The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-05-29

1888. Menaugh VS.. Bedford b. Ry. Co.
Lawrence c. c. Affirmed. Hadley. il.
The duty of a railroad TO carry passengers
cannot be so far extended. as to require
carrying passengers on all trains. ?. IN
the absence of an established custom, or
some sort of notice that amounts TO an in
v~itation, when a person gets aboard a train
composed of cars obviously designed for
and loaded with freight. in the absence OF
the conductor and other employees OF the
company, he will be presumed to be a tres
passer, and the burden rests upon him 10
prove that he was upon the train rightfully
for passage.
1885. Higgins VS.. State. Marion C. c.
Affirmed. Monks, c. il. In an incict-
nient against a member or the common
council for soliciting a bride TO vote 10"
an ordinance pending il is not necessary 10
allege that the defendant intended to vote
for the ordinance because of the money
solicited. 2. 1t is sufficient to charge an
cfense in the anguage of the statute. j.
While II is a general rule that in the pros
ecution of one offense ii is not competent
70 give evidence of another distinct and
independent crime, yet the prosecution can
not be denied the right TO give such evil
dence.- Il otherwise competent: on the
ground that it tends TO establish another
cffense. 4 Where it is essential 10 prove
the identity Of the offender. malice. guilty
knowledge. intent. motive. or the like
other crimes, if they tend TO prove such
facts may be given in evidence. 5. In re-
huttal TO a defendants testimony the short
hand reporter who took down the DEFEND
ants testimony before the grand jury. may,
dPOA IA plODCI llS ItaQ i'm A7
shorthand copy of the evidence.
1867. Western Union Telegraph Company
VS. Henley: Monroe C. c. Affirmed. Bak-
er, il a telegraph company may waive
Its right TO demand cash in advance for
messages sent over its wires. and In case
IL accepts business on credit 1t Is nur-
dened with the same duties that follow
cash payment. 2. An averment In a conf
plant against a telegraph company for
failure 10 deliver a message that the de-
PENDANT accepted the message for trans
mission is a sufficient statement that thu
message was proper to be accepted, and
It need not be alleged that the sender at
tached and Cancelled a revenue stamp upon
the message.
1861. Lee VS.. McClelland. Hendricks c.
c. Affirmed. Monks, G. il. On a plea
of guilty by a minor TO a charge Of lar
ceny, the court. in its discretion, may
withhold sentence and release him during
good behavior And the court may there-
the conduct of the accused in the opinion
OF the court makes such action proper, pro-
nounce sentence against him. and under
Section $40, Burns. 1884,, the accused may
be committed to the Reform School for
Boys. 2. Sections S3OS and S311, Burns, 1891.
IN regard TO verified complaints, have no
application when the accused is charged
with a crime by indictment or affidavit
and Information.
1880. Berkshire VS.. Galley. White c. c.
Affirmed. Jordan, il. Where a success
tut party in the lower court. when the case
has been appealed by his adversary TO this
court. fails to prepare and file a brief or
&C. nv III s0RBOA ~ l4l1 Jaa Z ANAA
in the time allowed, such failure upon his
part may be accepted and deemed to be a
confession OF the errors assigned by appel
ant, and this court, In the exercise or Its
discretion. may reverse the judgment with
out considering the appeal on its merits.
z As q general rule the father prima facie
is entitled TO the custody of his legitimate
minor children, the mother being dead, but
this right is not an absolute one, but de-
ponds upon the circumstances in each par
ticGlar case, and the question OF custody,
control and education of a minor child
when involved is, under the facts in the
case. lodged in the sound discretion OF the
to a higher court. 3. The right Of a ia
Their TO possession OF a minor child is sub
ordinate to the welfare of the child, which
* the M question in providing for
the infants custody and control.
1865. State VS.. Flynn. Tippecanoe c. c.
Affirmed. Downing, c. 1.-THE penalty i'm
1895, p. $50 for breach of the official bond
of the clerk of the Circuit Court cannot
be enforced in an action on the bond of
the clerk.
1854. Martin VS.. Berry. Huntington c. G.
Transferred to Supreme Court.
1857. Spiker VS.. Cole. Miami c. G. Trans
ferred to Supreme Court.
194f7. Morell VS.. Morell. Huntington c. c.
CertiCrari granted and issued.
1851. Fadely VS.. Henry. Henry c. C. Ad-
vanced.
1857. Louisa A. Spiker ct al. VS.. James
O. Cole, administrator. Miami G. G. Ap-
pellee's brief on motion to dismiss S)
Oral Arguments
1882. WEIGH VS.. Town of Roanoke. June Z.
1882. Indiana Power Company VS.. st.
Joseph and Elkhart Power Company.
June 10.
1926. Murphy VS.. Brown. executor.
June 20.
APPELLATE COURT.
1850. c.. c., C. & st. L. Ry. Co. VS.. Weight.
Marion S. G. Reversed. Comstock, j.
36SS. Soules VS.. Robinson. Clay c. c. Re-
versed. Roby, J.
3745. Covert VS.. Bray. Vanderburgh S. c.
Reversed. Comstock, j.
1867. Turner VS.. Turner. Shelby c. C. At
frmed. Comstock. J.
37S9. Bowlley VS.. Kline. Shelby c. c. Al
sSoS' Hay vs.. Mcdaniel. Clark c. {. Re-
versed. Roby, ].
$3.50. Bentley VS.. Goodwin Clark c. c
1865. Smith VS.. Holtz. vanderburgh c. C.
Dismissed. Wiley, j.
1872. Wagner VS.. Carskadon. Marion S. c.
Affirmed. Wiley, j.
1856. Oil Company VS.. State. Blackford
c. G. Reversed. Robinson, j.
3703. Seisler VS.. Smith. Wabash c. G. AT
frmed. Henley, j.
379. Redkey etc, Co. VS.. Orr. Jay G. c.
Affirmed. Henley, j.
1851. Bartlett VS.. Williams. Marshall G. z.
Affirmed. Robinson, j.
3761. c., /. & Z. Ry co. VS.. Weeks Grant
c. c. Affirmed. Black, c. j.
1862. Horner VS.. Clark. La Grange. At
hrmed. Black, {. j..
1853. Springer VS.. Foster. Jasper G. G.. At
frmed. Black. c. j.
376S. Jones VS.. Bradford. Grant 9. C. Az
frmed. Black, c.. j.
3775. Scarborough VS.. Scarborough. Ham
ilton c. c. Affirmed. Robinson. j.
1892. Harrill VS.. c., c., c. & st. L. Ry.
Co. Benton c. c. Affirmed. Henley. ].
1926. Fisher VS.. Peak. Sullivan G. G. Mo-
ton to dismiss sustained.
3341. Prudential Insurance Company VS..
Sullivan. Vanderburgh S. c. Petition for
rehearing overruled.
1851. HeintZ VS.. Mueller. Porter S. G. Pc
tition for rehearing overruled.
1914. McIlwain. etc, Co. VS.. Wall. Upton
c.. c. Motion for leave TO amend assign
ment of errors overruled.
1894. Marion Trust Company VS.. Crescent
L.. and /. Co. Marion c. c. Advanced. Mo-
ton to file brief granted.
1893. Light, etc, Co. VS.. Burk. Clark G. G.
Motion to set aside order of April 4 over
ruled.
1860. indianapolis Street-railway Co. VS..
Robinson. Marion C. c. Transferred to
Supreme Court
soS7. Simmon VS.. Ratcliff. Fountain C. C..
Dismissed.
1862. James II. Smith VS.. Edward NJ. Nc
Culloch. administrator. Floyd c. C.. APP
pellants dismissal.
1864. Victoria Bartell eft al. VS.. Edward N.
McCulloch, administrator. Floyd c. C..
Appellants dismissal.
1855. Dixon p. Smith VS.. Edward NJ. Nc
Culloch. administrators. Floyd c. c. APP
lellant's dismissal.
3e1l. William Z. Reynolds VS.. Esther !.
Pierson ct al. Marion S. c. Appellants
reply brief 80
1856. Charles H. Dudgeon VS.. Mary c.
Bronson ct al. Allen S. c. Appellees'