The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1883-05-26

levy, of her separate right, cannot be main
tainei. While the statue provides that a
married woman shall file ana have recorded
a schedule of her separate property ac-
quired after marriage, and declares such
registration shall be conclusive against all
subsequent creditors Of AND purchasers from
her husband, Or. S. art. i344-i9) yet 1t does
not provide that the wiie's failure to make
such registration will invalidate her right
or have the effect of making her separate
property liable 10 seizure and and sale by
creditor for the debts Of the husband.
Darlington vs.. May field, 8 Texas 367l. The
legislature not having intended 10 at:aca
the came consequences TO the failure of the
wife TO register schedule of separate prop
erty acquired by her after marriage, or
owned by her prior to marriage, o herwise
than through marriage contract, and 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. EdriDgton vs.
Mayfeld, supra). Affirmed.
Hillebrand vs.. McMahan ct al. from
McLennan county. Opinion by Willie C, j.
The vital and decisive question is, has a
justice of the peace jurisdiction to foreclosc
an attachment lien on landP Held: In
our attachment laws no distinction is made
between the powers OF q Justice of the
peace and that of district court in refer
ence to foreclosing such liens Except as TO
amount involved, 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 it 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 fore
gong further asks, as the power
Of "a justice Of peace to have land sold
under fieri facias issued from his court
has been frequently sanctioned by our
courts, why cannot he first attach and at.
forwards sell 1t under execution? and after
discussing what an attachment is, its man
ner of levy, the consequences, etc, con-
cludes "As the language of our constiLu
ton does not in clear and unmislakeab!e
terms remove from these inferior courts the
jurisdiction they have 80 long exercised
without challenge and which isso necessary
to speedy adjudication OF the rights
of litigants when small accounts
are involved, and as by nll the rules of con
struction in doubtful cases they are en-
titled to hold this jurisdiction. We feel
constrained to hold that it still rightiully
belongs to them. Reversed and remanded.
The above case overrues the case of Shan
ley VS.. Comrades e Mobiles, decided by the
court of appeals at Tyler. See opinion in
full in Texas Law Review, No 10. Rep
Hornback ct al. vs. Ellars; from Wise
county. Opinion by West. j. Appellee,
having raised the question as to whether or
not the Two hundred acres claimed by him
were so set apart and designated by him as
to give him the right thereto as II 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 evil
dence an0 pleadings. Reversed and re-
manded.
Ochoa vs.. Miller ct al; from I'll Paso
county. Opinion by West, !. A will can
not be used In evidence in this state as con.
shutting IA title, or u link in the chain OF
title to property, without il has been pro-
baed in the manner and form required by
our law. Here, as the genuineness of the
deed in question is admitted. and the proof
shows that 1t has not been under the con
troll of the appellant nor In its place of de-
post K. s., Art, 1879, but has been in the
possession and under the control of
appellee ever since the death OF the
testator, 1t may still be probated, il
appellant takes the proper steps and makes
the proper proof to the satisfaction OF the
Aa tn
OF payment OF taxes, the comptroller's re.
ceipt is neither the best nor the only evi
dencs OF that fact. The payment may be
shown by direct or circumstantial evidence
OF legitimate character, Watson VS.. Hop
kins, q Texas 63i, Deem VS.. Willis 20 Texas
6i3. Acklin vs.. Paschal Is Texas li). Re-
versed aud remanded.
Henderson vs.. Jones, from Tarrant county.
Opinion by Watts. 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 70.
laung to the verdict of the iures, or the
finding of the court trying the case without
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-
tunity to pass upon the evidence as did the
court below, and will 30 examine the eyi.
dence and ii 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.
lnpo county. Opinion by Watts, /. 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 tho creek upon
which 1t is situated AMI further reference
Is made for description of the land owned
by appellant to certain deed OF n particu.
lar date, recorded in certain book on
named pages, ETC.. Is held sufficient. The
legislature never intended by that law to
give the mechanic the right to designate
the particular fifty acres, or the shape or
the lines by which 1t should be designated.
The matter should be left to the court to
determine. Affirmed.
-