The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1883-06-20

on notes given for the purchase money OF
a certain steam engine. Appellants pleaded |
the failure of consideration and raised |
several other questions upon the trial, but |
as no error appears of record, and as sub |
stantial Justice has been reached in the
case, the plea of failure of consideration not
beng sustained by the evidence, the judg'
ment is affirmed.
Gallagher VS.. Freeman & Paul; from Nc
Lehman county. Appellees brought suit
against appellant for certain labor done
and performed for him. The only material
question raised 10 as to the admission OF
Harness testimony 10 the effect that appel
ant had made certain statements to
him as to what he was to
pay appellees for the work. Held,
There was nc error in admitting the evil
dence and there appearing no error OF re-
cord. The judgment is affirmed.
Kerr VS.. Mitten; from Navarro county.
Opinion by Hunt, J. In the Justice court
Judgment was rendered for defendant THAT
plaintiff take nothing by his suit, and that
defendant 20 hence without delay, and that
| he recover his costs of plaintiff" The APP
peal bond, after giving the proper style oil
| the case, its humber and date OF judgment
rendered in the Justice court, describes the
Judgment thus: THE defendant recovered
a judgment against said Kerr for the costs
of said suit, amounting to the sum OF $27 20
from which said judgment OF said Justice
court, the plaintiff Kerr has appealed" etc.
Held. The motion to dismissln the county
court was improperly sustained. The judg-
ment rendered was final judgment, aud
there was no misdescription OF the judg-
ment, but failure to give iull and com
plete description. Reversed and re
manded.
international & Great Northern railway
VS.. johnson; from Travis county. Opinion
by Hunt, j. Suit for breach of contract.
Appellee having brother in Alabama,
being DESTROYS to have him in Travis county
Austin for the purpose of securing
ticket for his brother, Law
less not having such ticket, and
not knowing the price OF it told appellee to
return next day and he would telegraph
and ascertain the price. johnson returned
and was told that an emigrant ticket from
Stephensville, Alabama, to Austin would
cost $2555. johnson not having the money
with him was told by Lawless to pay it to
Friar, thu .company's agent at Manchaca,
and when done so, he would have ticket
delivered to his brother by the company's
agent at Stephenville. The money was
paid to Friar, his receipt being taken for it.
No ticket was furnished, Frar abscOnding
without delivering the money to the COM
pany. 1t was proved that tickets
were frequently procured as was attempted
in this case Held: These facts authorized
a recovery against the company, but AS q
Judgment was rendered In the county
court less in amount than that which was
recovered in the justices court. The costs
of the appeal should be taxed against APP
pellee. Reversed and remanded
Allison vs. the State from Youngcounty.
Opinion by Wilson, j, The court did not
err in everything the motion for continu-
ance. All the material facts which de-
tendant alleges he expected to prove by the
witnesses, Jewell, Williams and Kent, were
sufficiently proven by the testimony of
other witnesses who testified on the trial,
and defendant was therefore not
injured by the absence of these witnesses.
.. Defendant was justly indicted with two
others, and he, therefore, had no legal
right to demand that they should be first
tried. 3. There vas no error in rejecting
the deed offered in evidence by defendant,
1t is provided that 1.-The rules of evidence
prescribed by the statute law of this state
in civil suits, shall, so tar rs applicable
govern also in criminal actions. 20. G. p,
Art. 726; 0 ct. App, 2i0). The deed offered
in evidence not having been filed in the
cause three days prior to the trial and
notice of same filing given as required by
law. Affirmed,
Miller VS.. the State from Fayette county.
Opinion by White, p. j. The following in
struction appears in the courts charge:
If you believe the offence was committed
as alleged in this county and state, and If
you further believe the defendant was the
party committing the sane, you will con-
vict. Held: The oath administered to the
Jurors when they have been selected, is
that they Twill true verdict render, nc.
cording TO the law and the evidence"
&C. c. p, Art. 657), and it is but reasonable
to presume that If suitable
as urged for the service required
of them, they must understand the nature
and obligation of this oath. Still the latter
practice is the uniform one, to remind
them that their findings must be predi-
ca ell alone upon their belief of the evil
dence testified to by the witnesses in the
case The evidence does not sustain the
verdict Reversed and remanded.
Maddox vs.. the State; from Milan coun-
ty. Opinion by Wilson, j. The indict-
ment charges that appellant ibid iraudu-
lently take and steal horse from the pos
session OF John Dennis, without his consent
with intent to appropriate the same to the
use and benefit Of the said l.. ii. Maddox"
Held fatally defective. There is no aver
ment of ownership. An indictment for the
offence, which fails to alege in direct terms
to whom the property stolen belongs or
that the owner thereof is to the grand ju.
rors unknown is fatally defective. Reversed
and dismissed.
COURT or APPEALS.
Judge Irwin vs. the state from Lamar
county. Appellant appeals from con-
viction of murder Of the second degree and
his punishment assessed at fifteen years
nprisoment. Three questions are pre-
senttd: First the validity Of the indict-
m,nt; second the suiiiciency of the evil
dence, and third, the correctness OF the
COURT charge. Held The indictment is in
all respects good and sufficient, the evi.
d,nce amply supports the verdict, the
. barge OF the court is correct in every ma
terial respect, and the judgement is af-
iirr,ed
Morgan VS.. the State, from Fort Bend
, county. This is an appeal from the con-
! vlction of the theft Of II $50 bill from one
Hopkins. The theft was committed while
I both parties were confined in jail The
, only questions presented relate to cor
rectness OF the charge and the sutlicency OF
the evidence. Held: The charge of the
court is full and correct, and submitted the
law applicable to the facts with impartiali-
ty. The evidence Is very conclusive and
; amply sustains the verdict. The record
shows no error, and the judgment is af.
, firmed.
Stovall & Lennox vs.. Forsgard
, from McLennan county. Appellee
sued appellants, as partners Tor the sale
. of a threshing machine which he had sold
5 them. Appellants answered denying the
/ existence Of a partnership and alleging
, want of authority in Lennox to bind Sto
vail, etc. Judgment for Forsgard for the
, value of the machine. Held, this beine
> purely u fact case, and having been fairly
0 submitted to the jury and their verdict be
ing amply sustained by the evidence, it 1.
. affirmed.
' Morrison VS.. Branham et al; from Hi
county. Judgment was rendered In favoi
r of appellees against appellant In
q the justice court. A pellant car
i ried his cause 10 the county conr
3 by writ Of certioari. After ammo unce
I. ment for ready in the county cour
!. appellees moved TO dismiss the cause FOL
q want of merit in the petition for certioari
= The court sustained the motion and dis
| mt ihN Hall