Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 534
viii, 704 p. ; 22 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
534 REED v. LUCAS. [Term of
Opinion of the Court.
dined to prosecute such offenses, it was not intended, and it
certainly has not deprived the owner of any right heretofore
existing, to recover his property. We are of opinion, that an
unlawful taking, or an unlawful purchase, cannot divest any
person of property that is his,by its being found in the possession
of a purchaser, or when the real owner has done nothing to
weaken or destroy his right, and we believe the principle will
apply most forcibly in the present case. The plaintiff, by his
own statement, as a witness for himself, admitted he had no
bill of sale for even one of the hundred and ninety-five hides
claimed by defendants as their own, or the property of those
whom they were authorized to represent. Plaintiff could not
tell, or would not give the name of any person who had sold
him any of these hides; he admitted that he knew the brands
on the hides to be the brands of defendants, or the brands of
their principals, as named in their exhibits; that he was not
authorized by any of these owners to purchase. any of these
hides, and that he had been warned by one of the defendants
not to purchase any hides with his brand. The evidence proves
he did purchase after that time hides belonging to the defendant
who had forbidden it; of the hundred and ninety-five
hides taken, over one hundred and seventy were shown to be
the property of defendants, and of witnesses who testified that
they had authorized some one of the defendants to look after
and protect their stock or property from depredations. The
evidence in this case shows that the plaintiff's claim to this
property as a purchaser, rests upon an acquisition of the same
in the face of Article 6568, Paschal's Digest, Act of 22d May,
1871, which prohibits the skinning or taking off "the hide of a
" dead animal without the consent of the owner, and the know"ingly
purchasing the same," and which makes either act an
offense. True, he had possession, but he shows that he obtained
such possession by purchase of what is in substance stolen
property, and with knowledge of the brands being those of
the defendants, or those represented by them, the prohibition
against his purchasing hide with defendant's brand upon the
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/542/: accessed May 2, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; .