The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1903-02-27

to ajority of votes cast at last gener-
al election, the auditor shall proceed to
call meeting OF the county commission
ers, post notices. etc. And because the
supreme court held that county seat
election held under this law was valid,
the law. has stood, without amendment
of the inconsistent provisions, ever since.
L presume the legislators feared they
would spoil it if they tried to make it
teonslstent.Sand l am rather disposed
TO commend their caution.
Some years ago an Illinois state SEN
ator introduced bill providing for the
eradication of e-u-c-k.l-e burrs. The
passage, when it was discovered there
was no such thing as cuckle burr. This
incident fastened to the senator the nick
name of "Cuckle burr Frew,''-in place
OF the more stately name of calvin II.
Frew.''
The same state had for many years,
(and l think still has) on it's statute
book, in its drainage law, a provision
that where man constructed a ditch
wholly upon his own land, he could dig
an open ditch or tile ditch as he might
choose. Surely very generous provi-
sion.
The statutes of our own state as to the
sale of real estate of minorseor decedents
provide about ten things which shall be
Further on the same. act provides that
if five of these ingss be done, the other
requirements; il Nding the petition. no.
tice of hearing o. the same, and the
still stand. I might cite similar instanc-
es ad infinitum. If time, space and pa
thence would permit.
1t is utterly impossible for any man
to tell how much of superfiuity there may
be IN the opinions and decisions of courts
of last resort: But as large per centage
biguous, uncertain and ill advised statu-
tory laws, I deem it best to give the
number of volumes of reports Cor de-
cisions), of courts of last resort in the
Sfnf No % u,
resort. will not technically apply to
few of those courts. For instance, I'LL
nois has a supreme court and appellate
Se court "A usually lying from the
two courts, whose decisions are publish
ed in book form. Texas four, while New
York breaks the record and publishes her
reports under ten different names. Not
that she has ten courts of different
grades.-but the decisions of some courts
are divided up as common law reports
and Chancery reports. though the same
But where a state has two or more
courts whose decisions are thus publish
ed, (and they are but few, the decisions
in this sense. they are practically courts
of last resort. With this explanation
here is the full list:
Aiaba% ea $50 Volumes Arzona, i AT.
Connecticut, 81; gakota. (before division
of the state), 6; Delaware, 81; District of
Columbia. A.; Florida, AZ; Georgia, 49,,
diana. 1.-TWO COURTS. 1874; iowa, lis; In
dian Territory 2; Kansas, "a; Kentucky
los; Louisiana, 10; Maine, 95; Maryland,
1.-TWO courts, 1875: Massachusetts,, 1871;
Michigan. l$4; Minnesota. IS; lMississip-
pi, 81; Missouri, (two courts), 261; Mon
tana, 25; Nebraska. So; Nevada, &c; New
Hampshire, II; New Jersey. -(two COURTS,
app eoar s HeY North afh ea za5Gas
100; North Dakota, 10; Ohio, (three
COURTS, 17e; Oklahoma, 10; Pennsylvania,
(tW0 GourtS2 4ss Rhode Island ~ South
nessee, IA; Texas, 0our courts ,175;
Utah, 23;Virginia, los; Washington ter
ritory and state), 30; West Virginia, So;
Wise ms e5 JIG; Wyoming, 10. Making
of the principal federal courts, and we
have the total Of ,261 volumes of reports,
any and all the decisions of which may
be used as precedents and guides in cases
in any of the several states, so far as
their principles apply to the case in ques-
ton, unless they be antagonistic to the
rulings of the courts in the state where
such case is pending. And when a law
yer has case involving questions not
yet passed upon by the supreme court of
his own state, he has a pretty wide range
TO cover to ind out what the courts of
other states may have held or decided
in relation to the subject. Many of the
decisions contained in those volumes are
no longer the law, and are simply so
T.,
will establish principle, or base one upon
precedent, and follow it for years. The
court may then, after all, conclude the
principle is wrong, and over-rule itself
Then all the decisions Ringing upon this
principle as formerly declared are use
less. Also, often a large number of de-
cisions are based upon some statute,
which enterprising legislature repeats
And with such repeal, all the findings and
decisions of courts based upon it, Ego a
glimmering:" We have a statute in this
state making the liability of railroad
sustained by the public where the rail-
road is not fenced. Under this law,
brought an action some years ago for
little child. While the case was pending.
the supreme court of this state decided
that said law applied to damages to
stock, but not to children, however
only act of negligence ]. could possibly
prove, 1 was obliged to dismiss the case.
After many years, and after holding as
apore statea IN aa num1er OF cases 1.-THE the
was worth as much, and entitled to as
much care and protection as calf, and
reversed itself. My little former client
was established. So the books are full
of dead matter caused by the repeal of
statutes, and by the court overruling it
seeker after legal knowledge through
precedent and decision, is very apt to be
mislead, if he does not run down his
ca ses pretty carefully.
l can suggest no remedy for the large
and ever increasing amount of law in
shape of decision and precedent, except
so far as they may be affected by reforms
in the mattre of prolific legislation. Many
such reforms we cannot look for or hope
for the near future. But there are certain
things that might be done in Minnesota,
some of which we hope to see dones at
least in part. And our comments as. to
MinnaSOta will .annlV' to other
states. We have not had a revision of
the Minnesota statutes since 1866. There
have been several compilations of the
statutes and some such compilations
have been legalized by the legislature.
as stating the law of the state. But what
we need is radical revision. There is