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

COURT OF APPEALS,
Strickland vs.. tho State, from Bay
Tor County. Conviction upon an in
formation charging defendant with
carrying pistol. The alleged vari-
ance between tho evidence and date
of filing the information as to the time
of the commission of the CfenSe, Is not
borne out by the record. Affirmed,
breckenridge VS.. Wood, from Tay
Tor County. The only controversy IN
this case being as TO tue number OF
sheep delivered by a to Is, under their
mutual contract, and the jury having
passed upon that question under APP
instructions, there being owl
dence III the record to sustain tho YER
dict, the Judgment is affirmed.
Holbert VS.. the State, from Wise
County. The information in this case
charged, in subtancs, that defendant
did put into q bale Of cotton, 8 COM
modify usually sold by weight, soiled
and rotten cotton and water, and trash
of no value, and that ho put such mat
ter In said bale &C cotton with the in
tent, then and there, to deceive and
defraud, and thar one u A j did sell
the said cotton. Held: suilicint 20
charge the offense denounced by, Art.
40, z. &. Affirmed.
West vs.. Thompson a. Co., from
Travis County. Suit 10 recover
money paid on an engine and appl-
ances. There being doubt IRON
the contract az TO the time the ma
chinery was to De delivered, parol ev-
idence was admissible to establish
such tlmo. Where the evidence of a
breach Of contract ls conflicting and
there was evidence going to sustain @
warrant thereof, but the evidence
would also constitute au estoppel
against plaintiff, the verdict will not
be disturbed. Affirmed.
Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
VS.. Dodson, from Tarrant County.
Suit for damages 60 crops by reason
Of the trespass Of cattle allowed by
appellant to stray into appellee's
land by falling to construct and keep
proper cattle guards at the point
where the road entered appellee's
field. AS there is no question of law
involved and there Is evidence to sus-
tain tho finding Of the jury, their ver-
dict Will not be disturbed. Affirmed.
Martha Mack va. the State, from
Jefferson County, The only issue in
the case is as to tho suiliclency OF tho
evidence To sustain conviction of as
sault with intent to murder. II
showed that the assaulted party went
to appellants house with q consta-
bic to levy writ OF possession upon a
piano; whom appellant assaulted him
with deadly weapon in such man
ner that if death had onsued the
crime would havO been murder. Held:
Sufficient. Affirmed.
LasBer VS.. Gsy, from Robertson
County. Suit by appellee for rent.
Appellant pleaded his residence in
q. County and his consequent priv
ilego OF 9eiDg sued in that County,
but ~ the contract was being per
formed IN that county, Robertson
County, and the appellant guaranteed
the rent as under the firm name OF
LsGterso u Company, the judgment
is affirmed.
Lamb Va. Oliphant az Kolso, from
Maverick County. There being no as
signment Of errors in the record, and
no evidence of appellants having filed
brief in the court below, as required
by the rules, the motion TO dismiss
the appeal based on these two grounds
must be sustained. Appellant, how
ever, will DO allowed TO withdraw the
transcript upon paying all costs,
which have accrued in this court. APP
peal dismissed.
Oppenheimer ~ Company, vs..
Fretter, from Kinney County. This
case having been duly cslled upon
tho docket aud appellants appearing
neither by attorney nor by briot and
no good cause being shown for the
failure in this respect the appeal Is
hereby dismissed for want of prosecu-
ton. But, appellants having asked
permission TO withdraw the transcript,
the same Is granted upon payment of
all costs. Appeal dismissed.
Harrison vs.. the State, from Jones
County. Whore the appellant Is con-
victed of a misdemOanOr and the 70.
cord brought up on appeal fails affirm
atively 10 show that notice OF appeal
was duly given TO the court below
and properly entered Of record, and
the record failing 10 contain q recog-
nizanoe or atiirmauvely show that
defendant is in Jail, tho court is
without jurisdiction and the appeal
must be and Is diamiased.
Murphy OF al. Ys. igndrum, from
Howard County. Appellants have
not filed transcript IN this court,
although their appeal has been duly
perfected. Accordingly appellee files
u certificate In due and proper form
and requests this court for ON affirm
ance upon tho record without refer
once TO tho merits, which Ii hereby
granted. Affirmed.
Forhis VIZ, West, from Johnson
County. In this cause appellant has
filed his motion for n rehoaring ofthe
cause and to set aside the judgment of
ailirmance heretofore rendered. The
motion, however, reveals no error in
our former holding and is, therefore,
overruled. Upon payment of costs
the appellant will be allowed 20 with
draw the Transcript. SO ordered.
X. Il. Company VS., Golding, from
McLennan County. Motion TO strike
out the statement OF facts Is made In
this cause upon the ground that the
same was not duly and properly filed
In the court below. In this respect,
however, the record does not bear the
motion out and it must, therefore, BIO
overrulod. The cause being duly
submitted upon briefs of both parties
Is taken under advisement and trans
ferrod TO Tyler. So ordered.
Segmo VS., the State, from Rexar
County. Conviction for murder in the
second degree. Penalty assessed ut
20. years IN tho penltentiary. Tho
principal objection urged TO the suf-
ilcioncy OF tho charge OF the court and
are not fundamental errors such rs
were calculated TO prejudice the rights
OF the appellant, aud there being no
proper exceptions taken thereto the
Judgment must DO and Is affirmed.
Gulf, Colorado Il Santa Fe Railway
". Fields; from Ellis County. In q
suit for damages tho single question
involved 10 ono of fact. The proof
shows that appellant permitted grass
and weeds to accumulate In consider
able quantities on its right of way, at a
point near appellee's land; that the in-
ilamable matter was fred by sparks
from the engine, and that the flames
spread to aud around about 100 acres
of grass, some stacks OF straw and
oats, and one or two buildings belong.
ing to appellee, aud that this damage
resulted from the negligence OF the
appellant. The appellee Insists, how
ever, that in permitting grass 10 grow
around his stacks OF straw and oats