Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v. State

Decision Date09 May 1896
Citation36 S.W. 819
PartiesHOUSTON & T. C. RY. CO. et al. v. STATE.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Appeal from district court, Nolan county; William Kennedy, Judge.

Action by the state of Texas against the Houston & Texas Central Railway Company and others for the recovery of land. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

The following are the additional conclusions of fact adopted by the court of civil appeals from appellants' motion for additional findings:

"(1) That the appellants had a file made upon said land as follows:

"`State of Texas, County of Bexar. To the Surveyor of Bexar District: By virtue of futy [forty?] certificates issued to the Houston and Texas Central Railway Company by the commissioner of the general land office on the first day of July, A. D. 1872, numbered from 40/4997 to 40/5036, inclusive, I hereby file upon the following vacant land in your land district, to wit: On the waters of the Colorados and Clear Fork of the Brazos, in Taylor county; beginning at the S. E. corner of John Trussells' ½ league, near the Clear Fork of the Brazos, and on the line of Travis district; thence west to Trussells' S. W. corner; thence northerly, with his line, passing his N. W. corner, and continuing to the Clear Fork; thence, with the Clear Fork and the line of Young district, to the W. line of the county; thence south to or opposite to the M. C. Lunicki survey; thence eastward, to and with Lunicki, to or Martinez's N. E. corner; thence S. E. with Martinez's, C. Colenck, Ed Taylor, and James Jeffries E. lines, to David Harrison; thence north, east, and northwest, with the lines of Harrison, E. Isias, N. Gwatney, Thos. Linsey, W. F. Smith, T. Berwer, and W. S. Henry, to the N. E. corner of said Henry's league; thence S. E. and S. W., with Henry, Jas. Walker, Thos. Linsey, and Elisch Isias, to the L. Forsyth league, and, with its N. and N. E. line, to the line of the county; thence E., with county line of Taylor and Runnels, to the John Forbes survey; thence north, with Forbes, C. M. Jackson, W. F. Sparks, Robt. Triplett, and John Kincaide, to N. W. corner of the latter; thence east, with Kincaide and Triplett, to Smith league, and, with its W. and N. lines, to the N. E. corner on the line between Bexar and Travis district; thence N. W., with said line, to the beginning. Robt. M. Elgin, Land Agent H. & T. C. Railway.

"`All valid subsisting entries and surveys are hereby excluded from the above, as well as the rocky summits of mountains in vicinity of Mountains Pass. Robt. M. Elgin, Land Agt.

"`Came to hand, and filed in my office, at 11 o'clock a. m., this 28th day of July, A. D. 1872, in File Book No. 4, page 131. C. Harnett, D. L. B. D., by L. C. Navarro, Dep.

"`I, W. M. Locke, district surveyor Bexar district, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the original, on record in my office, in File Book No. 4, pages 130 and 131. Given under my hand, at San Antonio, this the 23rd day of October, A. D. 1890. W. M. Locke, District Surveyor Bexar District.

"`General Land Office, Austin, Texas, March 24th, 1892. I, W. L. McGaughey, commissioner of the general land office of the state of Texas, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the original, with indorsements thereon, now on file in this office. In testimony whereof, I hereunto set my hand, and affix the impress of the seal of said office, the date last above written. [Seal.] W. L. McGaughey, Com'r G. L. L. D. Office.'

"Also the map showing file delineated thereon.

"(2) That the parties agreed `that all special acts of the legislature of the state of Texas, all railroad charters and amendments thereto, bearing upon the subject-matter of this litigation, may be considered in evidence without introducing same.'

"(3) That the land scrip certificates included in the suit, and the land located by virtue thereof, were issued for that portion of the road constructed between Brenham and Austin.

"(4) Also show the roads that got lands and sidings under the construction of the executive department.

"(5) That the lands were continued in the hands of Chas. Dillingham, receiver, first by order of the United States circuit court, and then further continued in his possession by an order of Associate Justice Lamar as follows: `United States Circuit Court, Eastern District of Texas. Stephen W. Carey et al., Appellants, vs. The Houston & Texas Central Railway Company et al., Appellees. It appearing to my satisfaction from the annexed petition and affidavit that the appellants have taken and perfected appeals to the supreme court of the United States and the circuit court of appeals from the decree entered herein on the 16th day of November, 1892, which appeals are taken in good faith, and that no injury can accrue to the appellees by a stay of proceedings as herein directed, pending the hearing and decision of the said appeals, now, therefore, on motion of R. H. Landale, solicitor for complainants, it is ordered that pending the hearing and decision of the said appeals taken by the complainants to the supreme court of the United States and the circuit court of appeals from the decree entered herein on the 16th day of November, 1892, Charles Dillingham, the receiver of the Houston and Texas Central Railway, be, and he is hereby, stayed from surrendering or delivering possession of the Houston and Texas Central Railway, or any of the line of railway formerly operated by the Houston and Texas Central Railway Company, and of which he is now possessed as receiver, and from permitting the said railways to be operated by any corporation or person other than himself, with liberty to the receiver, the appellees, or any of them, to apply to me to vacate the said stay, if the said appellant fail to prosecute the said appeals with due diligence. Dated, Washington, December 9th, 1892. L. Q. C. Lamar, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • February 24, 1901
    ...of law was expressed as to the validity of the locations. On appeal to this court the judgment of the district court was affirmed (36 S. W. 819) solely upon the ground that the certificates were void; and, on application to our supreme court, writ of error was denied solely upon the same gr......
  • Houston Ry Co v. State of Texas
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • April 25, 1898
    ...from Brenham to Austin. The district court gave judgment in favor of the state, which was affirmed by the court of civil appeals. 36 S. W. 819. Application was made to the supreme court of the state for a writ of error, which was denied. 40 S. W. 402. This writ of error was then The Galvest......
  • Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • April 15, 1897
    ...against the Houston & Texas Central Railway Company and others. Judgment for plaintiff. From a judgment of the court of civil appeals (36 S. W. 819) affirming such judgment, defendants apply for writ of error. T. D. Cobbs and Baker, Botts, Baker & Lovett, for applicants. BROWN, J. The attor......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT