The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-01-23
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS
Supreme Court-Jan. 22.
Hon. Geo. " Howk. Chief Justice.
DOCUMENTARY NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..


DOCUMENTARY MISREPRESENTATION
1920. Christ. Ehlert VS.. The State White
G. G.
collars, jim order to present any question
upon the exclusion of documentary evidence the
document excluded must be brought into the
record. ia Ind, 261; 20 i'd, 576.l The refusal
to give instructions asked for cannot be regarded
as error unless the instructions given are also in
the record. "a Ind, III; 60 i'd, 307.) Evidence
that the person to whom liquor was sold was
nineteen years old in August preceding the trial.
sufficiently shows that he was minor when the
liquor was sold to him. The argument made in
Meyer VS.. The State, so Ind, Is, is too refined
and technical to be approved. Judgment af
frmed.
vENDER's Observation-Disclosures
1080C. John Baker VS.. Samuel A. Gilbert ct AL
Switzerland c. @.
Hammond J.-Since April, 49, 1866, it has
been competent for an infant wife of
an adult husband to join with him
Sec. 2943, R. S.. In 1869 appellant sold land to
"a married woman, she and her husband giving a
note for the unpaid purchase money. As the
note OF a married woman was then void the APP
pellant received only the note of the husband
and this was no waiver of his vendors lein. $50
Ind, AL 60 Ind, 296; 81 i'd, 1851 In 1872 the
grantees conveyed the land to a daughter of the
wife, who paid nothing for the conveyance, but
her husband gave his note, secured by mortgage
on the land for the unpaid purchase money.
This mortgage purported to be, but in fact was
not signed by the wife. As the daughter was a
mere volunteer, appellants lein was not affected
by the conveyance to her 70 Ind, 400; "A Ind +,
429 SO i'd, IL AS appellant receipted the mort
gage in ignorance of the wifes infancy, or of the
fact that she had not executed it in good faith,
the fact constituted no waiver of his lien. (60
Ind, Ga Judgment reversed.
sEDueTIoN-BREAoH OF PROMISE.
11183. Levi F. Ireland VS.. Ida Emmerson.
Gibson G. c.
Howk, c. J.-In an action for seduction
it is not necessary to that the seduction was
accomplished under promise of marriage. The
averment is often made as matter of induce
ment, explanation or aggravation. But If made,
as 1t is not necessary averment, a judgment in
the suit for seduction will not conclude the
plaintiff from maintaining action for the
breach of promise of marriage. Judgment af-
frmed.
SERIES OF HORSEPOWER ADJUDICATION.
9510 David B. Creviston VS.. John w. Cleave-
land. Marshall G. C.
Niblack, J.-Suit by appellee as assignee upon
pronlissory note executed by appellant
Answer that the note was one of series falling
due at different times and that plaintiff brought
suit on one of the notes falling due at an earlier
date, in which action defendant had Judgment in
his favor, on the ground that there was
no consideration for the notes and
that plaintiff purchased them with full
notice of all the facts. This was good answer
of res adjudicata. Wells Res. Adjud., see. 233;
Cowen, 120, Otto, 351; IA Ind. ass; 81 i'd,
1872; As i'd, 1885, 66 i'd, 410; 70 i'd, 1873 Jpdg-
nent reversed. t4e
LEAsE-PRELDIINARY CONTRACT. p
1074S. John Il. Phillbrooks VS.. George P.
Emswiler. Wayne G. G.
Elliott, J.-Where a lease or deed is preceded
by preliminary negotiations, either written or
oral and is full and complete in itself. it must be
deemed the expression of the contract of the
parties, and measures their rights. Wharf
Cont, sec. 5; Is S. & R., 1872; 80 Eng @. L., ISL;
% N. Y, 516; 40 Ind, IS; % i'd, 56) A pre-
hminary contract, providing for the execution of
lease, and, also, stipulating as to distinct and
the latter, but as to the contract of letting and
all matters directly involved. in it, the lease,
when executed, expresses the ultimate agree
ment of the parties, Judgment affirmed.