Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1850-08-15

WEDNESDAY, June 5, 1850
Craftsman v. RGriden. Error to the Hancock G. c.
affirmed
Crawford v. The State. Error to the Hamilton c. c.
SMITH, AN indictment for the larceny of n bank
note, described bank of the State Bank
Ohio, for the payment of ten dollars"
Held, That the description sufficiently particular.
Engleman V. The State, at this term.
The 10Th section of the SD chapter of the Revised
Statutes enacts that any person who shall feloniousy
steal take and carry away the personal goods another
oil the value OF five dollars and upwards shall be deemed
guilty OF grand larceny, and prescrbes the punishment
for that offence. The 21s section of the chapter
declares that bank shall be considered personal
property of which larceny may he committed
Held That the indictment in this case which conclu-
dcd contrary the form of the Statute" concluded
properly The offence and the penalty are declared by
the same statute, and the indictment being founded
this statute there necessity that it should refer
to any other.
Upon the trial of prisoner for the larceny of bank
note of the State of Ohio of the denomination often dollars,
the testimony of three Witnesses who procssed be
of skill to the value and genuneness of the note and
evidence that the prisoner passed t genuine and
ceived articles of value the amount Of 10 dollars in
exchange for it, held be ample proof of the genu.
ineness of the note, and than necessary to
meet the provisions of the relative the evidence
necessary in such r. s. p. 1893, sees. As, IS.
Vide Wharton's Am Grim Law, 1893. 1t was also held
sufficient prima acie evidence OF the existence OF the
bank by which the note puported to have been issued
Affirmed
the Hendricks c. c.
PERKINS, 1.-The owner of mere reversionary int.
rest IN land cannot make such conveyance will cnt-
tie the purchaser to the immediate possession.
Where the plaintiff in ejectment traces title to the
land in controversy a person in possession under
deed and to the same source from which the defendant
derives his title, is unnecessary to show patent from
the Government.
Copies of deeds from the Recorders Office atested by
the Recorder and complete copies, under his
official seal may be used by plaintiff in ejecmen
tablsh his title. r. S. PIP 422, 72S.
Where lands are demsed for definite term, notice
to the tenant quit is necessary in order to maintain
ejectmcnt. r.. s. p. Sl7.
An entry adverse to the lawful to be pre-.
sumed. Johns. Cases. 124.
An instrument under the signature and seal Of party
and attested by subscribing witness, acknowledging the
receipt of of money for his interest in particu
lar of land but containing words of conveyance
does convey the legal title to such land Affirmed
Carey v. Baslord. Error to the Noble C. C.
BLAcKFceD, 1.-The mistake in a writ of foreign at.
achment which consisted in its being made returnable
within 20 days and earlier than the term of the
after it issued instead OF the first day Of the next
of the after issued required by statute
(R s. lS43, p. 773,) held be cured by another
statute which provides that all process returnabc at
day fixed by law shall be returnable at such dav al
though different day may be named in said process
r. S. 1913, p. 624.
In suit upon penal bond conditioned for the paw.
men OF particular sum of money, three years with
interest annually, il held that the had right
to determine the due to the plaintiff, and that
writ OF inquiry not necessary. r. s. 1843, p. 73l
Affirmed, with per cent. damages