Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-05-18
TRT OF APPEALS.
| !, ,bs Decisions Rendered at the
| ,r.tIu Sitting of the
Oourt Of Appeals
r,om the Full and Official Re-
\ i he Rulings and 0pin-
ions Rendered
....o,led for the Gazette.

4s6Co. ys. the Exchange Bank,
In. county. Appellants exc
q a delivered to one the follow
I'm instrument; Dallas, Tex,
IN 1883. Received ff0m city
Ia. 6uu pounds flour, g. E.,
Is az az "a Due October 20, 1888.
]. w. BARTON d Co.,
A ]. OAlERAD.
H. uurchased the above in
4 Va nm Omerad, paying him a
ccnsIderation for the same.
,us appellants refused to pay
IN If the same, were sued in
sourt, pleading tender Of half,
2ure Of consideration, and Judg-
& tsadered against them for the
.mount. Like judgment on
noor in the county court was
N Appellants pleas We're fully
Y N by The evidence. Held that
rsicn sued upon is u non-ne-
|&lusrHment. 1t was acquired
,Ils before maturity, for a
\ ruslderation in due course
ID good faith, and without
rIdge of any want or failure
m.ion, either in whole or in
Ak a72, Rev. STATE. Art. 267
s., Construed, IA it should be
s,Ilon with Art, 272, does not
With that article, but the arti-
n para materia. Bes ides Art.
sueral, and Art. 272 is special,
4 the law the latter takes pre-
Affirmed.
Nv vs. MCGOWAN, from Travis
n This was a suit in which the
below recovered judgment
( o:s Of clothing of the value of
u $50 in money. The con-
this court is that the
Nov erred in giving Judgment
kl5O IN money, the same being
"a 8 trunk in which it was car
De sumption being that the
kould not be properly consid-
Mart Of q passengers baggage.
M settled that a passenger can
\ part of his baggage such rea-
smount Of money for travel
|}enses as would ordinarily be
for such journey. What is a
'bleamount Of money for trav-
Expenses depends upon the
Of the journey, the mode of
|lld the position in life of the
4er, and should not exceed
\ prudent person would take
pa under the circumstances.
on Car. OF Pas, Sill; 5 Tex. l..
What such an amount is, ia a
A for the jury. Under the
this case, found by the jury,
4 no. an unreasonable amount.
"a.
(ermsn VS.. Harrington, from
county. Substantially the
! which the plaintiff below,
~ recovered judgment were IS
4 he owned u gold watch
Pc loaned one r. to wear for a
" without plaintiffs knowl-
3Ened The watch to defendant
Sometime afterwards plaintiff
enquiry Of defendant of the
fnd was informed cfthese facts.
4 then asked when the time of
Won would expire. Defendant
A him, and then inquired:
Of 1t? Do you want to
ont?" Plaintiff replied:
guess R, will take it ont"
Without claiming the watch
4mlng the defendant that it
Then and for several days
slG Il was in the city of Fort
0ut subsequently, left without
Inc defendant the loaned
a IMntiff brought suit for the
~ defendant relies upon the
lacts to establish an estappel
nIaction, or both. But held,
4 opposition is untenable, and
\ made by the facts is in no
aar 70 the case of Gass &
10 New. 1856. Affirmed.
N al. va. Stephens ct al, from
uh'y. This was a euit by
y trustees, etc., TO recover of
Y as prip cjpaI, and G. rs
"a anote for $3.50 with II
interest. G. answered that
lusaIion Of the note was $500
.aluney, the said note indi-
4 'pPsslssuug usurious interest at
y q per cent and prayed
'1nasAient for interest be rem
4 y answered that he was
y iloorser, and that he was
~ nave C.'s property first
!, sAid.note, which was prop
u,alhed In the note; that said
went, and owned only such
winch was his homestead
judgments sane in a court
.slt Jurisdiction foreclosing
e. :. lien thereon; and that the
N, v mad no such jurisdiction.
N, utiendant q. had no right
I'M ph a vendors lien note TO
I'm holder 10 sue for enforce
IN nen aud to subject the
condition prudent to
against him AZ an indorser;
442. The judgment
10 terms that C.'s
i,hlouid be first sold in satis-
4 ! s .lis uebt, and thus accorded
H. slt he was entitled TO. The
os,i issue was whether the
/ h az hote tn plaintiffs was q
|n u mem by G.. or whet her the
4 jn.lon, IN legal effect. was
n ~ ~ 70 Crozierg of $500 by
ior s sae repayment of which
nsd sSoO was given and that
a Ito. = TOT The accommodation
81 gso1ii,ntlns. Plaintiff S. YVES
h d,sg,ilowing question If at
n ~ sss .ant g Endorsed the
al uld he do so as surety for
Ihst y st his $50 request?
Al IN sae question was proper