The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-01-13
MINNEAPOLIS NAN
FIGHTING A TOWN
L. L. MERLIN WANTS SUPREME
COURTS ASSISTANCE.
Miller Asserts that Village of Brooten
Is in Illegal Competition with Him
Says President of Council Is Prophet
or and Town Marshal Is Manager of
Business. $50

L. L. Merlin, a Minneapolis miller, has
Injunction restraining the village Off
GERS of Brooton, Stearns county, from
continuing in the -four business, alleg-
ing that it is illegal for municipality
to compete with an individual. A year
ago Judge Searles, in the district court
at st. Cloud, decided against Mr.. Ner-
lin on the ground that, while it was
shown that John BONNER, president Of
the village council, was proprietor, and
the town marshal was manager OF the
business which was conducted in a room
in the town hall, there was no record
showing that these officials were acting
with authority of the council. Mr..
Merlin asserts now that there are rec
ords to prove this doubted point, and
expects the higher court to grant the
relief he asks.
Mr.. Merlin said this morning that he
established a business at Brooten in
1898. and that soon after the preslde1nt
! of the village council started in the
same line, apparently with the inten-
ton Of driving him out. But while
! he might have withdrawn from any field
which proved improbable, he Wouldn1 t
be driven out, and so Mr.. Merlin began
the fight. The odds, however, were
against him. The president, OF the
council was a banker, with plenty OF
money, and this he soaked in the new
venture, making prices Whle a1 the met MIN
I 'There is evidence said Mr.. Ner'
lin, "that the president Of the coun
eli paid no money to the village cor;
poration for the use OF the town nal
room where he carried on the Hour busl
ness; that when the business was begun
the council raised the salary OF the toWI
marshal and instructed him to assist
in the new business and that the coun
Gil, on one or two occasions, VoteC
money to make up shortages IN the
flour business. Also, there is nothing
on the village officers books to show
that any profits which may have &C
crued from that business were PAID u
the city,, We have been wondering
where they went.
A Boston Precedent.
HAbout a year ago I read in Tn!
Minneapolis Journal an article Whlcl
told that the city of Boston had en-
gagged in the coal business with a VleV
. to giving fuel to the poor OF the clt.
2 at a lower rate than they could get j.
the ordinary channels. 1t was chart
able business entirely. The art1cl
l said that the coal dealers at once pro
+. tested and restrained the city, fror
e continuing in that business, the law be
: inc on their side. I had our LAY
:. looked up and finding it substantially
the same as the Massachusetts law, ae
J, cided to begin action Tor Protectlo
: against the unfair a ana tllegaA eonlpe'
- ut seems to me that the village J
= criminally' liable, too. The records d
not indicate that the funds paid in b
o the taxpayers have been ,propeerl
e ouarded and used. And besides tina
n The action of the council and it's pres
l.. dent has robbed the farmers and cit
,, zens of something they urged me to pr
q vide for them when l went into buslnes
,there-a -four exchange, where the
: could ctvi bring their grain and have
;r n return, Now everybody knows tt
l. unjust competition there and nobod
]. will buy me out.'