Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-07-09


transcript fails TO show that proper
notice OF appeal was given In the court
below aud entered upon the minutes
Of the court. Again, thu transcript
brings up no lee 'gnizance, nor does IL
show ailirma,lvely that the defendant
is 10 ait. The motion to dismiss upon
these last grounds Is sustained. Appeal
dismissed.
Murphy vs.. Lurch & Landrum, from
Howard county. Though he perfected
his appeal In the court below, the app
pellant has failed TO Il lie transcript OF
the record in this court. Accordingly
the appellees have filed certified
copy OF the Judgment, aud Of the up.
peal bond, together with the certificate
Of the clerk OF the court below ~ To
the perfection OF the appeal, and asks
that the Judgment of the court below
be affirmed ne upon certificate. Hav.
ing complied with the law upon the
sui cot the appellees are entitled to
their atlirmnnce. The motion Is sus-
talned and the Judgment affirmed
Forbis We. West, from Johnson coun-
ty. The appeal Ia this case having
been dismissed NJ former term OF THE
court. the appellant files his motion 10
set aside the judgment Of dismissal,
and TO reinstate the case upon the
docket. The motion being without
sufficient ground or merit, Is over
ruled, but, ss prayed In the alterna-
tive, the appellant has leave to with
draw the record upon paying the costs
which have occurred against him ia
this behalf Ordered accordingly.
&Railway Va. Golding, from McLen-
nan couaty. The appellee in this case
/ ii les his motion To strike out the state
ment OF facts ~ II appears In the
record and hold II for nsught upon the
ground that IL was not filed within the
| Time prescribed by law. But In this
assumption the motion liz not borne
out by the record, hut on the other
hand the Endorsement discloses that
IL was filed within the prescribed time.
! The motion TO strike out il overTuled.
The cause being submitted by both
| parties on briefs the same Ia taken un.
der advisement and transferred to Ty-
Ter. Ordered accordingly.
Seguna Va. the state, from McMul'
len county. Under an indictment for
murder, the appellant In this case was
convicted In the second degree, and
! his punishment was assessed AT term
of twenty years In the penitentiary.
The D. ucipal objections urged go 10
the correctness Of the charge These
objections, however, cannot he oonsid-
cred IN view OF the fact that exceptions
were not properly lnterposed, and the
errors urged are neither fundamental
nor of such material character rs were
likely to ipjure the appellant The
evidence wNs ample TO support the
conviction and ~ the motion for new
trial disclosed no error in the proceed
inge, 1t was properly overruled. Al
lirmed.
q. w. Rogers VI. the State, from
, Falls county. The appellant was con-
vlcted upon hn Indictment which
charged him With the theft OF COW,
! the property OF one Spencer. The first
objection goes TO the action OF the
= court Ia refusing "A continuance. such
Z matters rest largely in the discretion
of the court, and even a fret cOntinu-
: anCe IL no longer, Rs formerly, mat
ter OF right. The absent testimony,
considered I'm the light OF that adducod
G does not disclose an abuse of discretion
Q In this case. The other objection, that
the evidence does not satisfactorily
show any connection OF the defendant
with the stolen nnimsl Mt the time OF
the theft, IL not borne out by the re
Z cord. IL IL only IN cases where the
f., evidence IL wholly clIcumstantlal that
the court Is required to charge the law
applicable TO that character OF EVIL
: dence Affirmed.
a The Texas g. Pacific Railway vs. =,
= Cox, error from Nolan county. The
y appellee brought this suit against the
= appellant To recover damages for In
!. jury 20 certain lumber, the result OF
d the failure Of the appellant TO furnish
, cars at Graham switch 10 transport The
/. same after the said csrs had been de
manded and promised Actual and pun
. itory damages were claimed, but the
I demand for the latter was abandoned
A.. The Identical questions which arose
n upon this trial are exbaustlvely dis
!. cnssed and sdjudicRted in the case OF
/. Railway w. Nicholson 81 Tex, 1875
Pro and con, that Ise raises the que
4 ton and the report embodies tbs
4 propositions and arguments resorted q
q In TINS case. Affirmed.