The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1896-03-01

following Is the text OF the decision
sl+-The state OF Texas VS.. the
acton. Harrisburg and San Antonio
v,y company. No. 1l,915-The State
k,,ss vs.. the Houston and Texas Cen
p,,lroad company-In district court
k,yi, county, Fifty-third judicial dis
4. State instituted the above styled
AGAINST the railroad companies
N as defendants respectively therein
kroyer balances amounting in the
.sate to over $500, 1000, alleged by the
10 be owing by the respective rail-
companies on bonds executed to the
for loans made of parts of thep spe-
Irhoo! fund during the years 1867 to
helusve, under acts of the Legislature
b
! special school fund out of which
hams we're made. was created by tho
nature Of 1854 out of funds acquired
the United States in settlement of
koandary question between the United
y in relation to the boundary be-
! Texas and New Mexico.
! acts Of 1856 authorized loan of the
b school fund to certain railroad
kanles and provided for lien to exist
Syor Of the State on the railroads to
"a the payment of the loans which
n be enforced by the governor, who
"a La .f L..
linz road without judicial proceed
defendant railroad companies.
L In their pleading or by admission
during the trial, recognize their
)i,y for the sums sued for unless the
kents made by them In State treas
warrants In 1864 and 1885 are now to
beated as effectual payments, which
Insist they must be. and the State
tiss that she has no case If such
bsnts were legal or have become
|ng on the State.
objections of the State to the liabjl-
The payments are:
That the special school fund in dues-
|vas protected by the constitution of
Epm diversion by the legislature to
than school purposes and that
|son was attempted when debts ow-
b the school fund were allowed to be
In treasury warrants.
Because the acts passed to authorize
Vents Of these loans in treasury notes.
(cy Of the railroads under this legis-
! and the payments made therein.
IN aid of the rebellion and were
tore void.
Because the acts in question author
payments In treasury warrants. con
)ated and attempted to aid in the
money of treasury warrants issued
fculate as money. IN violation of the
constitution forbidding the issuance
fisury warrants intended to circulate
Pney. and OF the constitution of the
States forbidding any State to
Hills Of credit.
take up and pass on these PROPOSE
10 the order in which they are
tRs1oN OF A SCHOOL FUND.
es point the Judge holds that the
ance Of the warrants was not an
fsltutlonal diversion.
EAlD OF THE REBELLION.
next question is. We're the laws
povidlns for the payment OF this
II State treasury warrants, and the
Y the railroad companies Hereunder,
Of the rebellion and therefore void,
n hese payments made in warrants
/ IN aid of the rebellion and for that
b void? |
|1is point Judge Morris holds that
lVments Were void for the reasons
ana ably reviews the State leglsla-
\ Inspect to finances in the war time
n DECISIONS Of the State and United
1supreine courts, citing Taylor. 81
~ ana other cases, and then says:
We assume that the statutes In
IN tnough void as to warrants Is
~ ~ nilhtary purposes connected with !
III , We're valid as to warrants issued |
PURPOSES. what must be the dispo- !
A., we payments in question? The |
||, ~. iallroad companies take the po- |
maj II they might have paid in legal !
1 Ill presumption is that they did |
MI warrants, and that the bur-
@ool Is upon the State to show |
I'M, payments We're made in legal |
u DO not think this position |
II. . several reasons. In the first !
W rule Is that, when one pleads !
| cISs ~ something other than money |
|y%es on him to plead. describe and |
NJ very Kind of paper or articles in |
NJ A. paid If the defendants had dis !
ms burden they would have 1
(pts in'aking out their case the very |
~ ,i H. which they paid and their le- |
Gthon, ssIlty would have been appar-
M proof on the part of the State |
a M avs of which the court must |
TIRn h., notice were applied to the |
me defendants have simply /
IN w" ,ra proved that they made pay |
j IA rasury warrants, and they are |
NJ prove, and the State Is unable |
Il no "nat KIND of warrants were used |
NJ rra,ysnientS. The warrants were re-
rir1 1 VIZ railroad companies as money |
oisa,e,eiN and were received by the .
waS IN the same manner, and no
! Of v eaken or kept of the various
Its rn, that might have heca |
The s,ot prooahle that the ability of
Ace Ne 'e or the railroads to produce
Il, Ia as 10 the class of warrants in
E WANTS We're made has been af-
/ ofsce lapse of time or death of
have ra,,s Probably neither party
N ,ba.nefnbered an hour after paw
iran,. ever knew. the exact clnss
than 10 which they were made any
Dawn man making or receiving n
reinarh IN paper currency now
drero,,. What part of II was paid
nation Kinds of paper money now
n AZ , S that there were n large
reb4,m,,oar rants issued directly in aid
lbs SIN SIN which they received at par
heir deh, laws In order to he able to
Al ali 70 the State in State war
lat tne, ..u y appears just as prob
4 class % made the payments in part
re no, VI warrants as In others. Ii
bat the,,o ound to take notice of the
With uh must have had Illegal war;
u wo min,ch they might have paid. !
Bnt not he so strong for the
\ % prnm uer the facts they should
as kind w. ~, :, not only that they maid
both Ie 81 state warrants. but. ther.
/ deyols,.aai and illegal state war.
x warrsn,en on them 20 prove what
nigh, s s1ts they paid in, SO that the !
al sarran, whether they were legal
" tS IN r reason the burden Of proof
y not aiehdants on this question.
ieyrnea SUIT by tho State to sci
sats aces, as defendants contend.
q hronvsIpted through mistake or
'sfely vni2d n fraud might not be void.
and auanie and binding until sci
Mould party to be relieved from
Ming the Ve TO assume the burden
ttts do avoiding facts. But void
nav ~ not have TO no set e;da.