The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1896-01-29
HIGHEST COURT DECISIONS.
Synopses of Decisions Handed Down
at the Last Sitting.
ONE OF IMPORTANCE TO SHIPPERS.
Principals Cannot Throw Respous billy
ON Their Agents Liability OF joint
1ndorsers on n Note.

Austin. Texas, January a7.-t'ollowing ara
tho opinions delivered by the supreme
court today.
NJ. c. McLAREN ct al VS.. r. II. JONES
ct al; trespass to try title, from Archer
county. Second district. Reversed and
rEmanded.
Defendants claim the land In controversy
under trustees sale The validity OF
| this sale is attacked on the ground that
u was not made on the first Tuesday Of
ihc month, as required by law. The trust
deed. under which the sale was made
did not specify any particular day on
which the sale was TO be made AT tn,
time of the sale. Mrs. McLaren was
mar. led woman residing in the State OF
New Jersey. 1t is claimed that she has
estopred herself from setting up the in
validity of the sale. The facts relied on
10 constitute the estoppal are as follows:
After the sale had been made by the
trustee, and the deed delivered 10 the
purchasers she received a part Of the
purchase money paid BY them, and appro-
priated II to her own use. She also wrote
a letter to third party stating that she
was satisfied with the sale and would
abide thereny: and, for about two wears
she permitted r. II. Jones. one OF the de-
[ PENDANTS TO remain in possession of and
improve the land. Mrs. McT.aren was rot
a resident of this State, and there Is no
evidence TO show that she knew that Jones
was In possession. or that he was making
| improvements upon the land.
! The letter written by Mrs McLareu was
addressed 10 third person. and it does
| not appear 10 have been written with a
| view To Its communication to the pur-
| chasers, nor is there anything to show
| that she knew who had purchased the
/ land. One who hears OF the declarations
"a 40 q,
| to be communicated 10 him, can lot set
| up such declarations so as to estop the
| person making them 10 any right that
| the latter may have concerning the matter
| IN dispute. To estop Il married woman
| from asserting her rights to lands II is
essential that she should he guilty of some
! positive fraud. or else some act of CON
| ceaiment or suppression, which in law
would amount thereto. go Texas. 500
! There IL no evidence In this case from
I which IL could he concluded that Mrs
/ NcLa'en WAS guilty n any concealtncnt
or suppression OF fact or that sne was
| guilty of any fraud whatever If the
! piairtln recovers In this suit she must
| pay 10 the purchasers. or to the persons
entitled To receive H. the note and inter-
est which they discharged. and which
I was Hen upon the land, as well as the
/ money received by her from the trustee
| with interest thereon. Jones may recover
] from the other defendants upon his war
raniy' FOR the money paid by him, and
mus the parties will be restored to the
] poSition In which they were before the
! SAFE Hence there will be no damage. done
| 20 any OF the parties. for the purchasars
al tho sale VIII receive from the nlaintiff
! what they paid for tho land or. at least
so much as was applied to the discharge
or her debt. and what she received her
self II the facts show that Jones was
purchaser in good faith he would be en-
| Titled TO recover from tho plalnttff thu