The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1883-05-31

svv. ot her setatate right, cannot be main
iaine1. While the statue provides ihH
woman shall file and have teopried
a schedule Of her separate propetIJ &c
G,uired after marriage, and declares suOl
NJ gistratjon shall be conclusive against all
creditors OF AVID purchasers rom
her husband, Or. S. art. 43H 40 yet IL does
not provide that the wiie's failure 10 make
such registration will invalidale her rlghI
or have the effect OF making her separatu
property liable 10 seizure ana ana SAFE oy
a creditor for the debts OF the HUSBAND
Darlington VS.. Mayfeld, Texas 800. Inc
legislature not having intended 10 attach
the came consequences TO the failure Oh the
wife TO register a schedule of separate prop
erty acquired by her alter marriage, or
owned by her prior TO marriage, o herwlse
than through a marriage contract, ana con,
sidering the relation between husband and
wife. we are of the opinion that the legis-
lature never intended to attach such con-
sequences to failure OF the wife to register
schedule of her separate property, (ParKs
VS.. Willard, | Texas 1853. Darlington vs..
Msyfield, supra) Affirmed.
Hillebrand vs.. McMahan ct al. from
McLennan county. Opinion by Willle c. j.
The vital and decisive question Is, mas
justice of the peace lurlsdlctlom 10 Ioreciose
an attachment lien on land? Held: In
our attachment laws no distinction is made
between the powers OF a Justice OF the
peace and that of district court in refer
ence to foreclosing such liens except as 10
amount inyolved), therefore if they have
| no authority to confer lien OF THIS charac-
ter upon land, it must be because the leg
islature has no right to confer IL upon
them. In very concise and able manner
| the learned chief Justice carefully reviews
| our several state constitutions and the
statutes enacted under them and the dis
cission of our courts upon the SUBJECT,
showing that up TO the passage OF the act
of August 18th 1870 district courts had
exclusive jurisdiction for the lore,
Going further asks, as the power
of a Justice of peace to have land sold
under a fieri facias issued from his court
has been frequently sanctioned by our
courts, why cannot he first attach and al
forwards sell it under execution? and after
discussing what an attachment is, It's man
ner of levy, the consequences, etc., con
cludes LAS the language OF our constltu
| ton does not in clear and unmstakeable
| terms remove from these inferior courts the
| jurisdiction they have so long exercised
without challenge and which is so necessary
| to q speedy adjudication OF the rights
| of litigants when small accounts
are involved, and as by all the rules OF con-
struction in doubtful cases they are en-,
titled to hold this jurisdiction. we feel
| constrained to hold that it still rightfully
belongs to them. Reversed and remanded.
| (rhe above case overrules the case OF Shan
| lev VS.. Comrades g. Mobiles, decided by the
court of appeals at Tyler. See opinion IN
| full in Texas Law Review, No 10. Rep).
Hornback ct a.. vs. E!lars; from Wise
county. Opinion Dy West, j. Appellee,
! by his pleadinss, and the evidence adduced,
having raised the question as to whether or
|
| were so set apart and designated by him as
to give him the right thereto as home
stead. The verdict for two hundred acres,
| without designating or in any way dis,
| tinguishiug what two hundred acres should
| be recovered, is not responsive to the evl-
dence ano pleadings. Reversed and re-
manded.
Ochoa VS.. Miller ct al; from Ell Paso
county. Opinion by West, j. A will can
not be used in evidence in this state as con-
stituting title, or link in the chain OF
title to property, without il has been pro-
bated in the manner ant form required by
our law. Here, as the genuineness OF the
deed in question is admitted. and the PROOF
shows that it has not been under the con-
troll of the appellant nor IN JUS place OF ae-
post (R. s., Art, 1879, but has been in the
possession and under the control OF
appellee ever since the death of the
testator, it may still be probated, II
appellant takes the proper steps and makes
the proper proof to the satisfaction oil the
court. (R. S. art. 1921 AS to the proof
of payment of taxes, the comptroller's re-
ceipt is neither the best nor the only eyi.
dencs OF that fact. The payment may be
shown by direct or circumstantial evidence
of a legitimate character, Watson VS.. Hop
kins. 81 Texas 637, Deem VS.. Willis 20 Texas
6i3. Acklin vs.. Paschal As Texas LAY. Re-
| versed and remanded.
Henderson VS.. Jones, from Tarrant county.
Opinion by Watts. j. adopted. When the
record upon appeal shows the evidence
upon which the verdict recovered below,
was rendered, is almost, if not entirely by
deposition, the stringency OF the rule re-
| lating to the verdict Of the juries, or the
finding of the court trying the case without
a Jury is relaxed. Especially in cases OF
| fraud, where the establishment OF the fraud
is dependent upon circumstantial evidence
and the appellate court has the same oppor-
tuuity to pass upon the evidence as did the
court below, and will so examine the evil
dence and if the verdict Of the jury or find
| ing of the court trying the case without a
| Jury does not appear to be correct, will pro-
! coed to dispose of the case as the facts there
of demand. Reversed and rendered.
Swope VS.. Stantzenberger, from Gauda-
lupe county. Opinion by Watts, J. adopted.
Under the Mechanics Lien law of 1876 the
description of the land accompanying the
contract filed and recorded in order to fix
the heir, when giving the name of the
grantee of the league and the creek upon
which it is situated AMI further reference
is made for description Of the land owned
by appellant TO a certain deed OF particu-
lar date, recorded in certain book on
named pages, etc., IS held sufficient. The
legislature never intended by that law 10
give the mechanic the right TO designate
the particular fifty acres, or the shape or
the lines by which it should be designated.
The matter should be lett to the court to
determine. Affirmed.
The Diamond Dyes always do more tn an
they claim do. Color over that old dress.
IL ,vill looL lika now Only 10 cents for any