Liquor law.

tends equally to all persons within the territorial limits described by the statute. 6 Ind 281. See 3 Ind. 258.

Same-City of Madison.-The provisions of section eight of the act of 1848, "to reduce the law incorporating the city of Madison, and the several acts amendatory thereto, into one act," etc., so far as they relate to the licensing of persons to retail spirituous liquors, did not repeal, by implication, within the corporate limits of said city, the general provision in the R. S. 1843, upon the subject. 6 Ind. 351.

A party can not be punished twice for the same act under the same jurisdiction; but he may, under different jurisdictions; as for an act in violation of the charter of a city, and a penal law of the state. Ibid.

Repeal of statute by another.-A clause in section 26, p. 435, 2 R. S. 1852, was as follows: "If any person shall sell or give away intoxicating liquor to any minor, without the consent of his parent or guardian," etc., "he shall be fined," etc. An act, approved March 4, 1853, entitled "an act to regulate the retailing of spirituous liquors," etc., contained the following section: "All laws on the subject of retailing, etc., liquors, etc., heretofore enacted, are hereby repealed." Held, that this section repealed the clause in the R. S. 1852, above quoted. 6 Ind. 432.

Consolidation of cases-Separate fees.-A., having been indicted in twelve cases for retailing spirituous liquor, the indictments were all, by consent, submitted at the same time for trial to a jury. The testimony of a witness was heard; the jury found the defendant guilty upon nine of the indictments, and assessed a separate fine in each case, and judgments were rendered accordingly. Held, that a separate jury fee, docket fee, and witness fee were taxable on each of the judgments against the defendant. 4 Ind. 647.

Laws of 1843 and 1849.—The fourth section of the act of 1849, relative to the retailing of spirituous liquors, contains no prohibition whatever, and is a nullity. The 93rd section of the act of 1843, relative to that offense, was in force in April, 1850. 2 Ind. 149. See Id. 523.

Costs in case of conviction.-A defendant pleaded guilty to an indictment for selling spirituous liquors, without license; and the court fined him two dollars, saying nothing as to the costs. Held, that the costs of a prosecution should, in such case, be included in the judgment. 6 Blackf. 549.

Purchaser of liquor must testify.-The purchaser of liquor, sold in violation of the statute, is not guilty of a criminal offense, and can

Barratry.

not be excused from testifying as to the purchase, on the ground that his answer would tend to criminate him. State v. Rand, 51 N. H. 361.

Evidence.-Under an indictment for selling spirituous liquors, -evidence of selling ale, porter, and cider is not admissible. State v. Allen. Id. 568.

Jurisdiction.-Justices of the peace have jurisdiction of cases under the liquor law of 1875. 58 Ind. 17.

Averment of quantity.—When every mode of sale is illegal, any kind of measure known to law may be averred. 16 Ind. 355; 12 Metc. 522; 35 Me. 489, cited in 2 Whart. Crim. Law, § 2448, note М.

Trades-Drinking free, but money paid for admittance.-No trick by which a sale is covered up as a trade, or as a free drink, when money is paid for admission will be a defense. If the liquor is directly or indirectly given for a valuable consideration, it is a sale. Id. § 2453.

Gift. But a bona fide gift is not a sale.

Ibid.

Measure immaterial— Variance.-If the proof shows the sale of an illegal amount, it is no variance if such amount does not correspond with that laid in the indictment. Id. § 2456, and authorities cited.

See on this subject, generally, Whart. Crim. Law, §§ 2433-2464; 2 Bish. Crim. Law, §§ 1124-1158.

SEC. 33. BARRATRY.

SEC. 19. Every person who shall frequently excite quarrels or lawsuits among the citizens of this state shall be deemed a common barrator, and, upon conviction, shall be fined not exceeding five hundred dollars, and be imprisoned not exceeding six months. 2 R. S. 466.

That A. B., on the

CHARGE.

day of, in the year

and on

divers other days and times between that day and the day of making this presentment, at said county, unlawfully frequently excited lawsuits among divers citizens of the State of Indiana, and then and there and thereby became and was a common barrator. Bicknell's Crim. Pr. 424.

Cruelty to animals.

FORM AND CONTENTS.

Require three acts.-The indictment must charge the offender with being a common barrator," and the proof must show at least three instances of offending. 2 Bish. Crim. Law, § 82, and authorities; Bicknell's Crim. Pr. 423.

Definition. A common barrator is one who frequently excites and stirs up suits and quarrels, either at law or otherwise. 4 Bl. Com. 134.

Same.-A person who habitually addicts himself to the fomenting of vexatious and groundless litigation in the public generally, or among citizens, irrespective of any private relations he may sustain to them, is a common barrator. 2 Whart. Crim. Law, § 2391.

Attorneys and others.—A man can not be a common barrator in respect of false actions brought by him in his own right, nor an attorney for prosecuting groundless action for other persons, he not being privy to the instigation thereof. Bicknell's Crim. Pr. 423.

Bill of particulars.-The prosecuting attorney, before the trial, must give the defendant a note of particulars of the acts relied on, and intended to be proved, and this note must so identify the legal proceedings intended to be given in evidence, that the defendant may readily find the records thereof. But this note forms no part of the record, and a motion in arrest of judgment can not be founded on any defects therein, and no acts can be proved except those mentioned in the note. Ibid. See 13 Ind. 117.

SEC. 34. CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.

SEC. 1. Every person who shall cruelly beat or torture, or overdrive any horse, or other animal, whether belonging to himself or another, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction shall be fined in any sum not exceeding one hundred dollars. Act March 10, 1873; 2 R. S. 484.

county, unlawfully did cruelly beat and torture a certain horse, the

property of said A. B.

Suffering minor to work more than nine hours per day-Dueling.

SEC. 35. SUFFERING MINOR TO WORK MORE THAN TEN HOURS PER DAY.

SEC. 1. No owner, agent, overseer, or foreman, of any cotton or woolen factory in this state shall employ, or permit to be employed in any cotton or woolen factory of which he shall be the owner, agent, overseer, or foreman, any person, male or female, under the age of sixteen years, for a longer period than ten hours in any day. Act March 11, 1867; 2 R. S. 484.

SEC. 2. Any person who shall violate any of the provisions. of this act shall be fined not less than fifty nor more than one hundred dollars.

Ibid.

CHARGE.

day of

in the year

That A. B., on the at said county, being then and there the overseer and foreman of a certain cotton factory there situate, did unlawfully employ one C. D., who who was then and there a male person under the age of sixteen years, to work in said cotton factory for a longer period than ten hours in one day, to-wit, for the period of twelve hours in one day.

SEC. 36. DUELING. (See Murder.)

SEC. 1. Every person who shall give or accept a challenge to fight a duel, or who shall agree to go out of this state for the purpose of fighting a duel, or under pretense of fighting a duel, or who shall knowingly carry to another person a challenge to fight a duel, shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined in any sum not less than one hundred dollars, and be imprisoned not exceeding one year in the jail of the proper county, and ever after be ineligible to any office of trust or profit.

.SEC. 2. Every person who shall fight a duel, if death do not ensue, on conviction, shall be fined in any sum not less than one hundred dollars, and be imprisoned in the jail of the proper county for any term of time not exceeding one year, and shall ever afterward be ineligible to any office of trust or profit. Act of June 14, 1852, 2 R. S. 457.

in the year

at said

That A. B., on the day of county, did unlawfully give a challenge to fight a duel with and. against one C. D., by then and there unlawfully writing and causing to be written a certain paper-writing, in the words, letters, and figures following, to-wit: [here set out the paper-writing with the proper innuendoes], which said paper-writing he, the said A. B., did then and there unlawfully deliver and cause to be delivered to the said C. D.

in the year

2. Giving verbal challenge. That A. B., on the day of at said county, unlawfully intending to do great bodily harm to one C. D.,. and to provoke and incite him, the said C. D., unlawfully to fight a duel with him, the said A. B., did then and there unlawfully give to the said C. D. a verbal challenge to fight a duel with him, the said A. B., with pistols, and did then and there unlawfully tell the said C. D. and challenge him, by opprobious words and threatening language, to fight a duel with pistols, with. and against him, the said A. B.

3. Accepting a challenge.

That A. B., on the day of in the year a certain provocation and challenge to fight a duel with and against one C. D., with swords and pistols and other dangerous and deadly weapons, unjustly and unlawfully from the said C. D. did accept, receive, and take.

4. Going out of state to fight a duel.

That A. B., on the day of in the year at said county, did unlawfully agree with one C. D. to go out of the State of Indiana into the State of Kentucky, for the purpose of fighting a duel with and against the said C. D., with deadly weapons, towit, guns, pistols, and other weapons.

5. Carrying a challenge.

in the year

at said

That A. B., on the day of county, did unlawfully and knowingly carry, convey, and deliver a certain written challenge of and from one C. D. to one E. F., to