Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-06-30
COURT OF APPEALS.
synapgss Of Decisions Rendered st the
Present Au..in Sitting oil mo
Texas Cong. Of appeals.
r. dlngs in 3 Number Of Southern It1aa
CaseE-anirmgd, Di'miaAed' and
Reversed Rl.d Rsmandeu.

convictiop for assault win intent tc muir
dor win three year5 IL the penllgntia-y
AZ me penalty. Held oy tle court: That
the eyiteuce and charge are efficient, ond
her IS no error in Inc conviction. Al
drmed.
DItc..lon FOR a51eas corpus. Tals IS
me celebrated case from Waller cOu1-
IL. Tag appellants were tried
before g magistrate as committing
cour-. sud were denied bail, they then
sued gu. the wit Of hsOess corpus before
the J0ige Of that district and were denied
bail by him; they then sppssl, to this
court. Held by the court: There is no
error in the judgment and it is attimed.
Atm d.
Montgomery Dennis Va. Peacock;
Ras..And county. In this case there
is sll agreement h.ed June 70, 1888,
by the attorneys Of app .llEEts ana
appellee thzt toe case shall pc dismissed
by This court, the appellee paying all costs
in this court. Dismissed.
Slusier & Co. vs.. Frud 3nthll & Co.; E.
pssg county. In this case the transcript
VS. d. ed 10 this court on tle fourth dsy
az J1na A D 1883. Since WlIch time 10
briefs have Oeen filed, no O. her steps
towards prOsJcu ing the appeal; tor this
reason It wss dismissed. Dismissed.
Morales vs.. h Safe; L5S.le. This is
a conviction tor an aggravated assault
and battery Dy the use Of q Qulrt IS
y7eepOn, AMI fine Of 325 assessed against
him. lie appeE..d from SAID Conviction.
The Cour. held: That me information is
good, the evidence sus5dlls the verdict
ard the charge IS full and correct.
Affirmed.
Wheeler VS.. Sts.ei Riines. This is a
CONVICTION Of theft CT AOgs q the value Of
50 and TWO years Imprisonment in ths
uenitentigrY assessed az the punishment.
Held by the court: Evidence in
This case is amply sufficient,
charge full snd correct. Motion for new
trisl was prCpeIly orerruled. Affirmed.
jones vs.. the State; from R,iles
This is g conviction for murder in the
second degree. Held: No CCj -cliol was
msda t. the charge ui the court below
nor is GLg made IL tEis court; we DO not
think the evidence shows that the GCt Vi
killing WSs accompanied by malice on the
par. II ln- defendant, on On the coz
trarV Cis9rlves malice. Reversed and
rumsnteG Wilson, Judge.
Parker Va. the S.at.; SLe!by. This Is y
conviction fer pc IN y on thu tTigI OF one
Hall for ib1 Eurutr If Willis MCAdEms
Held; That the excluded testimony
would have been most potent CiJCum
stgLc-, and the consequent fact that il
must Aave blen induced By some power
fol and improper motive or cause OF &C
r.On defendant could have proven 10 ,hs
satisfaction q the jury thattae copisssica
H''l cd made WAS absolutely fsise, sud
Tue CO. erred IN excluding tDa ,eaii-
mGny R-ve---- sd rlnanCei. White,
Pcasiti2g Jud. G..
r. II. Smi,l vs. State, Wise. This is an
sppesl from the dIsm .ssai u the petition
ior !.l1uCuop, seeking to restrain IN
collector OF the county attorneys com
mission on n fne RENTED by the GOV
ernOr OF Texas in favor OF appellant
Held: That If the money be no! col
leCted, no right TO such commissions &C
crues 10 the attorney, and this notwi:h-
standing thai their failure 10 ColleCE is
attributable solely to the seton Of the
Governor RENTING the forfeiture. Re
YsTsad and remsIded. White, Presiding
Judge.
j. W. Wnlisms alias Bill Wells; Nc
Lehman The facts of this case are:
Ash5urG owned two mules, one Ct whics
was 10 McLe0nRn county and the 0sDer il
Wharton county. AshOurn liysi n Nc
Lehman county snd appellant lived in
wharton county. Defendant being N
McLerDsn county, bought the two mules
OF AslbuTD, agreeing to pay him $l55
and igvc bis note with security for 5slc
amount, ard was not TO remove The mule
In MCLennan county. Tle mIis WAS de-
livered 10 him, and re carried j! 10 his
hvNv
did not give the note or the sc
cuTity. Held: In our Judgment these
fsCts neither constitute theft or eInbeZ
Element or any other Cfsrse against the
Penal Code OF this state. They show
merely : breach Ct Co-tracs on the part
OF the defendant for which Ashbu-n nad
his civil remedy. Reversed snd remsCded.
Wilson, Judge.
John Mime. vs.. the Sta.e; Falls, Con
yiction fJr perjury. Held: That in this
case the stste has not atducsd upon the
trlZl tlSt character or Quslity Of evidence
which is required TO convict OF perjury.
r Reversed ani rem6nded. Hurt, Judge.
Irvine ". the State; from Wise. This
Is second appeal aOd IL 3lis case the
appellant wss Convicted OF murder in the
second degree and five years in the peni-
Tertiary as the punishment. For 5Ras
errors n ne admission u improper ST.
dence and prejudiCisl 10 the defelS4nt
the csse is reversed and remarked.
White, Presiding Judge.
Buchanan VS.. the State; from Tom
Green Conviction for theft OF cattle;
i've yesrs IN the penitentiary. Held: AS
10 Defendants guilty participation in the
original taking Of the animal from the
alleged owner, B7r1, we are OF the
opinion the evidence is insufficient,
as Is also the charge OF the court upon
tlst phase Of the case, and we are further
Of the opinion the court erred in refusing
TO admit in evidence defendants bill of
sale from the Mexican, Gonzales. r.
yersed and rsmanded. White, Presiding
Judge.
jim Jones VS.. Ststc; San SAbs. Con
SicliOn for murder in the second degree,
with iwenty-four years in the peniten-
tisry. In one paragraph If the charge
appellants right of seli-defense is made
10 hinge upon whether ne
WAS the person named IN