The city charter provided that the citizens
of the city should always enjoy the same
rights and privielgee in said cemetery as
the citizens of the town, and contribute
its share towa and maintaining said ceme
tery. Chapter 266, laws of 1876, provides
that when such town cemetery becomes
embraced within the limits of any city
the duties of ihe town board relat
ing to such cemetery shall be exer
cised by the common council of the
city. The common council of tae
city attempted to exercise such
powers, but were prevented by the resist
ance of town authorities. The city then
- brought action against the lowu to
restrain them from interfering with the
control of such cemetery by the common
council. The town, in its answer, asked
for the same relief against the city. The
circuit court granted an injunction against
the city, and that judgment is reversed,
the decision is based on the validity of
chapter 266, laws of 1876. The court
holds that the town held the title in trust
for the inhabitants of both town and ci'y,
and the act of 1876 was merely the exer
cise by the legislature of the power to
change the trustee, and was therefore
valid.
Ottic al Proceedings.
The following decisions were handed
down in brief:
City of Columbus vs. town of Columbus.
O.der reversed and remanded for further
proceedings in accoidance with opinion.
Dwyer vs. American Express Cos. Order
reversed and remanded with directions to
sustain the demurrer.
Robbins vs. city ot Fond du Lac, Judg
ment affirmed.
Allen vs. Boomer et al. (two cases).
Orders and judgments of both county and
circuit court reversed and remanded with
directions in accordance with opinion.
