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: 409
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
-1875.] WooD v. WELDER. 409
Opinion of the Court.
where it was said that its " phraseology seemed to indicate
"that it was intended thereby to provide for the record of
" copies of instruments then remaining in the public archives,
"and which should be authenticated by the certificate of the
"officers then in charge of them." The case of Holliday a.
Cromwell (26 Texas, 193) is to the same effect, and also calls
attention to the first section of the same act, which requires the
certificate of "the acknowledgment in proof to be made upon
" such instrument and become a part of the record." In the
face of this requirement, we do not see anything in the mere
lapse of time since the record was made, raising a presumption
that the instrument was properly proven for record.
We regard the question of the effect of Section 43, Article
XII. of the Constitution of the State, declaring the suspension of
statutes of limitation of civil suits from January 28th, 1861,
until the acceptance of the Constitution by the Congress of the
United States, as now too well settled by adjudications of this
court, and as having been too long acted on, to be now disturbed.
(Bender iv. Crawford, 33 Texas, 745; Moseley v. Lee, 37 Texas,
480; Bentinck v. Franklin, 38 Texas 458.)
We see no such manifest error in the decisions referred to, as
would justify us in reopening the question of either the construction
or validity of that section of the Constitution. If
there is anything in the Constitution of the United States that
sustains the people of a State in their sovereign capacity from
declaring the effect of a state of war, in suspending the statutes
of limitation, it has not yet been so adjudicated, so far as we are
advised, by the courts of the United States, nor has it yet been
made to appear to our satisfaction.
The finding of the jury cannot be supported under the limitation
of ten years. According to defendant's own statements
on the stand, his possession began in February or June, 1852.
Less than ten years had elapsed, when, on 'January 28, 1861,
the suspension of statutes of limitation took effect.
We see no error in the exclusion of plaintiff's evidence of
title to the two three hundred and twenty acres patented to
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/m1/417/: accessed April 22, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .