The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-09-21
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS.
United States District Court.
hon. w. A. Woods, JudGa.
To-day no special calls.
Supreme Court.

supreme court
The following decisions were rendered on Sat
urday:
No. l2237. Sarah e. Brown VS.. William Will
Starke c. G. Reversed. Howk, J.-Q) A mar
rled woman cannot enter into contract for
suretyship for her husband. ~ A plaintiff
must recover secundun allegata ct probate. He
mustErecover upon the case stated in his COM
plant and where the court finds in his favor
cause of action substantially different from that
stated In his complaint he cannot recover in that
suit.
No. 1919. w, St L. & P R. W. Company vs.
Frederick Lash Warren G. G. Affirmed FOL
lars jim complaint in action commenced
before mayor OF a city against railroad for
stock killed when there was no fence an aver
ment the animals were killed by its ldefendant's)
locomotives, cars and carriages, ON its railway,
sufficiently shows that defendant was in posses
sion and operating the train. III A COM
plant sufficient before a mayor must be in
the Circuit Court The rules of pleading and
practice, though more liberal before mayor.
are to be observed in the Circuit Court on ap-
peal. (3.) The complaint charged that the
animals were killed near the city. This not be-
ing an action in rem, but against the corpora
ton, 1t would seem to make no difference that
killing may have been done without the city
limits to confer jurisdiction on the mayor. but
appellant having entered appearance, objections
to jurisdiction are deemed waived.
No. 1906 Charlottesville & Southwestern
Turnpike Company VS.. Charles L. Fletcher
Montgomery G. G. Reversed. Elliott. i'll. J
The act of 1859 prohibiting the collection of tolls
on gravel roads in certain cases is con-
stitutional statute embracing a single
subject is constitutional, no matter how
fully it may enter into the details of
that subject Il The statute, as amended
In 1875. vests in courts authority to declare a
forfeiture for designated breaches of duty
t3.l In suit to have the charter of a
gravel road forfeited, it cannot be presumed
that the private corporation was incorporated
under the general law and the complaint must
show by proper averments when the corporation
was organized, or under what law the corpora
ton Was created. This applies whore two com
panies had consolidated, and the rights of the
new corporation were sought TO be forfeited
The complaint here does not state any facts
enabling the court to ascertain what rights went
to the consolidated corporation, aud it is bad.
No. 1000 Western Union Telegraph Com
pany vs. John S. Ferris. Shelby c. G. Affirmed.
Mitchell, @. J.-(l) The statute providing a
penalty against a telegraph company for failure
to transmit messages applies also to messages
sent out of the State f. Where an answer in
such suit AYERS that the telegram was season
ably transmitted, and that payment had not
been made or rendered according to the regula-
lions of the company it is not plea of confes-
sion and avoidance, but merely an attempt to
argumentativey deny the complaint. g. An
answer must be considered without looking to
the exhibits.
No. 1904. BENJAMIN Binford VS.. Marcellus
III. Adams Hancock c. c. Certiorari issued
No. 12459. Thomas Written OF al VS.. Thomas
Clayton ct al. Elkhart G. @. Injunction dis
solved.