SEC. 2101. Concealing criminals. 2102. False personation. 2103. Producing false heir. 2104. Substituting child. 2105. Extortion. 2106. Judge practicing law. 2107. County officer practicing law. ment. 2114. Suffering capital criminal to escape. 2118. Aidng prisoner to escape from jail, 2119. Suffering person charged with mis- 2120. Obstructing writ of habeas corpus. 2127. Official negligence. 2128. Refusing aid to officer. SEC. 2129. Common barrator. 2130. Usurpation of office. 2131. Officer acting without qualifying. 2132. Intoxicated officer. 2133. Keeping county office in improper place. 2134. Officer discounting orders. 2135. Extortion from pensioners. 2138. Bribery of officer. 2139. Auditor of state drawing warrant il legally. 2140. State officer not accounting. 2142. False report as to treasury of state. 2147. Breaking quorum in general assembly. 2148. Neglect of roads. 2149. Recording deed without transfer. 2150. Misfeasance of clerk in printing bu reau. 2151. Misfeasance of inspector of grain. 2152. Sale of examination questions. [1881 S., p. 174. In force September 19, 1881.] 2093. (2006.) Perjury. 101. Whoever, having taken a lawful oath or affirmation in any matter in which, by law, an oath or affirmation may be required, shall, upon such oath or affirmation, swear or affirm willfully, corruptly, and falsely touching a matter material to the point in question, shall be deemed guilty of perjury, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be imprisoned in the state prison not more than twenty-one years nor less than two years, fined not more than one thousand dollars nor less than fifty dollars, disfranchised and rendered incapable of holding any office of trust or profit for any determinate period. See section 1816. An indictment for perjury, in cases where an oath is required by law, must allege that the false testimony was concerning a matter material to the point in question. State v. Flagg, 25 Ind. 243; State v. Flagg, 27 Ind. 24; State v. Anderson, 103 Ind. 170; State v. Cunningham, 116 Ind. 209. If the facts stated show the materiality of the false testimony a direct averment of materiality is not necessary. Hendricks v. State, 26 Ind. 493; Galloway v. State, 29 Ind. 442; Burk v. State, 81 Ind. 128; State v. Cunningham, 116 Ind. 209. The word "falsely" need not be used in an indictment if equivalent words are used. State v. Anderson, 103 Ind. 170. As to the necessary averments in an indictment for perjury by giving evidence on a trial, see State v. Walls, 54 Ind. 407; State v. Shultz, 57 Ind. 19; Burk v. State, 81 Ind. 128; Stefani v. State, 124 Ind. 3. When the charge of perjury is based upon a false oath to a written instrument, so much of the instrument that is alleged to be false should be set forth in the indictment. Coppack v. State, 36 Ind. 513; State v. Blackstone, 74 Ind. 592. An indictment for perjury should name the officer administering the oath. Hitesman v. State, 48 Ind. 473. An indictment for perjury based upon testimony before a board of equalization relating to property not returned for taxation, must state all the facts necessary to show that the property was subject to taxation. State v. Wood, 110 Ind. 82. The indictment must show that the officer administering the oath had legal authority to do so. McGregor v. State, 1 Ind. 232. Perjury may be committed in testifying before a grand jury. State v. McCormick, 52 Ind. 169. Jurors may commit perjury in making false answers to questions touching their qualifications. State v. Howard, 63 Ind. 502. When statements are matters of opinion, perjury can not be based thereon. State v. Henderson, 90 Ind. 406. Perjury can not be predicated upon immaterial matter. State v. Reynolds, 108 Ind. 353; State v. Cunningham, 116 Ind. 209. Whenever punishment is provided for false swearing by any particular statute, the prosecution must be under such statute and not uuder this section. State v. Runyan, 130 Ind. 208. On a trial for perjury it must be proven that the defendant was sworn, as charged in the indictment, by an officer authorized to administer the oath. Hitesman v. State, 48 Ind. 473; Muir v. State, 8 Blkf. 154. If there is the positive testimony of one witness to the charge of false swearing, the corroborating evidence need not be equivalent to the testimony of a positive witness. Hendricks v. State, 26 Ind. 493; Galloway v. State, 29 Ind. 442. State courts have no jurisdiction to punish perjury committed where the oath is taken pursuant to an act of congress. State v. Adams, 4 Blkf. 146. 2094. (2007.) Perjury in voluntary affidavit.-102. Whoever willfully, corruptly and falsely before any officer authorized to administer oaths, under oath or affirmation voluntarily makes any false certificate, affidavit or statement of any nature for any purpose, shall be deemed guilty of perjury, and upon conviction thereof shall be imprisoned in the state prison not more than twenty-one years nor less than two years, fined not more than one thousand dollars nor less than fifty dollars, disfranchised and rendered incapable of holding any office of trust or profit for any determinate period. Under this section it is not necessary that the matter falsely sworn to shall be material to any question involved in order to constitute perjury. State v. Flagg, 25 Ind. 243. Perjury committed in making an affidavit for a continuance does not fall within this section, but under the next preceding section. State v. Anderson, 103 Ind. 170. 2095. (2008.) Subornation of perjury.-103. Whoever suborns or procures any person to commit perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury, and upon conviction thereof shall be imprisoned in the state prison not more than twenty-one years nor less than two years, fined not more than one thousand dollars nor less than fifty dollars, disfranchised and rendered incapable of holding any office of trust or profit for any determinate period. An indictment for subornation of perjury must set forth facts showing that the accused procured the false oath to be taken, and that the party making the false statement committed perjury as defined by some statutory provision. Smith v. State, 125 Ind. 440. 2096. (2009.) Bribery of public officers.-104. Whoever corruptly gives, promises or offers to any member, officer, clerk, or employe of the general assembly, or of either house thereof, or to any state or other officer, agent, or employe of the state, or person holding any of fice of trust or profit under the laws of this state, or any officer intrusted with the administration of justice, or prosecuting attorney, either before or after his election, qualification, appointment, or employment, any money or valuable thing; or corruptly offers or promises to do any act beneficial to any such person, to influence his action, vote, opinion, or judgment in any matter pending or that might legally come before him; and whoever, being a member, officer, clerk, or employe of the general assembly, or state or other officer, agent, or employe of the state, or person holding any office of trust or profit under the laws of this state, or any officer intrusted with the administration of justice, or prosecuting attorney, either before or after his election, qualification, appointment, or employment, solicits or accepts any such money or valuable thing, to influence him with respect to his official duty, or to influence his action, vote, opinion, or judgment in any matter pending or that might legally come before him,—shall, upon conviction thereof, be imprisoned in the state prison not more than fourteen years nor less than two years, fined not exceeding ten thousand dollars, and disfranchised and rendered incapable of holding any office of trust or profit for any determinate period. See sections 2100, 2138. As to what is a sufficient charge of bribery against a township trustee, see Glover . State, 109 Ind. 391; State v. McDonald, 106 Ind. 233. A prosecuting attorney was held to be an officer entrusted with the administration of justice under the statute of 1852. State v. Henning, 33 Ind. 189. It was held under the statute of 1852, that the receiving of a promissory note by an officer to influence his action was not bribery, as the note was worthless. State v. Walls, 54 Ind. 561. An indictment for bribery should distinctly state and charge that the officer charged with being bribed, accepted, or agreed to accept, for his official action, some amount of money or article of value. State v. Stephenson, 83 Ind. 246. The offering to township trustees of money or property to induce them to purchase school supplies, is bribery under this section. State v. McDonald, 106 Ind. 233; Glover v. State, 109 Ind. 391. 2097. (2010.) Bribery of jurors, etc.-105. Whoever, with intent to corrupt a grand or petit juror, or a grand or petit jury, referee, master commissioner, arbitrator, umpire, commissioner to sell lands or make partition of lands, appraiser of real or personal property, county commissioner, mayor of a city, or member of the common council of any city, or trustee of any incorporated town, trustee of any civil or school township, or any inspector, judge, or clerk of election; or, to influence him or them with respect to the discharge of his or their duty, either before or after he or they are summoned, elected, appointed, qualified or sworn, promises or offers him or them any money or valuable thing; and whoever, either before or after he is summoned, elected, appointed, qualified or sworn as a grand or petit juror, referee. master commissioner, arbitrator, umpire, commissioner to sell lands or to make partition of lands, appraiser of real or personal property, county commissioner, mayor of a city, or member of the common council of any city, trustee of any incorporated town, trustee of any civil or school township, or inspector, judge, or clerk of election, solicits or accepts any money or other valuable thing to influence him with respect to the discharge of his duties as such, shall be imprisoned in the state prison not more than fourteen years nor less than two years, fined in any sum not exceeding five hundred dollars, and disfranchised and rendered incapable of holding any office of trust or profit for any determinate period. 2098. (2011.) Compounding felonies.-106. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a crime of the grade of felony, takes any money or property of another, or any gratuity or reward, or any engagement or promise therefor, upon any agreement or understanding, express or implied, to compound or conceal such crime, or to abstain from any prosecution therefor, or to withhold any evidence thereof, or do any act to encourage or procure the absence of witnesses or other testimony on the examination or trial of such charge, is guilty of a felony, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished as follows: First. By imprisonment in the state prison not more than seven years nor less than one year, or in the proper county jail not exceeding one year, where the crime compounded is one punishable either by death or by imprisonment in the state prison for life. Second. By imprisonment in the state prison not more than five years nor less than six months, or in the proper county jail not exceeding six months, where the crime compounded is one punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for any other term than life. The defendant must have had knowledge of the actual commission of the crime which it is alleged he agreed to compound or conceal, etc. State v. Henning, 33 Ind. 189. 2099. (2012.) Compounding misdemeanors.-107. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a crime of the grade of a misdemeanor, or violation of a statute for which a pecuniary or other penalty or forfeiture is prescribed, takes any money or property of another, or any gratuity or reward, or any engagement or promise therefor, upon any agreement or understanding, express or implied, to compound or conceal such crime or violation of statute, or to abstain from any prosecution thereof, or to withhold any evidence, or to do any act to encourage or procure the absence of witnesses or other testimony on the examination or trial of such charge, upon conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment in the proper county jail not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment. See State v. Henning, 33 Ind. 189. 2100. (2013.) Compounding prosecutions.-108. Whoever takes any money or property of another, or any gratuity or reward, or any engagement or promise therefor, upon any agreement or understanding, express or implied, to compound, discontinue, or delay any prosecution then pending for any crime or violation of statute, or to withhold any evidence in aid thereof, or do any act to encourage or procure the absence of witnesses or other testimony on the examination or trial of such charge, upon conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment in the proper county jail not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or by both such fine and imprisonment. See section 2096; State v. Walls, 54 Ind. 561; Gray v. State, 107 Ind. 177; State v. Bain, 112 Ind. 335. 2101. (2014.) Concealing criminals.-109. Whoever, not being husband or wife, parent or child, grandparent or grandchild, brother or sister, master or apprentice, harbors or conceals any thief or robber, knowing him to be such, shall, upon conviction thereof, be imprisoned in the state prison not more than seven years nor less than two years. 2102. (2015.) False personation.-110. Whoever falsely personates another person before any court or judge thereof, or before any justice of the peace, mayor of a city, clerk of any court of record, notary public, or any state, county or township officer who is authorized either to administer oaths or take the acknowledgment of deeds, powers or warrants of attorney, or other instruments, or to grant marriage licenses, with intent to defraud; or who falsely personates or represents another, and, in such assumed character, receives any property intended to be delivered to the party so personated, with intent to convert the same to his own use, upon conviction thereof, shall be imprisoned in the state prison not more than fourteen years nor less than two years, fined not exceeding one hundred dollars, and disfranchised and rendered incapable of holding any office of trust or profit for any determinate period. When the charge is for obtaining property by false personation, it is necessary to prove that it was intended to deliver the property to the man so personated. Williams v. State, 49 Ind. 367. When money or property is obtained by false personation, larceny will not lie therefor. Williams v. State, 49 Ind. 367. 2103. (2016.) Producing false heir.-111. Whoever shall fraudulently produce an infant, falsely pretending it to have been born of |