The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-05-18
SUPREME coURT-MAY II.

tCOUNI1 TkEASUkERS-ASS ASSESSMENT OF IhAESs
1866; Samuel Hamilton vs.. Eleazer Ans
Elliott, 1.-The treasurer of Shelby county
charged against appellant taxes for years prior
to 1879, and this action was brought to eniOin
their collection. Assessments made by an UNI
authorized person cannot be enforced. The
treasurer is authorized to make special assess
ments only IN particular cases and within Inn
tied time, and If he undertakes TO make them in
other cases or at other times his acts are void.
No authority is given him to revise the yalua-
ton Ofproperty made by the proper officers.
80 Ind, 4G6; rs Id, 353D Judgment reversed.
MARRIED woMEN-LIABILITY FOR DEBTS con-
\ TRACTED.
1910, Mary Burf VS.. Emanuel Platt. Marion
Hammond, 1.-The question present
estate of a married woman is sub
Deen answered In the affirmative. 40 ind, 250;
A i'd AL; 50 i'd, 419) 1t is claimed. however,
that under sections 5,115, 5,lf6 and 5,1l7 r.
;. 1881, only her personal property Is liable
Constituting all the sections together, the only
disabilities of married women with respect to
their separate real estate are those imposed by
section 5,1l7. This section pr0hibits them from
making any executory contract TO sell, convey
or mortgage their real estate, and from convey
ing or mOrtgaging the same unless their husbands
join IN such contract, conveyance or mortgage
AS the lien of a Judgment ID purely statutory
ana does not arise out of contract, section 0,l17
does not apply TO judgments. The course. of leg
slation1s In the direction of eniarging the prop
erty' rights OF married women. and these
snaSsd sses sY seed 5a
., l22 eoventuTe is no bar to q narried woman's
contracting debts i'll carrying on any trade, labor
or business on her sole account or as partner
with another. If she can contract such debts it
follows that their collection may be enforced.
The Legislature did not intend to give married
women the power to contract debts in carrying
on business and at the same time greatly impair
their credit by making their personal property
alone subject to the payment thereof. In all
WhRra n married
debt her property, both real and personal. is
liable for Its payment the same If she were
unmarried. Judgment affirmed.
CRIMINAL LAw-TEsTIMoNY OF ACcoMPLICE.
1O,905. Ellis Ayres We The State. Perry c.
Elliott, ]. An accused may be convicted on
the testimony OF an aceomplice. (65 Ind,
269; IA i'd, SD Bnt in this case there
Is other evidence corrOborafing The statements
of the accomplish. When the record does not
afhrmatlvely show that the accused was. called
on TO snow cause why Judgment SHOULD not be
pronounced on the verdict, but shows that mo-
ton for a new trial was overFuled and an appeal
prayed, 1t Is clear that the accused was not
harmed. BY such motion and appeal he was
awarded all the substantial rights that the law
accOrds him. Judgment affirmed
SWAMP LANDs-UEREcoRDED PATENT
9,944. John A. Ntche VS.. John e.. Earle
Lake &. G.
Howk. i'm 1857 George Earle bought of the
State certain swamp land and received patent
therefor, which he did not have recorded in the
county where the land is situated until 1873.
In 1866, Palmer. after due inquiry of the proper
officers and upon information that the land was
unsOld, purchased the saIle land from the State
and received a - which he had duly re-
corded. By mesre conveyances from
Palme the land came to appellant in 1869, who
paid value and had no notice of Eares claim
The land was wild and un0coupied until appel
liant took possession of 1t and made improve
ments 1t is claimed, on the authority of 81
Ind, 519, that it Was not necessary that the
deed from the State TO Earl should be recorded
in the county. Bnt in section of the act of
June A. 1852. supplemental TO the swamp land
act it is provided that such deeds shall be re-
corded by the Secretary of State in his office.
q G.. & H., 6071 AS the appellee, VINO was
plaintiff, must recover upon the strength of his
own title, IT. was incul bent on him 10 show such
record of his deed in the office of the Secretary
of State, and the silence Of the special finding as
to such record must be held as q finding against
tina appellee on that question. az Ind, 26 20
id, $40 Upon the special finding the appellant
mad the better title to the land. Judgment re-
versed.