Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1894-06-27

nnt The admitted rghi 10 defend RS per-
,oA 'sf. az. 'Ss, oaaser a a',d = tixnt
" iefcid4ul WAS nat litAAtel by ~ mo.
i've 80 70 i-ptcsefNation, Nda, possible
hr mas stranger against waisu IL
could bear no nisiict. MHAt reason could
Re- nave, save AMI except tnat III swine
Tor an,rsenent, OF throneA mere lows
killinN They l.dst have some motive 10
aeiuaSe tnein. Men is NO. liih s.acrity
eide NJ We'll az an Others We must Apply
the fllcs Of conmun srnel or ordinary
experience IN searching oli the motives
Was the netise OF Chllders la tsilnS tins
mlnis HE. save ami except to preserve
n e ~ 4 ss2as ,a up ~ lev wsrSs
- attacked IN an unproNpksi and brutal
way. attacked IA a Aearticra. outrageous
manner by n man 10 whom he has said
nothing and done nothing. one known 10
MN only vs. a bad and d0ngcroua charAc-
Ter, but otherwise wholly unknown.
THIS stranger has JUST frccd himself
from an alteration with a haciSmati, by
whom he has been insulted and provoked
almost beyond endurance. This aitefca.
unarined. Just tnen he Is Rttscked 81
4 new antagonist. whom he has only
heard q as a aanssiona character, and
the words stop Jim, stop Jim. his -.
- - has gun, ana, notwithstand-
ing that Jim Draper continues 10 r,lah
70 him he backs away and backs l away
dres me fatal SHOT j, i mos, i pain ann Ssd
o set away 70 avoid a dinleg1isyS.
90: / is mos, p psia that 10 10 nae az
there was hut one thing Tor any honest
unprecedented fury 20 DO. and that was 30
say that the defendant was entitled 10
mo same right to anticipate immincnt
daneer az Ellis, and that he had the
right 10 protect hlnselt from that DIM
ger by the most erlolen, means The
testimony OF the states wiincsses. ANA is
and must he true. There may he irninA-
terlul vnriAnces IN the evidence, but the
OF sslt-deicrse i predieatSi st S"S Wholly
unconiradtctcd
nc so lionel, " EoSst on also addressed
made a strong impression.
Criminal Anpcuis.
| Court OF Criminal AppeAis-.J. w Hurt
W. ,Hd,i L. lpayidi ,,n, and p :, slmls!ns
general Sitting ut Austinl
Austin. Texas. June a,-The court OF
criminal appeals decided tho following
cases yesterday;
II. II oebhardt vs.. the state. from
Galveston. This r. conviction under
article 1i2a. for theft OF a bicycle. the
properly " Joseph Labalie. There IL no
abatement OF facts The Judgment Is
euniclent Affirmed, OPINION by Hurt.
Y, j.
j. o. Dalton vs. the state, nom Bexar.
| Convicted OF theft, The Indictment In
l this cast simply charges theft gsnurally
The proof. however tends TO snow that
/ from tbs person OF the alleged owner
| VINO IL shown 20 have been drunk ut the
/ time, without his knowledge and consent,
! II IA well settled thai person can not
be convicted " theft generally where
I the evidence shows IL was stolen from
the person. The qualification added to
being IN the presence merely OF the al
! legged owner was not Justified by the evil
Idence judgment re'eracd AM remanded,
opinion by slmklns, j.
D. j. Peerchouse ". the state. from
| Erath. Convicted OF cattle thcft. The
journment wltaut proper order and can
not b. considered There IL no bin OF
exceptions, Judgment affirmed. Opinion
| by Davidson. J.
WIN swartz va, the state. from Mitch.
/ I'll, Convicted Of theft from the person.
i was taken 80 suddenly as not 10 allow
time to make resistance before said prop.
/ erty was carried away There " no all
Without The knowledge" Of the owner
Under the charge OF the court the Jury
was authorized TO convict II the money
waa taken from the person OF Tarvef
either without his ig-owledge' or 80
resistance" The charge was erroneous
! (Mct.in vs. State, p c, Az No exception
was reserved, IL the evidence showed
that the taking war with the knowledge
OF the owner. but so suddenly 49, not 70
allow him time 10 resist. then We would
hold tho error harmless. But such Il not
the case The evidence shows "a taking
/ without the knowledge Of the owner
Judgment reversed and remhnded. opln-
ion by Hurt r j.
Allen Ellis W.. State, from Mitchell
Convicted OF rape. There - voluntary
affldAyit OF w. T. Guide a juror who
says that the Jury nrst stood ten Tor
acqulttal aud two Tor convictions. that
after discussing his character they stood
stated. the jury not supp9sing there was
any wrong IN H. that defendant had
previously gone into the bed room ~ tho
wife OF one OF his nclghbora and that said
nelghhor had told defendant q he lll
and that defendant left After this the
twelve stood for cpnylctlop This was
not denied. tart, H. G. G. ~ Reversed
and remanded. opinion by slmhns, j.
Horny Blackwcn W. the State, from
Dewitt This Is motion for re-
hearing. The charge relative 20 assault
with Intent 10 murder was harmless, for
he was not convicted OF this and II did
not tend 10 induce the Jury to convict
did tend 10 show aggruYnted assault
and The charge on this was not error.
The motion for rehearinE Is overrnled.
opinion by Hurt. =. j.