The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1873-09-25
synopsis or Opinions Delivered BY the
supreme Court OF Texas.



No. 9f0.-S. S. Hudeburghv The State
Angelina. It was error in the Justice 70
order appellant TO be imprisoned till he de-
I livered into court the pistol. for carving
which unlawfully he was convicted and
fined. The law gives no such power. RE
yersed and remanded
I No. 1493.-MaryT T. Hardin Y. Milton A
/ Hardin-HoOd. The statements made bv
one, not party to the suit, nor to the decd
/ in-question, rs TO what he did and said to
compel the execution of a deed charged 10
/ have been executed under duress, are not
/ legitimate evidence to prove the duress.
/ EACH party, by decree for divorce, is left
with such property as he or she had at the
time. II there was a cause of controversy be
tween them as TO any property, (as in this
case, the wife in the community claims
land under a deed from the husband, which
deed he charges was obtained by duress, }
this controversy should then have been
made; and If not then made, it was waived
and forever lost.-Reversed and remanded.
No. 1546.-T. &. Jordan e al. V. w. w.
Peak and wife-Dallas. Husband and wife,
by deed OF trust duly executed and ac-
knowledge in the manner prescribed lsy
law, can legally cucumber the homestead to
secure the payment of a debt. A mortgage
or decd of trust to secure debt, is 8 con-
veyance, in the sense in which that word is
used in Paschal's Digest, Article 1908.
versed, injunction dissolved and dismissed
No. 5G9.-Francisco Armandaizv. Maria
Ant de Ia Serna-Cameron. The laws Of
foreign States must be proved. The courts
of this country do not attempt to enforce
the revenue laws of other countries
versed and remanded.
No 1drd TTas1anhainaor G. 90
Jere Buckley-H Harris. When party refuses
to pay his lawyer his fees, he has Just reason
to suppose, without further notice. that the
lawyer, If worth his employment, will
abandon his case, and if he then neglects to
employ other counsel, and judgment goes
against him by default, he has nobody to
blame for it but himself af-
firmed.
No. 1506.-M. Graham V. J. L. Hawkins
and wife-Ellis. There can be no doubt
that d sale of lands under an order of a
court Of equity, requires the confirmation of
the court in order to make the deed bind
ing. 1t may be well said, where there is
no confirmation of the sale by the probate
court, that the sale by the administrator,
like that of the sheriff, is a nullity, if not
made at the time and place prescribed by
law. The charge of the court, that the
law presumed everything legally necessary
to have been done by the probate court and
the administrator, should have explained,
at least, that such presumptions are ever
come by facts which prove the CONTRARY.
When one purchases from party having
the legal estate, without notice of the
existence of any trust such purchaser takes
the estate freed from the trust.-Reversed
and remanded.
No. COS. C. G. & j. il. Alexander v w.
w. 81. NJ. Thompson-Rusk. 81 desire
and direct that so much Of my estate as shall
be deemed requisite, shall be reserved from
division to defray the expenses necessary to
the proper education of all my minor chill
dren" This clause of theItcstator's will,
taken in connection with the other provi-
sions of the will, is held to intend the entire
support and education of his minor children.
In questions as to the jurisdiction Of the
court, we think safe rule would be, that
the court should be governed by the amount
of the judgment prayed for.-Reversed and
remanded.
No. 1651.-C Cora Morris v. The State
No. 1862 -Mollie Williams V. The State
Galveston. Proof of the character Of a
house which has become notorious in a city,
by general reputation, is sufficient to es-
tabIish the character Of the house. The
court below ruled rightly, that the witnesses
were not bound to answer the question, lift
would degrade them, and if the ruling was
wrong, the appellant, could not be heard to
complain of it, as it was manifestly to their
advantage judgments affirmed.
No. 1530.-Cushing & Boynton V. II. j.
Chamberlain & Bro.-Bell. Because the
Christian name Of one of the defendants is
not set out in the pleadings or process ;
because no bill of particulars accompanies
the petition, and therefore the petition does
not set out the plaintiffs cause of action in
plain and ineligible manner; because
certain depositions were taken eg pdrte, and
not properly certified, and even if correctly
taken, do not prove the plaintiffs cause Of
action, and there was no other evidence
Reversed and remanded.
No. 1434-F. W. Chandler ct al V. JOS
G. Rushing-Ellis. In an action of tres
pass to try title, no matter by whom, the
possession pleaded by the defendant was
broken; if broken at all, it required no
privity of blood or estate with the party
ousting to enable the plaintiff to take ad-
vantage of it. In order to make an adj
verse possession by successive persons for
the statutory period effectual, the success
sion must be continued by an unbroken
chain Of privity between the adverse pos
SCISSORS. He who is in possession of land,
with improvements and enclosures, holds
actual possession of that portion Of the
land embraced in his enclosure. If. at the
same time, he holds under a deed, the deed
gives him constructive possession Of the en-
tire boundary covered by the deed. If,
now, he sells part Of the tract, including
the improvements, conveying the same by
decd, the yendec taking possession, the
vendor viii 10 longer have constructive
possession Of the remainder for the con-
structive possession depends on the actual !;
and having parted with that Of which he
had actual possession, the vendor loses his
constructive possession Of the remainder,
and unless he take actual possession there
Of. loses the land.-Reverscd and remanded.
No. 749.-Wm. d. Mays v. r. a. Rut-
ledge-GuadaIupe The want Of a revenue
stamp is not good ground for excluding o
note in writing from the consideration Of
the Reversed and rendered.
On rehearing.-As It turns out that the
note was improperly excluded, and counsel
for defendant in error insisting that he hac
a meritorious defense. Reversed and re-
manded.
No. 1730.-Ben Hardin v. the State-No.
1735.-Georgc Poag v. The State-McLen-
nan. Act OF the Legislature authorizing
district court to hold q special term for the
trial Of criminal causes, is not in conflict
with the constitution. Judgment affirmed.
No. 1505.-Bank Of Virginia et0 v.
Sarah J. Hedges et ai.--Coiiin- The proof
under plea Of the limitation of ten years,
must show an unbroken possession for the
ten years. IL the party in possession moves
of the land, and afterwards puts a tenant
In possession, the possession IS not broken.
II lie continued to exercise acts Of owner
ship and possession in the interval between
his moving away aud his tenant entering
upon the premises. - Reversed and Re.
mandCd.
No. 1901. =. Owcns v Thomas ".
Mitchell e Qi.-Fort Bend. a joint claim
against guardian Carrying on q plantation
for his wards, under an order of the pro-
bate court, for work aud labor on the plan
tatiOn, should be paid out Of the estate of
h. -. 4