The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-12-16

subject
to liens, and remains at all times as an in
demnity for taxes the receiver cannot be
compelled to pay the delinquent taxes upon
the property.
1854 Wabash Railway COMPANY VS.. Kel-
ley. De Kalb C. C. Affirmed. Howard. J.
When a railroad company, as a part of the
contract with an employe, provides for sur
gical and medical attendance and care to
the employee as the same should be rem
dered necessary by casualty and accident
and to treat him for such injuries received
while in its service and retains part of his
wages for the maintenance of a medical and
surgical hospital where ii furnishes such
treatment, and places il in the treasury for
that purpose, it is liable to such employee
for damages suffered by reason of the NAL
practice Of the surgeon of the company in
treating him for an injury received while in
the employ of the company, although the
employe had not given his written consent
for the company to retain any part of his
1875 Chicago Terminal, etc. Company
vs.. Hammond, etc Company. Porter c. G.
Petition for rehearing reinstated and over
1925. Noerr VS.. Schmidt Marion S. C.
Petition for rehearng overruled.
1880 Capital National Bank VS.. Reed.
Washington c. c. Motion to dismiss post
poned.
1854 Alexandria Gas Company VS.. Irish.
Madison c. c. Certiorari granted.
Appellate Court.
2S45. Douglas VS.. the State. Morgan G. c.
Affirmed. Black, c, il Under Section
1871 Burns's r. S., 1894, the court as a mat
ter of law, knows that beer is malt liquor
and it is not question for the jury to de-
termine; and under an indictment founded
on Section 1855 Burnss r. S., 1894, it is not
necessary to a conviction for the jury, be-
sides finding sale of beer to find as a mat
ter of fact that beer is intoxicating. 2. This
court will presume that when the prosecut-
Ing attorney in a cause was admonished for
going beyond the record and the jury adj
vised accordingly, that both the prosecuting
attorney and the jury observed the advice
Of the court. when the. defendant merely
N1yffl1 ffY1c 11de qf
objection to the action of the prosecuting
attorney.
1887 Cromer VS.. State of Indiana. Cass
c. c. Affirmed Robinson. il. The ac-
ton of the trial court in admitting and re-
fusing TO admit evidence and in giving and
refusing instructions, the misconduct of
counsel in argument and the courts action
in limiting the argument to the jury should
be stated to the lower court as causes for a
new trial and not assigned Independently to
this court as errors. 2. A cause will not be
reversed on the evidence when there is evil
dence which supports the verdict of the jury
on every material point g. When an in
struction is correct so far as it goes the fact
that it does not go further and include some
other proposition will not make it erroneous.
T. A dedication of land need not be evil
denced by a written conveyance. 5. Re-
marks by the trial court made in the pres
ence of the jury should be brought into the
record by bill Of exceptions. G. The mis-
conduct of counsel can be made available
error on appeal only by an objection made
at the time and invoking the Intervention of
the court and if the court refuses to in
terfere by reserving an exception. z. The
time to be consumed in argument to the
Jury is within the sound discretion of the
trial court.
24s3 Sponhauer VS.. Malloy. Allen S. c.
Affirmed. Comstock. when the principal
in a promissory note dies leaving estate
worth less than $500 which is set off to the
widow and afterwards the surety on the
note procures the signature of the widow to
a new note which is signed by him also, and
it is applied towards the original debt the
widow is a surety on the note she signs.
294s Wright VS. Caskey. Decatur c. c.
Certiorari granted.
Superior Court.
Room ii L. McMaster, Judge.
Harry Wickers VS.. Frank Page ct al:
damages. July out.
Room FLAMES M feathers. Judge.
The Red Clay Orchard Company VS.. Jas.
H. Smith. On trial by jury.
Room 3-Vinson Carter, Judge.
Jennie Stark VS.. Charles Wachter: mali
cious prosecution. Jury returned verdict for
Frank n. Fitzgerald VS. Hartford Life In
surance Company; appeal. Dismissed and
Washington B. Lloyd VS. Charles F'rancke;
appeal. Dismissed by plaintiff. Judgment
against plaintiff for costs.
Thomas c. jay VS.. p, G. & st. L. r. r.
Co; damages. Dismissed. Judgment against
plaintiff for costs
John wagner VS. Cltlzens. Street-raliroad
Company; damages. On trial by jury.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge
James Boyce VS.. L. a. Kinsey & Co. ct AL;
on note. On trial by jury.
New Suits Filled.
Maggie e. Brown VS.. Eva E. Hobbs; suit
to declare judgment vacated and void. Cir
cult Court.
T. c. Whitcomb & Co. VS.. B. Koehring &
Son. suit on account. Superior Court,
Room 2.
Simon Yandes VS.. Thomas NJ. Bosom ct
al. suit to foreclose mortgage. Superior
Court Room /.
Lucinda J. Holland VS.. William r. Hol-
land petition for divorce. Superior Court.
Room 1.