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


plain certain inculpasory facts proven by
the state IN the shape Of eutries IN GER
txin book msde bY appellant 50 TO certain
produce in the house that wss buried.
1t furthermore coir0boTated sppellant's
father, who stated he rad purchased said
produce and directed same to be delivered
to appellant. 4. The conversation re-
curing b ,twsen the telmsters who were
taking he produce TO G.snbury end ap-
pel!art witG reference to the purchase
WAS admizsible. Reversed snd remsnded.
Wilson, j.
James Stou2rd v5. the Safe; appeal
from ShscklefJrd. Conviction fJr mur-
der in the Sc coDd degree, with SIX years
in the penitentisIy Sd s penSlty. Appel
liant was convicted Of the murder OF hie
father, W. D. S.ousrd. The con-
viction was due to the testimony CT Ell
bert C Crow, who WAS evidently an accom-
plice, il not the cole perpetrstcr Of the
crime. There were present at the scene
of the homicide MIS-. S:ousrd, deceased's
wife, appellant, .decesaed's eop, and
Ebert Cow. On the testimony OF Crow,
the mother and sou were indicted for tie
murder, and appellant WAS Gully TT Ella, d
convicted The testimony shows thRt
deceased Wss killed with bis own gun,
Winchester. Deceased was sho. twice.
Ole shell WIS., found By the DO y OF de-
ceased and another Vas found in the gun,
which had beeu freshly fred eff. There
was no evidence whatever as to any mel
ice existing between appellant and his
deceased father. Hslc: II the ABSENCE
OF moEe corroboratin5 circumstances we
must hold th6t the evidence fails 10 sup
no dc
more strongly TO show that CROW was
Reversed and remsnded. Hurt, j.
Railway VS.. Sam Heard ct
al; from Nivsr-o. l. Where
lsnd is leased upon condition that third
Of the crop shall be given to the owner
in payment Of rent, the owner acquires
reserved for rent until it is
set apart to him by the tenant. 2. When
8 bill Of exception is reserved to the re-
jaciior CT the testimony, the same should
set out The proposed testimony and fail
ure ID do this vii! deter this court from
revising tie scion Of the court below.
Affirmed. Hurt, j.
c r P4inter vs the State; appeal from
Parker. Conviction for burglary L
Whether the burPllIious entry into the
house YVES o. urtylng a rope which Sc
cured tie door 20 ne house, or by enter
ing at On opening not commonly used for
Edmission into the house, the other in
gradients attending, burglary would be
the result. The eViderc e, though cir
cums,antisl, supports the conviction. No
error. Affirmed. Hur1, J.
j. P, Davidson vs Houston, East and
West Texas Railway; appeal from
Nacogdoches. L. In assessing dsmages,
work already done by the railway compa-
ny upon the land, cannot &c regarded SIS
part OF the resliy for the purpose OF iuN
cressing the damages. 9 A rail
way constructed upon land with
out the right to do SO, does not become
the property Of the land owner.
5. II in addition to the intrinsic value
OF the property, the owner claims in
Gemnity for the losses and inconviences
which will incidentally devoive upon him
in conse quence Of such appropriation oil
hlslproperty, iInestImating those Losses and
the profits advantages and
commences which will result to him,
from the use to which the property Is ap-
piled, are also to be estimated, and the
excess OF the former ever the latter, is,
the amount Of the incidental damages. No
error. Affirmed. White, P. j. u
Scnff & O'Connor vs. Il. d Johnson
appeal from Nsvsrro. C J Husky being
insolvent made 81 assignment for the
benefit OF his creditors. Appellee John
son Was assignee, NJ. Husky was q
crsditor, and accepted said assignment
snd was the principal creditor. Ap-
pellants' brought this suit alleging That
they were the owners of the M. Rufky
clsim; that assignee had refused 10 pay
same; tho. NJ. Husky, G. j. Husky and
Assignee Johnson were in5olyen.. They
prayed an il 1nction restraining the as
signee from paying to n. Husky the |
claim, he having asslg aed same to them,
or to any one else, and that said assignee |
be ordered to pay ssid claim to appel> |
lants. The irjuuction wss granted, aps
pellee excepted to The petition u1on the |
ground thIt II showed NJ. Husky WAS O |
ut cesssrY party to the cult. The e1cep- |
ten was sustained and the suit dis
missed Held: TIE court erred in
the exception. Reversed and |
remsRded. vii sop, j.
John BreedloVe vs. the State; appeal
from Smith. Conviction for murder in
the second degree. The evidence shows
.hat one Willis King had had csrnal
CT appeIlanL's wife. Appellant
be srirg OF the same, procured gun, went
to the house where Willis King wxs sup
post d to be; 1t WAS then dark. His trscks
chow that he took position abou: !,
twenty steps from the gallery Of the he use
where deceased met his death. The
weeds and bushes were cut, 80 IS to give
him an unobstructed view OF the gallery.
1t wss dark when Isham Amor, deceased,
md Willis King came out upon the gal
ery. A gun fred and Ishsm Amos was
killed. Held: Under these
the court did NOT err In re
using sn instruction On msnsIsugnter.
There was no error in the conviction.
Affirmed. Wilson, J.
Travellers Insurance Company vs.. j. R
Houston; appeal from Hunt. Suit on an
accident insurance policy. Ole David
'op, the insured, Was shot Snd killed by
,ue Russell, who was drunk at the tina
II the homicide. The policy specified
hat the same should not cover "an7
Intentional Injuries irfcted by the in
ured or sny other person" Appel ant
thst the killing WAS Intentional
md not accidental. The trial Judge
ouDd thst at the time Russell shot David
Ion, he, Russell, was so drunk, and WAS