The Saint Paul globe., 1904-06-18

q
terror department. has no jurisdiction to
determine controversies between individ
ual claimants concerning the title or right
to the possession thereof
Railway company VS.. Olson, 81 Mimi. III.
distinguished.
Order reversed. Brown, ].
Writ in Mineral Lease Case Quashed
In quashing the writ in the So
called mineral lease case, the title OF
the case being the State of Minnesota
ex rel. Richard f. Grant, relator- Pc
titioner VS.. Samuel G. Iverson. COM
missioner of the land office, state OF
Minnesota, the court by Justice Lewis
says:
The action of the state auditor, ex-
of1cio commissioner of lands, in refusing
to grant an application for mineral lease
of certain lands lying under the bed OF
meandered lake constituting public waters
is not renewable by writ of certiorari.
The state auditor alleges the writ was
improyidently issued. The auditor refus-
ed for the purpose of inviting litigation.
and not as final opinion by the auditor.
| The case was submitted on its merits.
The attorney general waived objections TO
the validity of the writ, owing to Its i'm
portanee: but owing to its importance we
determined to pass upon that, and the
conclusions we have reached make 1t
necessary to consider the merits of the
case.
Under the mining lease laws the land
commissioners is not required to determine.
as legal proposition, whether the state
has title to the land applied for nor is
he required to pass upon the nature of
the states title. He is not by the act
vested with any judicial or quasi-judicial
powers In this case the land did not
belong to the state, but if the commits
sioner determined as matter of law that
der public waters, or if it did, that the act
referred to did not authorize mineral
leases for such minerals then 1t may be
said he assumed to act in quasi -1u-.
dicial- manner. But the right and title of
the state. and of the riparian owners, in
respect to minerals lying under public
waters: is complex legal question and
can only be determined by the application
of legal principles. The constitution and
the laws have definitely referred the So
luton of such problems to the courts.
There is nothing in the act to indicate an
intention on the part of the legislature to
transfer such authority from the courts
to the land commissioner. 1t is not ma
terlal what reason the officer may have
given for refusing to issue a lease, and
1t can make no difference If he acted ar
bitrarily in the premises. The decisive.
question Is not what he may nave as
sumed to do. but what power was con-
ferred upon him. We are of the opinion
that the duties of the land commissioner
under the law specified. are purely minis
terial and the writ must be quashed
In remanding the case of the State
of Minnesota, plaintiff, VS.. E. Boehm,
defendant, to the Redwood county
court for further proceedings, the
court sustains the validity of the wild
mustard law.
Of Interest to Sportsmen
Sportsmen will be interested in the
decision written by Justice Lewis in
the case of the L. Realty Company, re-
spondent, VS.. Ole Johnson, appellant,
involving the right of a hunter to shoot
game flying over a public highway.
The case went up from Ramsey coun-
ty, where it was held that a property
owner in granting easements for a
public highway over his land did not
surrender to the public his right to
foster and protect wild game on his
own land, and the public does not ac-
quire right to kill the game when ii
flies. over the highway. The suit was
originally brought to preserve the
game on property owned by the COM
pany at Forest Lake, and known as
the Lamprey pass. The syllabus in the
case follows:
Other Decisions
Other cases decided yesterday were:,
John w. Harris. respondent, VS.. c. E..
richardson. appellant.
Order affirmed Lovely, J.
Mary E. Robinson. respondent, VS.. North
western National Life Insurance Com
pany, appellant.
Order affirmed. Lovely. ].
William H Shea, respondent. VS.. Cloauet
Lumber Company and H. C. Hornby,
Order reversed. Brown. J,
Frank W. Foreman and M. Louise Par
ker, respondents, VS.. Henry j. Saunders,
appellant.
Order affirmed. Douglas, J.
State ex. rel, Henry G. soucheray. ap-
pellant, VS.. Edward G. Krahmer, as
County, Auditor of Ramsey County,
Judgment affirmed. Douglas, ].
Joseph Studer, M. ]. Studer and Joseph
s. sfudsr ds5udeg Tand de9Partners gaItIe as The w j.
kenney n. Dyson, respondent
Order affirmed Lovely. ].
Cain Calmenson, appellant. VS.. Equitable
Mutual Fire Insurance Company of Min
neapol1s, Mimi, respondent.
Order affirmed. Lewis. J
Iver johnson, respondent. VS.. Crookston
Order affirmed. Lovely. ].
E. S. Reishus and Ingebright Lee, respond
ents, VS.. Willmar & Sioux Falls Rail
way Company, appellant.
Order affirmed. Start. c. J.
Fred A. Gross, Albert F. Gross and Louis
II. Gross, respondents, vs. Gustav E.
Hafemann, appellant
Judgment affirmed. Start G. r
| Straw & Ellsworth Manufacturing Com
pa1y, plaintiffs appellant VS.. L. D. Kill
bourne Boot and Shoe Company, de-
fendant: III. p. Grouse ct al, defend
ants-appellants, Richard A. Burget,
respondent
Order affirmed. Brown T
State of Minnesota ex REL, Monitor Drill
Company, corporation and William
G. Young, REALTORS, vs. The District
Court of Wright County, Mimi, Hon,
Arthur N Giddings. Judge of said
Court, and James J. Erickson. Clerk
thereof. respondents
Order to show cause discharged.
CRUSADE AGAINST
THE VAULTS PROCEEDS