The Indianapolis journal., 1896-10-03

and complete copy of all the papers and
entries in the cause, the certificate is prop
1881. W. L.. Telegraph Company VS.. The
State Marion G; G. Affirmed Howard
J.-f a demurrer is sustained to an answer
such answer is taken out of the record and
cannot be brought into the record on Sec
ond answer by reference. 2. Where prop
erty is of special and peculiar class,
special remedies are appropriate to bring
about that equality required in assessment
and collection of taxes. 3. The power to
impose taxes for the support of the gov
ernment subject to the limitations of the
Constitution, belongs to the Legislature
fication thereof and the methods of collec-
ton are purely legislative matters. 4.
Where one is called upon to pay tax which
he thinks is illegal he has two courses to
pursue, FIRST he may resist payment al the
hazard of all penalties in case the decision
is against him; second, he may pay the
tax under protest, and in case the decision
is in his favor he may demand return of
his money
1775S. Croft VS. Clark. Marion s. c. At
firmed. Hackney. 1.-THE only errors
which will warrant the reversal of Judg-
ment are such affirmatiyely appear to
have Drejudiced the substantial rights of
the party aDDepaling.
Appellate Court.
1866, Reath VS.. State ex rel. Johnson.
Where a person sells liquor which causes
damages contemplated by Sec. 72SS, r. s.,
1894, he is liable therefor, neither are his
bondsmen relieved. even though the sale
made by the bartender and not by the
owner of the saloon. 2 Where minor 5
death is caused by the unlawful sale of
liquor the fathers right of action remains,
although the father was able to and was
earning more than enough money to sup
port his family at the time of his sons
death, the son having contributed his earn
ings to his father.
firmed. Davis, c. il. An action of tres
pass for an injury to real estate must be
brought in the county where the real es-
2135 Power and Water Company VS..
Town of Petersburg: Pike G. c. Affirmed
recover an Indebtedness for lights fur
nished it is not necessary to allege in the
complaint that the amount has not been
allowed by the board of trustees, or that
there are funds in the hands of the treas
to pay the bill or that the indebted
could have been paid at any time be-
fore the beginning of the suit, when the
complaint shows that the light contracted
ing and the same is due. and unpaid. g.
When a specification of error is joint as to
several rulings of the trial court the spec
ification will not be valla unless all the
1912 Gemmill vs.. Brown. Delaware c.
c. Petition for rehearing overruled
Superior Court.
Room John L. McMaster. Judge.
Arthur Jordan Company VS.. Allen Caylor;
foreclosure. Plaintiff dismisses at his cost.
Flora Johnston VS.. Richard Johnston for
divorce. Plaintiff dismfsses at her costs.
Room S-Pliny w. Bartholomew, Judge.
Nellle Green vs.. FRANK N. Zen; predch Oh
promise. Finding for defendant.
Otto H. Hasselman Calvin F. Dar-
nell ct al; from Room 2. On trial by
court.
Criminal Court.
w. N. Harding, Special Judge.
State VS.. Benjamin Hatfield; attempted
rape. Under adViSement.
Circuit Court.
Edgar A. Brown Judge.
Indiana Bond Company VS.. Thomas n.
Bryan ct al. street lien. Trial by court
Finding in favor of plaintiff for $5l21 16 and
decree of foreclosure. &t@s
Algernon Patterson VS.. Patrick Kelly ct
al. foreclosure. Trial by court. Finding
for plaintiff for $44S.17 and costs.
New Suits Filed.
John c. Ayerssvs. Henry T. and Rebecca
Ziegler mechanics lien. Room 3.
Thompson r. Bell VS.. Benjamin B.
Brown ct al. on account. Room 2.
Mary c. Evans VS.. John r. Walker; dam
ages; So coo. Room 1.