The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1896-04-14
POSSESSION OF 4 CHILD.
A Mother Wants to Have Her Child
Restored to Her.
THE CLEAR CREEK BRIDGE MATTER.
Galveston County WIN divide tho Extra
Expense with Harris County-A
Serious Cutting ARRAY.

arr yas engaged nearly the entire day in
herring Testimony and argument In the
haheas corpus case for the possession by
Mrs. Benning the mother of the little
boy, Timothy Morgan, lately In custody In
the home for friendess children. 1t APP
pears to have been uphill work Tor the
persons engaged In elicitsrg Information
from the ladies connected with tho home
In regard 10 the whereabouts o! the child.
One notary, commissioned 10 take inter-
rogatories in the case. reported that one OF
the ladies had come before him but had
declined to answer interrogatorios untii
she could consult her attorneys. Another
had been unable to ind TWO important VII
ncsSes and tho sherlTs return upon the
subpoena duces tecum for the marion OF
tho home was to the effect that she nsd
been served but she came not TO court.
Judge Stewart said the ladies' had right
70 see their attorneys, and on accom- oil
ho expected to do so today Chitf OF To-
lice Jones testified that one Of the lahies
told him in February that she knew where
the enid was, and thai II the attorney
would produce iuurrlaBc ccruhcatc shoW-
ing that Mrs. benning. the mother was
married and would pay 81 for the eS-
penses OF the child SO far as she was con
ccrncd tho mother might haze the chiti
but said the matter would have TO go be
fore the bonrl 81 managers.
Further hearing was postponed To give
the attorneys an opportunity to have in
terrogotories answered.
THE CLEAR CREEK BRIDGE.
A. the meeting of the county commits
aoners court today the following letter
from Judge Tod OF harris county was
read:
hon. w. H. r. LocNn"''' county jung "a'-
Eouet .,, rSyas AnrtI o--penr Sir: AT
,oday's session of the commiss oners court
OF harris eoIniy rsportea, ne ', 9peh"s 0,
aiiticipi,tel tho court lid not think The
condition imposed by yonr court. that We
should na% t9r On OF ,ne tfSslte ,T w9fN ON
,ie .'"l =, s ,' ~ Mr. ntcc ,h CON
rnissie aer n hose nreeinet 'iie 3flhss W..
De, TO RcuYn was taken aAH dShon On we
tep"rt WAS q erfsd 70 nc heAt iheetl.E o.
we Court "hlth WI isthSS 20 eStHp, Nv,
nstnse WIN ,he Sei,,l''ao . H"postni n''g ~
.nloNsn Hter ""NlhE VI ~ 'Vi ~ 'oi's a.
.lHlS: ! i"lt1h me VIZ Susi1 : Oukt;t L" So
'|ssler 9hH ny et 80 si''"ai a i'''
seht tn' hnaiu'i'H ~ .ue n1NlEe' "p".i
srhs',. u 1ftl N,'s.T VI ~. ~ ~ ~ ts'.e -
~ az - "i' ~, - 49,, -
Galveston tuhit another ma would nave
rr'A, tAst' tiarrls Hpnhty IHy sven cNSNSS
~ Ii,a palhlee ot {he w 10" punte eH""'-
u ~ '''9 TWO ''"''''N'' Innnt; Tos
"hnty Judte, hatts Hnil'S, htAHS'
MF. l"ur iIe Niel tilat We hVN,p,a - on
,rn,,S I!,'ni," M. sS,s,'it,,Je 10 t;a,y.s
ton county OF SIS more than Mas agreed
upon the other day. He thought this was
too small an item 10 prevent the building
OF the bridge. He moved the acceptance
OF the proposition. Galveston county 70
pay ne-halt or ne amount OF the Chi-
sla50, Carried
4Hr, tnhsua, ~ 10 uoua.r W 70 t"Si
/ county toward the cost or the bridge.
INJi' Notion MODIFIED
T., ,,o ot,tt diy,,,,, ,.,,,,, ,oto,, IN The
-
/ cHse OF Matilda Ella Sweeney US. Thomas
I II. Sweeney. upon defendants motion to
Z .., l ,,.ti.,. ~ ,,i,,,,y..,.,, h.,,o
! tair Eran,td nga n.y. nun JunHe S' eS ar
/
/ n i ofddtrd thht tde DEFENDANT. Thomas
~, S",rnsS he an Is n.t.nS stJoli,"t -, M.
| The itunroyenleuts on lot \ NOOK n, in III,