The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1873-10-02


ity Of law for allowing to a widow, TO whom
a homestead has been allotted by the pro
bate court, $1,000. in addition to the $1,000,
Tor one years support; nor could she (being
administratrix) take property out of the es-
tate a Its appraised value, to satisfy such
illegal allowance; and any title she might
attempt to make TO property so acquired
viii be null and toid--Reversed and re-
handed
No. 1671--SopAie E. Baylor e n v. san
Antonio National Bauk-Bexar. Where a
homestead has been dedicated under former
law, but has increased in value not 10 ex-
coed the amount reserved from forced sale,
under the present constitution, il will still
be protected as a homestead. -Roversed and
rendered.
No. 1323.-James w. Battle v. Reuben
w. Lockett-Bowie. Where, as in this
case, the transcript of record is made up
of one continued series Of blunders and con
tradictions, this court does not feel at lib
erty to revise or affirm the judgment. but
viii reverse and remand at the costs of ap-
pellant, who should have seen to the cor
rectness of the transcript. Reversed and
remanded.
No. 1915. M. J. & E. A. Dixon v. A. ID.
KenRard, ct al.-Johnson. A conditional
certificate issued to an emigrant aud settler
under the land law of 1897, and prior to
the passage of the act of January, 1899, is
transferable at the pleasure of the grantor.
Where there is no estate to be administered,
the probate court has no jurisdiction to
grant administration. The probate court
has authority to order sale and transfer of
land, or land certificate only for certain
specified purposes; and an order to the adj
ministrator to make a deed transferring a
land certificate to one claiming to be the as
signee thereof, is beyond its power Where
the only property claimed to belong 10 the
estate was the land certificate; whenever it
appeared to the probate court that the GER
tificate belonged to such claimant, it has no
longer jurisdiction to make any order what
ever, unless to dismiss the administrator.
Reversed and rendered
No 152S.-Jacob Hirshfeldt et al v.
Thos. J. Hays ct dl.-Parker. Where there
is no statement of facts, this court prestinles
the charge of the court and verdict of the
| jury to be responsive to the facts proven.
A statement in the petition that plaintiffs
and one of the defendants bought goods
of the other defendants, does not necessari-
ly import that there was partnership ex-
isting between the parties purchasing, and
is not, therefore, sufficient ground for a mo-
ton in arrest of judgment. az
firmed.
No. 1902. NJ Nesbitt, administrator.
V. A. c. Walters et al.-Hood. 1t was error
in the district judge to limit counsel to ten
minutes for the discussion before the Jury.
though the court has limited discretion to
prevent impertiuent discussion and unnec-
essary waste of time. This being case of
disputed boundary, neither party could
claim to be an innocent possessor in good
faith, and thereby entitled to offset improve
ments against rents. -Reversed and re-
manded.
No. 666.-C. B. Mccormick ct al. v. D.
Arnspiger ct alS.-Grayson. Until the issue
of the proclamation of the President of
the United States, pursuant to the acts
of Congress of July, 1861, CONNER
cial intercourse between the inhabi-
tants of the insurrectionary States and the
United States was not unlawful unless
carried on upon the high seas. When a
citizen of Texas, acting as thesagent of a
Northern house, made a contract with an
other citizen of Texas, in June, 1861, that
contract was not illegal, and if in October,
1861, he took the note on which tins suit
was instituted in contamination of that con-
tract, he held the note during the war as
the trustee of the Illinois owners, and the
contract may now be enforced. Payment to
Confederate States receiver did not dis
charge the debt-Reversed and remanded.
No. 1540.-E.,P. Bryan v. S. Z. 6; A. A.
Johnson-Dallas. A purchaser of real es-
tate, who goes into possession of the
purchased property under deed with war
ranty and gives his notes for deferred pay
ments of the purchase money, can mt re-
sist the payment of those notes on the
ground Of a failure of consideration, unless
Ne shows that he has been, or is liable to be
evicted by a superior outstanding title
Judgment affirmed
No. 1307.-John Hitson v Dillahanty-
Palo Pinto. Application by the sureties, OF
an administration bond to be relieved as
!, such sureties. does not necessarily susnepd
administrator, or for his use, for the col
lection of debts of the estate, for that might
be necessary to preserve the property of the
estate.-Judgment affirmed.
No. 16S0.-Filetas Owen v. The State
McLennan. A gelding is horse within the
meaning of the act of 1850, 1851 and 1866,
defining the manner of estraying stock.
By virtue of Art. ", Sec. II, of the cOnsti-
tuition, all misdemeanors may be prosecuted
before justice of the peace, and the limi
tation is one year and no longer Reversed
and remanded.