The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-09-26
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court-sept. 20,
MALICIOUS Observation-Disclosures.


11,162. The stateys. James r. Cole, switz-
Niolack, c. 1.-The injuries against which the
statute of malicious trespass is directed are not
such as are inflicted with intent 10 gain by
another's loss, but those which arise out of a
spirit of wantOn cruelty, destructiyeness or re-
venge, and as result in a partial or total de-
structlon OF property or in specific INJURY TO
properly, rendering it less valuable for the l'ur
pose for which 1t is designed. Dish Or. L.. see.
sos; wharton Or. L. Sec 2,OOIi Moure's Or. l.. sec.
900; Bish, Stat. Or. sec. 43O). An affidavit cbarg
ing the mere carrying away and selling of the
property of another, without right, presumably
for the benefit of the defendant shows no case
under the statute. Judgment affirmed.
DIvoRCE-ALIMoNY-HU EARNINGS.
9,608. Orange H. Logan vs.. Clara b. Logan.
Decatur e. c.
collars, 1.-THE trial court has a discretion in
divorce cases to fix the amount of anmony and
this court cannot interfere in such cases
unless it is clear that there has been
c5s Ind 57S 79id 1868; 81 i'd, 1897 Fne value
of the husbands property is not the Ouiy basis
for fixing the amount of alimony. The health
and circumstances of the husband and his ability
to earn money may also be considered. q Bish.
Mar. ard Div, secs. 446, 457) The value of the
husbands properly is not limited to the time
when the action for divorce was begun, but
may be considered with reference to the time
when the separation took place, The statuteeX-
pressly provides that provision for tile support
OF the minor children may be made, and IL is not
error to make an allowance for alimOny and an
other for the support of minor children. 1877 Ind,
IO1I III luz 4OOJ JuNSl ltHb uIlIfneu.
TRUsTEE-TAKING SECOND MoRTGAGE-PUR-
CHASER.
10000. Michael Shney VS.. Mary Latta. Elk
hart, c. c.
Elliott, J.-Copeland was administrator, with
the will annexed, of the estate of Beebee the
will directing that the money of the estate
should be loaned and the interest paid to his
widow during her life. Copeland held q mort
gage in his individul capacity GER
tain real estate owned by G0stner, and
as administrator took a second mortgage
ON the property for money loaned
from the estate. Appellee, without actual notice.
the first mortgage. Shuey, Copeland's successor
in the trust, agreed with Gostner to extend the
time of payment of the debt due the estate for
six months. Held: Such extension did not re-
lease the mort gage lien nor take from it any prl
oriJy il possessed. tJouess Mort, sec. 924; %
Ina, 1927; 63 i'd, 1907 By virtue of the prJvis-
ion Of the will directing the loan of the money
cestui que trust. (l31 Mass, 573; SS N. Y, 1919
Investments Of trust funds must be made not to
favor friends nor to promote individual inter
ests but for the best interest of the estate. Safe
investments must be sought, and as a general
rule real estate encountered by prior liens is not
a safe investment. go Hun, 1914; SO N. Y, 535:
80 N. j. Ed, GID 1t was the duty of the trustee
considers that as done which ought to have been
done, the mortgage taken by him in
his trust capacity must be held to eon-
stitute the prior lien. A purchaser of
an interest in land burdened with an
equity in favor of a trust of which
he has actual or constructive notice, holds
subject to the trust, aud as the appellee bought
the note and mortgage after maturity, the weak
ness or the asslgnor's title affected hers Judg-
ment reversed.