Volume 27 — Iowa Reports

One George Jones was charged with a criminal offense. He resisted the officer seeking to arrest him, and during such resistance shot and very seriously wounded the plaintiff in this suit, Albert Witter, and another.

Action in chancery to restrain defendant from closing a certain road running through his land. Decree granting the relief prayed for in plaintiffs petition. Defendant appeals.

This action was originally brought in the District Court . of Decatur county. The defendants made application for a change of venue on account of the prejudice of the inhabitants of the county against them. Pending this application, plaintiff asked for a change of venue out of the judicial district, on the ground of the prejudice of the judge. Upon this motion of plaintiff, the cause was ordered to be sent to Wayne county, in another judicial district.

. Plaintiffs declare upon two notes made by defendant in 1860.

Action to recover for tbeloss of certain wearing apparel stolen from the trunk of plaintiff, while the same was in the possession of defendant. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

Constitutional law : — local taxation in aid ok railroads. Petition in Equity, by resident property owners and tax payers against the township trustees and clerk to enjoin further proceedings under the act of March 22, 1868 (Laws 1868, ch. 48, p 54), authorizing local aid to railroads. A copy of this act- is set out in the margin.* An The present appeal is by the plaintiff, from the order of the District Court dissolving the injunction.

Action upon certain promissory notes made by defendant to John Pierson, Sr., who, after their execution, died testate, appointing defendant his executor.

Action in Chancery. The petition alleges that, on the 22d day of March, 1866, plaintiff recovered of defendants a judgment in the District Court of Decatur county for the sum of $223.36, and costs, upon a promissory note, on which there was at that time due the sum of $370 ; that upon the trial of the cause to the court without a jury the court found for plaintiff the amount of the note and interest, less $153, and directed the clerk to assess the amount so found due, but…

In equity. — Demurrer to petition sustained, and plaintiff appeals.

Practice: cross petition: notice: default.• — In July, 1867, a decree was entered on a cross petition in equity, filed by the defendant Rogers against Allen and one Hussey, in which affirmative relief of various kinds was given to Rogers. Allen’s suit had been commenced in July, 1860 (before the Revision), against Rogers alone, claiming rent, to the extent of one hundred dollars. Rogers, was alleged to be a non-resident; and there is no evidence of service upon him.

<p>Costs: against successful party. While, as a rule, the successful party is entitled to recover costs, the court has the power, under peculiar circumstances, to adjudge otherwise, and if a party would show error in this respect, the facts upon which the court below acted must in some manner be disclosed, so that it may be seen whether there was any abuse of discretion.</p>

Will case. — Joseph Bates, Sr., when aged about eighty years, made a will in due form, properly witnessed. He was at the time living with his second wife, the plaintiff, whom he appointed his executrix, and by whom he had three children still living. He had eight children by his first wife, four of whom were living at his death; the others had died before him, each leaving children surviving.

Dependant was indicted for perjury, in giving false' evidence in a certain action before a justice of the peace, wherein he was defendant and one Fritz Fry was plaintiff.

Mechanic’s lien : construction of statute, etc. — The controversy on this appeal is between the plaintiff and the defendant Dinwoodie. The action is for a mechanic’s lien, against Carpenter, the debtor, his wife, and Dinwoodie. There is no controversy about the plaintiff’s debt against Carpenter; and Dinwoodie alone appeals.

Larceny : guilty : possession.— The appellant, Brady, was jointly indicted with one Mollie Gardner and one Lewis, charged with stealing, in the night time, certain goods from a store in Le Claire, in Scott county. Brady and Mollie Gardner were arrested, tried and convicted. Brady insists that the judgment of conviction should be reversed for the reasons mentioned in the opinion of the court.

Action to recover real property. Neil McLean was the owner of the property, and plaintiff’s debtor. A judgment was recovered for the debt, but prior thereto Neil conveyed the land to his sister, the present appellant. By a proceeding in equity, at plaintiff’s instance, this conveyance was declared fraudulent. The property was then sold under execution, the creditor being the purchaser, and, relying upon this title, he brings this action.

Practice : pleading : partnership accounts, etc.— Plaintiff sues to recover for money paid, work and labor done, etc., and annexes a bill of particulars to his petition. Answer : First, in denial; second, a set-off, consisting of many items, including a charge for money paid to Russell & Co., to Hamilton, etc., with a bill of particulars annexed. Replication : in denial and alleging payment of the account pleaded by way of set-off.

Slander : practice : juror. — Tbe petition alleges that “tbe defendant, in the presence of sundry persons, did speak of and concerning the plaintiff to one Wearieh, tlie following false and scandalous words,” stating them as found on tbe trial. Answer — in denial. Trial — resulting in a verdict for tbe plaintiff. Defendant excepted to tbe refusal of the court to give certain instructions and to its action in overruling a motion for a new trial.

The plaintiff, claiming to be the fee simple owner of lot 1, 33 11, Hes Moines, filed a bill against Cooper et al. to quiet his title. The defendants, except Cooper, disclaimed all interest. Cooper filed a cross-bill denying the absolute nature of tbe plaintiff’s right, and claiming tbe right to redeem tbe property from tbe mortgage foreclosure and sale under which plaintiff derives bis title.

Real action. — Upon the filing of the defendant’s answer, the cause was, on his motion, transferred to the equity docket. Trial and judgment for plaintiff.

Ordinary action for the recovery of real property, to wit: the north half of the northwest quarter of section twenty-six, township seventy-nine, north of range two, east of the fifth principal meridian. Answer in denial; also averring title in the defendant by virtue of a tax deed; also setting up and relying upon the statute of limitations, as contained in the revenue law. Rev. § 790. ■ There was a trial to a jury which resulted in a verdict for the defendant.

At the May Term (May 22), 1868, of the Johnson District Court, judgment was entered against the plaintiff, from which he prosecutes the present appeal, which was taken directly to this court. The notices of appeal were not served on the defendant and the clerk until March 8th, 1869.

Plaintiffs seek in this action to recover for their services as attorneys in prosecuting certain criminal cases before a justice of the peace — the parties being charged with the violation of the provisions of what is known as the prohibitory liquor law. To the petition there was a demurrer, which was sustained by the District Court. This ruling was affirmed by the General Term, and plaintiffs appeal.

<p>1- Recording act! variance in name. Certain real estate bad been conveyed to a feme covert by the name of “ Almira J. Stringham.” Her name before marriage was Almira Jane Ashley. After her marriage she wrote her name in two ways, sometimes as Almira J. Stringliam, and sometimes as Jane A. or J. A. Stringliam. She was commonly called Jane Stringham when her Christian name was used. A conveyance was executed by her in the name of J. A. Stringham, but which was indexed as A. J. Stringham, and there was a caption to the instrument as recorded as from “ Almira J. Stringham to,” etc. Held, that the record was sufficient to impart constructive notice to a subsequent purchaser or incumbrancer.</p> <p>2. Trust-deed; error in statement. A trust-deed authorized the trustee “ to execute a deed to the purchaser, to pay off the amount herein secured, with interest and costs, and hold the same subject to my order.” Held, that the erroneous use of the word “same" instead of the word “ remainder" did not vitiate the deed, or render invalid a foreclosure and sale by the trustee.</p> <p>3. -foreclosure. Where, upon the filing of a bill therefor, an injunction was granted restraining the trustee in a deed of trust, from proceeding to sell the trust property, which, upon the final hearing, the court dissolved, and ordered that the trustee make the amount found due by the court under the power of sale contained in the instrument, instead of ordering the amount to be collected by sale on special execution, it was held, that this was regular, and that a subsequent foreclosure and sale by the trustee, in accordance with the terms of the deed of trust, was authorized and valid, the same as if no inj unction proceeding had been had.</p> <p>4. Redemption; dower interest. A dower interest in real estate will not entitle the holder thereof to redeem the land from a judicial sale under a deed of trust or mortgage, in which such person claiming the dower did not join.</p> <p>5.-The right of redemption is founded upon an interest in the estate mortgaged which will be prejudiced or affected if the right to redeem is denied.</p> <p>6. Dower; foreclosure sale of : rights of purchaser. Equity will recognize and enforce a sale and conveyance of the dower interest before the dower has been assigned or admeasured, and will accordingly recognize and enforce the rights which a purchaser of the dower interest of the husband or wife, as the case may be, acquires at a foreclosure sale under a mortgage in which both joined.</p> <p>7. -application OF principles. A wife, in whom the title to certain real estate was vested, executed a deed of trust thereon, her husband not joining therein. Subsequently she, her husband joining in the execution thereof, executed a mortgage on the land to another party. Following this, the wife died, and after her decease the deed of trust was foreclosed and the property sold thereunder. Sometime after this, and before his dower had been assigned, the mortgage, in which the husband and wife had joined, was foreclosed, and the property sold under the foreclosure decree. Held,</p> <p>1. That the husband, not having joined in the execution of the deed of trust, the foreclosure and sale thereunder did not bar his right of dower.</p> <p>2. That the dower interest of the husband became vested in the purchaser at the foreclosure sale under the morgage in which the husband and wife joined.</p> <p>8. -nature 03? dower right. The general nature and extent of the dower right fully considered and cases cited by Dillon, Ch. J.</p> <p>9. -right under laws 03? 1853. The law of 1853 (Eev. § 2477) gave dower as at common law. The fact that the husband or wife died intestate, and without issue, would not, under section 1410 of the Code of 1851, respecting the descent of property, enlarge the right of dower, as such, in the survivor. Said last-named section contemplated the disposition of property which had not been disposed of by the intestate in his life-time, or which was not necessary to pay debts.</p> <p>10.-damages 3?or detention. The right to damages for the detention of dower accrues only from the time of a demand for dower. An action will therefore not lie where the dower has not been assigned, though the party may be entitled thereto.</p> <p>11. -pleading. Although the petition in an action sets out facts which entitle the plaintiff to be regarded as the assignee of the dower interest, and although it asks in substance that his rights in this respect be declared and established, yet, if it does not specifically seek to have the dower assigned, the court'will not enter an order to that effect.</p>

Action at law. — The petition avers substantially, that one Fassett, being indebted to plaintiffs, and having susi tained a loss upon a policy of insurance issued to him by the defendant, made his certain order upon defendant in words following: “ $1,263.38. “ To the Phcenix Insurance company, of Hartford, Conn.: Please pay to the order of Alman Miller & Co., ..of New York city, the | sum of one thousand two hun- ... idred and sixty-three and T\ dollars out of any money *…

'Appeal from JaoTcson District Court. Allen commenced his action at law, against Hoy, claiming the recovery of the land in controversy. Hoy thereupon filed his petition in equity, showing his equiable title- — -asking to set aside that held by Allen, to restrain the trial of the law action until, etc. After issue duly joined in both cases, they were heard together, by consent, upon testimony taken before a commissioner appointed for that purpose.

The plaintiff left with the firm of James Dawson' & Co., composed of James Dawson and Greorge JJ. Howe, doing a commission business in • Chicago, the sum of $2,000, to be invested in the purchase and sale of corn. The said firm of James Dawson & Co. made one purchase and sale, yielding a net profit to plaintiff of $431.09. They then made another purchase, and, while holding the corn, they changed the name of their firm to Geo.

Practice : change of venue in criminal cases. — Tbe ■defendant, on an information filed before a justice of the peace for a violation of the liquor law (§ 1562 of the Be-vision), was tried by a jury, convicted, and fined twenty dollars. He appealed to the District Court, and there applied for a change of venue.

This is an action upon a bond executed by defendant and another. The facts constituting the cause of action are as follows : In 1855 one Wasson, being the owner of certain lands executed a mortgage thereon to Cook.

This controversy involves the title to 210 acres of laud. It is admitted that plaintiff owned the land before and at the time defendant obtained the tax title upon which he relies. The taxes thereon were delinquent for the year 1863; and in October (3), 1864, said lands were sold therefor and purchased by defendant. In October, 1867, he obtained his deed.

Seduction : requisites of petition : damages, etc. Tbe petition, alleging that the plaintiff is an unmarried female, claims of the defendant $5,000, and for cause states, “that on, etc., the defendant did seduce, debauch and carnally know the plaintiff, who was a female of previously chaste character. That defendant promised to marry the plaintiff, which he has refused and neglected to do.

<p> Appeal from Jackson District Court. </p>

<p>1. Municipal corporation: bridges. The town of Cedar Palls, under its act of incorporation, had the power to contract for. and to issue warrants to provide for the payment of, the construction of a free bridge across the Cedar river, within the corporate limits and upon ground dedicated and set apart for a street, though the town was laid oif on only one side of the river, but was approached from the other side by a road touching the river where the bridge was located.</p> <p>2-- character OF sorir. The scrip issued by the corporation to provide for the payment of said bridge was not issued to circulate as money, and is not therefore void for that reason.</p> <p>3. - SCRIP used as A circulating medium. The fact that mem bers of the council may have contemplated, at the time of voting the scrip, that it might or would become a convenient circulating medium, would not make it money, nor its issue violative of the law. Nor would the corporation be released from liability by the fact that the scrip was used by individuals, or the community generally, as a circulating medium.</p> <p>4. - object of the law. It was the object of the law to lay its hand upon banking corporations prohibited by the express language of the old Constitution, and it is not applicable to municipal corpo rations issuing its warrants or scrip in payment of its actual indebtedness.</p> <p>5. Verdict: special findings: new trial. The failure of the-jury to return a special verdict upon a particular question submitted to them constitutes no ground for a new trial; especially where the general verdict is warranted by the evidence.</p> <p>6. Municipal corporation: scrip : free and toll bridge. Scrip issued by a municipal corporation for the erection of a free bridge would not be invalidated by the council subsequently declaring it a toll bridge. And the rule would be the same whether the scrip remained in the hands of the contractor or had been transferred to third parties.</p> <p>7. - LIMITATION OF CORPORATE INDEBTEDNESS: CONSTITUTIONAL law. If a municipal corporation has the means in its treasury to meet its indebtedness, the issue of warrants to an amount larger than five per cent of its taxable property would not be a violation of section 3, article 11 of the new Constitution, which provides that no municipal corporation shall be allowed to become indebted to an amount exceeding five per cent of the taxable property within the corporation. In such case it would not become indebted within the meaning of the constitutional clause.</p> <p>8. - WHAT CONSTITUTES INDEBTEDNESS. So, too, an obligation arising under a contract on the part of a municipal corporation to pay for work, when, and as it shall be, performed in the future, does not constitute or ripen into an indebtedness within the meaning of the Constitution until the performance of the work.</p>

<p>1. Reference ¡ without consent : right oe trial by jury. The District Court has no power under section 3090 of the Revision to order a reference where the parties do not consent thereto, in cases not cognizable in courts of equity. The exercise of this power under such circumstances would be a violation of the right of trial by jury guaranteed by the Constitution.</p> <p>2. Equitable jurisdiction ¡ in matters oe account. While courts of equity have a general jurisdiction where there are mutual accounts, and also where the accounts are all on one side, but a discovery is sought, they have not jurisdiction where no such remedy is sought and the accounts are all on one side, or there is a single matter on one side and a mere set-off on the óther.</p>

Sheriff’s sale: effect of subsequent reversal of the judgment: statute construed. — In February, 1864, Franklin recovered a decree of foreclosure against Twogood, tbe present plaintiff. Twogood appealed to the Supreme Court, but filed no supersedeas bond. Bending the appeal, execution was issued and a portion of tbe mortgaged premises were sold to the defendant, Conklin, and a portion to Franklin, the plaintiff, in the foreclosure proceeding.

This is a proceeding instituted by defendant under Kev. §§ 1317-1320 to assess tbe damages of plaintiff on account of tbe location of tbe road of defendant upon bis land. From tbe assessment made by tbe jury, plaintiff appealed to tbe District Court. Defendant moved to strike the case from the docket, and that the assessment of the jury be affirmed, which was not done, and thereupon defendant appealed to this court.

<p>Ooutinuauce; in actions on right; discretion. While, -undertlie statute, continuances in actions for the recovery of real property may "be granted for reasons of less importance than in ordinary civil actions, yet the. action of the court below in overruling a motion for continuance will not be disturbed where there is no showing of affirmative error, or abuse of that discretion which is confided to the court in deciding upon applications of this character.</p>

<p>1. Oontracts: sealed instruments : defenses. By our statute tlie distinction which the common law made between simple contracts and those under seal is abolished, and want of consideration, either in whole or in part, may now be shown as a defense in all actions upon instruments made after the passage of such statute, whether made in this State or elsewhere.</p> <p>3. -law of forum. It is accordingly held, in an action upon a sealed instrument executed in another State, where the common law rule as to sealed instruments prevailed, and where the consideration, if the action had there been brought, would not have been inquirable into, that our law would govern, as that of the forum, and that the defense of want of consideration might' be made.</p> <p>3.-remedy : constitutional law. Our statute allowing such defenses to sealed instruments is one relating to the remedy, and does not impair the obligation of the contract.</p>

<p> Appeal from Dubugue District Court. </p> <p>This is a proceeding in equity to foreclose a mortgage. Decree for plaintiff in the sum of $70.12, who appeals to this court.</p>

On the 15th of October, 1866, these parties entered into an agreement in substance as follows: Plaintiff let to defendant 339 head of sheep to be kept for one year. The sheep were to be well cared for, and plaintiff was to have half the wool and lambs. If any were lost by unavoidable causes, the parties were to make up the same from the lambs.

PERRURY: FALSE TESTIMONY BEFORE GRAND JURY : REQUISITES OF INDICTMENT, ETC. : DEMURRER TO INDICTMENT. The error assigned by the State is that the cpurt erred in sustaining the defendant’s demurrer to the indictment. The indictment is as follows : “ The State of Iowa 1 . agst .

Action for forcible detainer tried before a justice of the peace.

Defendant was indicted for tbe crime of cheating by false pretenses, and demurred to tbe indictment. Tbe demurrer was sustained. Tbe State appeals.

From the petition we have this case: Plaintiff is the general agent of the “Iowa Central Insurance Co.,” and appointed one Knowles local agent, exacting from him a bond, with surety as required by the rules of the company. , This bond was signed by Knowles and this defendant, as surety, and was conditioned to faithfully account for all funds received belonging to the company, etc., the honest discharge of duties, and in conclusion contained this clause: “ This bond is also…

Action by ordinary proceedings by the plaintiffs against the defendant, Frederick Wehman, upon a judgment record of the Supreme Court of the city and county of New York. A writ of attachment was procured and levied upon certain real estate in Howard county. The appellant, Bernhart Asm us, filed his petition as intervenor, asserting his claim to the real estate attached.

Action by ordinary proceeding upon a promissory note indorsed by payee thereof, after maturity, to plaintiff; defenses, want of consideration for the note, and that defendant, before the commencement of this suit, and before the note was transferred to plaintiff, was garnished in a certain suit by other parties against the payee of the note, and was not released from the garnishment proceedings.

Action eor killing stock. — A jury was waived and the court found the following facts : 1. Plaintiff’s hogs, of the value, etc., were killed by defendant’s cars and engine as charged, etc. 2. At the time the county had, by a proper vote, adopted \jkat }s called the “ hog law,” and it was in full force. 3. Proper notice of the loss was given, etc., and the road was not fenced where the hogs were killed, though the company there had a right to fence. 4.

Suit upon a negotiable promissory note, of date February 20,1866, for eight hundred and eighty dollars, payable one year after date to Robert Berry or order, and by him indorsed in blank to plaintiff.

Lots 5 and 6, B, 80 in Iowa City, are like all other lots in that block, 80 feet front by 150 feet back, or in length. They front west, on Clinton street, lot 6 (the corner lot) being 80 feet on Clinton and 150 feet on the south, or on Washington street. There are eight lots in the block — a street on all sides — but there is no alley or other passage-way through said block. A plat of said block is here given, that this controversy may be the better understood.

Plaintiff, as administrator, sued defendant to recover money/Ifteid by his intestate, upon an unexecuted land contract. In the District Court he obtained judgment for seventy-five dollars and sixty cents, besides costs.' The defendant appealed to the Supreme Court; and pending the appeal, the cause having been continued by the parties, plaintiff collected the amount of the judgment and costs, $127.60 ; and, afterward, the judgment of the District Court was reversed.

Foreign State insolvent laws: discharge under. The plaintiff sues on two judgments rendered against the defendant in New York. The defense relied on is a discharge of the defendant under the insolvent law of that State. The validity of this defense is the controverted question. The facts relating thereto are these: In 1854 two judgments were rendered against the defendant in the Supreme Court of Jefferson county, New York.

The petition shows that the railroad company instituted proceedings to obtain the right of way over plaintiff’s lands, tliat the sheriff’s jury awarded damages in tlie sum of $300, the award being made Nov. 20, 1861. The company appealed from this finding to the District Court, the defendant Traer being the surety in the appeal bond.

This suit was brought before a justice of the peace, where a trial to a jury was had, and verdict and judgment rendered for plaintiff for seventy-five dollars and sixty-one cents. The defendant appealed to the District Court, where the cause was again tried to a jury and resulted in a verdict and judgment of eighty dollars. The defendant appeals to this court.

Money had and received : school taxes paid to wrong district, etc. — The petition alleges that certain lands {describing them) in sections 1, 2, ll, 12,13,14,24, 25 and. 36, T. 83, K. 8, situate in the civil township of Clinton, for eight years past have been and still are annexed to the township of Kapids (the plaintiff) for school purposes; tliat a district school tax for the years 1859, ’60, ’61, ’62, ’63 and 64 was levied on said lands amounting to over $500, the amount…

Plaintiffs sue upon an account for goods sold and delivered. In the answer defendant claims damages for plaintiffs’ failure to deliver certain articles of hardware, etc., according to the terms of a written agreement.

The following indictment was found and presented against tbe defendant, to wit: “The State of Iowa, Johnson County, ss: The State of Iowa ) agt. Indictment for keeping a nuisance. Peter Freeman. J To the District Court of said State within and for said county at Uhe January Term thereof, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven.

Appeals : General Terms : partnership accounts, etc. — Bill to settle partnership accounts. The cause was referred to a referee, who made a statement of the accounts, which was modified by the District Court and a decree entered in favor of the plaintiff for $351.90, with an order that each party should p.ay his own costs. The decree was affirmed pro forma by the General Term, whereupon the defendant prosecuted an appeal to this court.

This is an action in equity. Another suit, growing out of tbe same transaction and between tbe same parties, has been twice before this court. 19 Iowa}>134 ; 23 id. 398.

Sentón District Court. The land of defendants was sold upon an execution issued upon plaintiff’s judgment against them, and they, by proper motion, sought to set aside the sale on account of certain irregularities in the proceedings of the sheriff. The plaintiff and purchaser had proper notice of the pendency of the motion. The District Court overruled the motion, and defendants appeal.

Taxation oe national banks. — The first and second causes are appeals (by defendants) from Johnson; the third and fourth (by plaintiffs) from General Term, Yth District (Scott County). They all involve the same question, and have been submitted together.

The facts material to the question made in this case are as follows : There was a jury trial lasting ten days ; the jury retiring to deliberate upon their verdict about 12 o’clock m. of the 21st Feb., 1868. In the evening of that day, the judge said to the officer in charge of the jury, if they agreed, report to him and he would come to the court room and receive the verdict; if he was not at his chambers, that the verdict should be sealed and reported the next morning.

Release of 'mortgaged premises — effect of, etc. — Action to foreclose mortgage. Two subsequent purchasers of part of the mortgaged premises defend and claim that the plaintiff released a portion of the mortgaged premises, whereby he discharged his lien on other portions to the extent of the pro rata value of the portion released. The court decided the questions made in favor of these subsequent purchasers. The plaintiff appeals.

Action upon a note purporting to be signed by one Ogden “ for Western Stage Company,” the petition alleging that the consideration was money paid and advanced by plaintiff for defendant, and at its request. The original notice was returned served upon defendant by reading to Lawrence Whiteside, station agent at Centreville, Appanoose county, Iowa, for the Western Stage Company, and giving him a copy, etc. Judgment by default, and defendant appeals.

Challenge to jurors : actual and implied bias, etc. Action for assault and battery, and for slander, in which there was a jury trial, with verdict and jugdment for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals. The only error complained of is the the action of the court sustaining defendant’s challenge for cause to two persons called by the sheriff as jurors.

The petition sets out tbat on the 3d of June, 1869, defendant made his order, in writing, for the shipment to him by rail to Cedar Falls, by the 1st of July following, a Marsh harvester, for which he was to pay, etc., provided it answered the warranty indorsed on said order. If it did not answer this warranty, after notice and trial, it was to be returned to Gedar Falls free of charge.

Appeal from Keoltuh District Court. Beal action. — Defendant appeals from a judgment against him upon the merits. The facts will appear from the opinion.

Action in Chancery to set aside a deed. Elizabeth J. Eli instituted the suit; her husband was afterward joined by an amended petition as co-plaintiff. Tlie petition alleges, that the husband executed to one Lyons a deed lor certain lands occupied by plaintiffs as their home-, stead; that plaintiff Elizabeth did not, in fact, join in the deed, but that said Lyons, without her authority or knowledge and consent, signed her name thereto.

Replevin for a mare levied upon by defendant as deputy sheriff, at the suit of Rourke & Bro., against plaintiff, and by plaintff claimed as exempt from execution, as being “ the horse” (or part of the team) by the use of which, as a physician, “he habitually earned his living.” The court (under § 3088, Rev.) found the following facts: 1. The attachment, at the suit of Rourke & Bro., was levied upon the mare in controversy July 22, 1867. 2.

Action in equity by a junior lien holder to redeem certain real estate from the lien of, and title claimed under, a senior mortgage. The facts, in brief, are these. October 11th, 1856, C. D. Burmeister and wife, the acknowledged owners of the mortgaged estate, executed a mort,'gage' thereon to Chauncey Dewey to secure the sum of $6;000, balance of purchase-money due thereon, payable 1 in installments. This mortgage was duly recorded.

) Husband and wife : Bevision, charter 101, construed : LIABILITY OF WIFE’S PROPERTY FOR HUSBAND’S DEBTS.' — -This is an action of replevin, brought by the plaintiff (a married woman) against the defendant, as sheriff, to obtain possession of a mule colt, levied upon by the sheriff as the property of the plaintiff’s husband. The question in the ease is, whether the plaintiff can hold the colt exempt from liability to be seized and sold for the debts of her husband ?

Murder : requisite of indictment : presumption as to degree, etc. — The defendant is indicted for the murder of one William James. , Upon his plea of “not guilty ” he was tried, convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to be executed. From this judgment he prosecutes the present appeal.

TnE defendant, Samuel P. Watkins, was tried, convicted of murder in the'first degree, and sentenced to be hanged. The indictment is as follows: In the Dist. Court of Jaolcson Co., State of Iowa. The grand jury of the county of Jackson aforesaid, in the name and by the authority of the State of Iowa, accuse Samuel P. Watkins, Calvin Nelson and John B. Bucklin, of the crime of murder, perpetrated and committed as follows: 1.

Forgery : alteration oe written instrument, etc. The defendant and one Willis were jointly indicted for forgery under Revision, section 4253. The alleged forgery consists in altering a promissory note or instrument made by one Brown to the defendant. This instrument, as set out in the indictment, is as follows: “ $25. May 20, 1867. “ Six months after date I promise to pay to O. H. Stratton, or bearer, twenty-five dollars, with 10 per cent interest.

By an act of the Eighth General Assembly approved March 3d, 1860, certain persons were made a board of commissioners for the purpose of ascertaining all the liabilities, whether in suit or otherwise, against the Des Moines Biver Improvement or the State of Iowa, growing out of the said improvement, etc. (Laws of 1860, p. 18.) Under that act, the defendant, E. S. Colton, presented to said board a claim for $21,000 embraced in three items, in substance as follows: On account…

■ Liquor act: nuisance: instructions, etc. Indictment under section 1564 of the Bevision.

- Liability of telegraph company for mistakes in messages : statute construed : effect of conditions as to REPEATING MESSAGES : EVIDENCE : ADMISSIONS OF AGENTS.The plaintiff seeks in this action to recover from the defendant damages caused by a mistake in a telegraphic message.

<p>Ferry: franchise: effect of death of grantee. A ferry license is not vacated nor tlie franchise lost by the death of the party to ■whom it was granted, but passes to his representatives.</p>

Action in the District Court of Appanoose county to foreclose a mortgage given by the defendants to one Doras Healey to secure the payment of five promissory notes executed by the defendant J. S. Shupe to said Healey, amounting to about six thousand dollars.’ The notes (as they appear) were indorsed, and the mortgage assigned to plaintiff before the maturity of any of the notes.

Proceeding, in equity, commenced in March, 1868, to set aside a certain judgment of foreclosure, entered in favor of Dewey against plaintiff and wife, in September, 1859, and a sale made thereon in November of the same year. The property sold was bought by plaintiff of Dewey, mortgaged to secure a balance of the purchase-money, consisted of 240 acres, being described as a quarter and half quarter section.

The defendants set up certain equitable defenses in their answer. The cause was referred by consent, and upon report of the referee judgment was rendered for defendants. Plaintiff appeals. The facts are fully set out in the opinion.

— In the original petition, filed in 1864, the plaintiff, a corporation, states that on the 3d day of May, 1858, it became the owner in fee simple of the lands described in the petition, in all 1,984 acres; that said real estate was conveyed to the plaintiff by the State of Iowa, through R. P. Lowe, governor thereof, in accordance with law; that the defendant (register of the State land office) is about to execute conveyances of said lands to different persons whose names…

Action of replevin, verdict and judgment for defendants. Plaintiff moved the court to set aside the verdict, and for a new trial, on the ground of the misconduct of the jury, alleging that certain of the jury drank intoxicating liquors, and were intoxicated while deliberating upon their verdict.

Action to recover damages for flowing water back upon plaintiffs’ mill-wheels, premises, etc., and injury thereby to his water power. The mills and dams of the respective parties are situated on the Iowa river, a short distance above Iowa city, and about two miles apart.

'This was originally a proceeding in ejectment, commenced in May, 1863. In September, 1867, plaintiff substituted a bill in equity for her petition at law, asking that defendant Griffin, the holder of the legal title, be required to specifically perform a certain contract for the conveyance of the lot in controversy, made by one McDaniel with.the defendant Margaret H. Jackson.

Service by publication under Code of 1851; jurisdiction, etc. — Action by plaintiff, brought in the Circuit Court of Jasper county, to recover possession of certain real estate. Plaintiff alleged and showed a regular claim of title from the government down to him. The defendant relied upon a tax deed and foreclosure thereof.

Equitable proceeding to enforce a trust growing out of tbe conveyance of certain lands by Orwig and wife to B. E. Allen, trustee, to secure plaintiff on account of tbe unlawful appropriation of defendant Orwig, of certain •moneys, tbe proceeds of certain swamp lands of tbe several counties for whose use tbis suit is brought, received by him while secretary of tbe governor.

_ Action in equity. The petition alleges that the plaintiff, Isaac L. Allen, is a person of unsound mind, and has been for more than a year past; that on the fourth day of February, 1867, E. D. Stephens was duly apjiointed guardian of the person and estate of said lunatic.

<p>COMMON CARRIER : INSTRUCTIONS.</p> <p>The plaintiffs shipped a barrel of linseed oil by the defendant’s railway, from Chicago, 111., to luka, Iowa, and on its arrival at the latter place it was found that one hoop was off the barrel, and the oil had nearly all leaked out. This suit was brought to recover the value of the oil thus lost to plaintiffs. There was a jury trial, with verdict and judgment for the plaintiffs for sixty dollars, the value of the oil. The defendant appeals.</p>

<p> Appeal from Fayette District Court </p>

<p>tort : insufficiency of evidence.</p>

Green Lake, Wis , Jan. 20th, 1860. “ For value received I will pay to the order of F. W. Burdett, ninety- “ two dollars, with interest, on the first day of October next.

<p> Appeal from Floyd District Court </p>

<p>Action in equity to set aside a conveyance as fraudulent, and to subject the property conveyed to the payment of a judgment against the alleged fraudulent vendor. The cause was tried before a referee, who found the facts and law for defendants, and recommended that tlie petition be dismissed. This report was confirmed. The plaintiffs appeal.</p>