The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1885-03-07
THE HIGHER COURTS.
COURT OF APPEALS,


Robinson VS.. state, from Fort Bend
county. Opinion by Hurt, j. The in
dictment charged "that Ben Robinson,
late of the county Of Fort Bend, on Or
about November l, 1888, with force and
arms IN the county OF Waller, and
state of Texas, did then and thore I'M
lawfully, williully and felcniously take,
steal and carry away from and out OF
the possession Of Robert Allan, who was
holding the same for Shad Thomas, the
owner thereof, without the consent of
the owner aforesaid or Robert
Allan, or either Of them,
the following described property,
And after taking said mare as aforesaid,
did then and there bring and have said
mare in Fort Bend county, Texas, on or
| about the LIST. day of NOVem Der, 1888,
! the property of the said Shad Thomas,
with the intent TO wilfully and fraudu
lently deprive the owner OF the value of
said property and TO appropriate the
same to the use and benefit OF the said
Ben Robinson". Held to DO fatally de-
f5ctiye in failing TO allege that the ia
king was with the intent to deprive the
owner of tho value thereof and to APP.
prOpriate 1t TO the benefit OF the taker
Reversed and dismissed.
Dupre9 vs. Jne 5.aGei rom lArIls
county, opinion ny Whlle, p J. mere
the evidence lnculpatlhg tho defendant
is purely circumstantial, the court
should give the law applicable to that
character Ofevidence, whether requested
so to do or not. Tho evidence demand
ing a charge upon the law applicable to
q voluntary return Of tho property
within reasonable time and before
prosecutor WAS commenced, inc court
erred Ia not giving III us charge tne law
/. spplcanle I" inns character o. eFluehce'
reversed ana reihanucu'
W aEhef VS. Ihe HtdGe, from LsVsc"
co'hJy' Opinion ny WhiieI ?. j. Whete
tho cAprEa hlApe py ueisHuthJi lor
which he is being prosecuted, is q gen
} oral one mat he stated IN tha presence
OF named pafsous thab the pfuseeulIlX
{ was whore or q damned who're, ne
. was ehlJltu 10 prove any succession OF
/ ac's going To establish mo trutn OF suc1
imputalon, or IRON witch the jury
might reasonably be warranted in be-
q lterlug thai the lmpuid Iun was true
. the charge had havo been a specia
one, the specific acts aud conduct wOulC
have 10 bu proved as alleged, and The
prosecution could not prove other anC
diheran. acts thnu those alleged. iha
81 woman is whore may ba proven by
general reputation, or by CIV dgnce lhh
sho pIacucad unlawful sexual commerce
i with men. Every act OF unlawful s'N
q utl commerce would tend to establish
the trlth!uIress OF the charge that sat
" Was whore But 9hero won D. mar
. rie- q utuJ with whom she had lived Il
, adultery prior To Ter marriage proof %
I such fact Is iuacmissih'e, A ON 'r-e tina
y the jury must believe % defendant no
: guilty bofOre they can aoquit him. j
" eIIor. Reversed ana remauded.
y Grant ~ Co. vs.. Duer, from Vale
county. Opinion by Wilson, J. Thu
measure of damages IA a suit for q
breach OF contract, whore tho c0ntrSc
A is that a viii pay 10 B at II Sl6 per tor
i, Tor 10 carloads OF hay, freight prepai,
ii to H. and after receiving aud paying 10
i've car loads, A notifies u shat he wi
p. NOS receive any moro, "a the dluatone
y, between the contract price ana the mar
ket value of she hay at the time an
i place Wuofo toe nay Was Aud NOT IN