The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1891-01-30
The Court Record.
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.


14736. Lavinia Buck vs. David w. Hughes.
Montgomery C.. c. Affirmed. Odds. {. IA
contract whereby q married woman upon
a sale of her real estate is to receive in
terest upon the purchase money at a fixed
rate per annum, and the, principal to be
payable at her death. but in case of the
death of her husband, or she should sep
arate from him, the principal becomes pay
able, ia valid. 2. Where a juror, upon in
curry, replied that he had not served as
juror in q former trial between the same
parties, q new trial will not be granted for
misconduct of the juror when 1T appears
that the complaining party was present at
both trials and made no objection to such
juror.
14473. Samuel Broden VS.. Stansbury W.
Lennon ct al. Noble G.. C.. Reversed.
Coffey, Payment is q question of fact,
and when the ultimate fact In issue be-
and the special finding fails to find the fact
of payment, the conclusions of law which
show payment cannot aid the finding.
1868. Thomas N. Bryan ct al. vs.. Charles
c. Watson. Marion s. &. Reversed. Berk-
shire. IA subscription to aid in paying
for a church building made on Sunday is
valid. being u work of charity within the
exception of Section 1000. r. 1881.
l5774 John Sage VS.. State. Grant c. c.
Affirmed. Elliott. J.-Indictment for muir
der. Where qualified jurors are secured an
error or irregularity In calling or mpan-
neling them does not supply ground for a
Judgment of abatement. z. The act OF 1889
lElliott's Sup. Sec. 3s2l amending Section
1888 X. s., which defines and prescribes the
punishment of an accessory before the fact.
is not different from the former law except
as to the remedy. The omission to give the
offense o formal name is not important. A
change In the remedy is not within the
constitutional inhibition. anu the act OF
1889. applied to an Offense committed before
it's enactment, is not ex post facto legisla-
ton. 3. An amendatory statute defining an
offense IN substantially the same language
as that employed III the statute it amends
does not tax away the right of the State to
prosecute an offense committed before such
act. 4. 1t was competent for the State to
show illicit relations and pregnancy of
Eliza Sage, the principal. and the defend
ant. but he c0nld not show her specific acts
of immortality with other men. Proof that
the husband and wife were in a room by
themselves after arrest does not violate the
rule protecting communications between
husband and wife. 5. The accused had no
right, on cross-examination by the coroner.
to inquire whether his statement was all
reduced to writing. 6. 1t vas not error to
refuse to permit appellant to impeach the
character of a witness at u place where she
had not been for seven years.
147l1. Samuel Il. Roman VS.. John l..
Judson ct al. Elkhart G. c. Reversed.
ODDS. C.. J.-Where a debtor entered into a
contract by chich a third person agreed to
pay the debt, in an action on the debt such
debtor is not a necessary party.
14723. Jeanette Roberts va. Nancy Alb
bott ct al. Montgomery G.. c. Reversed.
Coffey. jim an action to set aside a will
and to establish another will, persons who
purchased property of the beneficiary nm
der the probated will are proven parties de-
PENDANT. 2. The fact that the plaintiff be-
gan suit against the t~estator for services
and the conversion of property, and prose-
crted 1t to Judgment against his estate and