Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-03-17
THE HIGHER COURTS.
srrorses of Decisions Rendered at the Present
Galveston lifting.
Court of Appeals.

Court OF Appeals.
White P j.; S. A. Wilson, A. ].
C.-resrcndence OF the Gazette.
C.,,rsToS. TEX, March IS. D. Il.
-, rs R. H. Bonham; Jackson
- Reversed and rendered. White, P. j.
~ occount sued on being one between mer-
mt and merchant. being mutual and current.
= M. barred by the statutes OF limitations Of
=, Gears. R. S. Art. 52O3. sub-div. 5: r. s.
A., s29J. su5-div. 3.
X. Habel VS.. the State; Dallas county
,a7-nad. White, P. J. We think il apparent
SON, he language used in article 5o56, Revised
e.,.-+es. that if the oath has once been admins
80 10 the sheriff and deputies that will suffice
tLa-aaFter at the same term for the summoning
- al .ssslch Jurors as may be ordered by court.
feFandant, cannot unreasonably delay the trial
- ms. on account OF the absence of some OF
tbe ,riCinRl venlremen. "A perfect right OF
tt--fs Safense caa obtain and prevail only where
tLa marty pleading it acted from necessity, and
1ree wholly free from wrong or blame in occas-
i-=rg or producing the necessity which re-
.r;-ad his action. II, however, he was in the
S-onr. the law justly limits his right of self
5efeTse. and regulates it according to the mag
nitude Of his own ohense lReed vs.. state, II
=. I'm SO We are not disposed to reverse
c,s for merely indiscreet ebulIitions of counsel,
rbich are ueutralized by the charge.
Ms T. NJ. Blakely VS.. J. G. Wimberly; Fort
Iend county, Reversed and remanded. Wilson,
l. The verifcation of an account entities it to
- considered and treated as evidence only WheQ
ne account is verified at the time suit is brought,
or Inv way OF amendment within reasonable
time before trial.
Enlf Colorado and Santa Fe Railway Company
rs n Pooton: Fort Bend county. Reversed and
rsrgnded Wilson, A. J. Appellee recovered
he va,ue OF a lot Of sewing machines shipped
C-l- apoeIlaut's road. The machines were
Knocked down and packed in number OF boxes
and crates one OF which was missing. Appellee
-efusad 10 receive them and they were sold at
the end Of the year for freight and storage
charges Appellee, under the facts of the case,
rras hound TO receive what was rendered and
c9rla recover only for what was not rendered
n Ann. s AS, Hutchinson on Curriers', 775l.
r A Boutwell, ct al. vs.. Jacob Hiltpold;
Harris county. Reversed and remanded Will
son A J. II is not pretended that the purchase
of the cattle in question by appellant was fraud
uIeut or without consideration, but involved be-
cause the bill Of sale was not recorded as re-
CURED by article 1854, Revised Statutes. We
think the said article does not apply in this
case The sale was not of cattle on the range,
Lut such = sale as is named in article 1852, Re-
vised Statutes-by written transfer, accompa-
MED by actual delivery.
! T. Smith & Bro. VS.. Chris Fox and l.. Falk;
Ga weston county. Reversed and rendered.
Wilson. A. J. The original Judgment was not
amended merely as to a mistake or miscalcula-
ton but as to material matter, changing the
rights and liabilities Of the arties and substi-
tu;ing different Judgment. Such change and
substitution after the term at which the original
Judgment Is rendeI ed and entered and after ap-
peal perfected, was without authority OF law.