The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-06-18
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme COurt-June II.
Hon. Byron II. Elliot, Chief Justice.

DELAY IN FILING NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
1887. Mark Jones, administrator vs.. Lewis +.
johnson. Clinton, G. G..
Hammond. J.-Suit TO forecOse a mortgage by the
appellant against the appellee. Motion by the appel
lee to stay proceedings until the costs Of former
proceeding were paid sustained. Twenty days
afterwards appellant offered to file counter affidavit
against the appellees affidavit for stay, which the
court refused He gave no excuse Tor the delay.
Held; That it was properly refused very large
discretion is necessarily reposed in the trial courts IN
such matters; and unless the record presents pal
pablo abuse of such discretion, the Supreme Court
cannot interfere. Judgment affirmed.
RELATIONSHIPS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY.
1909. The Standard Oil Co. VS.. John NJ Combs,
treasurer etc. Perry G.. C..
Elliott c. 1.-The appellant had contracted for GER
tain slaves to be delivered III Perry county for the
purpose of being 'hueked THAT is brought to uni
form thickness and slightly rounded. While in the
place where they deposited according the
tract 5axes levied on them which levy is the
basis of the present action Held that property in the
of transit through this State, and here only for
ton. $50 Ind, l; 80 N. j. 35.l If, however, the
property is here for different purpose it may be
subjected to taxation by laws, although its
may reside in another State. There is difference be-
tween property of tangible nature and chooses il,
action; property of the former character is liable to
assessment wherever it has sitas while taxes
chooses in action, general rule. leviable against
the under the laws of the State of his domice
go Ind, 472; s. c., 26 Am. r., Of; Bur
roughs Tax, section 40; Cooley Tax, Ia; II r. T.,
321J Here the slaves were in this State for
more than a temporary purpose connected with its
transportation. The sltus of the property does not
depend the extent of the work that is to be done
upon it. For # it is here to be put through any of
the stages in the process Of manufacture IT is here for
puspose which legitinately subjects it to taxation
t27 Ind, 2S8, q Ind, 1855; 70 Ill., I25; Fed.
Rep, 745; 80 Cal, 1872; 81 Tex, 1851 While the
property was here awaiting the execution of the pup
pose twas within the protection of laws and
bear its share of the public burdens. "A nation within
whose territory any property is actually situated
has entire dominion it while therein IN point
of sovereignty and jurisdiction, it has mov
able property situated therein STORY Conf of Laws
see. $50; 76 Ind, 512; s Q. 40 Ana. Rep, 25S; 2
Wall, 1897 Property in this State for the purpose
of being subjected to process essential to its fitness
for sale use, rs situated here matter what may
be its ultimate destination And there no interfer
ence with Interstate (under &. s. Const.,
Art l. sec. 81 in taxing it. This is ajax
merce but merely on property situated here Cooley
1t involves no discrimination against non-residents,
nor does il regulate commerce Q02 u s., 344,
697; 100 u. S., 676; Wall. ITO; ) WALL 475
462; WALL 1888; u Wheat. 419)
Many acts of legislation indirectly affecting com
meree have been upheld and the general rule is hatf
the legislation does not the form or effect of
regulation of commerce. it does not violate the ma
tional Constitution 94 y. s.. 1I3; 90 o. s., 90; Is
Wall, 293; ~ How, 299; 129 Mass, S. $. G. 81,
Am. Rep, 3S7; W. U. Tel. Co. Pendleton; 3 Ind.
Law Mag, 25.) The provision of the United States
Constitution art |, 10Y that mo State shall
duties on imports or exports, except what may be alb
soutey necessary for executing its inspection laws
does not apply to articles brought into State from
another to articles intended to be carried out of
one State into another but applies only intercourse
with foreign nations. e Wall, 1913. las; 100 u S.,
GIG; SO La. An. s43; s. G. 80 Am. Rep, 2s4; i'd,
647j s. G. 80 Am. Rep 279; 10 Rich, (I1aw) 474;
S. g. NJ, 591.l Judgment affirmed.
11165. l., B. & W. Ry. Co. VS.. Eglam S. McBloom.
Warren c. c.
Elliott c. J.-Appeal from Warren county, to which
the cause was taken by change of from Fountain
county. The Introductory clause of the assignment
of errors. was: 1.-THE appellant says that there
proceedings of this cause in the Circuit
Court OF Fountain county Indiana, in this, towit
Held That this statement confines the assignment to
errors committed in Fountain county, and does not
extend to any committed in Warren county (33 Ind,
30; 8 Ind, 257, 354; "a Ind, So; GA Ind, 29S;
ITO Powell, App. Proc. 277.) The principle which
these proceeds that the assignment of errors is
in the nature of complaint and the Supreme Court
is bound give the same effect to the statements of
the assignment of the trial court bound to
give to the statements of ompaint-although if the
question were an open one, we Inght be reluctant
adopt rule rigorous that laid down by of
the adjudged cases. Judgment affirmed.
PROCEEDINGS BY AFFIDAVIT AND INFORMATION
PROOF
11701. James Elder State of Indiana. Clay
&C.
1879. Arrest was made while the court was in SEES
sion; but before the grand jury met. Held: That the
subsequent meeting of the grand jury did not deprive
attached under r. s. 1879. 1t is we'll
recognized principle, pertaining to the juris-
diction of courts that when court once acquires
jurisdiction of cause, it is entitled retain its
jurisdiction until the is disposed of despite any
new proceeding which may thereafter be commenced
IN the same or any other court covering the sub
jeet-matter.
Sec. 1873 provides that in prosecutions for felony
by information it shall not be necessary prove the
facts showing the right of the State to prosecute in
that way unless such facts are put in issue by
verified plea in abatement. (S5 Ind, SCI 81 Ind. 81
Sec. 1879 is constitutional. Its provisions are
sufficiently indicated IN the title of the act And it
not special legislation being of uniform operation
throughout the State. az Ind, 99.l Judgment af
irmed.
TIE cJER'c W AcRsS1rrr ac ,rDrc4 ccrYorr ,So1x-Nr
sHIP-DEFENsEs
1880. Harrison school township, etc., VS.. VIII
lam w. McGregor. Clay c. c.
Howk, IA suit for wages ought 10 be brought
against the school township and against the civil
township (67 Ind, 3Sol The power of school
township to sue, and its liability to be
sued, have been Recognized in many
of the cases decided in this court,
(55 Ind, 1876; 50 Ind, 65; 81 Ind. $50 60 Ind
plead in bar of action in its written contract that
has funds on hands wherewth to pay its Just in
debtedness. $50 Ind, 276)
1t objected herein that the proper action would
have been mandate against the township trustee.
But it is not shown that ordinary civil action would
be resorted to in the first instance COL Ind 81
Especially is this so where, in this case, the validity
ofthe plaintiffs claim is contested Estate ex rel VS.
Snodgrass, trustee; Ind. Law Mag, 1879
Where a demurrer is improperly sustained to a par
agrapn of answer, the will be harmless one If
the evidence is admissible under other paragraphs re-
manning IN the record. f26 Ind, TO- SO Ind, IT'S;
So Ind, 2SS; 81 Ind, 229)
Afhdavits must be made part of the record ON ap
peal by bill of exceptions, an order of court;
or they cannot be considered. &c Ind, 80; 70 Ind
1884, rs Ind, $50; 81 Ind, 53J
s-