Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-02-03

blNlu purlnrrR AMI hWulof lemtultN ih-
spires confidence They are absolutely
pure and may be- used ON the youngest
infant They are agreeable 10 the most
refined and sensitive. They are speedy.
economical and nfuiliug Cures made in
childhood are almost invariably permanent
Sold everywhere Price. CuriCURA, 30 cts;
soar, 80 SIS, lie solvent, SLOl
Prepared by IurlER DiuG AND CHEMICAL
CoRrvH vuON Boston,
AN About the skin, Scalp and Ham, a
pages, 20 Diseases, mailed ireo
....-.-s....-..-
the Same year that Mnry Bird died
Jumcs Croft was appointed administrator,
but the records do not show That he
ever qualified. aud that in lStI Daniel
Shpman made application to be appoint
cd administrator which was granted On
tCb. II, 100. an iuNcntory was filed IN
the court by Shipmun, showing that the
property of the estate was the land sued
for la March, 1859, application To sell
1870 acres of this land to pay costs of
administration. and To pay ShipmNu and
his attorney for services, was made, and
ON March 81 was granted. and the sale
was made Ia the following June hy NJ.
NJ. Battle agent OF Shipmuu, which sale
WINS confirmed by the court I'm 1861.
Shipmun filed his FINAL papers showing
that lac had sold the 1890 acres. and
asked Tor ana order to SCH the balance
in order To reimburse himself for money
advanced aud this application WAS
granted. The court below hold that us
there wore no dcbts and no necessity for
administration, the same was void, that
owing Go th1 lapse of time from the time
the administrator qualified until be- ilJd
his Inventory, it viii hr presumed iu law
that the administration had lupscd TINT
an administrator could not net through
ln agent None of those findings can
stand. Though there is nothing tO show
that mo- debts existed. still 70 would not
bc presumed that NO debts IN fact existed,
on the contrary ti' presumption would
be that there were debts uud that the
action of the court was regular THIS
presumption becomes conclusive m the
absence OF proof tu the contrary in a
collateral nttack.-61 Tex 3dS, % Tex
50 81 Tex. 5G2l
The administration was not void be-.
cause seven or eight year, elapsed be
tween the death of the interstate
Ssid the grant OF the letters.
IS Tex G3, 90 Tex. 3GS) Nor do
We thinl, that such case rs shown ms
would justify the court In holding that
the administration had been closed. u
may have been the duty of the court tn
II was not done aud Il would not bc pre-.
stunned that 10 WIS, against the express
ucts uf the court eAprcI# INK jurisdiction
over the estate. The claim that thp
sale is void because undn hy an ugent
of the administrator Us not teunhlc The
proceeding was Irregular mud, II may Ice.
could have been set inside ON direct pro.
rrpiiug for that PURPOSE; but after 10
WAS confirmed by iGp court, IL was NOT
subject to collateral attack Tho val,
was of the land itself after the patent
90 the heirs of Mary lluuruDk. liv the
patent 10 the legal title vested In the
heirs subject tp administration Oi their
mothers estate; but Tor purposes of ud.
udnistratinn. the legal title was IN the
estate. For the errors pointed ont the
Judgment b. reversed and the cause re-
mundrd, Opinion by Justice Collnrd.
Trustees of school district No. !. vs.
W w. Wimbcry ct ale FROM Jeh
! Davis
Plniniinfs sought IN this suit 10 re-
strain the county judge from npporion
| to which district No. ] was en-
titled as pro rata part Of the schoo
funds of the county for children rcsid
| ing ON the Lewis survey. Prior "a
| March 10. 1889. jon Davis county wi'
| divided into three school districts, aud
| the Lewis survey was ln No. =. On
March 1G by an election the voters dc
! cided 10 redidrict the county, which wHi
| done by the commissioners court OF
March 20 Through error or mistak,
| the Lewis survey was put into district
| No. /. ON March 20 tuis action wa
rec0nsidorpd and the Lewis survey puI
| back into district No. =. The minute'
/ of the commissioners court say that
| three Of the commissioners were present
/ L.. frrua UUI fHrf I.sts
| this. they are silent The county iudg,
| was allowed 10 testify Tint be- was pres
cut. This was not error 10 b. simply
| explaining and not C0niradicting the ~
| cords Tho county Judge and three
! commissioners constituted fun cOur
| for the transaction Of business, as no.
/ uuireh hy law. The commissioners huv
! Ing voted for the proposition 90 recon
| slider the previous order hXiuH th,
| boundaries OF the several districts. i
| WINS not necessary that the county iudgi
! should cast his vote 100 order 10 give ]
| validity The court bad the right nt th,
/ same session 90 change iis orders mad,
| GO that term Of the court There r. %,
| error and the judgment ls affirmed.
Opinion by Fisher chief Justice.
| Ilano county vs. Scott, from Llnuo
| G. T. Scott brought This suit aguiug
| the county for damages alleged 10 huyl
| been accustomed boy the establishment %
public road over his land Appellee
| among others was appointed n jury %
view to lay ont a hfst-elass road From
| l.lanO 10 the line Of San Subn county, II
| the direction Of san saba, the count.
seat Al Of the jury but appellee rcportc
| iu favor Of the road running dingOnall
across his land; be- presented a rep0r
| showing that the rOAd could follow hi
! boundary line by tie addition OF u quar-
| Ter Of mile 10 its length The uiaiorit
report wns adopted aud abont tire
| months LATER appellee presented clalu
| for $500, which was fejcrbd Th
| commissioners court would take M
further notion and this suit was brongh
in the district court. j, Is urged by al
pollants that tlo district court had N
jurisdiction. We think &c had m
commissioners cOnrt had declined 4
ronader appellee's claim There was n
waiver BEFORE the failure 10 plrsen
the ciaiW for dnmugos would bave 40
elect m waiver ether parts Of AZ
llw must he compiled will Cart. 1870
His prehence as one of ihe jury coul
not bind him. lie protested and pr,
aputcd q minority report aiid then nslre
iho court 90 appoint "a Jury 90 assess M
damages. u has been held that wher
Die commissioners court fails 10 compl
] with tbs law tbs district court ha