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

1
parties belong to the same lodge or or
der, necessarily prejudices them against
the balance of the world and renders
them unworthy of credit In any contro-
versy between one Of their members and
an outsider. 8. Because charge on
cirrumstantial evidence was no; re-
] CURED. does not necessarily render It
unauthorized and illegal Not being
unauthorized or illegal. and being favor
3ble 10 appellant, the giving OF the
barge was not error. Affirmed.
White. P. J.
Zen Hooker We. the State; from Ma
vaSeo. Conviction for rape. l. The
placespf the rape was q room l6xl6 feet,
In winch were five grown persons About
CLOCK several parties came to the
house, shooting, cursing and raising a
disturbance GENERALLY. 1t was while this
disturbance was going on that the prose-
cutrix clnims she was raped. Appellant
was sitting in a char between two beds :,
and In this position pulled the prose-
cutriI down IN the chair and 'done his
work. - The prosecutrix at the time has
in her arms an illeCitimate eighteen
months-oId child which she never re-
leased during the performance. There
were present at the time in the same
room the father, mother, two grown
sisters and brother OF the prosecutrix.
The mother heard her say "don't do
that but beyond this there was no
complaint. One week after this the
prOsecutrix told of the occurrence. All
the parties in the room made affidavit
that no raDe was committed, before the
grand jury of Limestone county. Held:
The evidence does not support the con-
r-t.,. AID
White. 2. j.
Parker. Aggravated assault and bat
terry. l. The prosecutrix testified that
appellant caught her by the leg, threw
her down, and pulling up her clothes,
made indecent proposals, which she re-
jected. Under this state of facts, the
court charged the jury that, when an
injury is caused TO the person, the intent
TO iujure 10 presumed, aud it rests with
the person inflicting the injury to show
the accident or innocent intention. -
Held: Abstractiy this charge is correct,
hut IN this case it assumes the injury,
whit d under the facts of this case was
not warranted, because the evidence
reLders II doubtful whether the prose-
outrix feelings were injured, and it de-
volved upon the state to show this. 2.
The court also erred In charging upon
assault and bnttery in that 1t charged
that an intent TO injure was presumed,
etc. as above laid down. Reversed and
remanded. Hurt, J.
Gulf, Colorado end Santa Fe Railway
VS.. J. l.. Waugh; from Runnells. Mo-
ton for reheariug. |. When common
carrier executes and delivers to a shipper
a through contract or bill of lading for
shipment 10 point beyond its own line
of road. It. the carrier, cannot By a stip-
ulation in such contract limit its liability
to the end of its own line. 1t will be
held responsible for the negligence of not
only of itself aud Its servants, but of the
connecting lines. This rule applies to
the carrier making the contract. This
rule was land down at Austin, and the
motion for rshearing was transferred
here. The motion for rehesring is over
ruled. .. There remains. however. for
this court TO discharge duty in connec-
ton with this motion. and it Is duty
which ought never to be devolved on
Il court of justice in any enlightened
country. In connection with the motion
there has been flied in this court among
the papers of this cause, three copies of
O document which purports 10 be an ar
gunent IN support OF the motion for
reteari e. A great portion of the mat
ter of this document is dehorS the record,
and could suOservs no useful purpose.
The manner in which the matter is pre-
scented is offensive and indecent. and the
spirit of il Is malicious Much latitude
Is allowed counsel. No greater privi-
lece can be devOlved upon any citizen
than that which authorizes hi III to speak
in behalf of the rights of his client.
whether they be the rights of life and
liberty or right of property. But the
line of demarkation which separates the
right to speak in open court,
the truth, counsel see 1t,
and the unbridled license of the mob
orator is clear, distinct, and known of
all men. A sense of what is due to the
court, what is due the profession of the
law, and of wha. is due the people Of
this state who create the court and who
maintain it, should have restrained the
writing of such a document, and might
well invoke from this court an order
more serious than that which will now be
The clerk of this court is or
dered to strike from the files of this court
and from the record in this case the pa
pers herein referred to, and to return
them TO the writer thereof, j w. Terry,
I-sp
J. NJ. Drake vs.. the State; from Hill.
Murder in the first degree with death
penalty. Motion to strike out motion
tor rehesriug by the state. l. 1t has
long been the practice of this court TO
entertain motions for rehearing By the
state and in many instances such motions
have been granted. judgment of reversal
set asde. and the judgment OF convic-
tion affirmed. No reason or authority
has been presented demanding change
in the present practice which is sauc-
tiohed not only by long observance, but
is supported by statute ana by the rules
pr scribed by our supreme court. Mo-
ton overruled. Wilson. J.
&. r. Wea,hersby VS.. the State; from
S NTH. Murder in second degree. APP
peilaut was convicted of the murder of
Alex Pope at Marshall, Tex, and his
punishment assessed at five wears in the
/. To entitle appellant to
complain of the action of the court in
refusing his motion to have the jury for
the week called aud tried as jurors before
the sheriff should summon talesmen to
complete the panel; although said action
might be erroneous, he would have to
show further that because of said action |
na vas dppriye 1 of a lnpal right > The