Spring dam to remove the dam, thus draining and reclaiming a vast quantity of land. In one phase or another practically all the lawyers in the county were involved in this law suit. The main action was tried twice in the District court and twice in the Supreme court. It was eventually held that the dam could not be removed. Judge Searle, when the case was first tried in the District court, held that the dam could not be removed. On the first appeal Judge Searle was reversed on a three to two decision, the majority holding that the dam could be taken out. Judge Collins, then on the Supreme bench, wrote a very vigorous dissenting opinion, insisting that the dam could not be removed. The case was sent back for a new trial and after the second trial in District court, was again appealed. On the second appeal the Supreme court adopted the reasoning of the Stearns county jurists, Judges Collins and Searle, and held that the dam could not be removed. On pages 93 and 94 the court says: "When the action was here on the former appeal it was determined adversely to plaintiff on the theory of comparative equities. • • • The reasoning of the opinion on the former appeal we are satisfied, after mature reflection, was erroneous and cannot be followed. • • • To follow the reasoning of the former decision would result in confusion and flagrant inconsistencies." The dam was built more than forty years before the law suit and the final determination was that the right to maintain the dam was acquired by prescription and that there grew out of the relations between the parties reciprocal rights and privileges—the right on the part of defendants to maintain the dam, and the right on the part of the plaintiff to insist that it be maintained.
The most recent leading case from Stearns county is State ex rel Stearns County vs. Klasen, 123 Minnesota, 382, which was a proceeding to test the validity of the so-called Mothers' Pension Law. The decision sustains the law and outlines the methods of its application. It is of interest to note, as stated in 49 L. R. A., N. S. 597, that this case is the first in the United States in which a law of this kind is passed upon.
CONCLUSION.
In the course of sixty years a multitude of incidents have arisen in connection with administration of the courts of this county; some sordid, some dramatic, some humorous, many of more than passing interest. It has been impossible to give in this article much attention to the side lights, which are often more interesting than the main facts. Only an outline account of the courts, the judges, the lawyers and the cases has been attempted.
The writer acknowledges his indebtedness to the practicing lawyers of the county for help in various ways; and to General C. C. Andrews and Governor C. A. Gilman for accounts of early day conditions and men.
BIOGRAPHY.
Dolson Bush Searle. When in the history of any locality, there is a certain individual who goes his quiet, unostentatious way; conscientiously, faithfully, cheerfully, following his duty; and by so doing, infuses his own splendid personality into the very spirit of the community, attains the highest suc-
