The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1889-01-24

In addition to those that appear IN the
schedules and appendix herein the fol
lowing cases have been attended to by
this department during the past two
years:
The State Of Texas eX rel. vs.. the Sabine
and East Texas Railway company, district
court, Jefferson county; May term, 1887.
Quo Warranto-Responde company had
abandoned and refused to operate for
many months its line of road from Sabine
Pass, on the coast, to the CITY of Beau
mont, in the interior, distance of about
thirty miles. The portion thus abandoned
had gone to decay ar was unfit for use.
Under the proceedings so instituted the
company repaired the road bed, rebuilt
depots, begun and yet continues the daily
operation of its trains over the whole
line. The purposes of the action having
been thus accomplished it has been dis
missed.
The State of Texas VS.. the Galveston,
Harrisburg and San Antonio Railroad
company. Trespass to try tiJle and fol
partition. District court, Val Verde
county; spring term, 1SSS-This action
was brought and is yet pending for one
half of twenty-five sections of land held by
the com pany from the state, located under
the law granting alternate certificates"
to railways. The contention by this de-
partment is that the Constitution when it
took effect April 1S, 1876, Internationally
set apart to and vested in the public free
schools one-half the then unapproprIated
public domain, and required every alter
nate section that had been or that should
thereafter be reserved by the state
out of grants made to railroads
and other corporations to be ap-
piled to the same purpose. ARTICLE
7, section ~ No division or partition of
the public lands were ever in fact or in
law made so as to give force to those pro-
visions; but the certificates granted to
corporations were located on all not
otherwise taken up, leaving to the public
free schools only alternate sections. In
this way the constitutional grant of one
half has not been satisfied. Success in
this case will result in restoring to the
free schools between 100000 and 90
100000 acres of land, and the precedent
will serve TO raise the Constitution in one
of it's purest purposes to that standard of
respect it 80 Justly merits. Failure would
ut least be attended by one good result--a
vexed question that cannot be effected by
limitations will have been forever settled.
Elk parte Stockton; United States dis
trict court at Galveston, November term,
1SS7.-Applicant was a drummer, repre-
senting in Texas nonresident CONNER
cial firm. He was arrested under warrant
from the county court of Smith county
70 faiiinrf tn hfa nNnnnoNinp tnx onH
sued out a writ of habeas corpus in the
federal court on the ground that the law
as applied to drummers representing in
this state nonresident houses was in CON
flict with the interstate commerce clause
of the Constitution of.the United States,
and was therefore void. Following the
case of Robbins VS.. Shelby Taxing district,
decided by the supreme court of the
United States holding similar law I'M
constitutional, the Judge discharged the
applicant.
Before this proceeding arose the well
known Asher case, hereafter mentioned,
was then pending in the supreme court of
the United States to test the question
thds raised.
Ahner Taylor VS.. j. NJ. Robinson, tax
collector, Oldham county; United States
circuit court at Graham, spring term,
lS6S.--Iuiunction TO restrain collection of
state and county taxes assessed on the
"capitol lands" amounting for the years
1867 to over $4,000. Exemption was
claimed by Taylor on the ground that he
only held the lands under lease from the
state. On preliminary hearing the relief
was refused and the case dismissed, on
the ground that the property was held
under contract of purchase and subject to
taxation.
W. G. Asher va. The State of Texas;
supreme court CT the United States in
error to the court of appeals Of Texas