DOCGLAS V. DE LAITTRE.
DOUGLAS v. DE LAITTRE. (Circuit Court, D. Minnesota, Third Diyision. October 31, 1892.)
DEED-PowEH OJ<' ATTOR:'i1EY.
An irrevocable power of attorney to sell and convey land, coupled with a release to the attol'l1ey of the grantor's claim to the proceeds of any sales made by the attorney, does not vest in the attorney the title to the land.
At Law. Suit in ejectment brought by George Douglas against John De I..aittre. Judf,'1llent for defendant. "V. C. Goforth, for plaintiff. Jackson & Atwater, (E. C. Chatfield, of counsel,) for defendant. KELSOK, District Judge. This is a suit in ejectment, and a jury being waived, per stipulation filed, it is tried to the court. The following facts are found: That the land in question' was entered in 1873, and patents therefor issued. Each of the patentees, in 1873, duly executed and delivered to one George "v. Chowen, for a valuable consideration, instruments in writing, one of which is here given as follows:
"Know all men by these presents, that I, .Tames McDonald, of the county of H:11l1Sey, in the of Minnesota, have made, constitutpd, and appointed, by these presents do make, constitute, and appoint, Georg'e W. Chowcn, of H('lllwpin county, in the state of Minnesota, Illy true and lawful a ttOl'lH'Y, for me, and in my name, place, and stead, to enter into and upon. amI take possession of, any and all pieces and of land, or the timber and other mat0l'ials thereon, in the state of Minnesota, which I now own, 01' which I llIay lwreaftcr acquire or become seised of, or in which I may now or be in any way interested, amI to prosecute and dcfend any and all suits at law in the courts of said state of Minnesota, or of the United States, rdating to the title to said bnds; :Hul I further authorize and empower my said attorney to grant, bargain, sell. demise, leaRe, convey, and confirm said land, or any part thereof, or the right to sever and rpmove timbpr and other materials therefrom, to sueh person 01' persons, and for SUdl prices, as to my said attorney shall seem meet and propel', and thereupon to execute, and deliver, iu my UllIlle and ou my behalf, any dcpds, leases, contracts, or other instrullJents, sealed 01' unsealed, amI with or without covenants and warranty, as shall to him seem meet, to carry out the foregoing powers, with full power to my said attorney to appoint a l'mllstitute or substitutes to perform any of the acts which my said attorney is by this instrUlIH'ut HuthorizPd to perforlll, with the right to revoke suell appointments at pleasure. Hereby giving and granting to my said attorney and his said substitutes full power to (10 and perform proper or eonvenicut in earrying out and executing said powers, as fully as I could do if personally present, and ading in tlw premises. And in consideration of the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars to me in hand paid by my said' at the ensealing hereof, the receipt wlH'reof I do hereby acknowledge, I do further appoint and ordain that my said attorney is hereby irrevo,ahly vested with the powers ahove granted, and I do hereby forever rpnounee all right in me to rpvoke any of said powers, or to appoint any person other than my said attorney to execute the same, and forever all right on my part personally to do any of the acts which my said attorney is llPl'p\)y authorized to perform, and do hereby release unto my said attoruPy all my claim to any of the procN'ds of liny sale, lease, or contract relative to said land, or timber or material thereon. And I hereby revoke all powers of attorney by me heretOfore milde, authorizing any person to do any act relative to any part of said lands. Hereby ratifying and confirming what·,
soever my said attorney, or any substitute appointed I))' him, may do in premises by virtue hereof. Inwitne/lS WhereQf, I ,have hereunto set my hand and seal this 22d day of April, A. D. '1873. ' "James :McDona1d. [SeaLl "Signed, sealed, and delivered in presence of "Archy :McDonald. '''Dana White." "State of Minn:esota, county of Ramsey-ss.: On this 22d dayof April, A. D. one thousand eight hundred and seventy-three, before me personally appeared James Me-Donald, persollnlly lmowl! te. me to be the indivilluul described in, ant:). who executed" the foregoing instrument, anll uelmowletlgetl to me tllut he executed the same freely amI voluntarily, and for the usei-l and purposes therein mentioned. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official senl on the day and year in this certificate first above written. Dana 'White, [Notarial Seal.] "Notary Public, Ramsey Co., Minn."
Subsequently, Chowen, as attorney in fact for said patentee, executed certain warranty deeds to one Rufus J. Baldwin, and the latter on December 1, A. D. 1875, duly executed a mortgage on the property to Henry A. Stinson. All of the instruments above mentioned were duly recorded. The mortgage to Stinson was duly foreclosed under a power of sale in said mortgage, and after legal notice, as required by the of Minnesota, and the property therein described was sold by the proper sheriff on July 18, 1881, to the defendant, John De Laittre, and a certificate of sale duly executed by the sheriff, and recorded. On July 17, 1882, George 'V. Chowen made a quitclaim deed to George Douglas, the plaintiff. No redemption was ever made from the foreclosll1'e sale. It is claimed that the instruments executed by the patentees to George W. Chowen conveyed the fee in the land to him, and that the deed to Baldwin, executed by George W. Chowen as attorn,,-y in fact, through which the defendant claims title, is a nullity, and void. These instruments executed and delivered to Chowen are destitute of any greater legal effect than the creation of an irrevo-cable power of attorney, the fee of the land remaining in the pat· ·entees. Chowen, executing the deeds to Baldwin as attorney in fact for the patentees, conveyed the fee in the land therein de· ,scribed; and the defendant, claiming through Baldwin, has the title, and is entitled to a judgment. Let judgment be entered ac.cordingly.
In re OHIBBON. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circllit. May 23. IS!l3.)
CUSTOMS DUTIES-CLASSIFICA'PON- F,lAN.DKEHCIII EFS.
(fnder the t::triff act pf October 1, 1890, par. 373, imposing a duly of 60 per cent. ad valorem upcinthe goods therein enumernted, the provision fOl' "emtm;>iderl;'d and. hemstitched handkerchiefs" COVers only handkerchiefs which are both ,embroidered and hemstitched, and these words cannot be. titken distributively, so as to include handkerchiefs which are embroidered. ouly,or only. ,53. Fed. Rep.' 78, affirmed.
Appeal from the Circuit .court of the United States for the Southern Division of New York.