Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-11-27

| No material error. Affirmed. Wilson, J.
| George YarbTough VS.. Willie @. Pierce /;
apresl from Smith. l. Where thers is 8
COZ cs N evideoce as 10 the Items Ct sn
account in controversy, We will NOT dis
tub judgment OF the court below on the
ground Of the eyideI CO being contrsdic-
tory. No error. Affirmed. White, P. j..
J.H. Bsllew We. the StsEe; appeal from
Smith. Conviction for unleWf1lly per-
mitt!Dg q game o; cards to be played on
the premises OF the appellant, the said
premises then and there being appurten-
snces to a public place, to1tt: to 9
house for retailing spirttuous liquors..
l. The county court had jurisdiction OF
this case, although the amount OF the fac
TO be assessed was not less than S25 nor
more than 800. County courts have
concurrent i1ri. diction with Justices
courts CT mISdemeanors tcogn;zsble in
Justices coarts. 2. The playing was
dope in the bSck foom Of saloon. Held:
The evidence does not support the sllega.
tion that the premises were sppurtepances
10 public place. The room N which Eae
playing YVES done WAS not IN sppurten-
Ancs, but part Of the saloon itself An
appurteIanG II not 8 portion Of the pltn-
cipsl thing; it Is something belonging to,
pertsiuing 20 something else which is its
principal. the thing appurtenant must
be CT an inferior nature to the thing 10
which i: is sppurteusnt. Reversed anu rs-
nsuded. White, ? j.
D o. Quinn vs.. III. T. Jones Lumber
Company; :ppehl from Ellis. This csse
is DO. prosecuted by appellant, and the
appellee moves TO : I'll IN on suggestion OF
Gelsy Held: The css- will be affirmed
without damages. Affirmed. White, 2. ].
Henry Clark vs. the State appeal from
Smith. Conviction for theft Of jswelrY.
l. Several articles OF iewelry were traced
TO The possession OF appellant, but Of the
number { f 4rticles so traced TO him, only
two were identified BY the owner IN mis-
testimony Rs articles which belonged 30
S0d had BEEN missed by him. These wsre
8 watch worth So and & ring worth IS
There Is no proof Of the value Of any OF
the other articles CT jews!ry found in cp
pelianps posses sior, or thas any Ct said
other articles belonged 10 the alleged
owner. Held: Tie evidence does not
support the conviction for felony. Re-
vsrsed spd remanded. Wilson, j.
Ellis County Lard and Cattle Company
ct al. vs.. Ellis County Implement Comps
ny. There is failure on the part CT sp-
pelsnts TO prosecute this appeal snd ap
pelIee moves to stfirm with 10 per cent.
damages for delay. Held: Motion sus-
tIiaed. Affirmed with 10 per cent, dam
ages for delay. Will on, j.
Albert Jackson vs. tne Ssste; appeal
from Smith. Conviction for conspiracy
to rape. The evidence simply supports
the conviction. The charge OF the court
WAS fall ana correct. Therei is no error
disclosed oy the record. Affirmed. VIII
SD, ].
j. Simons ct 81. vs.. Betterton, Irvine &
Co sppesl from Dallas county. l. An
sile CATION in 3 petition that the sale was
mace under execution, means that 1t was
under ) valid execution. The evidence
sustsius this judgment. No error in the
court below. Wilson. J.
Jasper Wilson VS.. S. q. Russell; az
peal from Gray son. TIE evidence fully |
suslaiDs the judgment OF the court be-
low. Evidence objected to WAS sd. |
missible. There was no error Ia the |
cAsrce OF the court. Affirmed. Wilson, ] |
Capera Bios. W. Bkll & MCCsrl; appeal |
from Tsrrsnt county. The charge Of the |
court Was full, fair and correct, nor wss |
there any error 10 any rulings OF the |
court, No material error disclosed by |
the record. Affirmed. WiEscp, J.
George T. Smith Midlirgo Purifier
Company vs. W. C. Rurruss; sppsal from
Collin. None Ct the assignments Of error
sre well taken. TIE evidence fully sus-
tains the findings CT the court bslow, aud
toe laT On all issues as with sppellee.
No error. Affirmed. Wilson, j.
Childress County Land End Cattle Com.
pauS vs. T. F. Burnett; sppeEl from
Baylor. l. Where icadmissible testimony
IS admitted, but is controlled BY The
Charge Of thu court, admission OF same
viii not os reversible error. While the
evidence wss contradictory, 1t is
sufficient TO support the judgment. No
material error. Affirmed. Wilson, j.
Henry Hsnsely ct al. vs. Edward ERst-
burn; sppeal from Grayson. The ev.-
ieuce, though some Whist conflicting, is
u!,y srticiers 70 sustain the verdict and