The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1883-01-21
S<noPsis of Opinions Of the supreme Court.
Galveston Term. 1883

q
An auditor was appointed, who found the
balAnoe in which the sheriff was indebted
to the county. Exceptions were made 10 A
par Of the auditors report. which were
sustained, and balance 81 SI,s16.90, IS re
ported by him, was approved, and iuag.
ment rendered thereon, with Interest from
the date when such balance should have
been put into the county treasury. The
oniy error noticed m the opinion is as To
me correCtue'5 OF the Judgment al.
lowing interest as stated. Neither
Inc original petition nor It's exhibits
contain single Ryermeut on the question
OF interest, except IN the last sentence of
the prayer for relief Tue auditors report
docs hot mention amy interest due the
county, yet the Judgment gives interest IL
an amount equal 20 the principal. What
precise date, ioun0 by the court, when
money SHOULD have been paid into the
treasury, ia consequently the correct date
from which interest will be charged, canual
be determined from the record. Held. The
better practice in this character OF suits.
where interest Is sought 10 be recovered, is
mf the petition 10 state fully the facts, xiv.
ing the amount and dates upon which The
csalm Tor interest Is asked The record not
showing with certaiuty how the item OF
lnterest was ascert0ined, the Judgment is
reversed aud rem'nded. West,
HGloverVs Burtohreys ct al, from Duyal
COUNTY. EGe real issues OF THIS case. ms
correctly made 10y the charge OF the court.
were ID the property seized by uumph-
reys, as sheriff, belong to F.. A. Glover, or
had he irauduently conveyed it To appel
liant, before the seizure for the purpose o,
del audmg his credtors2 The testimony
vas 70 who paid the taxes on the property
Nnu how a. was managed, however shshtly
II tended to prove these issues, was relc-
want and admissible. The court did not
err In submitting the qUes ion of owner
snip oil the property Gud good faith OF the
evidence, by T.. A. Glover To appellant, as
there wasa conflict OF the evidence on the
question Had the verdict been din. rent
ltw3uld not have BEEN disturbed, but no
error OF Ia appear aud the judgment is
affirmed. Stayton, J.
Tea. CT ais vs., Terrell ct ais, from Veto.
ria county. The court haYmg charged
s only the legal effect of uncJntroycrtea wi
dencc, about which there was no question
& TO be passed on by the jury, it wa not err
{ rori Is Texas, 81; % Texas, 20i) Appel
lants claimed the land IRON Peter Teal, an
adopted son OF JOhn S.deck. Appeliees
claimed under Mrs. Sevein, Mrs Sideck )
daughter; and this land at his death dies
Z scented TO Teal and Mrs SEVEN, rs tenants
10 Common; by virtue Of which appellants
remained on the land down to 1872. NJ
which date their joint tenancy was dispute :
and IN 1893 suit to eject Mrs Teal from
the premises was filed. In 1872 PARTITION
s was made under decree OF the court in
the su above, in which partition Mrs.
Tea'S improvements was found to he on
the other parties land. There was no re.
{ puiiatlon OF the title of Mrs Seven un.i
the date OF the partition. Such repu liza
4 llon pust clearly appear to give a CO-tenauI
3 the benefit OF the statute of limitations
Acts ana declarations Oi the party in pos
session are construed most strongly against
him when there is no privity to title, t.,
IexnS isl TIE beueiiJ of the statute o
Limitations 10 \ C)-tenAnt has been deuiea
where tine proof of custer on his part was
strol ger than ia this case; t2l Tryas. 3s5
Texas, 3SS II Texas, l}Sl Affirmed
Willie, c. j.
Synopsis Of Opinions OF tho Court o
r Appeals, Galveston Term, 1883
Allen VS.. the State from Bexar county
This is convic ion of burglarizing house
The evidence showed that appellant wa
reoognized while in the house, and further
mat a policeman captured him as he ".
escaping from the house, The evidence /
amply sufficient to support the verdict
the Indictment is good; the charge of thu
court is full and correct, and there is no er
ror in the record. The motion for "A nos
triai. made by appellant on the ground o
insanity, was mauitestly insufficient
onould every matter alleged therein be ad
mttted, IL does not show that appellau
was sufficiently insane as to be relieved o
the responsibility of the crime for which
hcwas charged. Beyond this fact, Their,
isnot sufficient diligence shown in his at
tempt TO procure the testimony desired
Affirmed. Wilson, !.
Terrell VS.. the State, from Milan countt
This is an appeal from conviction OF tGt
theft OF beef, belonging to one Honder
son Appellant was jointly Indicted will
one Meadows, who escaped. The eyidenc,
clearly shows that the parties were caurh
Y she act Of skinning the beef, and tina
l ADMITTED that the beef belonged ia
lderson. The evidence is somevha
iicting as to who stole the beef, yet i
iolently supports the verdict. The in
d. tment is sufficient Taken as a whole
tfe charge is good, yet, as there was no ex
ceptlons reserved by appellant to any par
OF the charge, nor did he ask any additona
INSTRUCTIONS, the charge must stand. Tn,
record ials 10 reveal any error. and the
Judgment must be affirmed. Wilson, j,
drgssby vs.. State; from Milan county
Appellant was charged and convicted OF
the THEFT OF horse from one Pitman. Pit.
man tied his horse to a rack in the town G.
Cause and went visiting On returning h.,
found his horse gone Laying in wait, h,
arrested appellant on the latter coming u,
toA horse which stood near by. On tn,
person OF appellant he found an empty pls
tolscabbard The footprints OF tho MAJ
who stole the rOrse were traced some dis
tance out OF town 10 II motto OF timber
where the stolen hNr'e was found
was found ns,ol which iins'
the scabbMd owned by appellant. I'm,
foot prints of the thief correspond will
those OF appellant. The defendant relies OF
the inSutciency of the above ovidenc,
alone for reversal We cannot but thinl
that the eyidenoe,lairly supports the yer,i n
and the alignment is affirmed. White p.
Evans VS.. the state from Camp county
appellant WAS convicted OF an assault Will
intent to commit msrder on one Johnson
The omission of the words with intent,
where the court charges the Jury rcrsrdin
"assAuit 10 murder" IL not sufficient 4
utiatc conviction, NOr will the yerdio
be Dot aside on \ similar simple crouu,
OF omission, for an assault to murder coul,
not be without AN mleu
to murder Defendant put on III
stand witness who testified that be knew
nothing OF the case, but who had prev
ously testified that he would swear to Ger
cain facts, which appellant alleges he coul,
have proven by other parties Appollsn
oAses his ground for a new trial on thi
matter OF surprise. Held, appellant hsvin
QNn the chance, of acquIttal, canno
pa 90 such; for when surprised he shout
hefe plead tor u postponement in order I
set he witnesses, Affirmed. Wilson,
Lewis vs.. the State; from McLenna
county. This Is an appeal from conyi,
uQn OF an assault with intent to rapC
about 3o'clock Ia the mornips pes,i
0ltver, an orphan girl of IL years, wa
9Wakencd by some ono feeling abnu
her person. Upon awakening, sh
Noogni2ed appellant, who fed Appcllau
orked AZ the house where the act We
eomniticd, lie had gone 10 party Ia