The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1896-06-10

the case. 2. The attorneys for tho r.,,
lionel must so state Under the u" Nv ue,'.
terms OF the statute ono of isn. NJ 's>>s
,,ums Is Just as essential rs sother No
or the second conlii n, hut mol -, ~
iitsV; tur II Is clear that the rainy w.
o.e court OF yivil auoais A. to The yai1,itc
OF IN" ticket at the limo -, N,'''nirE
attempted to he used did MOI H. MS MS
pose OF tina -uart OF plailtin.s a.. ~
which alleged that. h.ing ,n9n the ,.,o''
IN a., .eiore she was cicc ed. she len'ieroJ
10 w. conductor the regular farn 49, ~
state line. The decision oi fla" co,,,, '''s
cVii appeals does moi pract.rnliv s.,la
.ne entire case as made by The H,saainrs
has n v,i 1r cd ana 'nSsrsfore MS court
opin on by penman. j.
= sA NilrsNE FR X RAi Gill.T c7o,RAGo
Mr Al; certified questions IN - "a asr-
n,,ishmrnt case from Harris co,,,,'v
r,,st n ,a answered in favor OF ~,
r. paut,o, thc cut tolorad. and Santa
y" railway company.
Rcisncr sued The Texas, Lou,sian, and
Eastern Railway company n the cou.tv
court of Harris county for n aoh, and
sued out writ of rarnishmout nraips
'he Gun Colorado ana Santa Fe rail,ya,
company on December s., 1874 THIS ..r,.
or earnishmcnt WAS duly served ,,, t,,,
HafN :. lAn. The carnlshep MIA H., -,
swcr March IN, 1894. admi,,inr ~, an
we uitie of service # the gai.nishu,,,r, II
t,n. i,i'n"VcH 70 no defendant COMPANY.
n,' aiesing facts to show ihss Tho f,,ni
was moi subject Ia thr wrii ANA IN, ~.
49,, ~. 'hc receivers Of tht defendant com
p l"i,N lr9roriN be made parties @ Inc
~ NJ "r1'r mat the unrs ions iuNol, "a
,nlshl hc aiiudiraicd. rhe facts nllo,.ci
~ me slrlishcc. to SHOW tnal ihn ri1ni
' "as not suhiec, 10 the writ, suificieg.i,
stated below 49, '"' A. 10
Question Was the fund in the hands
Oh ne pnrnishro Mt thr tinc Of ths scr-
nmn 81 tlr writ subject o tho garnish-
nlthl. or dit the application fey the M.
n"'htmen' of receivers of the pto-ef,iv ~
thr defendant counsellor 4 i'm nn,,ar..l ~
VIII me subsequent action of the rod.
,,' N.H' III granting SAID appAQation.
VIII '' '''
When lili has been nls whih : c'Ss
to subject the property eff a cnrpnra,i m
person or CONFERENCE.-The I, rho na,'n,,,,,
Of debts of an rrod ,rs ana pr.ys for
thf appoiuimcnt ni receiver To admin
laa been had upon the detcatnnt + mas
heeen generally he'd that ,he mrigli,;ion
on me court attaches to such proper Y
20 rs ~ "Xc'ulo Inc in'erferepc0 of t0y
DINER court thorewith
II arptars from tlie statement ocr I'D
IN his casn that h ueiiiioA secl>'nc = 10
apP"'Nim' ~ q receiver Of thu prorcrtv
of the defendant curporati9 VA nre-
sonfod ia the Il1o. David Il. BRYANT.
| WI ch poti.i0n 4. arird up1n 50 f,r rs TO
examine u aud orccr IL filed: from VII. Ii
"" con 'ule that he 'ict.~miuci that q.
ALLEGATIONS OF ne petition were sunici ut
to show lrimn facir case f,i the ir-
poini,ncnt Of reooiv.r Tbs action n
h" judge was sun cion'. If followed NJ
m dno time by the nproinmeni OF a re-
criNer 10 fiN the jurisdiction Of his rnurt
upon all 'hc rrouerty of the dct.nilan
IN hat sui as 10 liens thercnf,cr At
tempted 10 he acqusol through thu pro-
a. ~ rfr ,s ~,
stances. mo aprplntmrn f tho rae,'vr
WHEN made would relate back o lho fllnc
of ;he tn
1t is f7rguraie for the country for tre
intorsi OF uubli7 justice md % tho credit
Of the judiciary. hoih tie Ezra. and state
that, wi'h few exceptions, INC courts. 10 h
Federal and sine have hocn Hbe'nl and
lust in dc'"m.nlng questions VII ch in
volvc tho Fuhio"i of FUR siicion, : lorr
as ;hsr lr,hnnals maufe~' . spirit OF
ucnity ana fairness there onn m 70
serlous lis urhanrc of thu, harmony
which sh1uh prevail hHtwarn hrs, INFO
rdadent nni co-ortinaic jurisdiction mi
races r'iwn"u iparshais ani rtor.1s
tkely to result IN uuseeinlv controversies
he ,Toen the State and l'oanral eofrs
cour, may feel tina, !,S Nris'rrJi Aas
heen invaded H. WRONG VIII mo r.rhtei
ia q su,rii of FARM es and jus lie -
The first quariion we Euiiror ;hat fhe
'uNl- We nlnde % 'a' @hruis,e' ~
the tiule Of tho -orVi-s - writ shculi
he held not T. ic subject % garhshmen.
W. lO rni NOM t. say lnat y, no inter
ar nc.ion taiter bring hc Wlost1u be-
f.,rs $50 friai cour' ,na e., Md rendered
i+1~.n an'sf SO aarnishoc. IN NJ
-,ch Judgment would h. VOID SO es II
nf'ord no lfat' IN 70 'hr iIni h'e
vl md pat9 ti'. same, IN ''o no
, that upon the inicrVon.ioss ei III rr Ter
I II wa the duty 0f 10 county u. - or