The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-12-21
COAL MINE-FALsE REPREsENTATIo
SUPREME COURT-DEC. 20.

1898. Ell Thomas, administrator, VS., Samuel
T. Stewart. Grant G. c.
Elliott IA plea OF former adjudication is
not sustained by production OF the entry of
Judgment without any other part of the papers
by appellant was the docket entry of the justice
before whom the Judgment relied on was rem
dered, there is not sufficient evidence to sustain
the defense of former recovery. Judgment az
firmed.
RAPE-sExUAL CONNECTION THROUGH FRAUD.
11,151. Mark Pomeroy VS.. The State. Knox
C. @. Pr
Howk, G. J.-Where one, processing to be a
ply sician obtains pc session and control of a
woman's person under pretense of making an
examination of an alleged disease of the womb,
and thus obtains sexual connection with her
against her consent, such is guilty of the crime of
rape. e L. Rep, B. D., 40; 10 Mich. 427 2
Bish. Or. Law, 9TH edr sec 1,l20) Judgment
affirmed.
HABEAs CORPUs-PRACTICE
1922. James 7. Farmervs. William NJ Lewis.
Hancock G. O.
Hammond, 1.-THE guilt or innocence of a
prisoner with the view of his discharge if inno-
cent, cannot be inquired into upon tine writ of
habeas corpus when he has been committed upon
a warrant issued upon an affidavit and iuforna-
tion filed against him in the Circuit Court in a
case of which the court has jurisdiction of the
subiect-matter of the charge. His guilt or in
nOcence can be properly determined in the trial
of the case upon It's merits, and the employment
of the writ in such case is unauthorized. Sec.
Ind, 4i3 i'd, $50; z i'd, S24; 6s i'd, 50; Cooley
Const. Linn, D. 347J Judgment affirmed.
MANDATE-PRACTICE.
1888 Elk rel Solomon Snyder rs Comme-
doreP Riggs. Sullivan c. c.
EllIott,' Appellant alleged that the commits
siOners of Sullivan county made an order allow
ing to each person who should enlist In the army
$500; that the relator became a
soldier and entitled to that sum, and
that warrant was issued for the
amount, which had never been paid, but was lost.
Prayer for mandate. The return to the altern-
alive writ averred that the warrant was paid to
the REALTORS wife, with his knowledge and the
money used in the support of the REALTORS fami-
ly. AS no question as to the sufficiency of this
return was made in the trial court, none can be
urged here. (High Elk. Leg. Rem 1861 The
evidence strongly tends to sustain the verdict.
judgment aftlrmed.
BOND OF Observation-Disclosures OF sURETIEs.
$500. City of Lafayette VS.. Dundy A. James
ct nj. TippecanOe G. G.
collars, J.-Appeee was elected by the City
Council superintendent of waterwnrks, and
gave bond for the faithful accounting for all
moneys that might come in to his hands as such
superintendent The city had not had such an
officer before, and there was no legislation what
ever on the subject. AT the same session of the
council at which the bond was approved, the
council passed an ordinance fixing the duties of
such superintendent, among which were to
collect water rents. Having defaulted In tnrn-
ing over money collected, the city sued upon
his bond. The only question is were the
suretes liable for such defacaton? There was
no legislation prior TO the appointment of James
providing for the appointment of a superin tend
ent of water-works as a city officer. Not ben g
within the meaning of section 5.52S of the Re-
yised Statutes, which makes official bonds oblig-
atory upon sureties for the faithful discharge of
additional duties imposed upon the principal by
law. AS the collection of water rents was not
included in the original engagement, but an
additional duty of entirely different chara G.
ter, the sureties were not bound for appeIee's
defalcatiOn in falling to pay over the money col
lected from sueh rents. go N. Y, 42l; 80 Am.
r 237 Al Mich. 339J Judgment affirmed.
REFUNDING OF TAXES wRoNGFULLY ASSESSED
County Bartholomew G. c.
Black, C.-Claims filed before the board of com
missioners need not possess all the essentials of
a complaint. 1t is sufficient to state the claim
20; SO i'd, 81; 81 i'd, 543l BY the
act of March 8, 1873, the Legisla-
ture recognized the invadity of the
proceedings by which the appraisements of real
property in Bartholomew county were increased
as shown in the complaint and provided for re-
funding from the State treasury to the respec-
tive counties the sums thus wrongfuly collected.