Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-12-01
COURT OF APPEALS.
synopses Of Decisions Rendered a: the Pres
ent Tyler sitting.

synopses Of Decisions Rendered a. the Pres
ent Tyler sitting.
Correspondence OF the Gazette.
52TYLER, TEX. Nov. 29.-Thomas Bon
ner VS.. the State; from Galveston
Murder in second degree. l. The pen
dency of one Indictment is no bar TO
another even for the same offeEse,
though the accused can be tried only on
one 6 App, 659; Is App. 1894; 20 App,
357 J ,. After verdict il is too late to
object for the first time that a copy of
the Indictment was not served on the de-
PENDANT. 3. Deceased had run appel
liant and another party ou Sunday pre-
vious to the homicide and had chased
them inside their premises. When the
women asked him to go away he replied:
'If you don't keep that black bastard
s-n of u b-h penned up he is my
meat. - He lurked around the premises
trying to get at them. A few nights be-
fore the killing he again chased appel
liant home. The day OF the homicide de-
ceased run Nelson homo, and as appel
liant met them deceased turned to him
and said: 'You black s-n of b-h
you will do as well,' and began to ad-
vance on appellant with an open knife.
Appellant retreated ana warned
him TO come no further. De-
ceased kept advancing, and
appellant, after repeatedly telling him TO
'.stand back - fired the fatal shot.
Deceased was shown to be a violent aud
dangerous man and appellant q con-
suIuptive. 1t was shown that the appel
liant was badly frightened when he fred
the deadly shot. Held: By the express
sion Inadequate cause as used in the
definition of mansIaughter in our code,
Art. 593, is meant such ss would COM
monty produce degree of anger, rage,
resentment or terror in a person of ordi-
nary temper, sufficient TO render the
mind incapable of cool reflection. Under
tue evidence we think the court erred in
refusing TO charge upon manslaughter.
The fact that appellant testified that he
killed deceased in self-defense, this
would not alter the rule that he was en-
titled to charge on all the issues raised
I. The court should have charged that
in judging the Defendants acts in con-
nectiou with his real or apprehended
danger, the jury should Judge OF them
from his standpoint and as they ap-
pesred to him at the time. Failure to
do this was error. ). The charge of
seII-utleuSo WIS OOnOXlOus, IN that II
charged self-defense IN a negative man.
ner. 6. The words, ''justify the belief,'
are more restrictive than the statutory
words, "manifested an intention TO exc
cute the threat. :. Ii was objection
able for the court TO call attention the
second time as to appellant provoking
the difficulty. 1t was certainly improper
TO reiterate this principle and tended to
unduly cell the attention TO this phase of
the case. GO app. l2.) Reversed and
remsnded. White, z. J.
]. p. Stallings VS.. the State; from
Coryell. EmbeZZlemeut. /. The allega-
ton that the money was the property of
ian incorporate company, to-wit: the
Singer manufacturing company, was
sufficient. 2. The evidence falls TO show
more than $40 was embezzled at one time.
This was material because it must be
shown whether the offense constituted
felony or misdemeanor. 8. Conceding
that the property was embezzled, we