Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-11-24

'IzsSl$szss31 ~ is eorreo:. ThsEe
"a 5 ~ 49, 7ss no error in the
conviction; affirmed. Wilson J
A W. Heller vs.. A. G. Cu1d; appeal
from Z liz. II this. csse the evidence
shows Glat defendants were partners, and
the court hsd jurisdiction. There REs no
erEor IN cry !u.iTg OF the court below.
NJ error II Inc Judgment; affirmed.
Willsou J.
E. NJ Bloom vs. the State; sp2eal
from BJ8je. Convl ton for xsssuit 10
murder. Tae eVidelc4 shows an aggra-
ted case OF assault with intent to mur-
der. The motion for new tri6l upon
The ground OF newly discovered evidence
Is )ntrover.ed By The state, and the
coui5 al not err ia refusing the mosion.
N error; tffiiued. Wilson J.
S.N Garry VS.. j F. Wyatt; from Ellis.
Motion to afirm on suggestion oelsy.
ne case Will be affirmed without dam
ages, the record being incomplete. Al
filmed. Wilson, j.
Bob Smith vs.. the S!ste; appeal from
Smith. Conviction for assault with
intent 10 rob. Tue evidence is sutfi ;ient
TO sustain the convic ion. The charge is
correcs aud fair. No error. All :med.
Wilson, J.
G. a Jones VS.. T. K. Jordan; appeal
from Rjckwxll. While thu evidence in
this case is corf citing, it is amply suffi :
cisnE to sustain the verdict for snoellee
Nd error in the Judgment. Affirmed.
Wilson, j.
W. q Csrmsck ct al. vs. F. Sullivan +;
appeal from RJckThll None Of the
assignments Of error are well taken
The evidence sufficiently shows that the
note sued on had not been paid, but went
into the hands OF the appellee as collateral
security for money vsuced By him to
appellant. No reversible error. Will
son, j.
W. A Hines vs. j. P. Douglas ct al;
appeal from Smith. The evidence shows
that appellees owned only paio up stock
in the Texas Water snd Gas Company,
and under the statute they are not liable
for anything bu. unpaid STOCK. Affirmed.
WiIsop, J.
JEFF Yarbrough vs.. the STATE; appeal
II m Smith. Conviction for aggravated
sessulE. The court did not commit o
material error in recalling the Jury and
charging the given name Of the prose>
cutting witness, az written by the Judge
ia hIs charge. Evidence amply sufficient
t sustain the conviction. No material
erro-. Aft med Wilson, J
Bob Morton vs.. the State; sppeaI from
Smith. Conviction for assault to murder
L. There wss 70 error in overruliDg the
motion for continuance, IS diligence Is
not shown, and besides the same facts
we're proven by other witnesses on the
trial, and the ABSENT testimony in view of
the other evidence was probably untrue.
No reversible error. Aft :med. Will
son, J.
S: Louis, Arkansas and Texas Railway
vs.. Simon Tate; appeal from Bowie. l.
Payment OF verified account is not re-
CURED TO be sworn to. 2. The charge Of
the court taken as ! whole, in connection
with the special Instructions given, WAS
suff icieIt, snd was not upon the weight Of
evidence, nor did It assume thst import
ant facts were proven, ss Is complained.
Inc Judgment though sWkwardly ex-
pressed, is but personal judgment
against Lash & Co and q foreclosure
against the railrJsd. Affirmed. White,
P. J.
Gulf, Colorado and Santa Fs Railway
vs.. G. S. Williams; appeal from Hunt.
The judgment is for 81 in excess Of the
amount claimed, but this may include
accrued interest. No material error IN
the ldgment CT the court below. Al
frmed. White, P. j.
S; LouiP, Arkansas and Texas Railway
VS.. Wi MarrF; appeal from Hunt. The
OF error sre not well taken.
The evidence OH cted to was admissible
Charge Of the curt was correct. No
error in the Judgment Of the court below
Affirmed. White, P. j.
John A. Pierce vs.. ST luis, Arkansas
and Texas Railway; appeal from Hop
kins county. l. Where it is not shown
that sppsllan. was Injured by the acm1s-
sion OF illegal TESTING ny, the Judgment Of
The court below will not oe revised
While the evidence is conf citing, the
same supports the verdict, and we will
rot disturb the same. No error. AT.
hrmed. White, P. J.
.J.EsBfocks vs. Jake Lichtenstein; ap.
peal from Hopkins county. Suit by
appellee to recover of appellant dsmsges,
both sexual and exemplary, for an assault
and battery committed upon the former
BY the latter. Judgment for $500 actual
and $3.50 Exemplary damages. In this
court 9 remittieur OF the exemplary
damages is flied. l, Ole who rents q
houPe ami occupies same for business
and boards, Is householder,
IS to render him a qualified j1ror,
although he be 81 unmarried nan. The |
Judgment IS to the exemplary damages is |
reversed, and alignment here rendered for |
appellee for $500 actual damages. Re-
7ised and IL med. Wilson, J.
81. Louis, Arkansas and Texas Railway |
rs. A F. Hendrix ct al; appeal from
Hopkins. Sui. by appellees TO recover |
lRmeges for depreciation of stock, tatd
depreciation resulting from the failure OF
appellee to maintain q sufficient cattle
guard. 1. sppesrs that appellant did not
construct cattle guards, but put wire
ences on either side OF the railway in
tead, and that the cattle broke through
hese fences. Appellee cffersd to prove
N the trial this! much CT tho damsge
lone might have been prevented by sp-
,ellants 8. trifing expense. This evil.
'ence WAS refused by the court. Held:
lot error. Il WAS the statutory duty of
appellant TO constr uct aud maintain ST fiji
lent cattle guards upon It's line CT rail-
TlJ, where It passed through sppellse's
ane, or fence its rig Of wy so q. to
'rotect eppellee's crops. The judgment
s not excessive and substantial justice
rs been done. Aft med. Wilson, J.
G. NJ Rogers vs.. the Safe; appeal
rom Hood. Convection for arson. l.
Al "a dnoo