The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1882-06-14
COURT NEcIsioNs.

osty taxpayers the proposition TO
,syation such an amount in ad-
That derived from the state as
! necessary for the conduct of the
M ten months. not to exceed one
srcent. The result of such cleo
.ss duly canvassed and declared,
,oeeeding having been instituted
!, The election, it is not competent
I'M result inquired into in this
~ city council, by virtue of the
,S T vote OF the taxpayers, was au-
n levy a tax not 10 exceed
I per cent, and the dis
of the council i'll fixing
,s,essary amount will not be
Under Inc assumed control of pub
tSs public school-houses within the
Sts become public buildings, and a
One.fourth of per cent, Tor their
\ vas valid. The charter authoriz-
/. borroying of money, which was
n, Me issue of bonds, the validity of
.ay interest thereon is not affected
ks,eouent appropriation to an I'M
F.,e1 purpose. The charter provided
|,,pneyer The owner and assessor could
80 on the Valuation of property,
|rination should be fixed by the COM
II ii assessment. After the owner in
n. had rendered, and the assessor ac-
I'M valuation, the committee, with
4. knowledge or consent of the owner,
N The valuation. Held, that this &C
nm committee was Illegal, and void.
Fam & Texas Central railway VS..
h rom Navarro county. The injury
FSb damages were recovered, was re-
4 chile coupling cars, the gravamen
Lmion being such defect in the en-
|sto prevent its being brought under
[ste control of the engineer. The evil
Elbows that the engine was being re-
M be sent to II. for repairs. Upon
[ay damages, the court charged that
[riary was the result of defective ma.
Erand defendant agent used il, know
4 defects and plaintiff was injured
n fault OH his part, the jury could
'pnplary, in addition to actual dama-
h such an amount as the evidence
Hastily. Such damages under the
he in this case could result only
ross negligence in the operation Of
s,ine. As to the rule defining the
sol the master and servant in regard
bon to be performed, see 40 Tex, 100;
4, A6. Under this evidence, this rule
not apply. The purpose for which the
\ was being operated was to send it to
hops for repairs, that it might be rend-
ale for its legitimate work. This be-
one nproper, usual.and ordinary man.
Ne company cannot be held liable in
plny damages. The charge asked,
iriug this phase should have been
On actual damages, the court gave
lentcal charge, which, in So Tex, $40
ed error. Under appropriate pleading
Instruction the jury should be re-
itO respond in separate yerdicts to the
,ci both actual and exemplary DANA
Reversed and remanded. Bonner, ].
lsOn & Texas Central railway vs.
GER from -. 1t is shown by the
ice Of the plaintiff himself, of three
lin some of the cars, because of which
S injured, i. G.. the loss of ia Spring"
iv.head," and bumpers but at the
the cars, i'll which attempt
S injured, he did know that one of
the moving canvas the one from
necessary appliances had been lost.
that he was chargeable with knowl-
snd is guilty of contributory negli-
The court below, erred in refusing
the verdict aside. Reversed and re-
I'd. Gould, C. j.
,ls Of Opinions Of Court of Appeals.
rome VS.. State; from Milan county.
neral il is sufficient to charge an Of
N The language used in the statute,
Indictment for SANDER is one Of the
ions. This an oiicnse in which the
lous language used must be set out
Ter to put the defense properly on
A general charge of SANDER, in that
'endant imputed want of chastity to
male injured, will not charge the Of
y SANDER. reversed and dismissed.
l,J,
~ vs.. State; from Dallas county. The
nent in this case was for assault upon
the assault consisting in a threat to
less he paid o debt due. The indict-
md proof showing a threat, coupled
I ability, is sufficient. The evidence
le to sustain the conviction, and the
IS unobjectionable, Such being the
lejudgment must be affirmed. Per
L
y vs.. State; from Bexar county.
lhis court or any Of its branches adj
lor the term within less than fifteen
Tier rendition of judgment, man
Mess otherwise ordered, shall not
NTH the expiration OF such time, and
n that time, application for rehear-
VI be presented to the clerk having
Cd the order of any member of the
nat 1t be filed, mandate shall be fur.
spended. The clerk, in addition to
er duties with reference to motions
caring, shall forward the papers to
inch where the court next meets.
alton for the return of appeal to the
len in session need not be inserted
record, but if in writing, a certified
sufficient. lift be oral, the practice
De that indicated in S CT, App, 200.
ing refused. Hurt, J.
Us vs.. State from Bell county. The
ant charges "Wilfully