The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1881-05-10
TIE COURTS.
synopsis OF Opinions of Commission.
ers of Appeals Adopted by supreme

synopsis OF Opinions of Com mission.
ers of Appeals Adopted by supreme
Court.
BIASED upon reports of commissioners of ar
peal
Nichols ct al. VS.. Dibrell; appeal from
Gusdaupe. Suit of trespass to try title;
verdict and judgment for appellee; motion
for new trial overruled, add appellant brings
case before this court on appeal TIE record
disc1oses paper purporting to be state
meny OF facts, sereed 10 and signed by couns
eel Tor both parties, but neither approved
nor signed by the judge who tried the case.
1t cannot BIZ considered by the court, and the
appeal must be determined rs though no
statement OF facts whatever appeared in the
record, as there is no bill of exceptions show.
ing any part OF the evidence introduced upon
the trial.
Among other charges the court instructed
the jury shat tho plaintiff had shown sutli-
Gent title to entiile him to recover, unless
they believed from the evidence that the con-
veysnce made by Nichols to his wife was
ton, and not with intent TO place the same
beyond the reach of his creditors etc.
BY the terms of this charge the burden i,
deed TO her was made in good faith. for a
valuable consideration, etc, whereas the law
is that the buIden is upon the party who At
tacks conveyance 70 show that it Is fraudu-
lent, etc. Considering the same in connec
ticn with the plesdings, it seems An abstract
error that could work no injury to appellan.
sufficient 10 warrant reversal. Affirmed.
Watts, Com.
Ksmpmann ct al VS. Bonnet, sheriff, ETC.;
appeal from Bexar. This case arises under
the act of the Legislature of 1870, providing
for the establishment of q System of public
free schools for the state of Texas The
appellants sued out an Injunction restraining
the sheriff, eI otlicio collector of taxes Of
Bexar county, from collecting tho taxes
assessed against them and other citizens un.
der the aforesaid law. The injunction WAS
dissolved and ordered TO stand over for trial.
Upon trial the court made its decree, main
tanning the previous dissolution of the iniunc-
ton, and rendered judgment against the
appellants for the amount of tax levied
against each of them, from which Judgment
they appealed.
In the case Of Willis VI Owens, 43 Texss
ALB, in an Ell haustive and very thoroughly
considered opinion by the present chief ius.
tice, the court held said act to be unconsti.u.
tional and void. That decision has been
universally accepted by the bench aud bar of
the state as final and conclusive of the cues
ton. A proper disposition Of this appeal is
to remove the judgment of the court below
and for this supreme court to render iudg-
ment perpetually enjoining the collection of
said pretended tax. Watts, Com.
Stramber ct al, VS.. Walker; from Ersth
In this case there are no pleadings of the
plaintiff in the record; the clerk of the dis.
trct court certi6es that the original petition
for Injunction has been lest or mislaid, etc.
There is nothing in the record to indicate its
contents. TIE assignment of errors is not
signed by appellant nor by any counsel for
him. The law provides n mode for substi.
tuting lost records and papers, and if appel
liant has not seen proper to avail himself of
its benefits he must content himself with the
necessary consequences of his inacton, hence
we conclude that the judgment ought to be
fiirmed. Walker, Com.