Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-04-30
COURT OF Appeals.

OF Texas.
COURT OF APPEALS
Fo,t Worth & Denver Railway W.
Brown, from Montague county. I'M
was suit brought by, the appell.'
against the appellants ior damage y
h stock. The verdict OF the Jury on
proper charge OF the court on 'ne ques
ton OF measure of damages awarueo
the appellee the sum oil ~, III sm'
absence ola statementoi iacls anu ui,is
of exception this court can eAa.nine
the record only with reference 70 tunu'
, amental error. An Inspection vi .ae
petition shows that 1t alleges SUM-
cient cause of action, ana Is goou ON
: general demurrer. 1t further appears
that this appeal was prosecuted merely
for delay. Wherefore the luuglnsn J,
is affirmed and usual damage awarded
for delay ordered accordingly.
Sandoval vs.. State, appear from
, Bexar county. The defendant In THIS
case was convicted of the theit OF TWO
mules, the property of j. Montoya.
The main objection urged In this court
Is that the charge OF the court was
erroneous. But If the charge as given
was excepted to on the trial, such TACT
Is not disclosed by the record. The
charge upon circumstantiai evidence,
as requested by defendant, was given,
and he cannot now be heard TO COM
plain of the same. The defendant and
another were found in possession OF
the property two days after the theft.
They claimed the animals together
and together sold them. acting In con-
cert. This, with the other evidence in
the case, Is sufficient to support the
verdict. Affirmed.
Missouri Pacific Railway VS., Nlchol-
son, from Tarrant county. This was a
suit by appellee against appellants as
common carriers tor damages for fall
ure to transport cattle within reason
able time, and TO furnish proper cars,
whereby three head Of cattle died, and
others lost value in ilesh-the total
damage alleged to be $685.. Complaint
that the charge did not properly defihe
liability of common carriers is not sus-
tanned, and in default of objection or
requested charge on the subject the
presumption obtains that appellant
was satisfied with the charge. The
suit not being on bill of lading, but
on the common law liability of the
common carrier, the appellee (plsin-
tiff) was entitled to prove the liability
in the absence of appellants pleading
special contract. The damages
awarded were not excessive. On the
contrary, the evidence shows the APP
peal to have teen prosecuted for delay
wherefore damages therefor Is
awarded and the Judgment affirmed.
Wilson, j.
Bender vs. State, appeal from Collin
county. The appeal in this case is
prosecuted from conviction for pass
ing counterfeit money. The principal
objection urged by the appellant arises
upon the sufiiciency OF the indict-
ment. But the objection IL untenable.
1t alleges all the constituent elements
of the oilense Az defined by statute,
and aflirmatively charges the appel
liant with its commission. In the alb
sence ola statement of facts and proper
bills OF exception, this court can revise
none of the other proceedings in the
| case, the charge of the court being suf.
ficient. Affirmed.
Ross VS.. State, appeal from Wise
| county. This is an appeal from con
viction for false imprisonment, the in.
jured party alleged to be one Oben.
helm, n minor of twelve or thirteen
years of age. The penalty imposed by
the verdict OF conviction was a fine o.
one dollar. The single question in
volved in the case was whether or moi
the minor was placed by his mother
with the defendant, the appellant
averring the affirmative of that issue
But the question Is not so presented
as to invoke the consideration o
this court. The rules of practice pre-
scribed by this and the supreme cour
lay down the proper mode of present
ing to this court questions relied upol
on appeal. Affirmed.
Bender VS.. State, appeal from Coli
county. The indictment in this cas-
charged the appellant with having eel
: tain counterfeit coins In his possessio
with the purpose and intent OF passing
. Upon appeal from conviction below tn
appellant urges that the indictmer
was insufficient to charge any oilans
against the laws of this state, an
that there was material error in ii
q charge of the court. Responding to tn
. last objection first, it Is sufficient
, say that In the absence of stntemel
= of facts, and bill of exceptions, Il
= charge of the court will only be revise
: for fundamental error. The indie
ment, upon inspection, is found
charge all the essential elements of ii
s oilense and the judgment is aflirme
Moore vs. State, appeal from Ell
3 county. The oflense for which tn
appellant was prosecuted and CO..
victed, and awarded u term of thr,
a years in the penitentiary us puuis
!. ment, was an assault with intent
\. murder one Bush, The objectio
is urged to the Indictment ia not tenabl
The charge of the court properly mac
the criterion of the guilt of deienda,
y TO depend upon the fact whether
not, u death had ensued, the otlen
II would have been murder The ey
dence was ample upon that issue NJ
g the Judgment Is affirmed.
Bender VS.. State, appeal fro
Collin county. This IL the second co
yiction against this appellant for pas
e ing counterfeit money. The recoi
~ brings up no statement of facts,
Al bills OF exception and no assignnle
y, of errors. The objection that Il
IS verdict Is contrary TO the evidenc
q because 1t was not shown that ii
Is alleged counterfeit coin contained I
10 silver, CANNOT under these circui
n stances be considered. Nor In fact, O.
n any question, except where fund
III mental error Is apparent, be consider,
u In such condition of the record. NJ
Indictment Is sufficient and the char
fairly submits the law, so far rs, wilt
'm out statement Of facts, this cou
Nv Is able to determine. Affirmed.
au Davis vs. State, appeal from Dents
Va county, A fine of ten dollars W
assessed against the defendant up,
hi El..Nt .k..