The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1884-01-24

Nufuliv ard unlawlully make the assault,
~iihoni alleging the particular ,e'sol We
ieuse constituting the assault, Tue state
nrnt OF the means used was tufplnsnFsi
q Wharf. Peg Form 2lii sneed- Tenn,
"a; 2Sl3 III, Or, Prnr, so, ~. Tex IN, Areh
Cr. Prog, & III, Olb n Note. = lhA' the
affidavit upon which the iniormalloh "ae
based wes signed william HUT, -
onargfd the assault 10 have been committed
anon Wg.. Hum n not fatal objection -
tho Information; O.. q Pro, Az, 40;
Olsrks Or Law, p. 423). 3-fho iniuima'
ton may b. presented a. any timt helnf'
the uilsnns IN barred by he tistute ~ liml~
iatiun although tho oompl.int mey h'ye
been made long before Tho time OF PRESENT
ing the Information, Affirmed
Ga,oAmp ", Dfawh, from Washington
county Opni0n by White, SuiI by Ap.
pellre by injunction 20 rrHirsin epp'lhn.
rom interieFlug win acertriu roid oialnlfl
| % hs upigi bnrhpod road, Hud asking t'H'
"a. ns required tn remove certain ol,i hc-
| dnns piuce 4 hy him aoros' said road. Ap-
psIieo claims VA easement IN tn" laud nn'
| .nught 10 recover the shn' M ~ tD.
| Hello. IN easement ur scrY tude IA - ~
| which one proprietor has 90 snwr prom ,
| nrnl 10 or lawn use GU ui or over the ga
tate NJ another proprietor. ltAlNgYs implies
lr interest 20 lnud Va or over which Do M 70
| be enjoyed. case directly ~ p"W' w
| This b. Gore "a N that OF Scripture - h'nI'
| IT, that case case, The plea TO ihe lur'aeic'
| lion II tho county court gf3huna tnc lu'
| Junction IVES properly sustained, nrciute
| The ruhieot MISTER ~ the suit involved Au
| interestin land and by section 10, article o.
~ the constitution the county cou'l
was expressly DO led jnflsdic iou OF
sucn matters aud 10y section 81 SAIL AZ
/ uclr 0 al such ma trra are ounded 20 tne
exclusive jurisdiction 81 the dis'rct court
| 6l TEX lsO. W. e.. W. COP. Rep. Ste'
| 1851. Reversed eud dismissed
Golinia ". ,Gs STATE, f,om Weoo ooqin,y
Onuinn by Willscp Although the luHE'
nent Ia In literal compliance With Arugle
AL G. q. z, suu 70 ia insufficient TO sup
port the judgement final, becau'' ~ DOES
40. specify tho amount ndiu iSti aga'n't
tina d.fsndunts The Rmount OF money 'or
which the judgment ~ rendered nEe'ns,
tha principal oDligor aud tnr tt'e ~
should be rpeciiled Ia the judgment re-
yersed aid rernauded. -, -
county. Opinion by White y. J. O1nVlcN"n
for lcsping disorderly house Tor putpos'A
ng public prostituion. The first bill OF ex
c.otion. relatea to tho admission OF sVi-
drnce OF the state TO prove oy geneTal ru'
nor In Tn, community, that uo' ndeht VS. ~
IN the habit OF sleeping IN the mouse ui III
fame. The evidence was ELECTED IA answer
mes II he know where defendant slept, y ne
slept IN iho house, aud II they nnd seen MN
sleening In the house. Held: These qu's
ti5ns were unobjectioasb aud Legitimate.
But " Va snswer TO these qnesnpht'
the witness answered not from per
sonal knowledgr but from general rumor or
r,uutntio. the answara should be excluded.
@ The tecond oil of exceptions raises nc
question. "CAn the tact as 10 who Is the
Gee,er Of a @isorderly house be proven py
GENERAL reputation Held: l. Proof by
yenprsl reputation that the house IT, kep'
Tor the purpose OF prostitution is admissi-
ME aud sufficient TO establish us chsracte.
IS disorderly house; and the character OF
The occupants and parties resortlng TO ssld
house may be established by similar test
mony. t3S Tex, COS; AZ Tex, 496; 70 MINI
.92) Evidence OF rumOr or common re-
port OF = fact l. not admissible II better evl'
depce Is obtainable, and certainly better
evidence ough to be obtainnole thon mere
common report as to the fact ss TO who is
me keeper OF such house. Reversed ana
remsnded.