Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1894-06-16
ME HIGHER COURTS,


Court q criminal Appeals. W. hurt,
W - laNhlaor aud W y SlmAtnn,
lnds,s \ n iirnts. ag.lsiant attorney
Hencral tlVinE At Auntlnl
AuttiN, fc,aa, June ll..aTnc court %
c,lh'nei appeals decided the mllowlna
cAees Yesterday
Mack rhoinpaon and Charles chase ~.
NE seiri irsm Travis, The rSiioacc NJ
former indictments ana vouttc,lana wAa
ilup,rly admitted ioih defcOdAntt loa
Tined and the court pfrpgriy llnntoA tho
encet % this uvldenOe 90 tut dac.tlan II
efedulip. rlc court In to- chArac eut.
miticl 70 tho infy whtlhnt pssNesplpn
OF the money wac acquired ~by assault
or by violence OF by putuna Us uian
rh,n pgon "a flar ct ute or bodily injury,
w u 4, eunicniei The vNidvnec dld
~, I'M q al.ew due, ,he propsiis IVES
ycAr ~ uouliy mlNty,N aud tNat the uaatss
Mas not Instinct, W, think ihv gNi.
sh as ,Ssr ,s Ma. s"f ANIME hs s ena fntEss
iydgmenl Is AFFIRMED. onlNloh ~ Hurt
W. NJ, heSd w. thv state. from tar.
rant iiigamp IA not an onrnse against
the Wits IN contemplation " the statute,
whorcAife uho u not oomprlent Niuiahs
Ngainet her husband whvn he "a chafgcl
With that 0iteuav Hhe can mol be called
py the prosecution 10 pluvq hrf MARRIAGE
Win The accused nor Zoe nv purpose Of
idgnilylne HIN. twlMrwh lf.m Nv.
riiot, Reversed and fa,nanlca' Opinion
W Davidson. j.
Carhn Ahclps Na, tho State, from
WhAttan rhrrp il no statement VI factf
ia the fecori l'hN oonieht0n that thttt
WA no proper predicate upon whlch tn
ADMIT The dying 1rglaraiioNa ~ ,ioveaa' n
j 10 Nv Way Nurinrd lhe lii retit,t
ihh she tonrt was OF ITO opinipn NAt
opinion ~ bs2idsed, j
W q Exon ys inc STATE. from nsxar.
com1rtcd u rape tne question Va what
consideration Is 10 he Ri,on 90 hin OF
rSrtgtlom refused BY che court anu NO
oihrr bln ulcd IN leu lhervoif whateves
may haNe been ue ptac,re pror ~ the
adoption 81 the HeViscl Statutes. nudsr
the present law Il hlconeh the duty nf the
uaurt wUvn be- reircta thf hill uf rNeup.
tuna presented IA hmm fur approval vs.
ne one IN lieN ihotepi az = iaNal Nn-
10 6sstaed Sfss ,R"s ISIS W6ea ih5 9S'
fore. the court iNurota thN oiftrvd ull,
copnuei Nayr done Nn that can be y.
can not Nsfumr Tie court VIII not Dc as
duty NOR thnt he Wnl be- unable GO hHter
~ any bill the rputi may We, Ntief V 4
va afSGli tho tsNrt ian % 10 ~ dAty
and faV 10 lAv b hln NJ viii lnpk W ~"
hil originally presented ana inat : n
btiWA nprfnVel While NV eeNr' mhN
can nut ountrplitt or pueNty a hll oil es-
tCptiunu Without the consent Qi rNunHll.
llis counsel may wAivf hN riyhls hy nc.
cfntlnF a. lunef cnah, ~ =, W. Reg D
I'd MAY lnetsl upaW itq acceptance ur a.
Oauft hleh he hlli council VII W nlloWpl
time 'aufncrnt tn ne o. hNaiahdvia' hiu
and also Nnpn necessary aunlivNinF am
anyltf The court ctfgi n cNrMdinR ~
fNon Hs 10 her dlaaoluia ne ritter y
tnnllnur n went tn her character nnd
rrsdlhNty tNlr rourt urreA IN otclutnH
the question aa 70 huf MNihH stated q
oerihin mnfnlne, Tho dctrnan hRi piatoi
Mrs ilNan on thp einnd al
Niinsaa ta opntnilrt hof
daughter ana examined hqr on. nv
very mattor rroae.rNenlhvi into. nni sht
mrufo. NJ answer 10 tbF objection, tnq
district attorney stated thr Nntife Grand
July would HwrM 40 nor statement ilgli
sfi'iis wAs Improper and ifrcHplar anu ne
iIard msmners " ihe srsnl jOrt picy@l
thai Mrs Exon mldo such I. abatement
IA was not admissible ~ pthVt NNuhe
riillt on rufruhnfNte her daurlieFH tegtl'
monl. hui would only hpNp H,gno 70 iln,
y, t6p court na 10 the nhiect u ne tcttll
muuy, A. n WAS, tho testimony Was
hafufr th0m iffuNilnflN improperly nul
they were unrhutipncl, AMI wM glerih
attorney whs ccrialnlp nnafumNtnl4
The case was certainly ono 90 be drnliti
| vs. deliberate INDICTMENT rather than ",
| haatn induced by passionate lnYnntlyh
| Reversed ana remahdrd urlnlon by