The Waco evening news. [volume] (Waco, Tex.) 1891-1894, 1892-05-05

company VS.. the State is extremely |
doubtful. This latter case was suit |
by Mr.. Hogg to forfeit the charter of
the International and Great Northern
Railway company and take from it its
exemption from taxation. In the
court below there was a decree en-.
tered removing the exemption from
taxation, but iefusing to forfeit the
charter, and on appeal from that de.
cision by the railroad company the
case was reversed and dismissed
Chief Justice Stayon, delivering the
opinion Of the court, said: "The suit
should have been dismissed in the
court below upon general demurrer.
as Tex. 1861
The next case find is that of the
East Line and Red River railrt ad
company VS., the state, rs Texas, 434,
which was suit by Mr. Hogg to for
felt the charter of that railway for
various reasons assigned. He sue
ceeded in FORGETTING the charter of the
company and upon return of the man.
date to the court below he proceeded
to have receiver appointed and then,
with associate counsel specially EN-.
ployed, tried to get possession of the
property Of that railway for his ap.
pointed receiver and instituted pro.
ceedings In the federal court against
the federal receivers, which suit was
lost and the receivers of the Missouri,
Kansas and Texas are still controlling
the East Line as smoothly as if no
suit had ever been brought, and where
the state of Texas has ever received
any benefit from the suit remains to be
explained by some one who under
stands the subject better than |.
New where all these millions ofacres
of land come in that he has gained
for the people of Texas | am unable to
find, and, ii | could be induced to be
lleve that there was 1000 acres in any
one body that he had gained, as be.
fore said, would 60 out and camp on
1t awhile, as being something of sacred
territory.
l have thought it profitable to briet
ly review the work of Hogg's prede
oessor, the Hon. John ID. Templeton
in cases which formed precedents FL
Mr.. Hogg in his above mentioned lanC
cases find that the State of Texa
VS.. Thompson GA Tex, 690) was
case of first impression, with reference
t to the aforementioned land fraud act
and in which suit Mr.. Templeton trie
@ to set aside Johnson's claim to tw'
I sections of state school land and wa
defeated, but upon appeal the cas-
r was reversed and remanded upon tn
: merits.
g | find in the case of the State {
t Texas VS.. Work, carried up by Nj
+ Templeton, discussion of the leas
laws, ETC., in which suit he was de
: feated In the court below, but whic
on appeal was also reversed and re
q manded In the State of Texas V:
$ the Stone Cattle and Pasture company
&c Texas 1858, find also discussio
5 of the land questions involved in tn
suits Of Mr. Hogg, wherein he game
, two sections, or 1880 acres of lane
1t does not appear from the opinio
3 how much land was involved, but say
! the number of tracts. This suit wa
/ lost by Mr.. Templeton in the cou1
. below, but on appeal was reverse
and remanded upon its merits
[ The next case of the state of Texa
n va. Synder was suit by Mr., Temple
;. ton to recover twenty-four sections {
{ land under the above named clan
n fraud act" and points out the prope
remedy for the state to pursue in tn
e recovery and was rendered on Apr
a g. 1886. These cases of Mr.. Ten
8 pleton's formed decided and positiv
{ precedents for Mr.. Hogg in the case
n wherein he gained the 1880 acres.
;. l also note that Mr.. Hogg figure
in the supreme court of the Unite
+ States in the case of Asher vs.. stat
:. Q28 U. S. sup. ct. rep. l29) vherei
$ Asher sued out habeas corpus to in
quire into the constitutionality of tn
; drummers' tax In this case MI
: Asher prevailed and went forth fire.
J man.
q The Val Verde case is general
G known, and while dissenting opinio
r. may afford the attorney general relic