The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1885-05-02


calculated to change thu result already |
reached, there was no error in oVerrul- |
ing the motion for continuance. AL |
iirmed.
j. J. Lang VS.. tho State, from Wise
county; conviction for aggravated as
sault and battery upon an officer while
tho latter was endeavoring TO mako an
arrest. Fine assessed at $50. The inf0r
nation is good and the evidence sutii-
cienJ. None of the errors assigned are
maintainable and there is no error appa'
rent. Affirmed.
SUPREME COURT.
Harrison Machine Works vs.. j.
Reiger, from Tarrant county. Willie,
c. 1. Where two notes are executed at
the same time, which mature at differ
ont dates and both notes contain a slip
ulation to tho effect that the failure TO
pay one Of tho notes when due shall ma
ture both notes, the course Of action
accrued and the statute of Limitation
began to run from the Gate the first note
fell due.
The purpose of the statute Of limita-
ton is to compel tho settlement of
claims within Il reasonable time after
their origin, and whilo the evidence
upon which their enforcement or re-
sistance rests as yet fresh in the minds
Of tho parties or their witnesses.
Whore suit is left TO the option of The
creditor and he fails to bring his action
for the whole debt upon the non-pav-
ment Of one installment, the debtor
may possibly be authorized 10 cOnstrue
this ae M rcise of option IN favor of
pOstponiug the payment oil the unpaid
installment. He may be justified in
surprising that il he had incurred for
feituTe the creditor had elected not to
take any advantage of it, and may be
chargeablo with knowledge that limita-
ton would be computed accordingly.
Affirmed.
Texas II Pacific Railway company vs.
II. NJ. Medaries; from Tarrant county.
Watts, adopted. In this state the
husband may sue alone for the recovery
of any separate property belong.
ing to his wife, (Revised Stat
utes, Article 1904, MS well rs for dam
ages occasioned by injury TO such prop
erty, Where the evidence sufficiently,
for the purposes Of the suit, shows the
title TO the land injured to be in the
wife, it is only necessary for the court
to instruct the jury as to tho principles
of law applicable TO the contested issues.
1t is not negligence per 80 in q railroad
company To permit grass and weeds to
grow aud accumulate upon its right Of
| ing these to be removed therefrOm. The
fact that sparks may escape from muv-
ing engine Is not negligence per Sc.
Railroad companies, the same as natural
persons, are required to use their own
property 80 rs not to necessarily injure
that oil others, but In the operation OF
trains, ETC., such companies are required
to exercise that degree of prudence
which, under like circumstances, rea
sonably cautious person would exercise
Affirmed.
Texas ~ Pacific Railway company Va
NJ. S. Curry; from Tarrant county.
Stayton, ]. The general allegations oil
damage will suffice toilet in proof and
To warrant recovery tor all such dam
ages rs naturally and necessarily result
from the wrongful act complained OF
the law implies such damages; that is
damages of that sort, and proof Is only
necessary to show the extent ano
amount. Where damages actually sus
tanned do not necessarily result iron
the act complained of, and consequently
are not implied by law, the pleadei
must allege the particular dSmag,
which he has sustained for notice
thereof to defendant; otherwise no will
not bepermitted TO give evidence of i
on trial.
| Inc Eult ~ Hdllhutug Mhtll lInin III
facts alleged the law iniers other facts
whatsoever the law infers from givel
state of facts the adverse party is pre-
sumed to know aud must take notice o
it, whether specially pleaded or not.
Where IL Is alleged that 10y reason o
the injuries sustained, plaintiff has be
come permanently disabled, and q GRIP
pie for life, and will mover recover fro1
the effects thereof, and that he wa
greatly injured, cut. bruised an
wounded internally and externally
about his hip and spine, and IL who'll
unable to attend to the transaction an
performance of his usual and necessar
business, and has so continued frol
the time OF the accident to that of th
suit, the law infers that physical pal
and mental suffering resulted there
from. This decision is not in contli,
with that of the /. & q. N. II, X. VS.. Il
vine 20 Tex, Law Review, SOY. Affirmed
, A. b. Gardner and wife VS.. Il.
Douglass ct al; from Graysou county
Watts, /. Adopted. An actual occup,
ton of the land is not under all circun
stances an independent prerequisite
impressing upon IL the homestead cha
acter.
Whore there has been no previous o
oupation of the land as homestead,
invest 1t with that quality II is cssonti
that there 20 an eNistin
bona fide intention to dedicate Il
property as homestead. This inter
must be accompanied with such acts
preparation and such prompt subs,
quent appropriation as will amount
notice OF the dedication.
Where the property was purchased
a homestead and with the intention
occupy IL as such as soon as possessiC
thereof could be obtained, and as SOC
as the pending lease thereof expire
the parties promptly took possessio
and have since been occupying II as
homestead, and the property W
occupied under lease whe
purchased and no necessi
of any additional improvement
than those already on the place,
shown and the parties owned no 9th
former homestead being invested In q
purchase of this, the property was
vested with homestead character.
Where the debt upon which iudgme
Ia sought to be executed was contracts
before the purchase of the property
cannot be held to have been contracts
upon the faith of the property. h
versed and remanded.
Texas Il Pacific railway VS.. Roseda
Street Railway company, from Tara
county; Watts T.; adopted. The co
struction and operation OF a bona fl
horse railway ON the public streets OF
city by authority from the city Cover
ment, IL not such now or additional bu
denlmposed upon the land rs will EMIT
owner OF the fee TO compensation Their
for, or that II would amount 70 su,
: taking or damages as would require
condemnation OF the right-of-way.
Streets are acquired, established Al
maintained for the accommodation Al
convenience Of the inhabitants Of u
city and the general public, and no
ever acquired, whether by puroha,
condemnation or prescription, IL is tn
they may be used for the public conve