Incest. Form and contents.-The indictment must show, by facts or averments, that the second marriage was unlawful. 2 Whart. Crim. Law, § 2638. Need not aver time and place of first marriage, etc.—An indictment for bigamy need not aver the time and place of the first marriage, the person by whom it was solemnized, or the maiden name of the first wife. 28 Ind. 34; 6 Bush. 266. Evidence-Admissions of defendant.-In a prosecution for bigamy, it is competent to prove the former marriage by the admissions and declarations of the defendant. 46 Ind. 459. Same-Instruction-Criminal Intent.-In a prosecution for bigamy, it is proper to charge the jury that if they believe from the evidence that the defendant had been informed that his wife had been divorced, and that he had used due care, and made due inquiry to ascertain the truth, and had, considering all the circumstances, reason to believe, and did believe, at the time of his second marriage, that his former wife had been divorced from him, then they should find for the defendant. Ibid. Same-Reasonable doubt as to life of first wife.-In a prosecution for bigamy, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the first wife was living at the time of the second marriage. Where there is no direct evidence on this point, and the only evidence is that the first wife was alive two years previous to the second marriage, the presumption of the continuance of her life is neutralized by the presumption of the innocence of the defendant, and in such case there can be no conviction. Ibid. Same-Evidence. In a prosecution for bigamy, it is not error to admit in evidence the marriage licence, and the return made thereon by the clergyman who performed the marriage ceremony at the second marriage. Ibid. Proof of marriage-Admission of defendant.-On a trial for bigamy, the admissions of the defendant may be given in evidence to prove his marriage. 16 Ind. 352. See, on this subject, 2 Whart. Crim. Law, §§ 2616-2641; Whart. Prec. 985-994; 2 Bish. Crim. Proced. §§ 80-88. SEC. 18. INCEST. SEC. 45. If any step-father shall have sexual intercourse with his step-daughter, knowing her to be such, or if any Incest. step-mother and her step-son shall have sexual intercourse together, having knowledge of their relationship, or if any parent shall have sexual intercourse with his or her child, knowing him or her to be such, or if any brother and sister, being of the age of sixteen or upwards, shall have sexual in-tercourse together, having knowledge of their consanguinity, every person so offending shall be deemed guilty of incest, and on conviction thereof, shall be imprisoned in the state's prison not less than two, nor more than ten years, or may be imprisoned in the county jail not less than six nor more than twelve months. 2 R. S. 445, 446. That A. B., on the CHARGE. day of, in the year at said county, unlawfully had sexual intercourse with his daughter, E. B., he, the said A. B., then and there knowing the said E. B. to be his daughter. Bicknell's Crim. Pr. 484. FORM AND CONTENTS. Step-mother and step-son.-Under the statutes (2 R. S. 445, 446, section 45), to constitute the crime of incest from sexual intercourse between a step-mother and her step-son, they must each have had knowledge of their relationship, and the indictment must show such knowledge. 49 Ind. 544. The crime in such case is a joint one, and must be so charged, and one of the parties can not be legally guilty unless the other is also guilty. They may be tried separately, and one may be convicted and sentenced before the other is tried. If one is acquitted, the other must be discharged, and the acquittal of one may bepleaded in bar of a prosecution against the other. Ibid. Indictment as follows: Elijah Williams, late of said county, on the first day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty-nine, at the county of Adams, aforesaid, unlawfully did have sexual intercourse with his daughter, Elizabeth Williams, the said Elizabeth then and there, knowing that she, the said Elizabeth, was his, the said Elijah's, daughter, etc. The indictment is claimed to be predicated upon section 42 of the R. S., which enacts that "if any father shall have sexual intercourse with his daughter, knowing her to be such," he shall be deemed guilty of incest, etc. Disclosing telegraph dispatch. This indictment is bad in not alleging that Williams had the intercourse with his daughter, "knowing her to be such," unless the word unlawfully is equivalent to such allegation, which it is not. 2 Ind. 440. See 12 Ind. 549. Evidence of other offense.-In a prosecution where the indictment contained but a single charge of incest, it was held improper to prove another distinct offense for the purpose of raising an inference that the accused was guilty of the offense charged. In such a case the state can not prove that the defendant had sexual intercourse with the prosecuting witness at any subsequent time. 12 Ind. 18. See 10 Ind. 106. It has been held in Kentucky, that a man indicted for rape on the person of his daughter may be convicted of incest. 2 Met. 193. After the termination of the marriage relation between the stepfather and the step-daughter's mother, the relation of step-father and step-daughter does not exist. 22 Ohio St. 541. Proof of relationship-The relationship may be proved by the defendant's admissions. 17 Ill. 426. See, on the subject of incest, 4 Bish. Mar. & Div. §§ 546-548, and $700 et seq.; 2 Bish. Crim. Proced. §§ 31-34; 2 Bish. Crim. Law, §§ 23 and 24; 2 Whart. Crim. Law, § 2669 a; Bish. Stat. Crimes, § 656, SEC. 19. DISCLOSING TELEGRAPH DISPATCH. SEC. 72. If any operator, clerk, servant, or messenger of any telegraph company, shall disclose the contents of any dispatch or message received or sent from any office of such company, except to a court of justice, or a person authorized to know the same, he shall be fined not exceeding five hundred dollars. 2 R. S. 480. CHARGE. day of in the year at said That A. B., on the county, being then and there a telegraph operator in the servive and employment of the telegraph company, did unlawfully disclose the contents of a certain dispatch to one C. D., which dispatch had been previously sent by one E. F., from the office of said company at and was directed to one G. in the state of H., at Allowing Canada thistle to grow. at said county, and was receiued by said A. B. at the office of said company in the town of at said county, where the said A. B. was acting as such operator, said C. D. not then and there being a court of justice, or a person authorized to know the contents of said dispatch. SEC. 20. ALLOWING CANADA THISTLE TO GROW-SELLING CANADA THISTLE SEED IN CLOVER, etc. SEC. 1. Every person or persons who shall knowingly allow Canada thistle to grow and mature upon his or her farm, or upon any farm which they may have under their charge, without attempting its extirpation, and every supervisor who shall knowingly allow Canada thistles to grow and mature in any public highway on which said supervisor has supervision, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction be fined, for the first offense, in any sum not less than one dollar nor more than five dollars, and for the second and each subsequent offense, upon conviction, be fined in any sum not less than five nor more than twenty-five dollars. SEC. 2. Every person who shall knowingly sell and dispose of any clover seed, grass seed, wheat, or any other grain containing Canada thistle seed, shall, upon conviction, be fined in any sum not less than twenty-five dollars nor more than two hundred dollars. Act March 2, 1859, 2 R. S. 485. CHARGES. 1. Allowing Canada thistle to grow. That A. B., on the day of in the year at said county, unlawfully did knowingly allow Canada thistle to grow and mature upon his farm there situate, without attempting the extirpation of said Canada thistle. 2. Selling Canada thistle seed in clover. That A. B., on the in the year at said county, unlawfully did knowingly sell and dispose of one bushel of clover seed containing Canada thistle seed, to one C. D., at and for the price of dollars. Gathering cranberries, etc.-Texas cattle, etc. SEC. 21. GATHERING CRANBERRIES FROM PUBLIC LANDS, ETC. SEC. 1. Any person who shall gather cranberries from any of the public, state, or non-resident lands of this state, between the first day of May, and the fifteenth day of September of any year, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof, in a court of competent jurisdiction, shall be fined in any sum not exceeding twenty-five dollars for each offense: Provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to prevent any person from gathering cranberries at any time on lands of which he is the owner: Be it further provided. That it shall be sufficient, in the prosecutions for violations of this act to prove that the lands are reputed in the neighborhood where it lies, to be public, state, or non-resident lands. Act March 3, 1859, 2 R. S. 485. CHARGE. That A. B., between the first day of May, and the first day of September, to wit, on the day of —, in the year at said county, on lands belonging to [here say whether it is public or state land, or, if non-resident, give name of owner, or state that it is unknown, and that owner is non-resident of State of Indiana], to wit, the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section town south, of range, west, in said county, unlawfully pulled from stalks growing on said lands and gathered one bushel of cranberries, he the said A. B. then and there not being the owner of said lands. SEC. 22. BRINGING TEXAS CATTLE INTO STATE. SEC. 1. Any person driving, or in any manner bringing Texas or Cherokee cattle into this state, at any time before the first day of October, and after the first day of April in any year, and any person purchasing the said cattle, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction thereof, shall be fined in any sum not less than one thousand nor more than ten thousand dollars, and shall be imprisoned, in the |