The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-11-18

Hon G. v. Howk. Chef-iustIce.
The following opinions were rendered Nov. IL:
ABATEMENT TRAoT-coNsIDERATIoN.
l2807 Jacob n. Blacke VS.. Simon Dunbar.
Clinton G. @. Reversed. Howk @. jim
SUIT oy the payee on a note not governed by
the law merchant, when the defendant p Dads In
abatement that the plaintiff is not the real
party In interest, and that he has good, snb-
stantlal. lawful, and equitable defense, if he
fail to state what the defense was or why he
eonld not avail himself of it, there is avail
able error IN sustaining demurrer to the plea.
e. In answer to such suit the appellant averred
that he purchased the land from appellee as
agent of his wife; that the land was inherited by
the wife from her father, and was liable for his
debts: that appellee proposed to stand good to
appellant for the amount to be contributed by
bis wife to pay her fathers debts In reply APP
pellee admitted the contract, but claimed there
was no consideration. reply in suits before
justices is unnecessary, but overruling de-
murrer to a bad reply is not a harmless error.
Appellee admitted the contract, and the consid-
Grafton therein was sufficient.
FARM LEAsE-coNDITIoN PRECEDENT.
1244Z Morgan Andis vs. Amos NJ. Personett.
Hancock G. G. Affirmed. Niblack. IA farm
lease provided that the tenant was to have part
possession at once to sow wheat. All the other
stlpulations were of character which required
some intervening time for their performance
Full possession was to be given four months
later. The tenant was to execute his note
for the rent with interest at per cent. from
the day fixed for giving complete possession, and
due In one year. Held. that the execution of the
note was only condition precedent to the ten
ants right to full possession, and he was not alb
solutely required to execute the note previous to
that time Il. provision in the lease that
the tenant should procure good and approved
freehold surety" was equivalent to saying good
freehold surety worthy of approval
sTREETs-oRDINANCE
1855. Henry Meyer ct al. VS. Anna Fromm ct
al. Dubois G. G. Affirmed. Eli tt, IAN or
dinance establishing the grade of a street is at
least regulation within the meaning of Section
1888, Il. s., and, If it contain no emergency
clause, should be given publication. as required
by statute, to legally establish the grade.
STATUTE o" LIMITATIoNs-NoN- RESIDENT.
$685. Joseph V. Wood ct al. VS.. George p.
Bursell. Marion s. C. Reversed. collars, j.
Where debtor has been all the time resi-
dent of the State the statute Of limitations does
not run against claim arising in this State
(R s., 1881. Sec. 297
ETS-CITY-CHILD-INJUR
1908. City of Indianapolis vs. Henry Emmel-
man. Marion S. c. Affirmed. Mitchell, j.
Streets are open to persons of all ages, and chill
dren are and must be permitted, to some extent
at least, to go upon the streets of towns and
cities, without mourning the imputarion Of neg
Egence for themselves their parents e..
When city, in constructing bridge over a
stream which crosses street. dug hole in the
bed of the stream and left the hole in such a
condition that it was of easy approach it was
the duty of the city to suitably guard the hole,
or if this was impracticable, give timely warn
ing to the parents who had no knowledge of the
danger. Failing to do this it is liable to the
parent for injuries to the child of five years who
fell into the hole. g. The right of the child
to go upon the streets is not dependent on the
pecuniary condition of the parent.
13349 Board etc. of Wells county VS..
Franklin Roab. Wells G. G. Dismissed.
1924. Board, etc. of Wells county ct al vs..
John G. Bennett. Wells G. G. Dismissed.
DECISIONS FILED YESTERDAY
The following decisions were rendered Nov.
II, abstracts of which will appear tomorrow:
12S49 Michael Quill ct al. VS.. Thomas J.
Gallivan Wells q. G. Affirmed. Elliott, j.
1852 Monroe Blackburn ct al. vs. Robert
II. Crowell ct al Lawrence G. c. Affirmed.
Mitchell, ].
12l55 Moses Huller VS.. Catherine J. Clark.
Henry G. G. Dismissed.
1902 Thomas E. Watts vs. Ingram Fletcher.
Marion S. c. Rehearing denied.
1899. Gotteib Vogel VS.. State ex rel. VIM.
A. Land. Perry c. G. Rehearng denied.
124l6 Giles w. Burrow VS.. t. II. & L. Rail-
way Company. Marshall G. G. Rehearing de-
MED.