The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1883-04-18

witnessed the scene were afraid 10 testify
nom The TACT that the quarts are generally
desperate men and are feared, aud white
ciu1ens, not being much interested aud moi
often around, 40 not testify"
Inc attorney general referred the letter
20 tae county attorney OF Burleson county, :,
lect. S'V
The Sun Insurance company. of sa,
FRANCISCO, was to-day admitted 10 do bus
iness in Texas. N'''
Ihe capital board, at the instance of the
syhuloate, held meeting to-day 10 con.
siuer the propuety OF making changes in
.he contract as TO the cement To be ussd in
lne construction of the new capitol. The
pians call for Texas cement. but as vol
tests, '' '"o i'quuea
To-day cement makers from San Apto.
mo We're before the board, and expressed
.vSnnuenoe IN bringing their cement mn TO
lns uesired strength, and the board defer.
,eu any eStion as TO making change in con-
tract until the San Antonio firm make fnr.
ther experiments.
Ihe board provided by the land hin
mas mad no meeting MS vet, but indiyidnal
umsmbers express themselves as being con.
uuent OF having all necessary preparations
,1r carrying the law into fun effect within
ninety days, at the. expiration of which
time the law is operative ""'''
ihere u strong talk of an extra session
fall. 'V''o '''ne uurlhs the
lt IS bruited about that there is n stror-
ptH1oaolli!y of the governors yetoinr the
oih providing for paying fees of attach.
W. MltuoSseS IN felony cases. The bill. il
isia,nrn' '',mueH ,f oy It's opponents in the leg
60S 80 nar Wvulu cost the state at least $500.
~ CO. ~. auneii, and this assertion seems
vonJ S WIN IL a degree of certainty be.
mads ~ tdnssion, NO appropriation was
nsSo. W heet TINS extra expense. and 10
cIeite debt of the above marnitnds il
n'omloited by the constitution Uenca II
- aiiSgsu the governor will disapproys of
~, Muue ~ the same time he considers
'ne ooJect OF the law commendahIe
III Is also reported that he Is NO, sr,;.ol,,
III accord with all the items in Tho annro-
hna, phrla,lon oil, and may put his Veto p on
tclsn Inc comptroller CO.. paid into the treasury
,,;,, WoIk on the new deaf and dumb ASYLUM
VII. commence at once. '"'
ne Methouist Episcopal church south IN.
oSyy S"y upilimenced tearing down their old
some building. anu manu-
We're offered WV ioiioWinB cases
watson vs.; Allison ct al. from Tarrapt
Matshai " vs.. Hord ct al, from Collin Inn.
Berry VS.. Garnet ct al. from Tan,a,. ',Ss cavs
nett et al VS., Long Il Berry from Lamar,
,Lro,wery ct al VS.. Dugar ct al. from Iama,,
ih9npson VS.. Miller, from Lamar Snears
vs. Lyon, from Lamar; Eubank 4 Co VS.
Lra,huraws, ~, from Collin; Garner Of al va s'
pi peihuh,pson ct al, from Grayson. Tantill va
plurdell, from Clay; Cameron vs.. Roams,i
rom collin; II. S T. c, railroad W. Me-
nnan,er, from Grayson Evans & Martin va
Buckner, from Wise; Senter Of ' vi vs. vs.
lambeth ct al, from Lamar. RowSe, , q,
a.; ; Us. Ryan ct AL, from Dallas; Rhine and
VIE vs; Biase " Jenkins, from Dallas. ~
me following were reversed and decisio,
rendered; Clayton VS.. Kendall & Fmorv
rom Parker; Clayton VS.. Randall q Day'
ling, from Parker. '' " Dn''
| Inc following was reversed and remapd
sd: Gushing vs.. Steagall ct al, from DNi.
A rehearing refused in the followinc. II
y, ~ W, Texas Railway vs.. Snelling from
narrls; Greenleve, Block & Co. va. Leon q
IL, Blum, ct al, from Milan. y"
me Following were dismissed: Mays Of
a., vs.; Beard. ct. al, from Dallas. Stronc
vs. Millett, from Wise; Rankin and wife t,ons ys
Light, from Denton. ""' '0'
,lhe following was reversed and dismiss.
e'' 'oheh VS.. Munson, from Grayson.