The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1883-05-24

ond, bond not properly conditioned
and, third, that 1t was signed as surety
by one of the defendants, and there
were not two sureties as the law re-
quired. Only the last two are insist
ed on before this court.
The court decides that the bond
was conditional, substantially, in ac-
cordancejwith the statute.
In regard to the other question
that one of the suretieS upon appel
lees claim bond, and against whom
the judgment appealed from was
rendered, is also one of the
sureties upon the appeal bond,
there being but one surety besides
him upon said appeal bond. there is
say the court, more difficulty. After
review of the authorities ON the sub
ject, believing that the cases of Ira
nell VS.. Tramell and Sayler VS.. Marx
contain the last expressions of our
supreme court upon the subject and
sustain the Sufficiency of the appeal
bond objected to in this case, they hold
that the court did not err in
overruling appellants motion to
quash it and dismiss the appeal.
| Nor does the court, it is further de-
cided, err in overruling the appellants
application for a continuance. AS a
first application it complied with
the requirements of the statute,
but it was not sufficient as a sec
ond or subsequent application
in that it did not state the facts ex-
pected to be proven by the absent
witnesses. Witnesses under process
to appear in Justices court are bound
to follow the case to the county court
and appear there, without being sum-
moned.
On the point further raised by ex-
ceptions of collision between Bledsoe
and atson, the court holds that
not having pleaded his title the PLAIN
tiffs could not be required to plead in
avoidance of it. Plaintiffs could not
be required to anticipate the claim
ants evidence of title, and plead to it.
When produced in evidence, they
must be allowed to introduce evidence
to impeach its validity. We think
the court erred in rejecting the evil
dence offered by appellants, and for
this error the judgment is reversed
and cause remanded.- Wilson, j.
Judgments in the following cases
were affirmed:
G.. S. Martin VS.. Merchants and
Planters bank; from Grayson county.
Jack Paddock VS.. state; from Cooke
county.
Greenleaf, Black & Co. VS.. Chris
tian Rouff; from Caldwell county.
Henry Warren VS.. Masterton ct al;
from Shaekelford.
The following were reversed and
remanded:
A. Dutton VS.. J. E. Norton; from
Hood county.
Heidenheimer Bros. VS.. Lane Blead
soc; from Wilson county.
John G. West & Bros. VS.. S. w. Har-
ris; from Caldwell county. Opinion in
this case by Judge r. s. Walker of the
court of commissioners of appeals
adopted and judgment reversed and
case remanded.
Texas & Pacific Railway company
VS.. H, H. Hubbard; from Palo Pinto.
Dismissed for want of prosecution.
j. NJ. Hurn VS.. Semple; from Fannin
county. Motion to affirm by certificate
overruled.
James +. Mckee ct al VS.. La Gette
ct al; from Guadalupe county. Mo-
ton to dismiss overruled.
The following cases were submit
ted on briefs or notions:
Melvin VS.. Bayler; from Wilson
county.
Blumstein VS.. state; from Ellis
county.
City of Austin VS.. Erwin; from
Travis county.
Mckee ct al VS.. LaGette ct al;
from Guadalupe county.
Cartwright q Nah VS.. the state;
from Bastrop county.
Texas and Pacific railroad company
VS.. Hubbard; from Palo Pinto county.
Tubing, Klein IL Co. VS.. Freeman
& Bay, from Shackleford county.
j. o. Sullivan VS.. A. M. Reid; from
Kinney county.
Texas Pacific railway company VS..
Al. Gilstrap; from Nolan county.
p. S. Nolan VS.. state; from Medina
county.
Davenport ct al VS.. Nutter ct al;
from Bell county.
Maddox VS.. state; from Milan
| county.
Submitted on motion to dismiss ap-
peals:
Roland Durin VS.. state; from Bur-
Lesson county.
A. Day ct al VS.. Keating;, from
johnson county.
S. O.. Prattur VS.. state; from Bos-
que county.
w. w. Pearce VS.. state; from Bos-
| que county.
Same VS.. state; from Bosque
county.
Teney Pearce VS.. state; from Bos-
que county.
V. B. Wilson vs.. state; from Bosque
| county.
w. J. w. Kerr VS.. ]. w. Mitten;
| from Navarro county.
Andrew Sheffield VS.. state; from
Milan county.
Mary E. Forester VS.. E. McNutt
ct al; from johnson county.
Submitted on oral argument and
briefs for both parties: John Coulee
VS.. state; from Brazos county.
A. B. Norris VS.. state; from Lime
stone county. Motion for certorari
submitted.
John Kennedy VS.. state; from
Hill county. Set for the 26th prox.
S. W. Owens VS.. A. Levy ct al.
Set for Saturday next.