Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1847-06-10
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA.
Afay Term, ls47.

Sloan the STATE Error TO the Wayne c. C.. SMITH, j.
By the charter OF city Of Richmond in Wayne county
the exclusive rights given council Of the
city fix he rates Of all licenses for retailing pituous
liquors Held that such right must be understood to mean
purposes only and that indictment could be
tanned fJr selling such liquors without license fIom the
board Of county commissioners.
Held also that the grant Of such privilege tea munpl
poaon, right against The State aud l. subject
repeal at the will of the eg3iufe either by SPECIAL or
general law, and il the sale and exclusive right Of granting
licences given city Of Richmond by the
Of acorp ration passed $780, such pro-
hbi Use Of authority in such cases by any other
department Of The State il was repealed by the Revised
Of IS93 which require license TO be obtained from
The corporate authorities Of all incorporated cities and towns
addition obtained from the board Of county
mis>iooers of the proper county affirmed
HichlHd o. The STATE Error 10 Jennings C. c. SMITH, J.
The Statute Of Feb 10Th, 1881, "oonceInng fee negroes
and mulaoes servants and slaves is constitutional
But the tia Of indictment for the violation OF that
statute should have been proved that the negro into
the State after the Of the before The defendant
could have been rightfully convicted Reversed.
The ihh0bHaats Of Congressional Township &c. T. White
Ell al Error to Tippecanoe c. c. PERKINs,J
II be dismissed by the circuit court; the record
disclosing the Of dismissal the will be presumed
sufficient by this court Affirmed.
KINs j.
failure Of consideration may be set up as defence 10
An ineumbrance upon estate purchased, for which
deed with covenants given at the time of sale and which
ncumbrance the purchaser compelled TO pay 10 his
purchase may be pleaded by Of failure OF consideration
against assignee and the purchaser will not be compelled
Cd1braiih o. Doe ZOOk Appeal from Wayne c. c.
PERKINS, j.
General objections evidence will not be noticed
The evidence will not be examined with view ot deter
mining whether supports the verdict, when motion for
a new trial was inteTposed
defendant in ejeetment may show outstanding title
in stranger and may prove such outstanding title BY such
stranger. Reversed
Merton al Weed ct a. Appeal from yigO C. C.
BLACKBOARD, ].
bill in Chancery was flied to set aside SheIifs sale Of
real estat the ground of fraud On trial. the complain
ants contended that the land was sold without It's having
been y appraised as the law required This obcc-
on 10 the sale not being charged in the bill is not therefore
proper subject of inquiry in This court Reversed
THURSDAY, May 27th lS47.
Cooper .. Hamilton. Error 10 the Allen C. Z. SMITH,
An injunction against strangers when there is no priority
of Ile prevent the commission repetition Of aespss
will only be granted when strong Of destruction
irrepaabe mischief made out, OF ueparabe mischief
which may be effected before any a be had 10 the
contIoveried right. Affirmed
Garter Kerr and others Error the Fountain c. c.
SMITH
No general rule can be laid down as to what constitutes
multiarOusness in bill in equity The Court must exer-
else sound discretion determining from the circumstances
Of each case, whether bill is liable that objection
- bin is not utaIious however for setting forth
entitled TO the relief prayed for IT, in bill praying foI
partition Of real estate it appears that the plaintiff Is the
owner Of some share proportion Of the land described in
the BILL tenant in common with the defendants, he will
portion. Reversed
Caidceu o. WHIiars. Appeal from vigo c. C PERKINS J.
On uial Of the right of property between assgnees Of
the judgment debtor aud execution defendants the dcaa
lions of the assignee made ubt quenty to the assignment
not admissible evidence to defeat that assignment and
when, as in this the assignment TO trustees for the
payment Of debts his declarations nadnissibe for the
further that he himself competent witness for ell
ther party.
Such assignment above spoken OF is void forhe
fraud Of the assgnOr alone the trustees and cesRis que trust
being ignorant thereof.
Where however part Of the ceSiUS que trust also
trustees and parties the fraud the assignment the
part of the assisnor the assignment void, not only to
the trustees but to the innocent ceStuis que trust who
trustees. Reversed.
IVGrrick u Hoover. Error to Carroll c. C. PERKINS, J.
mis- binder Of counts is durable by amendment
tiIal without an issue is RereI Sed
FRIDAY. May rs.
KenSe Ruddick. Error to Bartholomew c. C. SMITH
In making sales OF land under execution the sheriff acting
as the Of both parties invested with discretion
powers to act independent of the directions Of either
lie should endesvor make the money called for by The
ecuton in his hands without any sacrifice of
properly and he is responsible 10 either party fol- any losses
occasioned by his neglect or misconduct
When the bill does allege that the loss Occssoned
by the in which the property sold will
not be presumed from the fact that sold contrary
the directions Of the execution defendant.
Pomssoy notes and other notes in action may be received
payment collateral security only, but their receipt
is payment unless they received such produce
payment. affirmed.
Wright the State the relation Of HoWe Error 10 the
Lagrange Probate Court. SMITH, j.
When there several issues, verdict in general terms
for the plaintiff may be sufficient i. will be presumed
that the jury found for the plaintiff all the conrOveed
points But it render judgment verdict
protesting 10 answer one issue ony degardng the others
Reversed
Oldham ct al D. Mccormick Error to the TppccanOe C..
To render bankrupt competent Witness to increase
amount Of his asets compared with his debts it must
appear not only that he had claim t. surplus of his
at but also that he had previously received his allowance
in full Reversed
H,ckcor ct al D. Eastman Error to the vermlion c. C.
Motion 10 dismiss suit on the ground that two several
returns of not found wits Of Scre fdcia
'he lace oil me proceedings mouon oVeriuea
Held that the ground specified for the motion to dismiss
was insufficient Two returns Of "not found" authorized
the plaintiff 10 proceed in the cause
The bill Of exceptions in this does not show whether
there any other ground for The notion stated TO The cr
cult count and notice of oher therefore, can be ta
WATSON D. Robinson Error to the vgo C. C. PERKINS,
Question Of diligence A. made his promssory note TO b.
bearing date March g. 1872 due June 5 1912, which
assigned before due
On the 23d of March, 1912, A. left The State taking with
him produce considerable which sold part
at New Orleans and the residue at Chsrestown, c., and
the proceeds returned A. about the 10Th Of August At
that time the maker of the left New Orleans where he
resided since he left the State and proceeded To ST. Louis,
Mo- where he disposed Of all his funds payment Of other
debts holding property that could be reached in atisiac
the State the I'd Of May lS43 and sued the Sd
Of The same month"; aud regularly prosecuted to judgment
and execution.
does not appear known the time A. the
maker left where he going, The length Of the time
he intended 10 be absent that he was taking his
with him.
ed the facts show of due diligence and that
the plaintiff (who the assgnee) entitled to his
judgment. affirmed.
The Common Council of the fown of Indianapolis o. Fair
child. Error to the Marion c Z. BLACKBOARD, J.
The decarstion in this ordinance of the
Common Council TO restrain The licensing Of Groceries IN the
of Indianapolis which oriains amongst other things
that Of 100 dollars per anuum be levied each license
to sell by less quantity than quart at time Of spiruous
liquors. &C., or keep tipping house &c within the bounds
of said town &c. The declaration further that the
defendant &C., aud before The Of the suit