Paffe v. Ervin. SAME.-Conflicting Evidence.—Where the evidence is conflicting, this court cannot reverse on the evidence, if there be any evidence upon which the finding can reasonably be sustained. APPEAL from the Marion Circuit Court. PETTIT, J.-This was a suit by the appellee against the appellant to set aside a transfer of land as fraudulent, and to subject it to the payment of a debt. There was a trial by jury, verdict for plaintiff below, motion for a new trial overruled, and judgment on the verdict. The only question in the case is as to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict. All of the evidence is not in the record. A title bond that appears to have been read in evidence is nowhere in the transcript, the clerk saying that it is not on file. Here we might stop, but we will add that the evidence, so far as it is before us, is conflicting, and is such as might warrant the finding; and although, as we see it in the transcript, we may think it preponderates against the verdict, we cannot reverse the action of the court below. It has been the uniform ruling of this court that we cannot reverse on a mere preponderance of evidence, where it is conflicting, and where there is any upon which the finding or verdict can reasonably be sustained, which is the case here. The reason of this rule is so obvious, and has so often been stated, that it will not bear repetition; and we only wonder that counsel will continue to bring such cases here and urge a reversal upon the weight of evidence. The judgment is affirmed, at the costs of the appellant. F. Milner, for appellant. L. Barbour, C. P. Jacobs, and C. W. Smith, for appellee. VOL. XXXVIII.-36 INDEX. ACCORD AND SATISFACTION. 3. Pleading-Power not Coupled with an 1. 2. persons, and the award is only ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR. See SUPREME Court, 2, 6, 7, 13. ATTACHMENT. Practice.-Answer in Bar.-Trial. 3. Garnishment.-Proceedings in at- or inadvertence of the ticket agent, 2. Street Improvement.-Appeal from Precept.- Transcript.-On an appeal from a precept issued by order of the common council of a city for the collection of an assessment for the improvement of a street, although no question of fact can be tried which arose prior to the making of the contract for the improvement under the order of the council, the transcript must show a substantial compliance with the statute in all the essential steps required to be taken by the common council and the officers of the city; and if it fail to do so, it will be held insufficient on demurrer. Moberry et al. v. The City of Jeffersonville et al................198 3. Same.-When an improvement is ordered by the common council, without a petition, the transcript must show affirmatively that the improvement was ordered by a vote of twothirds of all the members of the 4. Same. The transcript must_show that the letting of the contract for the improvement was properly advertised..... ....... Ibid. 5. Same. It must appear from the transcript that the bids were submitted or reported to the common council, and that the contract was awarded upon one of the bids............... Ibid. 6. Same.-Where it does not appear from the transcript that, on the line of the improvement ordered, there are public grounds, or street or alley crossings, it is not necessary that the transcript should show that, provisions have been made for the payment by the city for street or alley crossings, or for improvements in front of public grounds...... .........Ibid. 7. Judicial Notice.-A court will not take judicial knowledge of the number of wards into which a city is divided....... ..........Ibid. 9. the contract, will not change the rule....... ............. Ibid. Transcript.-On an appeal from a precept issued for the collection of the amount assessed for work done on a street or alley, in pursuance of an ordinance passed by the common council of a city, the transcript must show that the common council, before letting the work, advertised to receive proposals therefor, as required by section 68 of the act for the incorporation of cities. Kretsch v. Helm.......... .........207 10. Proceedings to Change Channel of Stream.-Where a city attempts to change the channel of a stream of water flowing through a portion of the city, there must be a substantial compliance with the requirements of the charter; and the commissioners appointed must estimate the value of the land or other property to be appropriated; the part thereof, if any, to be borne by the city; what real estate is benefited, specifying the same in parcels, with the name of the owner, if known, and the proportion of benefit or damage each would receive; and report upon each of the specifications; and any failure to comply with these requirements will render the proceedings ineffectual to give rights to the city, or divest the rights of the owners of the property affected. McKernan v. The City of Indianapolis et al..........223 11. Street Improvement.- Advertisement for Proposals.-The common council of a city possesses no power to make a contract for the improvement of a street until after advertising to receive proposals therefor. McEwen v. Gilker... .......233 12. Same.- Transcript.-Where the transcript on appeal from an assessment for the improvement of a street fails to show such advertisement for proposals, it is defective, and a demurrer thereto may properly be sustained.......... .......... Ibid. 13. Same.-Issue of Law. Such an omission in the transcript presents an 14. Same.-Lien.-Although the work under a contract for the improvement of a street in a city be completed, |