The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1894-02-10

Dallas, TcNasi FEBRUARY b-Ihe ludpW-
lns decisions were rendered by the court
OF criminal appeals yesterday:
Richard s,hurtE.r, from Dallas, conVlc-
ton for selling liquor to minor without
written consent OF parcn,s, After a care
full examination OF The facts we are OF
opinion mat the appellant knew that tho
vendee was a minor In this character OF
case this is necessary. Reversed Hurt
p. j.
Lonnio Smith, from Johnson; conviction
for burglary. The charge Of he court WIS
correct. There was no evidence shat tho
pistol fruits OF the burglary was glven
10 apuelant by the boy. Appellant sNore
that he purchased It from the boy, The
requested charge was properly refused,
The evidence supports the verdict. AZ
hrmel. Hurt =. j.
Abe Riddle, from Jack county. The conf
plant charges that one Abe" committed
The assault and battery. The Information
allcecs that one Abe Riddle committed the
assault ana battery. The complaint must
STATE the name Of the accused Il k1own,
and Nc not known, must give some rea-
sonable description OF him T1e con-
plant ls worthless. The Information Is
not supported, and therefore hats no legal
existence. Reversed aud dismissed. Hurt
p. J.
H. j. Wandell, from Bexur The indici-
ment EMBRACES both articles sc and 6H
T.. c.. blcuds the fact In owe count which
constitutes the consummaled oNcnsa tupor-
tom with those which mikes the door
thereof an accompice 20 the abortion.
This IS bad pleading. II should have de-
carei on the first arjcla Ia one count
and on the second In another count, The
court should have submitted to the jury
the rule as to the testimony OF an accom-
plice.
Because the indictment Is fatally defect
i've, the Judgment is reversed and the
prosecution dismissed Hurt, p. j.
Elk parte John r. Scars from Brown
Appeal from refusal VI the county ridge
to release appellant under an Information
charging him with Violation OF the local
option law The relator claims the locnl
option district which embraced the city
of Brentwood and a portion OF the coun-
try lying around said city was not lcEa ly
defined and designated; that he suhdivls-
ion should first have been designated by
the commissioners court before an cleo
ton was ordered. The position is not
wen taken The record shows that
th- limits Of the proposed subdivision was
specifically set ont as required by Inv.
. Relatcr maists that the local option
Jaw passed in 1893 is invalid because II
purports TO be an amendment OF ttlc 49,
Revised Statutes, when in fact the said
t!tle hAu pSen ltpe,seu Wy vac lot"' or
ion Jaw Oh APll'' iNo', ~ '"",'l' 20
laet s9lu u'ie was my !tp'''''u ny Vle
act Oh lso" p"' cel'"l" ".t','e7 o'lS VIZ
ai'euu,u anu d" new "',ID,e "u9 u,'1 ,','
ny sdlu "o'' iue7' ~ 80
IONS u'e'. became pu' vi we i'e'lStp
.u''S' me contention i',y ~ ."'s tuo
eapl'h ana "iS' het.'yh vi ,'e ult "I 1919
""-"iu hNEe usu'ni eu 1t 70 ne an ny 10
tnivHl tl'ie IS @. '''p Nty'seu SV'I ,9sS ;;
ns ai'ehoGu by uv 1'V VI Apll, i'S''
hrsl seclloh shoui9 properly noVe so STAT
ed, we 40 not ulnh the lailule IN mat
respect lnNalilS'eS inc Jaw foT' WINE
lhe edpuvh uoes not IN express 'eiiua
rtIrr 70 inc dct on 10" II uHQueSuu"aoiy
means the REVISED statutes as ahehatl ny
that ll"' pe'"usv ','o,'s al ~ i'i IN
IN the caption Whlch the act oil lN" seeks
to amend is the article which was added
by the act oil 1851
Relator iufther eonlendS 'nat the act Oh
~" is imperative ana ihVala because
II provinces no peua!ty anu Gun not there-
lofe pe euloiceu' N'oit o-'1 Oh salu Aet
declares thht any one violating lhe lochl
optloh IA" sHd' DC pu''isheu as piesc'l'eu
m the penal code me contention here Is
that altIelo 80 penal coue' mas been re-
peaied ny the ael oil laaG when mas pre-
sciihed hiiiercn' Penal'ies for diuerent
violations ana repealed the Ola penalty.
For the reason move stated the penal
coue releiFeu 10 ny ar lcio "-Je OF me
act OF ISjS ~ ule penal code as II STANDS
amended ny the act OF lbSt' by reference
TO sala act there rs no dihiculty IN under
standing WHAT penalty has been prescribed
IoF lhe oNelse Oh W"ISh appeHhht sulH1h
charged we 40 not thihk the irreRuiarl-
bes compialhea OF m the erection are SUM-
eieht TO set aside' Affirmed slmhlhs'
d.
,- 49,. -. .,..,.-
James lawson 1 from Lamar; cohVloton
lor puIBlaTy' Lhe court erred IN refusing
appell,lht applieallon Tor continuance.
John dawson, an aeeoinphee' denied sell
ing the stolen soous' by the absent VIE
u-fS aPpeiIhHl P'oPo9eu 10 prove tlat
1oih Dawson "as sti,'hE the stolen Bood5'
ana TINS laet "ou'a nave shown Johh
dawson 70 pc an uceompilce. we 40 not
MINK the court 'iied IN admitting evil
Gtnce OF tine way DlllA, There can be no