
    WYNNE et al. v. CITY OF HOUSTON.
    (No. 14458.)
    (Supreme Court of Texas.
    Feb. 10, 1926.)
    Eminent domain <&wkey;>l — Restrictive covenants in dedication of addition, and in deeds, could not affect municipality’s right of condemnation for fire protection.
    Restrictive covenants in dedication of an addition to a city, and in deeds thereto, could not limit or affect police power of state, acting through city, to condemn property for fire protective purposes.
    Application for Writ of Error from Court of Civil Appeals of Eirst Supreme Judicial District.
    . Suit for injunction by John H. Wynne and others against the City of Houston and others. Judgment for plaintiffs was reversed by the Court of Civil Appeals (279 S. W. 916). On application by plaintiffs for writ of error.
    Writ refused.
    Homer Stephenson, of Houston, for applicants.
   PER CURIAM.

In our opinion the covenants in the dedication and in the deeds can-, not be construed as intended to in any wise limit or affect the police power of the state acting through the city. Eor that reason the purchasers of lots acquired no interest not subordinate to the right of condemnation exercised in this case for the protection of the persons and properties of the inhabitants of the city against fire.

The property embraced in the Eastwood addition is necessarily in the city of Houston and subject to the lawful exercise of all governmental power, and no valid contract could be made which would restrict the right on the part of the municipal authorities to exercise the police power of constructing and maifitaining fire stations, and the contracts in this case cannot be properly construed as having the purpose to set aside, nullify, or prevent the exercise of governmental authority.

It follows that the proper judgment was rendered by the Court of Civil Appeals, and the application for writ of error is refused.  