The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-12-24

of the jury should show that the affiant had
the means of actually knowing personally
the alleged misconduct of the jury to be re-
ce4ved as a ground for new trial.
1885. Driver VS.. Driver Howard G. c.
record and the brief of appellant are filed
in this court the record may be corrected in
the lower court by appellee, and filed in this
court in lieu of proceedings by writ of GER
tiorari by agreement of the parties. al
though the notice is given to the attorney of
appellant. who is still in the case instead of
ton to correct the record should be reason
able so as to give the party concerned ample
time 10 make all needful preparations. 3.
The court is allowed to make a correction
of the record as to words inadvertently
omitted from the testimony of a witness be-
fore the court f. The action of husband
in accusing his wife OF want of chastity and
abandoning her is cruel and inhuman treat
ment. D. Where party TO a divorce pro-
ceeding details his own confidential commu-
nications with his wife he cannot complain
of the wife in introducing in evidence his
letters to her, when introduced for the pur-
pose OF rebuttal and showing that his ac-
cusations and testimony made against her
were false. 6. In granting aimony and an
allowance for the child, the court may take
into consideration the present value of the
husbands property, his health, occupation
and future prospects for making money.
1850 State eX rel. Taylor Mount Ma
rion c. C. Petition for rehearing overrued.
Howard, il. A person cannot be elected
to fill the. office of judge for a longer time
than the duration of the office itself as it is
fixed by the law in force at the date of the
election. 2 The Legislature cannot extend
the term of the existence of a court and
then name those who shall be judges for the
time so extended.
l782l: p; G, G; & ST; L Railway 0 Com,
for rehearing overruled.
1861 Mckee VS.. Root Jay c. C. Motion
to dismiss postponed until final hearing.
Appellate Court.
2645: B. & o. S. w. Railway Company, VS..
Spaulding. Davies C. c. Affirmed. Wiley,
il Where a complaint charges that the
defendant kept and maintained bin for the
purpose of storing scrap iron; that it was the
duty of the employees of defendant to go to
said bin from time to time to get scrap iron
to use in and about the FORCES in the black
of the duties of plaintiff in the course OF his
employment; that on the occasion Of his IN
jury for which he brings his action, ne WE; Went
into said bin for the purpose of getting
piece of scrap iron to be used at the forge
to protect the blacksmith for whom he was
helper; that defendant knew that that was
a part of his duty, and while thus engaged
he was injured, it was not necessary to aver
that the scrap bin was place provided by
the master for his servants to work IN, or
that the scrap iron was placed therein IN
any particular manner. 2 The master must
servants are required to work. and the serV-
ant is not required to make careful exam
ination of the place before performing his
services. 3. Due diligence" depends largely
upon the facts of each particular case. A. 1t
is only when there is no evidence to sustain
the verdict of the jury that the court Of last
resort will be disturbed account Of not
being sustained by the evidence.
Superior Court.
Room ii L. McMaster, Judge.
Alonzo A. Bowman VS.. Charles b. Knerr
ct al; appealed from Clark, justice of the
peace Jury out.
Room FLAMES M. feathers, Judge.
The Red Clay Orchard Company VS.. James
James McHugh ct al. VS.. Mary Johnson
ct al. foreclosure of mortgage. Judgment
against defendant, Mary Johnson, for
$2,31043 without relief and costs
Room 3-Vinson Carter, Judge.
Lewis Kaminsky VS.. Indianapolis Chain
and Stamping Company; account. Jury re-
against plaintiff for costs.
William "A. Greene VS.. V. p. Van Horne
ct AL; contract. Dismissed and costs paid.
Circuit Court.
Henry Clay Allen, Judge.
William H Smith VS.. r. r. Shiel & Co.;
on account. Finding for plaintiff. Judg-
ment against defendant for $513.90 and costs.
New Suits Filled.
Mary T. Huegele VS.. Charles Burgan ct al;
mortgage. Superior Court, Room 2
William b. Burford VS. Otto Stechhan;
suit on account. Superior Court, Room !.
Anna f. Brown VS.. Alonzo F. Brown: di-
dorce. Superior Court, Room g.
Albert H. Lacey ct al. VS.. American In
demnity and Assurance Company; applica-
ton for receiver.
Eliza Myers ct al. VS.. John NJ. Cook ct al;
suit to quiet title. Superior Court, Room 8.
Thomas HiZer VS.. Samuel Fallender; dam
ages. Superior Court, Room /