The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-03-11
THE COURT RECORD
Supreme COurr
LIQUOR SE-APPLICANT-MOR
AL CHARACTER.

AL. CHARACTER.
1895. Kosciusko G. c. North VS.. Bar
ringer. Affirmed. McCabe, il. In order
to present for review on appeal the ques-
ton whether the trial court decided cor
rectly an agreed case presented under Sec
ton 553 r. s. 1881 an exception must be
taken to the finding of the court on the
agreed facts, there being no necessity for
a motion for a new trial in such case
2. An agreement as to the facts in a case
may take the place of evidence on the
trial 3. A bond filed by an applicant for
a license to sell liquor which is signed by
sufficient freehold Sureties and approved is
not invalid because not signed by the appli-
cant. 4. Sales of liquor by one who holds
a license issued in due form and honestly
believed to be valid does not prove such
moral turpitude as to unfit the holders to
procure another license upon the first be-
ing shown to be invalid.
CRIMINAL LAW - EMBEZZLEMENT -
RESTITUTION.
1852. Madison c. c. Dean VS.. State. AZ
firmed. Monks, il. In an indictment for
embezZlement under Section 1914. r. S 1881,
it is not necessary to allege or prove de-
mand for the property or money charged
to have been embeZZled. 2. This section is
aimed at attorneys, clerks and employees
who have right TO the possession of their
employers money only for the purpose of
performing specific duty with reference
to ii. 3. An attorney receiving money or
securities for the purpose of paying a
judgment against his employer has no right
TO retain the money or mix Ii with his own.
A. An allegation that defendant was the
prosecuting witnesses attorney sufficiently
charges that he was her ernploye. ). 1t is
not within the power of one who commits a
crime, by restitution. payment or other
wise, to take away the right of the State
TO insist OH a conviction for the crime COM
mitted.
REAL ESTATE - DESCRIPTION RES
ERvATION
1880. Warren c. c. Edens VS.. Miller ct
al. Affirmed in part. Hackney, il. 4
deed, devise or reservation of real estate.
the description of which is impossible OF
one acre out of the west side of a tract of
land to be laid off in the form of square
so as to include an existing private burying
lot, the west line of which is the west line
of the tract from which the acre is re-
served is good TO the original lot and
any additions made thereto by consent of
the parties, but not as TO any additional
1899. Marion c. c. Hamrick. trustee. VS..
Loring ct al. Petition for rehearing over
ruled.
Appellate Court
STOCK KILLING GUARDS.
2O30. Marshall C. C. New York c. & St
L. Railway Company VS.. Zumbaugh. At
firmed. Wiley IA finding that plaintiff
horses, which were not unruly or breachy
escaped from securely fenced pasture
where he had confined them TO the public
road and passed from ii TO defendant s
right of way over a surface cattle guard
which was deficient unfit unsuitable and
insufficient 70 turn animals" and was there
killed. justifies a judgment in favor OF the
plaintiff. even though the particular kind
of guard is named and is found to be in as
good order as when il was put in.
RAILWAY FIRES - CONTRADICTORY
NEGLIGENCE.
2024. Marshall c. G. New York. C. & St.
l.. Railway Company VS.. Grossman. At
firmed. Robinson il. A special verdict
which shows that dry weeds were allowed
to accumulate on defendants right of way
in an exceedingly dry time. and on a day
when q brisk wind was blowing toward
PLAINTIFFS land. sparks were allowed TO es-
cape from defendants locomotive and set
fire TO the weeds and this fire was per
mitted TO escape TO plaintiffs land and de-
stroy his property establishes that defend
ants negligence caused plaintiffs injury.
2 A finding that plaintiff was using his
property in the ordinary way. and made an
effort TO prevent it from being burned
shows that he was not guilty of contribu-
tory negligence.
LIQUOR LICENSE-BoND-LI
ON
Pip. Sullivan c. c. State ex rel VS..
Leach. Affirmed Comstock & Ii A
saloon keeper is not liable on his bond exc
cuted for the purpose OF obtaining a IL
cense TO retail intoxicating liquors on n
judgment for a fine and costs assessed
against his barkeeDer alone for an illegal
sale. 9 The condition of such a bond is
that the principal will pay all fines and
costs that may be assessed against him for
violations OF the liquor laws. and does not
embrace fines assessed against others
200.. Marion 5. G. Peoples b. l.. * s
Association Va. Reynolds. Rehearing
granted.
al vs.. Hewitt. Transferred 20 Supreme
Court.
Superior Court.
Room John l.. McMaster. Judge
Margaret c. Abrams VS.. Home Savings
Associations; on contract and for receiver.