The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-11-02
THE HIGHER COURTS RECORD.
SUPREME COURT.

u
Hadley, il Writs of mandate must
specify the particular things TO be done.
?. Mandamus is proper remedy to compel
gas company 10 furnish gas TO a person
who desires 10 use the same, when il is
shown that such person Is entitled 10 it.
3. natural gas company organized under
the act OF 1893 CActs 1899 =. 22) and licensed
by city 10 lay pipes through its streets
and alleys for the transportation and dis
tributiCn of natural gas to its customers. is
bound to serve ali members of the public
contributing to its asserted right, impair
TALLY, and TO permit all such 10 use gas
who have made the necessary arrangements
to receive IL, and apply therefor, and who
pay or offer to pay, the price and abide by
company. T. The mere fact that such COM
pany is a voluntary enterprise in the gen.
eral interest Of the people of the city, and
its purpose is not 10 make money. but to
provide gas to consumers I'm the city at the
lowest possible rate, and that the supply
of gas on hand or that it may possibly
secure Is insufficient To supply what Gus
toners ii has now connected with its mains,
in severely cold weather, and that to permit
person TO use gas would be to further
reduce the already insufficient supply, viii
not excuse such company from furnishing
gas to a person who has complied with all
the requirements on his part.
1868. State of Indiana vs.. SCpher Hamil-
ton c. G. Appeal sustained. Jordan, il. y
prosecuting attorney. in all criminal cases
appealable by the State. may subscribe his
name TO the appeal notices and take all of
the necessary steps leading up to an appeal
to this court. including the preparing and
signing the assignment OF errors. .. Section
Of the act of March II, 1901 authorizes an
appeal for the proper construction OF
penal statute. 3 Where statutory law is
clear upon its face, and when standing
alone is fairly susceptible TO but one con-
struction, that construction must be given.
L. The phrase, next term of court" a
used in Section of the liquor law of 1919
means the next tern Of court to which the
appeal has been taken. and which COM
menced ten days after the transcript of the
proceedings before the Board of Commits
sioners has been filed with the clerk of the
court, and a summons, If necessary. also
served on the applicant for q liquor license
ten days prior to the beginning of such
term. s. If remonstratOr to a liquor
license appeals from the order of the Board
of County Commissioners granting a license
he must take his appeal within ten days
from the time the decision is rendered, and
such appeal may be lawfully tried at the
term OF the court at which 1t IS appealed.
or at the term next following the fling of
the transcript with the clerk in vacation.
Or, II the transcript is filed in term time,
then such cause may be lawfully tried at
such term after the expiration of ten days
from the date of filing the transcript 6. An
applicant to whom a license has been grant
ed by the Board OF Commissioners to sell
intoxicating liquors is not estopped by vir-
tue OF appeal by demonstrators TO the
circuit Court in the exercise of his rights
under his license until the close of the term
of court at which jurisdiction is acquired
by the court over his person by reason of
the fling of the transcript. At the close
OF such term his rights under the order of
the board and the license issued TO him
terminates, and thereafter all sales as
sumed to be made by him under the license
1855. State ex rel. Johnston VS. Wayne
County Council. Wayne G. g. Affirmed.
Downing, il. A township assessor whose
salary is per diem for an indefinite period,
before he can collect a claim against the
county for services, must file ii with the
auditor and obtain its allowance by the
Board of Commissioners. 2 Only in a case
of emergency. arising after the close of
the regular annual meeting of the County
Council, can further appropriation be made
at a special meeting of the Council. 2. The
failure or refusal OF the County Council TO
make an appropriation TO pay claim
against the county does not affect the
validity of the claim.
1869. Keith VS.. State of Indiana Glib
son G. C.. Affirmed. Baker. il. In
criminal cause it is for the jury to decide
what facts and circumstances were proven
beyond a reasonable doubt, and for them
TO draw the differences deducible therefrom;
and If the inference or guilt was fa1rly TO
be drawn from the circumstances OF which
there was evidence, the appellate tribunal
should accept the finding Of the jury, APP
proved by the trial court, although other
differences might be drawn from the cir
cumstances in evidence. 2. While the pre-
sumption is that a person was murdered in
the county in which the dead body was
found yet IL may be proven that the muir
der took place in another county. >. Per-
sons acquainted with n person who had
been murdered may testify as TO the ident-
hcation OF the person when found, although
ii is in a somewhat decOmpoSed state. 4.
Where the trial court heard evidence upon
the expressions Of opinion by the jurors
prior TO the trial this court cannot disturb
the finding of the trial court. o. Evidence
of isolated threats by third persons against
a deceased is not admissible. o. The
weight and the credibility of the evidence
of confessions in given case are TO be
determined by the jury as facts. Z. Where
a person is charged with murder IL IS not
error for the court TO instruct the jury that
IF you find the defendant guilty of murder
in the first degree, as charged in the in
dictment, you have the right TO fix his pun
ishment at Imprisonment for life, or that
he suffer death.
Minutes
1889. p. c.. G. & St. L. Ry: Co. VS. John
1925. Indiana Trust Company, executor,
etc. VS.. Susie A. Finitzer Marion s. c.
Appellants motion for transfer to Appellate
1865 William E. Shilling ct al. VS.. State
ex rel. Board of Commissioners of Marion
County. Marion e. G.. Appellees brief 90
1868. 7. II. & L. Ry. Co. VS.. William Err
and brief TO dismiss (S)
APPELLATE COURT.
SS47. Ladd vs.. Kuhn. Grant c. c. At
frmed Henley, IL. Where a remote
grantor Of real estate is notified 70 appear
and defend an action involving the title TO
real estate conveyed by him he has an ap-
pealable interest in such cause, and cannot
be deprived OF his right 10 appeal by any
action OF the grantee. ,. Questions de
pending upon the evidence, in a motion for
new trial, Will not be considered when
the evidence is not in the record s. Ex-
ceptions 10 the conclusions of law stated
upon special finding OF facts admit the
truth of the material facts found. 4. one
tenant in common cannot. by purchasing
an outstanding lien, acquire a title which
Will evict his cOtenant.
$3.50. BarJmess Vs. Holiday. Tippecanoe
5. G. Affirmed Black. G. il. Under
Sec. 1850. Burns. 1901. when the inchoate
interest OF the wife II not directed by the
court 10 be sold or barred by virtue of the
sale. ,he wife's inchOate interest becomes
absolute and vests in her i'm the same man
ner and 70 the same extent as such in
chOate interest now becomes absolute on
the death OF the husband. >. BY demurrer
20 complaint 10 review a judgment the
correctness and completeness OF the record
set out in the complaint is admitted
$685.. GOrmley VS. Kirkland. Martin c. g
Affirmed per curiam. When the con-