Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-12-04

erty; from Kaufman. /. In an action
OF replevin bond for damages for d
failure 10 comply with its conditions the
evidence must show the value OF the
property replevined. The sheriff 3 re-
turn Is not sufficient evidence to show
the value of the property. 2. A bond
is not void because wrongfu!ly demanded
under color of Office. rs Tex. 3t7I.
Reversed ami remanded. Gaines, j.
Pullman Palace Car company VS..
Hampton Bates; from Tarrunt. APP
ppllee secured in St. Louis two sleeping
ear birthstone for himself and wife.
and one for his mother. There were two
sleeping cars attached to the train with
different conductors and porters. Ap-
pellee's wife assisted his mother, who
was aged, 10 uudress aud 10 bed, ard
she then crossed the aisle of the car and
entered her husband : berth. At Wall
nut Ridge the party left the sleeping eur
and went into q Passenger couch. AT
Ttxarkaua appellee again engaged two
herths, telling the porter they were for
himself and two ladies. They went into
the sleeping car, and shortly the con-
ductor came i'll and found the mother of
appellee and his wife sitting on one berth
and appellee on another. The wife paid
LOT que DtttH INC SblidutlOT GTOssluS
over collected from appellee for his
berth. Appellee, his wife and mother
ate lunch together and appellee went
into the smoker. Appeliee's wife as
sisted his mother 10 undress, and while
doing so appellee came in, undressed
and went 10 bed. After his wife put
appellee's mother to bed, being partly
undressed at the time, she Slipped across
under the curtains and got into the berth
with appellee. The porter then came
up, pulled the curtain OF the berth aside
and said, 1.-The Pullman car company
does not allow such proceedings. -
Appellee told him the lady was his
wife, and the lady in the
other berth was his mother. The porter
then brought the conductor, who pulled
the curtains aside, exposing appellee aud
wife &c view AMI said. Here, the Pull
man car company does not allow any
such proceedings as this. - Appellee
explained that the lady was his wife.
The conductor said, ''That don't CO.
He again repeated his statement and
told him they slept together the night
before. The conductor again said in an
insole1t manner, 'That don't GO, we
don't allow anything OF the kind. -
Appellee's wife then left the berth and
went 10 that of his mother. Appellee
arose and stayed up the most of the
night, being much mortified. Held:
The wife not occupying berth for which
she paid for, breach of contract is not
shown. Actions of appellee aud wife
excited suspicious as TO their relations.
No cause of action is shown. Reversed
aud rendered for appellant. Henry, J.
". Il. Barth vs.. W. B. Green; from
Navarro. Trespass to try title. /. The
provision of the statute which saws that
the defendant In suit of trespass TO try
title shall have twenty days after notice
to file an abstract of his title is peremp-
tory and without exception. 2. The ad-
mission of the declarations of Irvine not
made in the presence of appellant was
error, but same was cured by the court
who excluded the testimony from his
consideration in rendering judgment.
s. The evidence with regard 10 the levy
of the attachment aud the institution of
the suit by Nieper both relating TO land
not i'll controversy in this suit, and both
having been voluntarily abandoned,
should have been excluded on appellant
objections. 4. In the action of trespass
10 try ii le may. If his relation to the
title is such as to confer upon him the
right, Introduce evidence attacking
Ink in pluiAtiif S chain of title as fraud
uieut, under the plea of not guilty. He
need not specially plead such defense.
5. Appellant showed u claim OF title
from the common source which appellee
did not do. Reversed aud remanded.
Henry, J.
Missouri Pacific Railway VS.. J. C. R.
Haynes; from Hopkins. Motion TO set
aside submission and file supplemental
briefs. /. No good reason Is shown why
all questions in this case are not dis
cusssd in briefs fled on o former day Of