Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-06-24

Slu6TallOn Oh properly DUuSuI lTOn ep-
pellee. a II directs the jury to con-
slider any benefits TO the property Of ap-
pellant, when there WAS no such issue
raised and no evidence of such benefit.
o. The verdict and judgment is agsinst
the evidence. Held by the court: The
grounds of the motion for new trial are
not well taken. Motion denied.
Richardson vs.. State; McLennan. This
was conviction for aggravated assault.
Richardson struck Barnett on the head
with . clawhsmmer, fracturipg his skull,
as the witness testified. A fine Of s25
WAS imposed by the jury. There are
several oils OF exceptions bearing on
the admission OF testimony, but the court
holds: That the evidence snd charge
sre sufficient. None CT the bills OF eXcep
ton are mAintainable. Affirmed
Cudd VS.. the Safe; from McCulloch,
Conviction for theft OF horse with FIVE
years as the penalty. Held: We cannot
reconcile it to our sense OF right sud to
our view CT the law to permit this con-
victoQ to stand. The evidence as it is
presented is not sufi ;ient to sustain the
CONVICTION. Defendant proved inst he
purchased the horse from one Cooper and
produced en- the trisl s duly authenti
Gated bill Of sale from said Cooper
While there are some circumstances in
proof, which throw some doubt upon the
bona flde OF that purchase, they are Of
Slight weight and do not dispfove the
purchase or the good faith Of The defend
ant in the Transact IN. These suspicious
circumstances are all consistent with de-
fendan4's innocence; he also established
s good character in the community in
which ne lived for s number of years.
Reversed snd remanded. Wilson, Judge.
Douglass ct ais. VS.. the State; from
Kerr. The bsil bond on this case obi
gates the principal to appear at the
mex. term OF the Distric: court of
Kerr comfy on the eighth Monday after
the frat Monday in M2rch, it being May
2, 1887" At the time specified legsl
term OF court could not be held,
and no term was then held, and Cd
the 9Th O; May legal term was held
and this bond forfeited. Held: That
the whole proceeding and the
bsu bond is erroneous snd
the said hand e nudity. us App 283; II
app Az; Is App, 496 Reversed anc
dismissed. W lson, Judge.
Jack Coleman vs.. City Of Fort Worth,
Tarrant county. Held: Tns question
presented in this case WAS decided st this
term II the case OF Dunn vs.. the City Of
Fort Worth. Reversed and remanded.
Hurt, Judge.
Jsmes Dunn vs.. the City OF Fort Worth,
Tarrant. The cue II IN raised IN This case
was determined IL favor CT appellant in
the case Of JscS Coleman (+ouvt) sid
tie case herein cid. Rive sci aad re-
manded. Hurt, Judge.
Tumliu vs. State, E lis county; corvic-
tioa for rape, with q LIE imprisonment
assessed IS the punishment. Trial Snd
sentence April 8. 1888. Bills of excep-
ton raising the only question presented
for revision, died April IS, 1888. Held !:
% That as coutenGed by the counsel,
these bills may have been presented to
the Judge within Ten days, and il SO, ap-
pellbns complied with tina law, the pre-
sumption being that the trial Judge would
rot have approved this bill II not pre-
senteG within ten days. (2) The motion
to QuAsh the special veuire is not well
taken. ~ There are fscts in the record
strongly tending to show rape. There
ere also facts tending 10 prove that If
appellant had CGrnal knowledge OF the
prCsecutrix, It was with her consent.
The stS,e proved by one Cordel that five
years ago, before the trisl, appellant told
him that he (sppellant) had medicine
which, if administered TO woman, 1t
Ronld make her yield to his desires. In
this case the state relies alone On
force used for conviction. Nd evidence
tending remotely to show that five years
before appellant knew the prosecutrix, it
is Impossible 70 perceive the bearing this
matter had upon this case or any issue
involved in the trial. (3). The Sufi
cheney of the evidence is not discussed,
believing, however, that II the case is
properly tried, and defendant Is convicted
we would not reverse bec&use eli insult
cheney OF the evidence. o., The crti-
clsms upon the charge ms0e by appellant
are not Just. Reversed end remalded.
Hurt, Judge.
Dawson vs.. State; E.sth. On the oh
Of December, 1856, "local option" was
adopted in ErAtn County; on the 18th of
September, 1887, defendant was charged
with violating thkt law, shout jane q,
1887, and was on that day coUvicted:
pending this appeal & second election YVES
held in said county for the ssm3 purpose
Of the hrst, snd resulted IN majority
sgR-cat prohibition. The defendant have
Z motion TO dismiss this prosecution on
the grounds that tie lsw uEdsr which
ne wss convicted WAS repealed
By the result OF the sec
ond election. TIE assistant attorney
replies that the second election was o
nudity because held before two years hsd
ex pired after The date Ct the fist election,
and therefore did not repeal the local
option in Erath county. This issue re-
quires determination Of t1e effect OF the
amebdatory act Of January 4, 1887, upon
the stGtute as 1t wss st the time OF the
sd ption Of local option IL Ersth county
in 1886, December 9. Held: Our view
Is that the amendatory act OF January 4,
1887, in each and all Of its provisions, WAS
intended to and does operate only in To-
ceIities winch have since 1t went into
efect, or may hereafter adopt local option
in accordance herewith; aud thst sad
provisions caunot epd do not, aud were
not intended to operate in localities
which prlor to their going into effect
voted upon and adopted the lswsas it wss
prior to such amendatory provisions. (2)
That the people CT Ersth county had the
right to repsel the local option law in
that county st the time and in the msn-
ner they did. and there being now no law
in force under which the Judgment is re-
versed snd this case is dismissed. Will
sen, Judge.
Caubb Howard VS.. the State, Colorado.
Appellant WAS tried and convicted Of