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: 201
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1875.] IKEN & Co. V. ()LEICK. 201
Opinion of the Court.
specific value, irrespective of its uses. It may consist, it is true.
of one or more lots, but unless such lot or lots constitute or
form in fact, part and parcel of the homstead, they are not
'included in the exemption. The word homestead as understood
in popular use, and as defined by standard lexicographers,
conveys the idea of a house and place connected therewith.
It is, says Worcester, "The place of the house; a mansion"lhouse
with the adjoining land." And though it may be,
the adjoining land connected with the mansion-house is not to
be understood, in the constitutional exemption, in its strictly
literal sense, but may include the land which, from its use, as
well as its contiguity, it is to be supposed was intended to be
exempted from the demands of creditors, as part and parcel of
the land connected with and necessary for the use and enjoyment
of the mansion-house; and without which there would
not be an exemption of both, the house and place necessary to
the full measure of the constitutional exemption intended to
be secured for the benefit of the family. But this falls far
short of giving any ivarrant for including in the exemption, as
a part of the urban homestead, lots in no way connected with,
or contributing by their particular use or appropriation, to the
comfort and enjoyment of a mansion-house as a homestead.
The revenue or profit derived from property wherever situated,
may no doubt contribute to the comfort and pleasure of its
possessor; but this by no means authorized the conclusion,
that a lot or lots disconnected from the homestead, are appendages
to it, or contributing by their use to the enjoyment of it
as a residence, or house of the family.
It may also be added, that the homestead exemption, while
designed to secure to the wife and family a home of which they
cannot be deprived by creditors or purchasers from the husband
without the consent of the wife, was not intended to
Operate as a means of fraud upon either creditors or purchasers.
Nor is there aly reasonable danger that it will, if confined
within the limits intended by the constitution. The visible
occupation of the homestead, or mansion-house and land
Here’s what’s next.
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.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/209/: accessed August 21, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .