The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-11-02

/ said railroad company for adings AMI
/ district court In favor Of the state. and
4 upon appeal to the court OF civil appc rs
/ armed IA part ann reversed aud rpnnudrd
/ In part Applications We're then made fpt
/ writ Of eIgor 20 the supreme court q the
| state. which was granted February s.
/ 1900. The case was submitted IA the s1-
preme court on brief and ogal argument
the Judgment u the court Of civil appeal
1 was affirmed. and cause remanded TO tag
| district court, ana the case Is now pend
| Ing IN the district court and is now being
No. $50 The State Of Texas vs. lIoustoa
! and Texas Central Railroad Company
| This SUIT is similar in nature to tnG Pre-
! cedlng one, and was Instituted Ia the dis
trict court OF Wichita county N 1892 e
1892 the case was removed 10 the circuit
court of the United states fer the Nortu
tion Of this department remauded said
csse to the district court The case WAS
then, upon agreement Of parties, trans trans
ty. where e is nov pending. having been
| continued from term 20 term, by agree
mont, awaiting the decision Of nc supge ne
this case Involving, 20 a large extent the
same points involved ~ tint case. ,,,.
ana Texas Central Railroad Company and
George Z. Downs; This IS companion
case to the one y nboye % IeSoyf yer lVSo1l
tics The case Is now pending IN the dis
trict court OF Travis county. and Is In the
same condition as the one above, having
been continued by agreemtnt
The state Of Texas vs.. Houston ani
Texas Central Railroad Compsny This
suit was Instituted IN December, 1894 IN
the district court OF Travis county to re.
cover from the defendant the special sch ool
fund loaned under the act of 1886 to the
Houston and Texas Central and washing.
ton County Railroad computes, Upon q
trial Of the case In thg district go9T,,
State February. iS96, for s6T8 100. with
foreclosure. Of lien upon the railroad o.
irmed by the court OF civil appeals sni
the supreme court. Writ 81 error was sued
ont to the, supreme court 81 the Unite |
states ana the case submitted In that
, court December IA, 1899. BY which court
It was reversed and remanded to the court
pa S ~ tSe distrst court Of TrivIs
county, IN accordance With the mandate
OF the supreme court
ION OF the supreme court Of the United
, states, the case could not be successfully
I, prosecuted Il was. on June. u, 1902, dis
\ missed at the cost OF tho state.
No lo2 The State of Texas VS. Calves
ton, harrisburg aud San Antonio Railroad
! the one above, brought TO recover S4iI061,
In which the same action was taken ANA
Of which zen the same dis9oSrton was m9df
, | and Texas Central Railroad Company; This
l was suit Instituted in the district court
: Of Nolan county 70 recover 1920 acres OF
E land. In the district court Judgment was
rendered IN favor OF the state for all of
the land sued for, which Judgment was
Upon writ Of error to the supreme court
S Of the United states, and submission there
, under, the judgments Of the state courts
We're reversed and the cause rcmanded for
= further proceedings. Thereupon defendant
Z filed a motion in the court Of civil appeal'
g to have Judgment entered In Its favor
Q which was overruled by the court and the
Z cause remanded to the district court,
where Il Wfss P" pending when assumed
,. Upon further investigation OF the case.
IT was dstcrmired that the state could
u not recover more thar two sections Of III,
Y hind sued for and entertaining this view "
. was agreed that judgment might be cntered
I favor Of the defendant for the balance,
Is fourteen. and such judgment was accord
lie iugly entered.
& No 125 This state OF Texas VS. Austir
Ie and Northwestern Railway Company. This
s. wna suit instituted IN the district court
81 OF Travis county August 20, 1873, to for
b. felt the charter ~ tile defend1nt compan
n for alleged unlawful consolidation With the
h Southern Pacific company OF Kentucky.
IN The case has been continued under th'
IS provisions OF an act Of the rwenty-sey entt
Il Legislature being chapter g special laws
1901, being M act TO authorize the ptr
st chase of thu franchises, etc, OF the de
Texas Central Railroad company, aud pro
l5 vldng for the dismissal Of this case upol
i, the latter company complying with certain
No. Iii. Tho State of Texas VS., Gree
10 County ct nj. This was suit original
~ county june 20. 1898, to recover 1896
~ acres Of land IN Cochran and Hockey
10 couutlea granted to Greer county for tn
se benefit Of its public schools under the gen
an era law when said county was considere'
,s part OF the State of Texas The cas-
was transferred TO tho district court 0
- Travis county by agreement, and In tina
,e court tried December rs, 1900, after sever
~ ance OF the motion Of the defendants, an
W. on April 20, 1901, Judgment was rcudorc
In hot nuningr Greer county Ia
"a T4S4 acres and against the heirs and eXecu
"a. tors Of William Cameron deceased 10
Of ciyii appeals by the Inter defendant
tho Judgment Of ghe district court wa
affirmed. Application being made to Oh
OF supreme court for writ Of error, which wa
es granted, the case was submitted In thf
court and on May -, 1902, the Judgment
M Of this conrt OF civil appeals and 'listt.
as dered In favor OF defendants, tho heirs
"a William Cameron, or the land claimed b
o7 Writ OF error has been sued out by Il
96 defendant Greer county, aud upon thi
10 writ Of cttor thr case is now pending
81 the court OF civil appeals
,2j Under an act of congress OF the Unite
64 States, passed Jnn1ary -. 1901, providir
20 for an adjustment O. the accounts b
ie6 States on account Of Greer county, th
TS claim Of the state Was presented to Il
l2l secretary. of interior. In accordance Wit
-, e eh an item Of si5,714. being the vail
~ Of the land thus lost 10 the state by q
an Judgment In favor Of the heirs OF Camera
In this case, This claim has been duly a
/, proved by the secretary. Of interior y
report TO congress, and u Is expected tn
/ congress- VIII at lta next session pass Il
necessary appropriation bin for its pa!
re. ment The same course VIII be take
M sbould the state lose the balance OF Il
he land upon the appeal by Greer county.
The remainder 81 the suits referred 70
at. General Bell IN his report are for small
bodies OF public lands. from single sc
l. tons Of $40 acres M 70 25,oo0. pendii
against private individuals, manufacture
l. companies cattle companies and sund
other concerns having their habitat al
ri headquarters In Texas.
MONEY COLLECTED.
ur The report contains an itemlzed stat
). ment Of money collected from mlscelaneo
sources be the attorney generals Or
I decessor for the time sDeelhed, amonu
IL ing la S2S02 81. Total collected from bat
lease Of school lands S405877
OF money colsated and paid into Il
r state treasury from March q. 1901, to A
/ ~ afusaa Ia Husas