The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-03-24
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS.
United States District Court.
Hon. w. A. Woods. Judge
To-day-No special call.
snpreme Court.

Supreme Court.
Hon. W. Z. Nsblack, Chief-iustice
The following decssions were rendered March
12701. Central Union Telephone Company vs..
STATE ex rel Daniel b. Brad bury Marion s. G.
Affirmed Niblack, G. j. a. The act of April
10, 1885, concerning the telephone, is valid and
constitutional t2) The meaning given to the
word telephone" as used in that act, in Hockett
We. State, decided recently. adhered to.
$780, John Sanduerlen vs. John Wheeler.
Shelby c. c. Affirmed collars I'LL When
q paper asking for subscriptions to build a
church, provides to be paid to named individu-
al as treasurer, he is the trustee OF an express
trust and may maintain an action to collect the
amounts subscribed without joining the cestui
que trust, although his appointment is subse-
quent to the date of the paper. ~ A contract
that "We. the undersigned, promise to pay the
following subscriptions for new church" etc.
and the amount each subscriber is set opposite
his name is not joint, and each is individually IL
able. 49, Instructions copied into the record
and denominated by the clerk instructions of
She court to the jury not part of the record.
a. A subscriber who was present at a meeting
when the subscriptions were read and offered no
objections, and the church is built on the faith
of the subscriptions, ratifes hts contract and
cannot escape liability on the ground that the
name of the payee was inserted after he sub
scribed
12548. Eliza A. Sims ct al. vs. George W.
Cooper OF al Brown G. G. Affirmed. Elliott,
landlords they are not entitled to notice to
butt and, and no demand is necessary before
bringing ar action to recover possession and to
quiet title.
l2058. Samuel Gullett VS.. Ruth Miller Orange
z. G. Affirmed. Howk, JILL Where a plant
lff seeks merely that her share Of real estate
may be set off to her in severalty, and does not
claim possession or ask that her title may be
quieted. to which the defendant enters general
denial, the defendant is not entitled to a new
trial as matter Of right under Section 1904.
r. Section 1911 is merely legislative recogni-
zion of the decisions of this court applying the
statutory motion for new trial as OF right to
partition cases whenever it is shown by the rec
ord that the title to real estate is IN good faith
Involved in the issues
1894 Martha A. Spencer ct al. VS.. William
M. Robbins ct al. Sullivan C. G. Reversed.
Mitchell, I'LL Suit for partition. The defend
ants, by cross-complaint, set up an instrument
TO them, in substance that Eliza Robbins con-
yeyed and warranted to them, and for natural
love and affection and So, the real estate in con-
troversy, as tenants in common in the following
proportions: TO be equally divided between
them, at her decease, after payment OF funeral
expenses the defendants to pay taxes, repairs
and improvements during her natural life; the
paper being dated and acknowledged with the
Iormalities of a deed An instrument executed
Donfornably to the statute, which is to operate
10 the lifetime of the grantor. and which passes
any estate in the property during
J the grantor's lifetime,i even through the
:. absolute enjoyment of the estate,
passed is postponed until after the grantors
death, is deed and not will (2l It is with
in the discretion of the trial court whether a
question may be asked witness in cross-exam-
ination for the purpose Of showing and lmpeach-
ing his moral character. (3) The term party"
as used in Section 400, means party to the issue
and not to the record. AZ Where it is disputed
whether or not deed was delivered, declara-
tions OF the grantor in the presence of of the
q lntees against his interest were competent as
directed to the issue made upon the delivery Of
the deed. (5.) A request to submit particular
question to a jury in case triable by jury, is a
waiver of right to jury trial of the case gen