Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-04-26
issue of fact to the jury upon the evidence.
Affirmed. Henry, j.

E. P. Swenson vs.. J. W. Taylor; from
Jones. Trespass TO try title. Suit by APP
| pellant to recover section of land set
| apart for the benefit of the common school
| fund. ]. Appellants petition alleged that
! on the 10th day of February. 1885, he was in
| possession of said land, holding same under
| lien from the state for q term Of six years
from the 18TH of April, 1854. by virtue of an
| act of the legislature of Texas, approved
| April, 1888, providing for the classification
| sale and lease of state school funds, ETC.
! and that plaintiff was in continuous pos
| session OF said premises from said 18th of
! April, 1884, TO said 10Th of February 1855
| by the fence enclosing said land in past
| ure with other lands held by plaintiff That
| said land was at the date of said lease and is
Stlli 4 Watered section OF land, and that it
| was applied for and leased to plaintiff as
Yatered section. That plaintiff did not on
| or prior to said 10th OF February, 1888, have
any other watered sections of land leased
from the state in the vicinity Of said sec
ton No. 1872, nor has he had any other wa
tered section from the state unit that date.
but that during said time said section of
land is and has been the only watered sec
ton in that vicinity that he has had
leased from the state. That on the 10th
day of February, 1855, J. w. Taylor unlaw-
fully entered upon and dispossessed plain
tiff etc, etc. Held: The court erred in
legislature has the power to authorize such
leases of school lands as will not interfere
with the right of the, state to sell them
when the legislature may think proper.
The lease is not for an unreasonable period
of time. Such lease made in pursuance
of an act of the legislature must be held
binding. at least until abrogated by another
act of the legislature, and before any SUISSE
quent law should be given that effect it
should clearly appear that it was so in
tended. The act of April. 1857, directed
that nothing therein should be construed to
impair any lease, sale or rights groy6es
out OF. former laws. Reversed Ssd re-
manded. Henry, ].
NJ L. Mcdowell VS.. John Fowl&; FROM
Jack Trespass 10 try title. l. NdshSlS
exception or statement of facts in the rec
ord. .. An agreement of counsel as to the
sole issue in the case which is not incorpo/
rated in a statement of facts cannot be COZ
sidered. l59 Tex. 3l5.I The agreement
does not comply with the statute providing
for an agreed case. 3. But one assignment
OF error, and that is too general to be CON
sidered. Affirmed. Gaines. J..
Charles Dillingham; ct al. vs.. J. L.
Parker; from Grayson. Suit against APP
pellantS as receivers of the Houston and
Texas Central railway TO recover for per-
sonal injuries sustained by appellee. !.
The court erred in charging the jury that
sit is the duty of those operating railway
locomotives and cars to use reasonable care
not 10 permit the view of the track to be-
come INSTRUCTED with cars standing on the
sidetrackS 50 that persons passing along
public road or street cannot conveniently |
see and hear passing engine or train |
as they approach the crossing of the track, |
and receivers so operating such railways |
are liable in damages for an injury to any |
one passing along such road or street by |
reason of any negligence on the part Of their |
employees for failing to use such reasonable |
care" etc, etc. AS Tex, S56; 20 Tex,
55S Our statutes does not make such |
acts negligence, and it was for the |
jury. to say whether there was |
negligence. . The court correctly re- |
liable, if at the time the injury occurred, |
had no authority to do so. Reversed and |
Gaines, ].
P. J. Loonie vs.. ]. T. Burt; from Bosa1
Suit by appellee to recover for work
material in building a courthouse Or
Bosque county, being sub-cont tor
under appellant. Bosq ue county was lade !
a party defendant Judgment agaht app
pellant with decree of foreclosure Y
chanic's lien against the county. H4ke |
county does not appeal. I. Appellant can
not complain of the foreclosure of the me- |
,hanic's lien against the county. ?. Being |
no statement of facts in the record we can
nor tell upon what evidence Judgment was
based. ). New trial was properly refused