The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-07-29
SUPREME COURT
THE STATE FAIR
CAN'T Be SUED
RULING OF SUPREME COURT ON
THE QUESTION.

Those Who Have Grievances for Al
| legged Wrongful Acts of the Agri-
cultural Society Must Appeal to the
Legislature for Relief-Other De-
cisionS.
AS department of the state gov
eminent, the Minnesota Agricultural
society, operating the state fair, can
not be sued. This ruling is made in
supreme court decision handed down
today. Samuel Berman, arrested last
September for an alleged violation of
the liquor law, sued the Agricultural
society and appealed when he lost his
case. The syllabus of the supreme
court decision says:
Samuel Berman, appellant VS.. Mime
sofa State Agricultural society, respon-
| dent:
First-Under Chapter 1875, Laws of 1903
wherein the state was given the title and
entire control C the property and funds
Of the previous State Agricultural society,
sumed by It's successor, the Minnesota
State Agricultural society was clothed
| with public duties, became department of
the state and immune from suits brought
for the wrongful conduct of it's servants
| Second-In an action to recover for a
wrongful arrest of a person visiting the
fair grounds by the servants of the Min
nesota State Agricultural society that as
ISOLATION was not the subject Of such an
action for damages, but that the relief for
such a wrong can only be redressed by
| the Legislature.
Third-The question Of the legality Of
the transfer of the original State Agricul-
tural society and its acceptance by the
state Is not open to attack In private
action, but can only be inquired into by
the original society or the state upon quo
| warranto.
| Fourth-The act et 1903, chapter t2e, Is
not subject to the objection that it is
special or class legislation.
Order affirmed. Lovely, J.
For Shipping Ducks.
Another important case, involving
the illegal shipment of several thou
sand wild ducks out of the state, was
included in today's decisions. Poole,
the driver who hauled the ducks, fails
to get relief, while Kerr, his employer,
who was also convicted, secures a re-
versal. The syllabus:
The state Of Minnesota, respondent. vs.
Robert Poole APPELLANT; the state of Min
nesota, respondent. VS.. William Kerr. ap-
pellant:
The defendants were convicted Of the
offense Of having in their possession wild
ducks with intent to sell them as de-
| fined and punished by section 45, chapter
$50, Laws 1903 Held:
First-The statute Is not unconstitu-
| tional for the alleged reason that 1t pro-
vides for the imposition Of excessive fines
and the infection Of cruel and unusual
punishments.
second-The court did not err by its re-
fusal to instruct the jury to return a YER
III Il
for 1.-THE evidence was sufficient to justify
his conviction. 1t was otherwise as to the
| defendant, X.
Third-The court did not err in its
rulings as to the admission Of evidence
nor in its instructions to the jury, ex
! cept as to the defendant, K. ~ 81
Judgment affirmed as to one of the de-
PENDANTS and reversed and a new stria1
granted as to the other. -Start,5C. ].
| An Attorney in Trouble.
| Charges against John T. Byrnes, a.
! Litchfe1d attorney. are sustained IN
| the following:
In the matter Of the application for the
! removal Of John T. Byrnes, an attorney
and counsellor Of the state Of Minnesota:
i Respondent found guilty of the charge
of misconduct in his office as an attorney
and counsellor at law, in the respects
stated in the opinion. Per Curiam.
A Linseed Oil Decision.
A per curiam decision handed
down by the supreme court today in
i the case of the state VS.. M. d. Will
I lians, upholds the law Of 1897 requir-
/ ing standard of purity for Hnseed
! oil. Williams, who was arrested in
Mower county, for selling boiled lin
seed oil below the legal test, attacked
the validity of the law and also
claimed that it only applied to raw
oil Inc Court et ho to that th bG doS
ers both kinds.
Another per cur!am decision en-
titled the city Of st. Paul VS.. Robbins,
follows the Hangbro case, upholding
the smoke ordinance.
Other Decisions
Town of Iosco, respondent vs.. the
board Of county commissioners of Waseca
county, appellant:
First-Where a chairman of the town
board Of commissioners, upon information
of the secretary Of the state board Of
health, received information that an cpl
dernic of smallpox was prevalent in his
town, and incurred expenses to quaran-
tine the persons afflicted herewith, but
without receiving specific authority there.
for from the town board of health, and
the expenses were audited and paid by
such board, the want of authority to Or
der the quarantine was sufficiently rati-
fed to authorize reimbursement from the
county, under the statutes Of this state
In force at the time.
Seoond-Where a person In the town
whose residence was quarantined under
the health laws is responsible for expenses
In attention to his personal affairs during
the quarantine, the same Is not a town
charge nor the subject of reimbursement
from the county.
Third-Evidence. considered and held
that the evidence sustains the findings Of
fact which support the conclusion Of law,
except In one particular instance, where
personal services were rendered for an
Individual who was subjected to the quar-
antine.
Order modified. Lovely, j.
M. W. Mcdonald, appellant, VS.. Louise
H. Boyhe ct al, respondents:
Order reversed and new trial granted