Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: State v. Derry?171 I nd. 18. may, or may not, exist in a thing, according to the use to which it is or may be applied, or the purpose for which it is kept or exhibited. The same principle runs through the search-warrant statute which forms the basis of this proceeding. This statute is sustained under the federal Constitution (4th 5. Amendment), forbidding unreasonable search and seizure, only as a necessary means in the suppression of crime and the detection and punishment of criminals, and is required to be cautiously framed and strictly construed. Neither at common law, nor under the statute, is such process available to individuals in the course of civil proceedings, nor for the maintenance of any mere private right. It may only be invoked in the furtherance of public prosecutions. Robinson v. Richardson (1859), 13 Gray (Mass.) 454; Lipp- man v. People (1898), 175 1ll. 101, 51 N. E. 872; 25 Am. and Eng. Ency. Law (2d ed.), 145. It is apparent that the legislature had this view of the subject when it enacted the following: Justices of the peace may issue warrants to search any house or place: Fourth. For any gaming table, establishment, device or apparatus kept for the purpose of unlawful gaming, or to win or gain money or other property. Acts 1905, p. 584, 56, 1923 Burns 1908. A justice of the peace has no right arbitrarily to issue the warrant here provided. He must require a priina facie case to be made by some responsible person before he has any power to authorize the invasion of private property. Section fifty-seven of last-named act (1924 Burns 1908) provides: No warrant for se.arch shall be issued until there is filed with the justice an affidavit, particularly describing the house or place to be searched and the things to be searched for, and alleg...