The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1898-02-24
) FATE WITH JURY.
..t n the Case Mas Finished
|, Ysste rday Morning. VI
SCOTT WAS FOUND GUILTY,
4. A.sesscd MT Five Years in
: s,stc Reformntory-Deed
from MIR. Hermann.

.rument in the case OF Franz
..rred with uxoricide, was finishet
!, morning, and at noon the jury
..,sed and retired. No agreement
!, arrived at when the court ad.
last night and the Jury was
AZ for the night.
.nernoon session of the court Vas
! by the hearing of the evidence
,sse OF James Scott, charged with
Scott is a colored boy about u
!, age, and is accused OF killing
~ another negro, near the Santa
4 on the Goth of last January. .'be
i but little time after the ease Was
,spm in rendering verdict of gull
eualty of the prisoner was assess
fiye-years' sentence in the State
atcry.
,wy In the case of j. NJ. Perry ct
usrianna Weeden brought in a YER
!, the defendant. This case has
More the Eleventh civil district
n four days past.
! Office of the county clerk deed
ring from George II. Hermann TO
ounty block POS, south side, was
This is the property donated by Mr..
nm TO be used as site for a county
n according to the terms arranged
meeting of the county cotnnia-
last week.
ny.Fiftb civil District Court.
following proceedings were had IN
khy.fifth civil district court yester-
|udee W. II. Wilson presiding:
Storrie VS.. Josie E. Bell ct al :,
"a withdraw demand for jury aud
Ne BY agreement.
Ramsey Manufacturing company
| c. johnson ct al; the order hereto
rade giving leave to Fl. b. Rice TO
me is vacated; Judgment that plain
',ke nothing by their suit, and judg-
| that A. C. Johnson recover the land
HI on his plea in reconvention, and
{uts be adjudged against plaintiffs.
Peruvian ct al VS.. Robert Lock
| % trial.
I'm. Eyres & Co. VS.. Houston and
| Central Railway company, contin-
tserally.
z Bodenheimer vs.. W. w. Wilson ct
Etinued generally.
Lanier. assignee. vs. j. Nj. Faehr-
|nntinued generally.
ID. coghlan VS.. Valley Pugh ct al;
\ is waived by agreement and the
Fubmitted to the court; judgment en-
lis per decree on file.
|Keegan VS.. w. S. Crenshaw: leave TO
|fs. Nellie Hoval and husband to
kond supplemental petition: on trial.
A Peterson VS.. San Antonio and
is Pass Railway Company; motion for
Erial granted,
h Oates VS.. g. Hardcastle; continued
keement.
n Converse VS.. A. C. Allen ct al;
kred by agreement.
b Moore VS.. z. S. Artusy; continued
(feement.
i. o'Connor vs NJ. Mobiles; continued
Feement
IN. Colby VS.. @. A. Shepherd ct al;
fued generally
i. Moody VS.. City of Houston: settled
dismissed at defendants cost.
BE Chambers VS.. Isaac Milligan; con-
generally by agreement.
CASES SET.
lowing Is a list of cases set by the
for the first and second jury weeks
March term. The two-day rule does
|pply to these cases. They will be tried
\ order in which set;
MONDAY, MARCH IA.
Peterson VS.. San Antonio and Aran-
fss Railway Company.
pr Kessler VS.. Buck Grimes ct az.
p { Kuhlman VS.. Robert l.. Ward
TUESDAY, MARCH IS.
shapleigh Hardware Company vs.
~ Eyres & Co.
HumphreviIle VS.. Houston Ice and
Pig Company.
FL Thayer VS.. W. G. IIeintz.
WEDNESDAY,, MARCH 16.
Fsaore Keller VS.. l.. j. Smith.
" Breeding VS.. Houston Electric
Railway Company.
THURSDAY, MARCH II.
PIES schulze VS.. Bonncll. Matthews
Ptdlng ct al
secarty VS.. T. j. Collins ct al.
FRIDAY. MARCH is.
! Boyles VS.. a. H. Hitchler ct al.
SATURDAY, MARCH 10,
y Brooking VS.. San Antonio and
FL Pass Railway Company.
seAard's Troy Laundry vs.. Gerson
| MONDAY, MARCH 81.
Ilss Henry VS.. Texas and New Or
railroad Company.
L. d, Parker 70. Texas and New
4 Railroad Comn,n,.
S0l Iexsa VS.. Estate of Hammeridge.
TUESDAY, MARCH %.
|Vrow VS.. Houston Ice and Brewing
n house VS.. Ed Banks ct al.
II hinton et al VS.. International and
N0ftiern Railroad Company.
MEDNEsDAY. MARCH %.
q nifsch VS.. Il. - Stuart.
Y. Cantreli vs.. Missouri. Kansas
10 hallway Company.
thursday. MARCH "a.
& - w. " San Antonio and Arkansas Pass
" COMPANY.
|'m II. B. Rice ct al.
FRIDAY. MARCH 25.
~. Y. Missouri, Kansas and Texas.
F~k VS.. Ford.
SATURDAY, MARCH &c.
I s ,.,l vs., Electric Light Company.
flowing rules iiave been pro-
81 " the court. effective March 7:
II ease Is called. either for trial
suy call of the docket, and there
4 g s;sA ance for the plaintiff, the case
IA sI.ssed for want OF prosecution,
res,.M DC strictly enforced.
q ~ with the first day of the March
4. ~ flfty-fifth district court cases
y uocket mora than two vaars old