The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-06-16
THE RECORD OF THE COURTS.
United States District Court.
Hon. w. A. Woods. Judge.
To-daY-No call
Supreme Court.

Supreme Court.
Hon. G.. v. Howk, Chef-justic
The following decisions were rendered June Is:
13l08 John Mulreed Vs. State. Delaware c.
c. Affirmed Howk, G. J.-Indictment for SELL
ing liquor to minor. H. Instruction, That If
| the defendant bona fide believed the minor to
be of full age. and used due to ascertain his
age, it was proper. ~ The evidence sustains
the verdict
1891 Western Union Telegraph Company
VS.. Abba K, Locke, administrator Huntington
O. Z Dismissed. Elliott, Jan order requir-
ing party to produce document is not a final
Judgment or interlocutory order, and an appeal
therefrom will not lie.
1880. The State ex rel. Board of Commits
sioners of Allen county VS.. Lewis O. Miller.
auditor. Adams C. G. Reversed. Niblack, j.
So much of Section IA as was applicable to
criminal case was superseded by sections 1778
and 1719, and allowance regularly made to
attorneys, either for prosecuting or defending in
criminal case, by circuit or criminal court on
a change of venue, come within the provisions
OF the latter sections, and the county from which
the change was taken is liable.
12513 Weed Sewing Machine Company vs.
George N. Winchell ct al. Grant c. G. At
frmed. Mitchell, I'LL Where a bond given
to principal provided that the agent would well
and truly pay every Indebtedness and liability
now existing, which may hereafter exist or
be incurred by the agent, whether said indebted
ness shall exist in accounts notes, etc.. and that
continuing guaranty until after notice
is given in writing to the principal, it is q
contract of guaranty. u Where bond and
contract of agency were executed together, the
liability of the suretes cannot be extended be-
yond the scope of the contract, and where the
agent purchased goods of the principal after his
contract of agency had terminated and the settle
ment between the principal and agent was
agreed upon as to amounts due from him as
agent, without the consent of the sureties. the
latter are not liable.
1861. Jonas Johnson VS.. Board of Commits
siouers of Wells County ct al Wells c. G. At
frmed. collars, 1.-The act of 1885. which le-
galized the acts of the commissioners of Wells
county in relation to the Bluffton e. Rockford
Gravel-road Company, which were decided void
because the initiatory steps in the proceedings
were taken at session to receive school trustees
| reports, is not unconstitutional as being retro
spective in terms and effect; as being
in conflict with Sec %, of Art A. which de-
clares that in all cases enumerated in Sec. %,
and in all cases where general law can be made
form operation throughout the State; as being
in conflict with Sec % of Art 4, which de-
clares that the General Assembly shall not pass
local or special laws in certain cases. among
which is "For the laying out, opening and
working on highways as being an infringement
on the judicial department by the Legislature
1885, Board Of Commissioners of Knox coun-
ty VS.. John NJ. Barnett. Rehearing denied.
Daviess c. c.
1864 Thomas Blake ct al VS.. John c. Viii
son. Dismissed. Porter C. q.
1885. John F. Brown VS.. Clement q. Jones
| ct al. Certiorai issued. WarrNn G. @.
1922 James M. Justice, jr, VS. James M.
Justice, ST. Motion to dismiss overruled. Cass
&C.