt at Staples, to whom
they were given by the mother on he
death bad. At the end of that time, say
the supreme court If the father and step
mother show that they can properly car
for the children, the order may be modi
fed.
statfels Gets New Trial.
A new trial is granted Joseph Staffels
who was sentenced to so days in jail TO
running blind pig on the state fai
grounds The error on which the lowe
court is reversed is the county attorney
reference to the fact that the defendan
q did not go on the stand.
May Enforce the Contract
The Keystone Manufacturing compan
has not complied with the Somerville law
I but is allowed to collect a. debt arisin
! under a contract executed before tn
enactment of the law. The case come
up from Renville county.
A per curiam decision affirms the judg
nent in four cases brought by Napoleo
I Ramgren against Otis Staples, fror
St Washington county, for malicious prose
] cution. The cases were all won by tn
defendant.
I Other decisions to-day were:
Stearns County.
Noah D; TAYLOR RESPONDENT, Order Of Raj
way Conductors, appellants.
Order affirmed.
iss Mobiles County.
". NJ. Evans. respondent, VS.. Peter Thompson
Il appellant.
Judgment affirmed.
/ Cass County.
Philo Powell, respondent, vs.. George G. Bard!
4 Order reversed and new trial granted.
Lac qu! Pare County.
i Charles B. Reith. as Trustee Of the Estate .
John Albrecht. Bankrupt, appellant VS.. Anr
4 Albrecht respondent
Order affirmed
ST. Louis County.
II Thomas G. Coffin, respondent, VS.. William Graf
Il appellant.
q, Order affirmed.
Becker County
a Dora Fredenburg appellant. VS.. Gottlteb Fac
IS etal., respondents Order affirmed.
a Blue Earth County.
Nellie Heaton Wall. ct al. appellants '
Herman Meilke ct al, respondents. Ord
~ affirned.
Washington County
Albert Deppe. plaintiff Franklin c. Ford al
l Addie NJ Ford. respondents. vs. w. S. Gilley.
III receiver. appellant. Order affirmed.
1 Ramsey County.
sS9 Frederick Il. Camp. respondent vs. Minneso
Il Canning company, appellant. Order affirmed.