The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-05-29
HIGGINS CASE AFFIRMED
MARION COUNTY COURT SUSTAINED
BY THE SUPREME COURT.
Oral Argument in Three-Cent Fare
In the County Courts.

n Supreme Court yesterday affirmed
tho conviction Of Councilman John NJ. Hig-
gins on a charge of soliciting a bride from
David M Parry on the promise of procuring
the passage Of an ordinance permitting the
laying of a switch from a railroad to his
factory. In so doing the higher court de-
MED the contention Of Higgins's attorneys
that Judge Afford, OF the Marion County
criminal Court, erred in permitting the in
PRODUCTION of testimony tending to show
that Higgins had solicited brides from 9TH
ers besides Mr.. Parry. The court conceded
with the contention of Attorney John B.
Elan, for the State, that such testimony
tended to prove Higgins's motive. Higgins
Is now forced to rely for release from
state prison upon the petition for his par
don which is being circulated by his
friends. The question Of Higgins's men,
bership in the Council seems to have also
been settled by the court. and 1t is expected
that a resolution will be introduced in the
next session of the Council declaring Hig-
gins's seat vacant. City Controller John
son thinks the mayor is bound under the
law TO order an election within ten days
to choose a successor to Higgins.
THREE-CENT FARE CASE.
The 3-cent-fare case, entered on the dock
ct as Charles Finley Smith against the In
~dianapolis Street-railway Company, was
argued orally before the Supreme Court
yesterday. Attorneys for Mr.. Smith con-
tended that the statute Incorporating the
present street-railroad company and giving
l. the right to charge 3 cents for cash fares
ana 1 cents for tickets is unconstitutional,
chleay because it creates a special COM
pany and grants special privileges to a GER
tain class of citizens. They cited the con-
stitutional provision that corporations
otner than banking shall not be created
by special enactment of the Legislature.
attorneys Tor the street-car company ar
Sued that Appellant Smith had not been
injured by the operation of the law, and
could not. therefore. ask the court to de-
clue the question of its cOnStitutiOnality.
They also contenGed that. while the Lecis-
lature may not create special companies,
II may pass laws in regard to particular
COMPANIES that have been created under
street-rallroad business is Of necessity in
the nature of a monopoly, and that the
Legislature may authorize a city to give a
iranchlse 10 a company that may prove TO
DC a monopoly, however subject to further
grants to other companies.
VACCINATION CASE DECISION.
In reversing the case of the State on the
relation of Brose S. Horne VS.. the School
Trustees Of the City Of Button the SUI
preme Court held yesterday that the Cir
cult Court should have issued a writ of
mandate compelling the school trustees Of
Blufton TO enforce an order of the city and
county boards of health requiring children
TO be kept out of school until they had
been vaccinated. The case grew out of an
epidemic OF smallpox in Adams county in
1899 which threatened 10 spread to Wells
county; Dr. Horne attempted to secure
n an fnrGAn0anf - The ~ A - i
but the school trustees refused TO CO.
operate, and the Circuit Court declined to
mandate them to do so. The Supreme Court
laid down as settled principles that the
protection and promotion of public health
Is a part of the police power of the State;
that the Constitution sanctions the action
OF the Legislature In delegating TO the
State Board OF Health power TO pass and
enforce certain rules not inconsistent with
other statutes on the subject of the public
health; also that under the authority thus
delegated a local board has power to re-
quire that no unvaccinated child shall at
tend school during the continuance OF an
epidemic OF smallpox. The court also held
that since the board of trustees has control
over the schools and teachers the primary
duty or enforcing such a rule rests witt
the board.
OTHER DECISIONS.
In the opinion affirming the case of Solo
mon NJ. Berkshire VS.. James w. Galley yes
terday the Supreme Court said that here
after it would reverse cases in which the
appellees had failed to file briefs. Hereto
fore the court has searched records for
foundations upon which to affirm rulings
of lower courts. but this has proven too
laborious. The case mentioned would have
been reversed for failure of appellee to file
& brief, but the attorneys had not had sufi-
cient notice of the courts intention to en-
force the rule.
In the case of Cassius z. Reeves VS.. Fred
erick j. S. Robinson the Appellate Court
reversed the decision of the Clay Circuit
Court, holding that a judgment declaring
a guardian for him without giving notice Of
the proceeding either to him or somebody
representing him is void.
The Supreme Court held in the case Of
the State VS.. David II. Flynn. clerk of the
Tfppecanoe Circuit Court. that a clerks
Cured by him for failure to account to the
treasurer at the end of each quarter for
fees received during the quarter unless the
officers failure to make such accounting
has injured some one, and then only in the
amount OF such injury.
In affirming the case of Andrew c. Bow
ley VS.. Mary T.. Kline the Appellate Court
held that the purchaser OF a building as
ISOLATION mortgage and of notes and bonds
secured by ii cannot foreciose II nor en-
securing an order Of the Circuit Court or
the judge thereof that the purchased Sc
curities shall be assigned to him.
In refusing 10 order the city or Mobiles
VILE to restore Frank Barnett to the office
of CITY marshal the Supreme Court re-
iterated its former declaration that a city
has the right TO remove q marshal from
Office for drunkenness.
JUDGE ACTS AS JUROR.