
    AUSTIN v. STATE.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    March 25, 1914.
    Rehearing Denied April 15, 1914.)
    Weapons (§ 7*)— Carrying Weapons — JUSTIFICATION.
    One informed that an indecent proposal had been made to his wife by a third person may not carry a pistol while going to see the third person to demand an explanation of hig conduct, though he is on a lawful mission.
    [Ed. Note. — Eor .other cases, see Weapons, Cent. Dig. § 6; Dec. Dig. § 7.*]
    Appeal from Polk County Court; P. R. Rowe, J udge.
    Jesse Austin was convicted of unlawfully carrying, a pistol, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Holshousen & German, of Divingston, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State. • ■
   HARPER, J.

Appellant was convicted of unlawfully carrying a pistol. He contends that, if in fact he had a pistol on the occasion, he had been informed that George Johnson had made indecent and improper proposals to his (appellant’s) wife, which had been communicated to him, and he had gone to see Johnson to demand an explanation of his conduct.

It may be that appellant’s mission was perfectly legal and lawful, yet if all men were permitted to carry a pistol" when on a lawful mission, this would in effect work a repeal of the statute against carrying pistols, for nearly all men would, nine-tenths of the time, at least, under such construction, be lawfully authorized to carry a pistol. This court has never consented, and we cannot give our consent now, to thus nullify this provision of the Code. The court did not err in refusing to give the special charge presenting this phase of the case.

The evidence supports the verdict, and the judgment is accordingly affirmed.  