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: 408
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
408 WooD v. WELDER. [Term of
Opinion of the Court.
Smith v. Power, 23 Texas, 30; Smith v. Power, 14 Texas,
Sixteen years have passed since this court, speaking of this
grant and saying that it was void, adds: " A series of decisions,
" continued almost from the organization of this court down to
"the present time, thus settling the construction of the local
"law, upon which the titles to real property in the oldest and
" -most densely peopled portions of the State so largely depend,
S must be regarded as emphatically the law of the State."
(Smith V. Power, 23 Texas, 32.) We remark of the case of Trevinio
v. Cavasos, that the title in question emanated from the
State of Tamaulipas and may possibly be distinguishable from
similar titles from the State of Coahuila and Texas, so often
pronounced invalid by this court. But at all events we regard
the question as long since finally settled.
We do not think the testimonio was properly recorded so as
to support the five years' limitation. The facts are identical
with those discussed in the case of Lambert v. Wier (27 Texas),
where the opinion is intimated, though no decision was made
on the point, that the record was without authority. It was
said in that case that since the case of Titus v. Kimbro, 18
Texas, the general rule has been acted on, that a testimonio is
not admissible in evidence without proof of its execution.
In the later case of Hatchett v. Conner, Justice Coke says:
" It is well settled that the execution of a testimonio of title
must be proved before it is admissible in evidence." (30 Tex
as, 108. See also Word v. McKinney, 25 Texas, 258; Paschal
v. Perez, 7 Texas, 338 ; DeLeon v. Whitc, 9 Texas, 600).
We think it would be to depart from. the policy that prompted
these rulings, to hold,that this testimonio was properly recorded
without authentication. The 2d Section of the Act of
January 19th, 1869, authorizing the admission to record of
" copies of all deeds where the originals remain in the public
"archives, and were executed in conformity with the law exist.
"ing at their dates" (Paschal's Digest, Article 4984), was to
some extent discussed in the opinion in Lambert v. Wier,
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/m1/416/: accessed March 23, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .