The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1934-03-17
ALLEN CHALLENGES
MORATORIUM ACTION
IN court DECISION
Orders Defendant to vacate
6urlsigh Farm; Says Ex-
ecutivs No Fairy

Governor LANCER can't play put
and take with his moratorium pro-
clamation In Police Magistrate Ed
ward 8. Aliens court.
Allen. in . decision ordering judy
raent and immediate possession Of q
farm in eastern Burleigh county for
Mrs. Dina Peterson, said the pen Of
the governor Is not magic wand, nor
Is he the good fairy, who, with q ges-
ture, can take away and give back
and take away again the rights Of q
citizen who Is attempting to enforce
those rights in the courts"
The decision was given In case
that created considerable attention
some time ago. owing to the fact that
enc governor had given Attorney Al
sin strutz. who bought his law busi'
ness about year ago, letter in
which he lifted the moratorium and
then gave Usher L Burdick, attorney
for the defendant, j. r. johnson, q
letter the next day putting the mora
forum in effect again and ordering
the court to dismiss the proceed
ings with costs to the plaintiff"
Facts brought In the action show
that Mrs. Peterson bought the prop
e-ty involved at q foreclosure sale on
January 10. 1892, and was given q
4kerfffs deed. johnson. former own
er Of the farm, refused to move Oft
the promises and she brought an &c
Ttlon through Attorney Strutz to Sc
cure possession. Burdick appeared
for johnson and pleaded that the
moratorium stopped Mrs. Peterson
from taking possession Of the land
and asked that his client be given
time to secure . loan and buy the
property back.
Governor Lifts Moratorium
Strutz then produced letter from
the governor waving the moratorium
In the case and authorizing Strut
to bring the action.
Burdick asked for time to prepare
q reply. Two days later he filed .
written answer in his motion to dis
miss the action and with 1t . letter
from the governor cancclling the let
ter to Strutz and part Of which Allen
says in his decision. read as follows:
and O direct further proceedings
to be dismissed, with costs to the
plaintiff"
1.-THE court Allen continues, then
asked Burdick II Governor LANCER
meant to direct this court how to
make its decision, and Burdick ask
ed the court to strike out the words
quoted, and pen was run through
those words
Allen recites In the decision that
he granted additional time to Bur-
dicks client to secure . loan to buy
back the property, postponing action
from time to time from Nov. n to
March S, when he was told by Mrs.
Peterson that she wanted possession
OF the property, and johnson not
having made what he considered pro-
per attempts to secure = loan, he Is
sued an order complying with her
demand.
Must 10 l,onsistent
In commenting on the case Allen
says In part: IT it should Be con-
ceded that the moratorium would af-
feet this case then would the gov
ernor, after having declared : gen
eral moratorium, have the right ia
LIFT same, Of could he legally waive
same in any individual Or specific
case in which he individually should
deem It proper or might personally
or otherwise desire? The court
thinks not.
And II the governor could LIT OF
waive the general moratorium in q
specific case, could he then, Is he
might see fit, place the moratorium
back?- The court thinks not.
The court holds that II the gem
eral moratorium Of the governor did
affect the rights Of the plaintiff, then
the governor had no right by stroke
Of the pen to waive those rights, and
then BY another stroke Of the pen
take those rights away from the plain
tiff again. The pen Of the goverl1os
y NOT . magic wand. nor Is 10 thu
good fairy who, with . gesture. can
take away and give hack and then
take away again the rights Of : citi-
ZEN who 4 attempting to enforce
those rights Ia the courts.s Nor car
the governor compel this court r
comply with the request Of tho plain.
tiff and render judgment herein"
Allen held that the moratorium u
the governor had no effect o. thu
case anyhow. 6 tho foreclosure sall
had been made before tn n0tatori.