The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-05-05
New Suits Filed.
Note. of Recent opirion..

The disputed question of the right of a
railroad company TO give one hackman an
exclusive privilege of SOLICITING passengers
State VS.. Reed (Miss.), 43 l. r. A, 134, in
the negative, after reviewing the other de-
cisions.
In determining whether or not a person is
an habitual criminal under a statute max
ing him such after two former imprison-
ments for felony. ii is held, in State VS..
Martin (Ohio). AZ L. r. A, "a, that impris-
cannot be counted.
The distinction between common carriers
and ordinary employers in respect to liabil-
ity for malicious assaults made by employees
Central Railroad Company On. j., 43 L. r
A, s4, holding that for an assault upon a
passenger the carrier Is liable.
An action Of mandamus to compel the re-
instatement of a pupil in q school is held
proper in Jackson VS.. State, Majors (Neb.).
AZ L. r. A, 1872. If the action of the officer
Sdmission TO- py o mn conti n cen in the scbooI
was an arbitrary or capricious exercise of
authority.
The limitation Of a general ticket for pas
sage on a railroad to the day on which ii is
sold is held. in Louisville & Nashville Rail
road Company VS.. Turner (Tenn.); 43 l.. r.
A, 40, to be invalid. unless there is an ex-
consideration. or an alternative given 10 the
purchaser to have a full and unlimited
ticket.
Assessments upon abutting owners for
new sidewalks and drains. which become
necessary only because Of a change of the
grade of a street. are held, in Maudlin VS..
Greenville IS. CD. As l.. r. A, 101. to be un-
constitutional. where the Constitution re-
quires the whole property of the munich
pality to be taxed for any public or corpo-
rate purpose.
The serious conflict of authority on the
is considered in Ritz vs.. Wheeling wv. Va.5,
43 l.. r. A., 14s. I'm which 1t is held that
there is no such duty toward trespassers,
even If they are children. and that negli-
gence to create a right of action In their
favor must be so gross as to amount to a
wanton injury.
The power of a municipality to collect a
tax upon property or business so situated
that 1t cannot receive any protection or
benefit from ii Is denied in Kaysville VS.,
Ellison (Utah). AZ L. r. A. 81. where a city
a license for doing business at a little place
about two miles out of the city, though
within its territory. but which received nc
police protection from the city.
On the theory that the laws accept human
clared in State VS.. Grugin Mo.). ~ l.. r
A, IA. Notwithstanding many judicial decla'
rations, that words. however opprobrious
constitute no provocation in law, that fou
and opprobrious words may be sufft cient &c
reduce a homicide to manslaughter If they
Of the mass OF men as to enthrall their rea-
son. This doctrine was applied In favor OF
a man who slew the ravisher of his daugh,
ter. who. when asked about II. declared, 81
will do as / damn please about it,"
The right of a State under the Fedora
Constitution TO provide for a jury of les:
than twelve men is sustained In State VS.
Bates (Utah). 43 l. r. A. 30, In which the
provision Of the state Constitution for a jury
OF eight was sustained. This case also helt
| that such a provision was not ex post fsctC
as applied to prior offenses. but on thi:
point ii has been overruled by the United
States Supreme Court in Thompson VS.
Utah. 10 L. S. 343, ~ l.. ed. 1861. The cas-
is accompanied by an exceedingly elaborat,
note reviewing all the authorities on tn,
subject OF the number and agreement o.
jurors required TO constitute a valid yer