Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-12-19
COURT OF APPEALS.

.yncrsNs of Decisions Rendered at the Pres
ent Tyler sitting.
Correspondence of the Gazette.
TYLER, TEX. Dec. 1.-THE court of
appeals handed down decisions rs fol-
lows to-day:
5 f. Lane VS.. State; from Dallas.
Murder in the second degree. /. A
householder il one who Is the head or
mast r OF u family, person who occu-
pies II house and has charge of, aud pro-
vide. for II family therein. The term
mpnns something more than the mere
occupant OF a room or house. 1t i'm
ulirs the idea OF domestic establish
u.pui, the management of a household.
Il 5 not requisite that the person should
be married man. HIS family may con-
si.t Of servants, or others occupying
with him. but he must be the head or
muster OF the establishment. In Rubles
Is. State, . App 347 it is stated that
one who rents II room and boards' is a
householder. We are unable to say that
that deci5 on is wrong upon the facts,
but we do say that the mere occupancy
Of rented room, and boarding does not
constitute person householder. 2.
But the mere disqualification of a juror
who served in the trial. is not good
ground for a motion for new trial. 1t
must be made to appear that the service
of such disqualified juror, was
calculated to injure the rights of the
defendant, and did probably produce
such injury. 29 App, 63l. The hill
Of exceptions does not show that the i'll
competent juror injured the rights OF
altpp.lnRt. The afidavits are as to in
formation and belief. In our judgment
none of the errors assigned are we'll
taken. The evidence would support Il
conviction for murder in the first degree.
Affirmed. Wilson, j.
NJ. u. Gibson VS.. the State: from
Falls Motion for rehearing. Convic-
,ion tor perjury. l. On a former day
this court affirmed this case, briefs for
appellant al TINT time not having reached
tins court. After careful reconsideration
we conclude the judgment of affirmance
should be set inside, for the following
reasons: The court erred in admitting
In evldrnce, over defendant's objection,
the Judgment rendered and entered in n
cHsr in which IL was not charged that
APPELLANT committed e.jury i'll giving
his les imouy. This was irrelevant and
doubtless tended TO prejudice the rights
II appellant, and was not admissible for
nuv rurposa. The court also erred in
charging the iury 10 the effect that If the
nupr!laut made the alleged false state
mrutS and did not know them TO he true.
he would he guilty, etc. To constitute
perjury the evidence must show that the
accused knew tn, statement to be false,
md that he did not know them TO be
true Motion granted and reversed aud
remanird. Wilson. ].
! X. BAILEY vs. the State: from Hon.
kin. Theft of cattls :, The Judgment
IS fundamentally erroneous because the
record IN 10 show the manner of sslec-
zion and sppoiutment, and that the oath
was administered to the special Judge
vito tried the cause. Reversed and re-
minded Willsou. j
Cul Lincecum vs.. the State; from Bur-
nett. Conviction for rape. /. The court
erred ia refusing to permit appellant to
prove his general repututiou in the
urishhorhood where he lived as "a
peHreablp MANI and "a law-abiding
citizen - The inquiry was not limited
20 Is reputntiou for chastity and moral
ity. ApprIlant was charged with rape
committed by assault and force The
crime carries with il as an essential a
criminal intent TO do the act by assault
wtb force and without the consent of
the injured female In all criminal cases
Whenever II criminal intent is necessary
70 Constitute the off-use, evidence of the
general charnc er of the defendant is