Volume 55 — Minnesota Reports

Appeal by defendant, Levi L. Cook, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Charles M. Pond, J., made January 27, 1893, denying his motion for a new trial. On October 13, 1887, defendant Cook leased to Byron Towne the premises on the southwest corner of Hennepin Avenue and Fourth Street in Minneapolis, one hundred and twenty three (123) feet front on the Avenue by one hundred and eighteen (118) feet deep.

<p>Appeal by the Minneapolis, St. Paul and Sault Ste. Marie Railway Company, from the judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., entered Januarj^ 25, 1893.</p> <p>The Farwell Farmer’s Warehouse Association on February 12, 1892, presented to the Railroad and Warehouse Commission of this state (Laws 1887, ch. 10, § 9) a complaint against the above named Railway Company that it was refused a spur track to its warehouse at Farwell. The Railway Company answered March 1, 1892, that the warehouse stood 350 feet from its nearest switch and sidetrack, that the Warehouse Company did not own the land where the warehouse stood and had no right to build thereon, that to construct a sidetrack to the warehouse would cost $1,000 and that the business it was likely to furnish would not justify the expense. On April. 1, 1892, a hearing was had before the Commission and evidence given and the Commission decided that the Railway Company was guilty of unjust and illegal discrimination against the Association and had violated the Statute, and it ordered the Railway Company to construct the track within ninety days. The Company appealed to the District Court of Hennepin County, where it was submitted October 24,1892, on the pleadings and the report of the Commission without other evidence. After argument the Court affirmed the decision of the Commission and judgment was entered accordingly. The Complaint was made under Laws 1887, ch. 10, § 2, subd. b., which is a substantial copy of the first clause of Section Three (3) of the Act of Congress of February 4, 1887, ch. 104 (24 U. S. Stat. p. 379).</p> <p>Whatever may be the duty of carriers in the way of furnishing public facilities of any sort, it would seem clear that they cannot be compelled to go beyond this. The sidetrack covered by the judgment is for the sole use and benefit of the respondent. There is no pretense that it is in any sense a facility for the benefit and use of the public, like the sidetracks covered by the second proviso to the act of 1887, ch. 10, § 3, subd. c. The Railway Company is thus required to give up to the private use of plaintiff so much of its right of way as may be required for this sidetrack, and besides this to forever dedicate to the use of the plaintiff an amount of money sufficient for the construction and maintenance of the sidetrack. Certainly this is taking the property of the Company for a private use. But the property of the Company cannot in any maimer or on any pretext be taken for a private use without the consent of the owner, nor can it be taken for a public use without making just compensation. State v. Chicago, M. de St. P. Ry. Co., 36 Minn. 402.</p> <p>The Railway Company has furnished to the public at Farwell ample sidetrack facilities for the accommodation of every individual in the exercise of every right which he holds in common with the public. What the plaintiff demands and what the court has ordered the defendant to furnish is, in effect, the right to an individual sidetrack which it would be preposterous to assume is the right of every person, because this in principle would require the Railway Company to furnish as many sidetracks as there might be individuals composing the public; if they saw fit to make the demand.</p> <p>It may be suggested that the order complained of is really to sub-serve public convenience. In view of this, we call attention to State v. Noyes, 47 Me. 189; Nelson v. Vermont Central Ry. Co., 26 Yt. 717.</p> <p>cited State v. District Court, 42 Minn. 249; State v. Missouri P. By. Co., 29 Neb. 550; Mayor éc. v. Norwich & W. R. Co., 109 Mass. 103.</p>

Appeal by plaintiff, the Second National Bank of Grand Forks from an order of the District Court of Polk County, Ira B. Mills, J., made September 16, 1892, denying- its motion for a new trial. The defendant, William C. Sproat on January 14, 1887, borrowed of Howres & Dwyer two hundred and fifty dollars and made and delivered to them his promissory note by which he promised to pay that firm or order on June 1, 1887, that amount with interest.

Appeal by defendants, Dwight G. Cutler and Edward A. Gilbert, from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, Calvin L. Brown, J., made February 27, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial. Thomas J. Nicol of Duluth being insolvent, on October 7, 1892, made a general assignment under Laws 1881, ch. 148, to the plaintiff, William E. Covey of all his non-exempt property, in trust for the benefit of his creditors.

Appeal by defendants, Rebecca Raab and Jacob B. Raab, her husband, from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, Josiah D. Ensign, J., made February 8, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial. Charles A. Stewart was a physician and surgeon practicing Ms profession at Duluth. He was employed by defendants to visit, treat and perform certain surgical operations upon the wife, Rebecca.

Appeal by defendant, Israel W. Cone, one of the defendants, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Henry G. Hicks, J., made December 1, 1892, denying his motion to dismiss the action. On June 9, 1891, Andrew S. Keyes presented his petition in the District Court, stating that George F. Plympton of Massachusetts was of unsound mind and had there been adjudged a lunatic and had no general or testamentary guardian in this state.

Appeal by plaintiff, James F. Brown, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Henry G. Hicks, J., made March ■20, 1893, sustaining a demurrer to his complaint.

Appeal by plaintiff, the Prince Investment Company, from an order of the District Court of McLeod County, Francis Gadwell, J., made March. 21, 1893, sustaining demurrers to its complaint. On May 12, 1864, the United States owned the southwest quarter of Section thirty-one (31), T. 116, R. 27, in McLeod County.

Appeal by plaintiff, Herbert Nash, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., entered March 9, 1893. Appeal also by defendants, Charles A. Smith and John S. Pillsbury from the same judgment.

Appeal by defendant, the Duluth Milling Company, a corporation, from a judgment of the District Court of St. Louis County, J. D. Ensign, J., entered December 15, 1892, against it for $7,062.18. The plaintiff, Doud, Sons & Co., a corporation, on May 2, 1891, entered into a contract with defendant to build cooper shops and make barrels therein for it for one year from January 1, 1892.

Appeal by defendant, Peter P. Swensen, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, Frederick Hooker, J., entered May 12,1893, against Mm for $105.71 damages and costs. The justice lost jurisdiction to enter judgment two days after the jury brought in their verdict. Our statute is like that of New York, Wisconsin, Ohio, Iowa, Nebraska and numerous other states.

<p>Appeal by plaintiff, Per Johanson, from an order of the District Court of Traverse County, C. L. Brown, J., made August 27, 1892, denying his motion for a new trial.</p>

Appeal by defendant, the St. Paul City Railway Company, from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Chas. D. Kerr, J., made June 29, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial. On October 23,1891, the plaintiff, John Delude, was in the service of the defendant as conductor upon its Selby Avenue Cable line in St. Paul.

Appeal by plaintiff, Albert 0. Middlestadt, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., entered January 18, 1893. On October 11,1892, plaintiff commenced this action in a Justice’s Court in Minneapolis against defendant, James McIntyre, to recover $10.88 which he claimed defendant had received from Hall & Ducey Lumber Co. for plaintiff’s use and benefit.

Appeal by defendants, David L. How and others, from an order of the District Court of Eamsey County, James J. Egan, J., made December 5,1892, denying their motion for a new trial.

Appeal by plaintiff, Gillette-Herzog Manufacturing Company, a domestic corporation, from an order of the District Court of Hen-nepin County, Thomas Canty, J., made January 24, 1893. Action against defendant, R. W. Ashton, to recover $63.16, balance of an account for goods sold and delivered. The Summons was-personally served on November 22,1892, by the Sheriff of Pipestone County.

Appeal by plaintiff, B. A. Costello, from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, J. D. Ensign, J., made June 17, 1893, denying his motion for a new trial.

Appeal by plan tiff, George R. Newell, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., made July 28, 1892, denying bis motion for a new trial. On April 3, 1891, Hans C. Peterson, a merchant doing business in Minneapolis was insolvent and unable to pay bis debts. He owed George R. Newell & Co. $4,060. He owed tbe First National Bank of Minneapolis $15,000. He owed other creditors about •$11,000.

<p>Appeal by defendant, American Building and Loan Association, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., entered December 28, 1892, against it for $12,634.69.</p>

Appeal by defendant, William L. Jackson, from an order of tbe Municipal Court of the City of Duluth, Roger S. Powell, J., made July 27, 1892, refusing his motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, Grant Wyatt, sold defendant on March 15, 1892, twenty shares of stock in the Shaw Iron Company for $400, and took his note for the amount due thirty days thereafter with interest.

Appeal by William A. Edwards, one of tbe defendants, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Thomas Canty, J., made January 21,1893, denying his motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, Joseph Genevey, was in the business of manufacturing and repairing umbrellas at No. 316 First Avenue South in Minneapolis. On November 4, 1891, he made and delivered to the W. A. Edwards Printing Co. his due bill for four dollars payable in merchandise and work from his store.

Appeal by plaintiff, William O’Donnell, from a judgment of the District Court of Sibley County, Francis Cadtvell, J., entered August 8, 1893. On February 25, 1889, Brown and Flinn owned a lot in the village of Oreen Isle on which was a store building in which they sold merchandise and bought country produce. In the street just outside the sidewalk in front of the building they had placed platform scales for weighing hay, grain and other bulky articles.

Appeal by defendant, James R Taggart, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Charles M. Pond, J., made February 2, 1893, denying his motion for a new trial.

Appeal by defendant, Maximilian Bloom, from an order of the Municipal Court of the City of Duluth, Roger S. Powell, J., made August 10, 1893, denying his motion to vacate and set aside his conviction.

Appeal by the garnishee, the Central Women’s Christian Temperance Union of Minneapolis, a corporation, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., rendered March 7, 1893, against it for $114.80. David Howland, plaintiff, commenced this action December 23, 1892, against Hans Jeuel, defendant, upon contract to recover money due from him.

Appeal by plaintiff, A. L. Gordon, from a judgment of the District Court of Norman County, Frank Ives, J., entered against him June 9,1893, for $13.45. Gordon kept a retail country store at Ada and sold goods on credit to defendant, Thor J. Ven, a farmer, living near Hendrum. E. Orbeck did some painting for Ven in 1885 and on October 2, of that year gave Gordon an order on Ven for $16. Ven afterwards in 1886 signed an acceptance of the order.

Appeal by plaintiff, tbe Security Bank of Minnesota, from an order of tbe District Court of Hennepin County, Robert D. Russellr J., made August 26,1893, denying its motion for a new trial. On November 27,1892, tbe defendant, tbe Minneapolis Cold Storage Company, a corporation, contracted with J. W. Stevens & Co. to receive and store 640 barrels of apples valued at $1,280 at its cold storage warehouse No. 69 Nicollet Street on Nicollet Island, Minneapolis.

<p>Appeal by defendant, Lou Davis, from an order of the Municipal Court of Minneapolis, Charles B. Elliott, J,, made March 3, 1893, denying her motion for a new trial.</p>

Appeal by defendants, Samuel Matthews and Thomas Nolan, executors of the will of Thomas Dunn, deceased, from an order of the District Court of Dakota County, W. G. Wüliston, J., made September 13, 1892, overruling their demurrer to the complaint. The complaint stated that plaintiff, Sarah L. Comstock, owned one hundred and twenty acres of land in section two (2) township forty-one (41) north of range ten (10) west in Washburn County, Wisconsin.

Appeal by plaintiff, Daniel W. Ham, from a judgment of tbe District Court of Hennepin County, Henry G. Hicks, J., entered June 14, 1893, adjudging that he take nothing by this action and that he pay |39.23 costs.

Appeal by relators, Samuel Mathews and Peter Jourdain, from an order of the District Court of Kanabec County, F. M. Crosby, J., made April 4, 1893, denying their application for an alternative Writ of Mandamus.

Appeal by defendant, Daniel Mullen, Jr., from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Haseall E. Brill, J., entered February 28,1893, against him for $103.33 and costs.

Appeal by defendant, S. D. Bayantis, from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the City of Minneapolis, Charles B. EUiott, J., entered June 30, 1893, adjudging him guilty of a violation of a city ordinance and fining Mm $50 and in default of payment committing him to tbe workhouse until it be paid, not exceeding sixty days. The Charter of the City of Minneapolis, Sp.

Appeal by Frank Nicolin, assignor, and Gerhard Hilgers, his as-signee, from an order of the District .Court of Scott County, Francis Cadwell, J., made May 25,1893, removing said Hilgers and appointing Theodore Weiland assignee in his stead.

Motion by Mrs. Cooper, executrix of the will of Henry C. Cooper, deceased, to vacate the proceedings in this Court taken subsequent to his death on August 2,1893. Henry C. Cooper was a passenger on October 6, 1891, from Merriam Park east to Marion Street in St. Paul on the Interurban Electric Line of Street Cars along University Avenue. While he was alighting at Marion Street the car was started suddenly and he fell and was injured.

Appeal by plaintiff, the State of Minnesota, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Thomas Canty, J., made July 17, 1893, refusing to appoint a receiver and to grant an injunction. The defendant, the Bank of New England was a corporation having banking powers. It was organized in December, 1891, under 1878 G. S. ch. 33, and was located and doing business in the Guaranty Loan Building at Minneapolis. Its capital was $100,000.

Appeal by defendant®, John J. Nelson, D. S. Sivright, William E. Harrington, H. H. Pennoyer, D. H. Duckering and C. A. Pen-noyer from an order of the District Court of McLeod County, Francis Cadioell, J., made February 15, 1893, striking out their answer as frivolous and ordering judgment for plaintiff.

Appeal by plaintiff, Charles Clifford, from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the City of St. Paul, entered November 28, 1892'. During the mouth of June, 1892, O’Malley, a switchman, worked for the defendant, the Northern Pacific Railroad Company at its request seven days at $2.50 per day. He assigned his claim for wages .to plaintiff who demanded of the company $17.50.

Appeal by defendants, John C. Perry and other®, from a judgment of the District Court of St. Louis County, Chas. M. Start, J., rendered January 9,1893, that they take nothing in this action. Appeal by Archibald J. Boyd from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, C. L. Broion, J., made February 25,1893, denying his motion to open the judgment in this action and make him a party defendant therein and allow him to answer and have a retrial.

Appeal by plaintiff, R. L. Wilkins, from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, Josiah D. Ensign, J., made February M 3 6, 1893, sustaining a demurrer to his complaint.

Appeal by defendant, Mary Karels, from an order of the District Court of Stearns County, D. B. Bearle, J., made March 1, 1893. By Sp. Laws 1877, ch. 234, paupers were made a town charge in the County of Stearns and it was therein provided that every poor' person unable to earn a livelihood and residing in that County should be supported by his or her father, mother or other nearest relative, if of sufficient ability.

Appeal by plaintiff, James F. Foster, from a judgment of tbe District Court of Clay County, Frank Ives, J., rendered February IS, 1898, for $65.21 damages, less $22.86 costs, taxed and allowed tbe defendant, Joseph Hansman. Plaintiff brought tbis action in a Justice’s Court to recover $90 and interest due him from defendant upon a promissory note. Tbe defendant by bis answer admitted this debt.

Appeal by defendant, Michael Clifford, from an order of the District Court of Traverse County, C. L. Brown, J., made July 30,1892, granting plaintiff’s motion for a new trial after verdict for defendant. The plaintiff is a corporation.

Appeal by defendant, the Pioneer Savings and Loan Company, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Frederick Hooker, J., made February 23, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, Wallace W. Wetmore, furnished materials and did work in constructing a house for defendant David Royal on the North forty eight (48) feet in width of lot five (5) of Cornell’s Out Lots to Minneapolis.

Appeal by the defendant, Clarence A. Robinson, from an order of the Municipal Court of the City of Minneapolis, Stephen Mahoney, J., made March 8,1893, denying his motion for a new trial. Defendant kept a drug store at No. 2901 on Washington Avenue North, in Minneapolis and employed therein Joseph Fremstad, a boy nineteen years old, to keep the store clean, sell cigars, soda water and notions and learn the business.

Appeal by defendant, the Fergus Falls Water Company, from an order of the District Court of Otter Tail County, L. L. Baxter, J., made August 29,1893, denying its motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, the City Power Company, is a corporation and owns a dam across the Eed River at Fergus Falls and the waterpower on that river created thereby. The defendant is also a corporation engaged in supplying the City and its inhabitants with water through pipes laid beneath the streets.

Appeal by defendant, the Minneapolis, St. Paul and Sault Ste. Marie Railway Company, from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Hascal R. Brill, J., made August 8, 1S92, denying its motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, Charles Gibson, was a locomotive engineer employed by defendant on a switch engine in its yard at Gladstone, Michigan. He claims he was injured on August 29, 1890, by a fall in the cab of this engine.

Appeal by Frank Horgan, a police officer of the City of Duluth', from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, J. D. Ensign, J., made June 14, 1893, discharging the relator, Fred Weideman, from his custody.

Appeal by plaintiff, Benjamin F. Martin, from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Charles D. Kerr, ,T., made June 14, 1893, denying his motion for a new trial. On August 7, 1885, defendant, A. H. Hornsby was appointed a notary public for Ramsey County for the term of seven years. He was required by 1878 G-.

Appeal by plaintiff, Amanda Y. Green, from an order of the District Court of Sherburne County, L. L. Baxter, J., made June 24, 1S91, granting the motion of the defendant, the St. Paul, Minneapolis and Manitoba Railway Company, for a new trial. On July 16, 1889, plaintiff’s horse was running at large in the Township of Livonia and went onto the track of defendant’s railroad at the station at Zimmerman and ran north about sixty rods along the track to a cattle guard.

Appeal by plaintiff, James Fitzpatrick, from an order of the District Court of Steele County, Thomas S. Buckham, J., made March 25, 1893, denying his motion for a new trial. The defendant, Eric Hanson, owned a farm in Dodge County and in the fall of 1890 leased it to Ferdinand Himple for five years and was to furnish seed and have as rent one half of the crops raised thereon. On November 11, 1891, Kimple mortgaged to G-eo.

Appeal by defendant, the Village of Carver, from an order of the District Court of Carver County, Francis Cadwell, J., made July 1, 1892, denying its motion for a new trial. On the west side of the street called Broadway in the Village of Carver was a sidewalk made of pine plank. On June 39, 1891, the plaintiff, Emma Holm, while going along this sidewalk carrying a house lamp stepped upon a loose plank in the walk and was thrown down and her right knee was injured.

Appeal by plaintiffs, Elizabeth Pfefferle and Richard Pfefferle her husband, from an order of the District Court of Brown County, B. F. Webber, J., made January 28, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial.

Appeal by defendants Samuel L. Dobson and Nicholas Martin, from a judgment of the District Court of Polk County, Ira B. Mills, J., entered January 28, 1893. .

Appeal by defendant, the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company, from an order of the District Court of Mower County, John Q. Farmer, J., made December 30,1892, denying its motion for a new trial. On June 15, 1875, a petition was presented to the Board of Supervisors of the Township of Lyle in Mower County, asking them to lay out a highway on the line between sections two (2) and eleven (11), Township 101, Range 18.

Appeal by plaintiffs, John H. Leslie, Frederick G. Baker and George H. Leslie, from an order of the District Court of Rice County, Thomas S. Bvckham, J., made March 3, 1893, discharging the garnishees, George R. Newell et al. The plaintiffs were doing business at Chicago, Ill., and on October 5, 1892, made a contract with the defendant George L. Godfrey in which he agreed to sell and deliver to plaintiffs free on board cars at Faribault, Minnesota, 8,000 cases of canned corn…

Appeal by plaintiffs, Llewellyn A. Cobb and Alfred F. Norrisb,. from a judgment of the District Court of Dakota County, F. M.Crosby, J., entered April 26, 1893, that they take nothing by their action and that defendant recover of them his costs taxed at $17.25. The facts in this case appear in the report of a former appeal. 51 Minn. 48.

<p>Appeal by defendant, tbe Home Insurance Company of New York from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Seagrave-Smith, J., made March 21, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial..</p> <p>Appeal also by- plaintiff, the Minneapolis, St. Paul and Sault Ste.. Marie Kailway Company, from that part of the same order reducing; the verdict from $52,673.55 to $30,136.97.</p> <p>On September 5, 1891, the Insurance Company in consideration-of $600 premium insured the Railway Company for three months-, against all direct loss or damage by fire which it might sustain,, not exceeding $50,000 "on flour, corn, grain, seeds, provisions and other merchandize, excluding petroleum and its products, it being-understood and agreed that the insurance under this head is to. cover the liability of the Railway Company as carriers and ware-housemen as well as its own property and its- charges for freight or moneys paid on or charged on for which the Company is liable- or may have earned while contained in its elevator situated at Gladstone, Mich.” The Railway Company was doing business as. a carrier of grain from Minneapolis by cars to Gladstone and sending it from there by vessels to Buffalo, N. Y. It unloaded the grain-from its cars into this elevator where it remained until it could be loaded upon vessels. Several dealers at Minneapolis employed the Railway Company to carry their grain to Buffalo by this route. On November 29, 1891, the elevator and 74,054 bushels of wheat therein were casually destroyed by Are. The wheat belonged to-such dealers and was worth $60,273.94. The Railway Company had earned freight by carrying it thus far and for storage in this elevator, $3,768.03, but had no other interest in the wheat. The owners had not insured this wheat. They relied upon an oral understanding with the Railway Company that it would insure it for their benefit, but the bills of lading given the shippers provided that the Railway Company should not be liable for any loss or damage to the property arising from or caused by fire, not caused by its own negligence. By the policy other insurance was permitted, to the amount of $50,000 in other insurance companies. Such insurance was made on grain while in this elevator and belonging to the Railroad Company dr held by it in trust. This action was brought by the Railway Company to recover of the Home Insurance Company the sum insured. The defendant denied liability, except for one half the freight and storage earned. The issues were tried on December 13, 1892.</p> <p>At the close of the evidence the Judge instructed the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff for the $50,000 and interest. The ■defendant excepted and moved for a new trial. After argument the trial Court was of opinion that defendant was liable for only one half the value of the wheat, because of the other insurance and ordered the verdict to be cut down to $30,136.97 and directed that plaintiff have judgment for that amount with interest and costs. The plaintiff appeals from that part of the order reducing its recovery and the defendant appeals from the refusal of its motion for a new trial.</p> <p>The policy issued by this defendant insures only the liability of the railroad company. It does not insure the goods. This distinction must be kept in mind, that the other companies insured the goods and the Home Company by its policy insured the Railroad ■Company’s liability only. Home Ins. Co. v. Baltimore Warehouse ■Co., 93 ü. S. 527.</p> <p>What is covered by the policy must be ascertained by the words written in the policy. Frost’s D. L. & W. W. Works v. Millers é M. M. Ins. Co., 37 Minn. 300; Burton v. Connecticut Mutual Life Ins. Co., 119 Ind. 207; Mills v. Farmer’s Ins. Co., 37 la. 400; Fuller v. Phoenix Ins. Co., 61 la. 350; Gillett v. Liverpool L. á G. Ins. Co., 73 Wis. 203; Blake O. H. Co. v. Home Ins. Co., 73 Wis. ■667; King v. Merriman, 38 Minn. 47.</p> <p>The Court below seems to have ignored the fact that the railroad ■company performed its oral agreement with the shippers and did obtain insurance upon the grain at its own expense for the sum of $50,000 in the other companies.</p> <p>Although the bill of lading issued and accepted exempted the •carriers from liability for fire, yet the bill of lading was in no sense inconsistent with the allegations in the complaint and the proof, that the railroad company also agreed to procure insurance for the benefit of the owners. The owners had a right to accept the bill of lading and then go out and procure insurance from an insurance company, or they could contract with the railroad company to insure. This is what they did do as the evidence shows.</p> <p>The terms of the policy of the Home Insurance Company cover in express words the liability of the railroad company as carriers .and warehousemen. The liability of the railroad company as ■established by the evidence was not a® a carrier or warehouseman. Its liability to the shippers arises out of an oral contract between it and the owners of the grain to insure the grain for their benefit.</p> <p>The grain in question was shipped over the plaintiff’s railroad upon bills of lading, which exempted the railroad company from liability on account of fire. Parol evidence was not admissible to vary or contradict the terms of the bill of lading, and the defendant insurance company stands in the shoes of the railroad company and may make any defense in this case which the railroad company ■could itself have made had it been sued by the shippers. The railroad company not being liable to the shippers, this defendant is not liable to the plaintiff, because by the terms of the policy it only insured the liability of the plaintiff.</p> <p>The effect of exchanging a small shipping receipt for a large bill is stated in Wild v. Merchants D. T. Co., 47 la. 247, as follows;</p> <p>“Where a common carrier upon the delivery of merchandize for transportation issued to the consignor a shipping receipt, which ■stated that the bill of lading would be issued upon application at .a place designated therein and that the merchandize would be transported subject to the conditions expressed in the bill of lading,. held that the bill of lading and not the shipping receipt embodied the contract of the parties and that the consignee would be bound by the conditions expressed in such bill of lading.</p> <p>A warehouseman is only liable for his own negligence. There can be no pretense here that plaintiff is liable simply as a warehouseman, because there is no pretense that the fire was caused .by the negligence of plaintiff. Aldrich v. Boston & W. R. Co., 100 '.Mass. 31; Rice v. Nixon, 97 Ind. 97; Claflin v. Meyer, 75 3ST. T. 260; .Willet v. Rich, 142 Mass. 356.</p> <p>The contract as established by the parol evidence was a contract mnder the common law liability of carriers to carry the grain to Gladstone, and thence deliver it through its elevator upon the vessel of the next water carrier at Gladstone. It was not an agreement to insure, but an agreement at common law to deliver to the next connecting carrier. The oral evidence was properly received. The rule that parol evidence is inadmissible to vary the terms of a written instrument is applied only in suits between the parties to the instrument, or their privies, and not to suits where the issue is between one of the parties to the instrument and a third person. Van Eman v. Stanchfield, 10 Minn. 255; Sanborn v. Sturtevant, 17 Minn. 200; National C. á L. Builder v. Cyclone S. S. P. Co., 40 Minn. 125; Buxton v. Beal, 49 Minn. 230; Clerihew v. West Side Bank, 50 Minn. 538; Lee v. Ad-sit, 37 N. Y. 78; McMasters v. President Ins. Go. of N. Am., 55 N. Y. 222; Lowell Munvf’g Co. v. Safeguard Fire Ins. Co., 88 N. Y. 591.</p> <p>The plaintiff was not a warehouseman with reference to the grain. The answer admits that plaintiff was the owner of the elevator at Gladstone and that it was used by the plaintiff in its business as a common carrier.</p> <p>If the Bailway Company be held liable for the grain in the elevator as a common carrier, then in the absence of proof as to the origin of the fire, defendant was liable for the grain destroyed in the elevator and is within the terms of the policy as interpreted by the defendant.</p> <p>There can be no contribution between “in trust” policies and policies insuring liability. North British é M. Ins. Co. v. London & L. & G. Ins. Co., 5 Cb. Div. 569; Lowell Manuf’g Co. v. Safeguard Ins. Co., 88 N. Y. 591.</p> <p>The insurance of the defendant covered the ultimate liability, and it must alone bear the loss to the amount of its policy.</p>

Appeal by plaintiffs, Betty Weitzner, Charlotte Gruenberg and Simon G-ruenberg, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Frederick Hooker, J., made March 1, 1893, overruling their demurrer to the second defense stated in the answer. The complaint stated that on September 20, 1892, defendant Ole A. Thingstad made a contract with plaintiffs to convey to them with warranty two lots in Minneapolis for $23,000.

Appeal by plaintiffs, James Slocum, Jr., and Amelia M. Slocum Ms wife, from an order of the District Court of Carver County, Francis Gadwell, J., made January 23, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial.

Appeal by plaintiff, G-iles Gilbert, from a judgment of the District Court of St. Louis County, Charles L. Lewis, J., rendered September 19, 1893, decreeing that… Held: that to a tract of land having a navigable body of water as one of its boundaries, riparian privileges attached; but if such tract were bounded by right lines not coincident with the shore, such lines would be regarded as excluding such privileges. In the case of the City of Duluth v. St. Paul & D. 11.

Appeal bj defendants, M. G. Wyman and over one hundred others, from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, Charles L. Leivis, J., made June 3, 1893, granting a new trial. Huntress-Brown Lumber Company, a corporation, brought this action for an accounting as to the proceeds of a large quantity of lumber manufactured by it and on which the appellants had liens for labor.

<p>Appeal by plaintiff, E. P. Trautwein, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, Henry G. Iiicks, J., entered May 13, 1893.</p>

Appeal by plaintiff, Henry M. Little, from an order of tbe District Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., made March 23, 1893, denying bis motion for a new trial. Frank E. Little bad tbe legal title to a lot on First Avenue North in Minneapolis with a warehouse thereon. It was incumbered by mortgage given by tbe former owner to Charles H. Maxcy for $20,000 and interest at seven per cent, a year payable semiannually.

Appeal by defendants, T. Frank TJpbam and N. J. Upham, from a. judgment of the Municipal Court of the City of Duluth, entered.. March 8, 1898, against them and in favor of plaintiff, Robert L. Scovill, for $167.94.

Appeal by defendant, Henry H. Fuller, from an order of the District Court of Washington County, W. C. Williston, J., made January 12,1893, overruling his demurrer to the complaint. On November 30,1888, Ida M. Essery made a contract with Henry H. Fuller to sell to him for $600 the north half of lot one (1) in block twelve (12) of the Town of Wilson in Section twenty T. 30 E. 21 in Washington County. He paid $30 and was to pay the balance on delivery of a warranty deed.

Appeal by defendant, the Duluth Street Railway Company, from .an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, J. D. Ensign, J., made March 23, 1893, granting plaintiff’s motion for a new trial .after verdict for defendant. On May 21, 1S92, the plaintiff, Elizabeth Jarmy and her daughter rode, from West Duluth to the corner of Superior Street and Fifth Avenue West in Duluth, upon an electric railway car operated by the defendant.

Appeal by plaintiff, Kate Scott, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Seagrave Smith, J., made September 8, 1893, sustaining a demurrer to her complaint for partition. Ansel F. Scott departed this life intestate prior to June 27, 1889. His widow, Kate Scott, was appointed sole administratrix of his estate. On that date she petitioned the Probate Court of Henne-pin County for license to sell his real estate to pay his debts.

A writ of Certiorari was issued August SO, 1893, by this Court on tbe relation of Herbert B. Spencer, Acting Mayor of tbe City of Duluth to Josiah D. Ensign, one of the Judges of tbe District Court of St. Louis County, and to Henry Truelson, James Farrell and Nils Nelson, composing tbe Board of Public Works of tbe City of Du-lutb, requiring tbem to certify and return to tbis Court on or before October 3, 1893, tbe record and proceedings in an assessment of |28,870.95 made…

Appeal by defendant, Jerome B. Tabour, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Charles TV. Pond, J., made October 20, 1892, refusing to vacate a judgment in the action and to allow him to answer. The plaintiff, the Pine Mountain Iron and Coal Company, a foreign corporation, brought this action to recover of its agent the defendant $2,057.17 rents collected by him from its tenants of Central Park Terrace in Minneapolis.

Appeal by defendant, James B. Dowling, from an order of the District Court of Bamsey County, Chas. D. Kerr, J., made March 25, 1893, granting plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial. The plaintiffs, Timothy D. Sheehan and Edward J. Cannon were partners in business practising law at St. Paul and were retained by, and rendered professional services for defendant, for which he by special contract agreed to pay them $2,000.

Appeal by defendant, Fred É. G-oddard, from an order of tbe District Court of Hennepin County, Thomas Canty, J., made December 3, 1892, denying bis motion for a new trial. Tbe plaintiff, Alfred J. Dean, brought this action September 3, 1891, under 1878 G. S. ch. 75, § 2, to determine tbe adverse claims of Goddard and all other persons or parties unknown claiming any right, title, estate, lien or interest in the real estate described in the opinion. Goddard alone answered.

Appeal by Cbristena Catharine Swenson and Hilda Louisa Peterson, from an order of the District Court of Goodhue County, W. C. Wüliston, J., made June 21, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial. On May 8,1884, Charles A. Swenson of Roscoe in Goodhue County made his last will. He was over sixty years old, married but childless. His wife, Dortha Swenson, was sixty years old. His father and mother were both dead.

Appeal by plaintiff, David A. Corey, from an order of the District Court of Eamsey County, James J. Egan, J., made May 25, 1893, denying bis motion for a new trial.

Appeal by Charles A. Passavant, Executor of the Will of Eleanora Hummel, deceased, from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Wm. Louis Kelly, J., made May 6, 1893, denying his motion for a new trial. On September 1, 1874, John E. Haggenmiller loaned to Joseph Hummel $300 and took his note for the amount, due six months thereafter.

Appeal by defendants, John B. McKinnon, Frank Jerome, Henry R. Nolan, N. S.- Gervais and E. W. Wile, from an order of the District Court of Polk County, Gorham Powers, J., made April 4, 1893, refusing to set aside the verdict in the action and grant a new trial.

<p>Appeal by plaintiff, Morris F. Williams, from an order of tbe District Court of Clay County, Frank Ives, J-., made March 16, 1893, denying his motion for a new trial.</p>

Appeal by defendant, Charles B. Jones, from a judgment of the District Court of Becker County, D. B. Searle, J., entered August 28,1893. Complaint was made June 14, 1893, by Eli Holder before W. W. Kossman, a Justice of the Peace at Detroit, that defendant did on June 1, 1893, at the Township of Burlington obstruct a public highway on section eleven (11) in that Township by building a fence therein.

Appeal by defendant, J ohm Gilbert, from a judgment of the District Court of Polk County, Ira B. Mills, J., entered January 13, 1893. On January 29, 1889, defendant made his promissory note for $500 and interest at ten per cent, a year payable on December 1, 1889, to the order of plaintiff, Anna Bahnsen. He delivered it to her deceased husband for her and afterwards paid $232.85 thereon. She brought this action October 23,1891, on the note to recover the balance.

Appeal by defendants, William W. Nichols, Clive Nichols and William W. Nichols, Jr., from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Chas. E. Otis, J., made May 2, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial.

Appeal by defendants, Simon Klovdahl and William Carlson, from a judgment of the District Court of St. Louis County, O. P. Stearns, L, entered September 23, 1892, against them for $1,360.86.

Appeal by plaintiff, George E. Williamson, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, Thomas Canty, J., entered May 29,1893. On March 4, 1891, Philo L. Hatch owned lots one (1), two (2) and three (3) in block fourteen (14) in Wells, Sampson & Bell’s Addition to Minneapolis valued at $100,000, but incumbered $40,000. He was insolvent and owed over $75,000 beside the mortgage.

Appeal by plaintiff, Walter J. Scase, from an order of tbe District •Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., made March 25, 1893, sustaining a demurrer to Ms complaint. The defendant, the G-illette-Herzog Manufacturing Company, a .corporation, on March 25,1890, entered into the contract with plaintiff mentioned in the opinion.

Appeal by Jeremiah J. Howe, one of the defendants, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, Seagrave Smith, J., entered J anuary 30, 1893, against him and Sumner W. Farnham for $2,820.51. On May 25, 1886, at Fargo, Dak., James A. Chesley and Frank L. Loyejoy were partners in business, under the firm name of Chesley & Loyejoy, dealing in lumber.

Appeal by defendant, the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company, from a judgment of the District Court of Mower County, John Whytock, J., entered May 24, 1893, against it for $1,082.18. On September 24, 1891, Charles Dunlap was employed as brakeman upon a freight train on defendant’s road. While near Owa-tonna, going- north, he attempted to set a brake on a refrigerator car..

Appeal by plaintiff, Bank of Montreal, from an order of the-District Court of Wadena County, G. W. Holland, J., made April. 8, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial.

Appeal by plaintiff, Bank of Montreal, from an order of the District ‘Court of Wadena County, (?. W. Holland, J., made April 9, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial. This action was brought against Peter Richter and nine others upon the two promissory notes, one for $DOO, and the other for $900 mentioned in the statement of the case in the foregoing action {ante, p. 362). The parties to this action were the same as In that. It was tried December 12, 1892.

Appeal by plaintiff, Davis & Rankin Building and Manufacturing Company, from an order of tbe District Court of Otter Tail County, L. L. Baxter, J., made January 31, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial. Daniel J. Davis and Thomas Rankin were partners in business at Chicago, Ill., under the firm name of Davis & Rankin. As such partners they made a contract December 10, 1890, with defendants, A. H. 0.

Appeal by the defendants, the Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Company, W. H. Truesdale receiver of its property, and the Railroad Transfer Company of Minneapolis, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, William Lochren, J., made January 31, 1893, denying their motion, for a new trial.

Appeal by defendants, John Chisholm and Mary his wife, from an order of the District Court of Stearns County, D. B. Searle, J., made February 2, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial.

Appeal by plaintiff, Mary 0. Lane, from an order of tbe District 'Court of Clay County, D. B. Searles, J., made July 19, 1893, denying her motion for a new trial. Tbe mistake wbicb defendant seeks to correct by bis answer, praying for equitable relief, was an error of law and was not mutual to tbe parties. When neither party is to blame and damage results to one, relief cannot be granted to the other.

Appeal by defendants, Reginald H. Shoemaker and Amelia D. his wife, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, Thomas Canty, J., entered May 22, 1893.

Appeal by Rachel Ellis, Jane Walker and Charles Ellis, from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Chas. E. Otis, J., made May 24,1893, denying their motion for a new trial. Flora Ellis of St. Paul filed her petition in the Probate Court of Ramsey County, December 13, 1892, praying to be appointed ad-ministratrix of the estate of Matthew Ellis, deceased..

Appeal by A. E. Capehart, one of the defendants from a judgment of the Municipal-Court of the City of St. Paul, H. W. Cory, J., rendered against him and Olin S. Schwartz, April 20,1893, for $279.70. On June 11, 1892, defendant Schwartz gave his promissory note to plaintiff for $250 and interest due in thirty days. Defendant ■Capehart guarantied the payment of the note in writing indorsed thereon. This action was commenced August 17, 1892, against the maker and guarantor.

Appeal by plaintiff, William H. Lang, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Frederick Hooker, J., made March 20, 1898, denying his motion for a new trial. On August 29, 1881, plaintiff sold and conveyed to defendant, Emil Ferrant, 'lot four (4) in block six (6) in Oak Lake Addition to Minneapolis, subject to a mortgage for $1,600 given by plaintiff to Mary Scott and David Crim. By a clause in the deed the grantee was to assume and pay this incumbrance.

Appeal by plaintiff, Neis E. Nelson, from an order of the Municipal Court of the City of Minneapolis, C. B. Elliot, J., made February 10, 1893, denying bis motion for a new trial. Plaintiff claimed that on January 15,1889, be. loaned to defendant, Halvor E. Finseth, $175, which sum defendant has neglected to repay and be asked judgment for the amount with interest and costs.

Appeal by defendants, John F. Byers, Frank W. Cook and Edwin Clark, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Seagrave Smith, J., made March 11, 1893, striking out their answer as sham. The State Bank of Minneapolis commenced this action January 7, 1893, against the defendants above named and Frank Barnard upon their promissory note to him for $2,500 dated April 7, 1892, and indorsed by him to that bank.

Appeal by plaintiffs, Horace Williston, James Charnley, William McKinley and A. S. McKinley, from an order of tbe District Court of Lake County, J. D. Ensign, J., made May Id, 1893, overruling tbeir demurrer to tbe second counterclaim in tbe answer.

Appeal by plaintiff, George B. Crummey, from an order of the Municipal Court of the City of St. Paul, H, W. Cory, J., made June 29,1893, denying his motion for a new trial. This action was brought to recover $225 damages for breach of a contract, of which the following is a copy; St. Paul, April 2,1889.

Appeal by defendants, James G-. Donnelly, George Mitsch and 'Terrence Kenny, from an order of tbe District Court of Ramsey County, William Louis Kelly, J., made March 20, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial. The defendants, William Forrestal and James Forrestal, contracted with the City of St. Paul to construct certain sewers in University Avenue and other streets in the western part of that city.

Appeal by defendant, the People’s Savings and Loan Association, from an order of the District Court of Hennepin County, Seagrave Smith, J., made March 13, 1893, denying its motion for a new trial. On March 14,1890, Dora Hogan mortgaged to the People’s Building and Loan Association of Minneapolis, her property in that city near the corner of Third Street and Eighth Avenue South, to secure the performance of her contract with it.

Appeal by plaintiff, Horatio Holton, from an order of the District Court of Wright County, Seagrave Smith, J., made May 8, 1893* setting aside the service of the summons in the action.

Appeal by defendant, Great Northern Railway Company, from .-an order of the District Court of Wright County, Thomas Canty, J., made April 15,1893, denying its motion for a new trial.

Appeal by Hugo F. Yetter, as administrator of the estate of Mary K. Yetter, deceased, from an order of the. District Court of Hennepin County, Seagrave Smith, J., made May 13, 1893, denying bis motion for a new trial. Mary KÁ Yetter died intestate November 30, 1891, at Minneapolis, and Hugo F. Yetter was appointed January 4, 1892, by the Probate Court of Hennepin County, administrator of her estate.

Appeal by plaintiff, Henry M. Bradley, from a judgment of the District Court of St. Louis County, M. J. Severance, J., entered December 22, 1892, that he had no cause of action against the defendant, Robert B. Whitesides and dismissing the action on the merits, with costs. • The Court erred in finding the power of attorney to be a good and valid instrument and effective for the purpose for which it was executed.

Appeal by defendants, Thomas E. Cannon and Daniel Moody, from an order of the District Court of Clay County, Frank Ives, J., made April 11, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial. This action was upon a promissory note made by defendants April 16, 1892, for $1,254.95 and given plaintiff, Dennis F. McGrath in part payment for a stock of hardware they bought of him that day at Barnesville.

Appeal by defendant, Halvor Fergestad, from an order of. the District Court of Carver County, Thomas Canty, J., made April 11, 1893, refusing to vacate a writ of attachment.

On the trial of William Herges in the District Court of Stearns County, D. B. Searle, J., he was convicted June 6, 1893, of the crime of incest committed March 22, 1892. Questions of law arose, which in the opinion of the Judge were so important and doubtful as to require the decision of this Court. The defendant consenting, the Judge reported the case so far as was necessary to present the questions and certified the report to this Court.

<p>Verdict not supported by the evidence.</p> <p>Held, upon the evidence in this case, that the court below erred when refusing to grant plaintiff’s motion for a new trial.</p> <p>{Opinion published 57 N. W. Rep. 205.)</p>

Appeal by John S. Billings, Sheriff of Otter Tail County, from an order of the District Court of that County, made by R. H. Mar-den, Court Commissioner, June 26,1893, discharging from his custody, Maria J. Blaisdell. On June 3, 1893, an information was filed in the Probate Court of Otter Tail County, stating that Maria J. Blaisdell of Pelican Bapids in that County was then insane and needing care and treatment and that it was dangerous for her to be at large.

Appeal by defendant, the Winona and St. Peter Bailroad Company, from a judgment of the District Court of Brown County, B. F. Webber, J., entered July 14, 1893, against it for $87.19. The plaintiff, Jacob L. Schoch, commenced this action February '21, 1893, in a Justice’s Court at New Ulm to recover $44 for his services as surgeon and physician in treating one Joe Woratchke, a servant of defendant, injured while in its service. He had judgment for $44 and costs.

Appeal by defendant, William F. Wood, from an order of tbe District Court of Hennepin County, Seggrave Smith, J., made May 6, 1893, granting an injunction restraining a sale pending this action. The defendant constructed a house on lot four (4) in block forty nine (49) in St. Louis Park Centre, for Ida F. Schmidt, for $1,035. The plaintiff, Joseph Hamilton, advanced this money for the purpose and tvas to have a mortgage on the house and lot for the amount.

Appeal by defendants, C. Gotzian & Co., George W. Freeman, Isaac H. Arthur and James W. Warren, from an order of the District Court of Pine County, F. M. Crosby, J., made April 12, 1893, overruling their demurrer to the complaint.

Appeal by plaintiff, C. Aultman & Co., a corporation, from a judgment of the District Court of Brown County, B. F. Webber, J., entered October 11, 1892, for defendant for his costs. On August 8, 1S84, the plaintiff sold and delivered to defendant, John A. Torry, a harvesting and binding machine, and warranted it to do good work, that it was made of good material, not' liable to get out of order, of light and easy draft, and would not miss binding bundles.

Appeal by defendants, Samuel Schwab and Max Schwab, from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Chas. D. Kerr, J., made July 6, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial. The defendants were partners in business at St. Paul, dealing in dry goods and notions at wholesale. They occupied a three story brick store, No. 211 East Fourth Street, in which was a freight elevator running through all the floors from cellar to third story.

Appeal by the defendant, the Village of West Duluth, from an order of the District Court of St. Louis County, Frederick Hooker, J., made April 8,' 1893, granting plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, Henry Nelson, brought this action to recover $800 damages to lot one (1) in block twenty six (26) in Grassy Point Addition to West Duluth, by filling in earth upon it in grading a street'.

Appeal by defendants, Ovid P. Lanpber, Dudley B. Finch., James H. Skinner and Charles W. Williams, from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, John W. Willis, J., made June 19, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial. The plaintiff, Bridget McDonough, was sixteen years old and in the employ of defendants.

Appeal by defendant, Dennis Ryan, from a determination of the District Court of Ramsey County, John W. Willis, J., made April 29, 1893, allowing plaintiff to amend her complaint.

Appeal by claimant, Eau Claire National Bank, from a judgment •of the District Court of St. Louis County, J. D. Ensign, J., entered July 25, 1893, disallowing its claim against the estate of Ludwig Ivahn, Insolvent. On December, 28,1892, Ludwig Kahn of Duluth made an assignment of all his nonexempt property to Morris L. Fischbein for the benefit of his creditors, under Laws 1881, ch. 148, as amended.

Appeal by defendants, Andrew P. Johnson, Aaron Abrahamson, •James P. Onstad, Andrew Nash, Jonas Olander, and Lewis Lilly, •from an order of the District Court of Fillmore County, John Whytock, J., made June 7, 1893, denying their motion for a new trial. Edward A. Hostvet and Carl C. Hourn were partners in business. They had a creamery at Houston, another at Rushford and a creamery and feed-mill at Lanesboro. They also had two ice-houses and •a dray business at Rushford.

Appeal by defendants, James S. Parsons and others, from an order of the District Court of Cottonwood County, P. E. Brown, J., made August 14,1893, denying their motion for a new trial. . The plaintiffs, John T. Smith and Jennie Smith his wife, made their promissory notes, ten for $1,000 each, and twenty for $500 each, all dated October 1, 1883, due five years thereafter, and bearing interest at the rate of seven per cent, a year payable semiannually.

Appeal by plaintiff, Hewson-Herzog Supply Co., a corporation, from an order of the District Court of Eamsey County, Chas. E. Otis, J., made March 14, 1893, granting a new trial.

Appeal by plaintiff, Keystone Iron Company, from a judgment of the District Court of St. Louis County, Galvin L. Brown, J„ entered July 21,1893, directing that plaintiff take nothing by its action. On February 24,1892, the defendant, Lillian Logan, was the owner of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter, and the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of section twenty six (261 in Township 58, Range 18 in St. Louis County.

Appeal by plaintiff, John J. Khodes, from an order of the District Court of Ramsey County, Charles E. Otis, J., made April 12, 1893, vacating and setting aside the service of the summons in the action.