The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1883-05-15
Padgitt Bros,
wholesale Jobbers In
the case, and the evidence amply supports

the case, and the evidence amply supports
verdict. Affirmed.
Moncallo vs., the State; from Nueces
county. Opinion delivered BY White, y. /,
the continuance was properly refused MS
the evidence Of the witness, when consid-
cred with that ON the trial. was probably not
untrue nor was the verdict decided by lot
as alleged. The facts are these one Juror
swears that thsv all aereet to sum up their
penalty and dividing the total by 10 the
quotent would be their verdict. The
eleven others swear that while they did
this, they did not agree to abide by the re.
suit and did not do So for the quotient a
| above was Syears aud months, aud the
| tirmed
Mcllenrv VS.. The State. from Mitchell
county. Opinion by White L. j. No.
where IN the record is it made to appear
| That there was any plea Of or for the deien.
dant upon which the case was tried. Non
Is 1t shown that the jury which tried the
case was sworn, Helo, the facts must ap.
pear or the conviction cannot stand. Re.
Yersed and remanded.
Wilson VS., The State, from Brown
county, Opinion by Wilson j. The re-.
cord to sanction conviction when the case
is tried by special judge, must show the
manner in which the judge was selected
and that he was sworn as such Judge AS
the law requlres--(6 ct. app 207). 10 was
IN proof that defendant In explanation OF
| his possession OF the property said that he
had found 1t. Held. A charge with refer.
ence to this claim should have been given.
See ct. app ic). Reversed and remanded,
Chubb vs. the State, from Mitchell county
Opinion by Wilson, J. Defendant was con.
vlcted OF assaulting his father. Upon the
trial the latter testified for the state. In
rebuttal defendant offered the appellants
mother asa witness. Upon objection she
was not allowed, because the court held she
would be testiiying against her husband.
Held error, the husband not being party
TO the cause, the wife, In testiiying would
not do so against him within the meaning
OF Art. $40, &. &. (Wbart, Grim. Ev., s, IO2)
The court also erred when giving his oral
charge in reading the articles from the
fenal Code, relating 10 assault and battery,
ana aggravated assault and battery from
Art. ISL to Art. i9S inclusive. Reversed
and remanded.
international Il Great Northern railroad
vs., Duedersi from Comal county. Opinion
by White, y, The rule of fencing pre-
scribed for railroads by Art. i2l5
Rev. Stats does not apply
to the streets Of an incorporated
town or city because railroad companies
haye no right TO fence and cannot fence
such streets, Where stock is killed by a
passing train at the crossing OF the track
over street IN an Incorporated town or
city, 1t is incumbent on the plaintlii suing
lor the value OF such stock To prove neg
ligence on the part OF the company in order
10 entitle him TO recover. IL is merely a
question OF negligence, and to recover the
plaintiff must establish IT, (1b Texas, Gal
Texas; law review volume number 0, page
1922 Reversed and remanded.
Duer, Endres Il Co, from Williamson
county. Opinion by White, p. J. Citations
are required to be directed TO the sheriff or
any constable of the county where the de-
PENDANT is alleged to reside or be revised
statute art. l2lo) and shall be directed to the
sheriff or any constable OF the proper coun.
~ (Rev. stat, article liI3.) The correct
practice where adefendant siter commence
ment Of suit abssnls himself from tho
county so that process cannotlbe had upon
him, but not under Circum stances warrant
lng the issuance OF an attachment, is to
file II supplement or petition alledging his
absence and the county where he may be
found, and the clerk would then be author.
lied to issue citation TO the county In
which defendant liz alleged to be. Re.
yersed and remanded.
Duran vs. the State, from Preside cOun.
ty. Opinion by White y. ]. Defendant
was convicted OF murder oi the first
degree and his punishment assessed at
death. The evidence was conclusive OF his
guilt; he even admitted IL and his vounta-
ry statement, together with the corrobor-
ating evidence of the state, rendered his
| guilt and the degree of the murder beyond
| doubt. Affirmed.