The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1896-02-02

No, 2216-E, G. bartholomew. receiver
vs.. city of Austin
| No. 22So-E. G. Bartholomew. receiver.
vs.. city OF Austin
| No. 2aSi-E. c. Bartholomew. receiver.
VIZ. city OF Austin.
| No. 22S2-DwiEht, Skinner & Cows. Jack
son, Crnmcr & March.
| No. 2eS9-J q. Bourne VS.. Wells. Fargo
& company.
No. 2esi-Alhert Wade va. Travis coun-
| ty.
No 22S5-Koiih Bros. va. Woody n Per-
No. 22s6--E. C. bartholomew, receiver,
| VS.. city OF Austin.
| No 22s7--Thc State of Toxns VIZ. Gal
weston. Harrisburg and San Antonio Rail
| way company.
| No. 22SS--The state OF Texas va. Hous-
ton and Texas Central hallway company
LAW DOcKET-DISTRIcT COURT.
No s9i The United States VS.. A. NJ
jackson ct NJ.
No. Sg7-J. W. Foster receiver. vs.. John
w Snyder Ton appeal.
| No. 500 The United States va. Robert
| G.. Charlton ct al.
No mo-The United States W.. Stllwcn
| II Russell ct al.
| No ais-H u. billiard, receiver. vs.,
James q. Burleson.
| No alo-i +. Hllliard, receiver, We.
| w. u, moore. Jf-
| No D22-t r. Tnliard. receiver, vs..
| Charles l.. Luuderdaie.
| No. 92S-The United States VS.. Henry
| Andrews at al.
No a24-H p. HIilisrd, receiver. Va.
G. $. Stoudeumior. earuishee
! No e2b- H. +. iIIlllard. receiver, VI.
G. s. Stoudenmior, garnishec.
cHANCERY DOCKET
No. b5-Cly OF San Antonio VI. Thomas
j. Mehaffy.
No s2-A II. Abercrombie. assignee. VS..
r. j. willis & Bro ct al
No. Ql--Clark Is Harmon Vs. commits
sIouorai general land office
| No. l72--Thc Mercantile Trust company
vs.. Missouri. Kansas and Texas railway
ct al.
No. Igl--.Iames r. Hair & Co vs. j. NJ.
Day and James Ford.
| No 1911 Groton Bridge and Manufacture
| Ing company VS. Burns A. Dillon ct nj.
| No 1gj--Galvcston. Harrisburg and San
Antonio Railway company Va John IL.
! re gan ct AL
No. 2Ol- Samuel Il. Hucy ct al W.. Aus
| tin Water, Light and Power company ct
lal
No. 2o2-The New yor. Security and
Trust company ct al. VI. Equitable Mort
gLPe company.
No Washington Trust company vs.,
City OF Austin Sewerage company
| No 2O5 HSnry +. Nash vs.. New York
ana Texas Land company dimited)
No. 20j-A. NJ Leo ct al VS.. Il, ID. Hatch
ct al
No. oo7-Penn Mutual Life Insurance
company VS. city of Austin ct al (on APP
peaD.
| No 20S--H. II. Kerr. receiver, VS.. First
National bank of Lampasas ct al
No. 200-Henry L. Preston VS.. n. w.
Finley. comptroller.
CRIMINAL DOCKET
No ilos-The United States VS.. t. A.
Scott; smuggling
| No iIOi-The United States VS.. Thomas
Clark and Thomas Burns: theft from
postoffice.
No. iloJ-The United States vs.. Thomas
Clark and Thomas Burns. breaking into
postofice.
No. iiii-The United States Va. NJ. L.
Woods; msapplication National bank
funds
No. u2o-The United States VS.. II. T.
Webb; uniswfuily opening letter.
| No. 1I2l-The United States VS.. Link
Hankins; passing counterfeit money.
| No li32--The United States VS.. NJ. L.
Woods; misappiication National bank
funds.
No iiss-The United States va. w. r.
Moore. Jr.: misapplication National bank
funds.
No i1s4-The United States VS.. W, T.
Moore. Jr.; embezzlIng National bank
| funds.
| No. 1135-The United States VS.. W. o.
Richardson; makipg false entries In bank
books.
No Iiss-The United States VS.. W. q.
Richardson; making false entries In bank
books.
No. lis7-The United States Va. w. O,
Richardson; misappl,cation National bank
| funds
No. iI2s-.The United States vs.. W Q.
richardson; making false entries In bank
books.
No. lie9-The United States vs.. w. O.
Richardson; embezzlipg National BANK
funds.