The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1898-01-08

courts for the large number OF divorces
granted There were six In the Fifty-fifth
civil district court and one In the Eleventh
district. Otherwise the day was unevent-
4 fui, though much business Of general
character was disposed OF, Including u
great many continuances In the civil disc
trict court.
Eleventh civil District Courr.
The following proceedings were yestoi.
day had III the Eleventh civil district court.
Hon. John e. Tod presiding:
J. 4. u. Wilson vs.. Thomas Leighton ct
a.; leave to plaintiff to file first supple
mental petition; Judgment as per decree
on file.
It. j. Kelly vs.. Missouri Kansas and
Texas Railway company. continued gem
orally.
Mutual Building ana Loan association Vs.
John q. Geisbers; continued generally.
E. II. Benefited vs.. San Antonio and
by defendant.
Elizabeth Jainison VS. San antonio and
AraDsds Pass Railway company: continued
by defendant.
Mary Wheeler VS.. John Grumpy ct al;
pauper's oath contest sustained, continued
generally and set for February ", 1888.
II. j. Bcrwind VS.. Mrs Kate Burlington;
continued generally.
A ~ J. Berwinj VIZ. j. Il. Carson at al
contit ucd generally.
Il. j. perwird VS.. City of Houston, con-
tinued generally.
T.. j. Berwind VS., y. w. Brasey,. tvn-
tinued generally.
Il. j Derwind w. e. c. Blake ct al. con
tinued generally.
5i =. J. Berwind vs., j. u. TROLLS; continued
generally
= ], Berwind w. John Ilager,aun; cor
tinuad generally.
II. j. Berwind vs.. j. u. Hamilton; oon-
tinued generally.
u. j. Berwind VS., j. G. Hhtchesoni ouu-
tinued generally.
r. j. Berwind W.. j. G. iIutchesun ct al;
continued generally.
II. j. Berwlnd vs. Lasker and ihwiey,
continued generally.
Il. J. Berwind VS., j. y. Mckee; contlnoel
generally.
Il. j. Berw,nd VS., w. NJ. Reed; continued
generally
o. J.. Berwind VS.. Ella II. sowall con
tin,red generally.
Maud Schubert VS.. William II. Schubert.
Judgment for plaintiff for divorce.
Charles Kosrtze VS.. Louise Schott; jury
and verdict for defendant
Charles Hagan ct Il, vs.. Houston City
street Halfway company; continued gen
orally.
Ben kiam VS.. William II, Turner eol-
tinued generally,
J. A. Cushman. Sr, and wife rs. Houston
Land and Trust company; continued ecu
orally
Addio Ice VS.. Texas and New Orleans
Railroad company; continued gencrallf
j. n McKinnon Vs. San Antonio ana
AIansss Pass railway company; continued
generally.
Firfy-fifth Civil District Court.
Tho following proceedings were yesferhay
had in the Fifty-htth civil district court,
Hon W. II. Wilson presiding:
Sarah Stephens VS.. Joo NJ. stephens: on
the contest of pauper's oath the court on
evidence oyorrules the contest; Judgment
for plaintiff glNnting tho divorce prayed
and awarding the custody OF the two
minor children. Mamie Rosa stephens aud
Burris Monroe stephens TO the plniu.in.
Robert Thomas Ray VS. Eliza Annie Ray;
Judgment for plaintiff for divorce.
I.arkin Cannon VS. Lula Cannon; 1udB-
nont for plaNitifi for divorce; costs against
plaintiff.
Jack Griffin vs.. America Griffin; judy
ment for plaintin for divorce.
Mitchell Thomas Vi. Florence Thomas
Judgment for plantin granting divorce,
George Franklin VS.. Rosa Franklin;
Judgment for plaintiff granting divorce.
T. 4. Burlington VS.. Emma j. Jones ct
al; passed.
l., b. Moody w. Mrs. Irene Whceldou;
John p, Latreyte VS.. Albertine Stier; uu-
der Amusement
william Hartley Vs. Thomas Martin ct
nj; Judgment for plaintin for land sued for
and writ OF possession; fec OF guardian I'D
Mtem fixed Mt $35 and charged ms costs
against plaintiff.
city of Houston VS.. W, j Moore and
William Cole; Judgment by agreement
OF dismissal as to w. j. Moore and dis
missal as TO lot q. block o. Forbnsh add
ton to Houston. as per agreed decree for
this date hled.
Judgment for defendants ms per decree On
file OF this date
NJ. 7. Jones Lumber Company VS.. Texas
City Improvement company; interooutory
Judgment by default against Texas City
Improvement company, the firm of Meyers
4. Bros. and j r. Meyers for SsGi9. 10. inter-
est at 10 per cent from September ., tsN,
and 10 per cent attorneys fees on prin-
cipal and 81 so protest fees; continued by
operation OF law TO complete service on
III. II. Meyers.
Proceedings Probate Court.
The following proceedings were had yes.
terday In the probate court, Hon. w N.
Shaw presiding:
Inventory and appraisement and list Of
claims this day filed. examined approved
and ordered recorded.
Estate OF John Cushing, report OF tenn
porary administrator and supplement
thoreto flcd january q. 1898. examined.
Approved and ordered recorded: l.,mnorary
administration allowed 5000 for his services
And fee Of $3.50 additional for attt ,nty's
fees, Ordered that upon the eniporaIv adj
Administrator turning over The assets OF the
estate 10 the permanent administrator that
\ ~ and his Guretiss will ne reli 4vcl from
all further liability; Michael Meyeis. the
halt brother Of deceased declared to Tie tho