The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1884-06-05
THE COURTS.
COMMISSIONERS OF APPEALS.

DECISIONS were Iuduc ny ILLS COuIG
yesterday as follows:
Affirmed: e. Herschell, Claimant,
ct al, VS.. Leon 81 II. Blum from John
son county-opinion by Judge De
laney; E. G. Hanrick vs.. Iicholas
Han rick, ct al, from Williamson
county, opinion by Judge Watts;
jeremiah Jones VS.. A. M. LaSater
from Parker county. opinion by Judge
Watts; J. M. REVERE VS.. j. ID. john
son from McLennan county, opinion
by Judge Watts.
Reversed and remanded: G. L.
Tatum VS.. Jesse Harrison from Collin
county, opinion by Judge Delaney; Z.
G. Rucker ct al, VS.. Susan Spotford
from Bell county, opinion by Judge
Delaney; Isaac b. Webb VS.. Z. L. Huff
from Hill county, opinion by Judge
Delaney; M. Mark ct al, VS.. L. l..
Caldwell ct al; from Young county,
opinion by Judge Watts; Philip An
derson VS.. f. S. Stockdale ct al, from
Calhoun county, opinion by Judge
Watts; Texas and Pacific Railway
company VS.. John j. Howard and
wife from Tarrant county, opinion b :
and Pacific Railway company from
Callahan county, opinion by Judge
Watts; j. r. Saunders and Benjamin
from Coryell county. opinion by pre-
siding Judge Walker; John Bonyet
VS.. Pearce Woodward from Wise
county, opinion by presiding Judge
Walker; Houston and Texas Central
Railway company VS.. Travis county.
opinion by presiding Judge Walker.
/ t. Sc Ioa tho roiIrnod "
refused or neglected to make an en-
bankment under bridge in the
county.
The decision in all the above cases
are not final till adopted by the
Supreme Court.
| DISTRICT COURT.
In this court yesterday Judge
Walker rendered judgment against
the Travis County Road and Bridge
company for 81 ,429 in favor of plain
tiff Coleman; and against the same
company for So, 1923 in favor of plain
caused by loss of cattle drowned by
Colorado at Austin.
In the case of Palmer VS. Stroud
suit for trespass to try title to some
city property, judgment was for de-
PENDANT.
The case of Greuner VS.. Westin
suit for property now occupied by
Westin, on Congress avenue, was ar
gued and submitted for decision.
UNITED STATES COURT.
The United States curcuit and dis.
trict courts meet to-day-Hon. w. b
Woods, associate justice of the United
States supreme court, presiding, with
Hon. E. b. Turner, district judge OF
the United States district couat.
SUPREME COURT.
The following cases were determined
by the court yesterday:
Affirmed: E. d. Mayes VS.. r. G
Houston, from Wilson county; Texas
& Pacific railway company VS.. w. N
McAtee, from Grayson county; H
Black ct al, VS.. Isaac G. WELLER, from
Milan county; E. q. Hanrick VS.
Nicholas Hanrick, ct al, from Will
hanson county.
Reversed and remanded: Isaac b.
Webb VS.. u. T. Huff, from Hill county;
r. d. Jones ct al, VS.. Thomas Il
Fancher ct al, from Hill county; Tex
as 81 Pacific railway company VS.
John j. Howard and wife, from Tar.
rant county; Sanders & Morley VS.
Hartwel Il Chambers, from COryell
county; G. S. Tatum VS.. Jesse Harris
ct al, from Collin county; Albert
Weir ct al. VS.. Felix E. Smith ct al
from Travis county.
In the Weir case the rights of the
parties, plaintiff and defendant, depend
on the true construction, says Justice
StayGon as the organ of the court, to
be placed on the will of Adolphus Y
Weir, and upon the will of his wife
Martha ]. Weir, subsequently exc
cuted.
The wife, Martha j. Weir and Ben
jamin Weir, a son, were by the will of
Adolphus G. Weir, appointed the ex-
ecutors of his will, without the con.
troll of the probate court, and they so
qualified The points of his will
which bear on the questions at issue
between the parties are the follow
ing:
"2. 1 will and bequeath unto my
beloved wife, Martha Jane Weir, all
my property, both real and personal,
of every character and description, to
be by her kept together during her
natural life for the support of herself
and the support of her and my chill
uT0l, duU CU6 Observation-Disclosures ana 6QuCa-
ton of such of them as have not COM
pleted their education; each of said
children on his or her arriving of age
or marrying, to receive such amount
of my property, or that may then be
on hand, as my wife may, in her dis
erection, think proper to give him or
her.
"3. leave to my said w1fe's discre-
ton and judgment the education to be
given our said youngest children, feel
ing confident that it will be as liberal
and thorough as may be practicable.
| "a. 1t Is my will and desire that all
my said property shall be managed
and controlled as it has heretofore been
by myself and my said wife, as
near as may be. And if my
| said wife should deem 1t
| advisable to sell alien and convey any
portion of the same, IL 10 my viii and
desire that she, with my executor to
be hereafter named, shall do so at
such time or times as she may deem
proper and advisable.
20. 1t is my will and desire that nv
said wife, at the time of her death.
shall make such final disposition of
such of my said property, as also the
increase and profits arising from the
Soma ao fhoro r,ou thav, 10 nj, -