Springfield-Greene
County LibraryJanuary Term 1866
Book G
p 563.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Grand Larceny
Jordan Allen Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes on behalf of the State and also the Defendant, Jordan Allen, in person and by attorney and being arraigned before the Court and the Indictment read to him in Open Court, he, the said Jordan Allen, did then and there for a plea say he was guilty in manner and form as charged in the Bill of Indictment, wherefore the Court doth find that the said Defendant, Jordan Allen, is guilty and doth assess as a punishment on said Defendant imprisonment in the Penetentiary of the State of Missouri for the period of two years and that the Sheriff of Greene County without delay convey him, the said Jordan Allen, to the State Penetentiary at Jefferson City, Missouri, and deliver him to the Keeper thereof to be by him confined as aforesaid and that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Defendant, Jordan Allen, her costs in this behalf laid out and expended and that she have an execution therefor.
p 564.
Martin Brashears Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
C.W. Warren Defendant
Now at this day it is ordered by the Court that this cause be dismissed by agreement of the parties and it is further ordered by the Court that the Defendant pay all costs in this cause up to the time of tendering the money in Court and that the Plaintiff pay all costs of this suit from and after that date.
Jacob Painter Plaintiff
vs Judgment Final
Robert Adams & Greene Austin Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiffs by their attorney and this cause coming on to be heard and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court setting as a Jury from an examination of the same, that the Defendants had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present term of this Court by delivering to them a true copy of the Writ and a copy of the Original Petition in this cause as appears from return of the Sheriff to the Writ of Summons issued in said cause and the Court further find from and examination of the same that said cause of action is founded on an instrument of writing signed by said Defendants for the direct payment of money whereby said Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiffs in the sum of $250 debt and the further sum of $180.02 for damages and costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and said Defendants failing to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendants their said debt , damage and costs and that they have an execution therefor.
p 564/565.
James Ivans Plaintiff
vs Interlocutory Judgment
D.D. Berry & B.R. Cannefax Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by publication in the Springfield Journal, a weekly newspaper printed and published in Springfield in said County and State aforesaid at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present term of this Court by dates of the October 30, November 6,13,20 1865 and it further appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that a Writ of Attachment (continued)
64
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
January Term 1866
p 546/565 (cont.)
was issued by the Clerk of the Greene Circuit Court on the 16th day of August 1865, which said Writ of Attachment was, but the Sheriff of Greene County on the 16th day of August 1865, levied upon the following real estate of the said Benjamin R. Cannefax, to wit: the W 1/2 Lot 1, NE fcl 1/4 and E 1/2 Lot 1 Nwfcl 1/4 and N 1/2 SW 1/4 all in Section 3 Township 28 Range 22, and also the undivided interest of Dorsey D. Berry, Jr., of, in and to the following real estate, to wit: SW 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 34 Township 28 Range 22. W 1/2 SE 1/4 Section 7 Township 29 Range 22 and E 1/2 SE 1/4 Section 7 Township 30 Range 22, N 1/2 Section 18 Township 29 Range 22 and E 1/2 NE 1/4 and E 1/2 SE 1/4 Section 18 Township 30 Range 22, W 1/2 SW 1/4 Section 17 Township 29 Range 23 and NW 1/4 and E 1/2 SW 1/4 Section 23 Township 30 Range 23 and SW 1/4 Section 24 Township 34 Range 23, W 1/2 NE 1/4 Section 13 Township 29 Range 22 and NE 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 24 Township 30 Range 23 and N 1/2 of E 1/2 NW 1/4 Section 20 Township 29 Range 23 SWfcl 1/4 Section 18 Township 29 Range 21 and S 1/2 SE 1/4 Section 13 Township 29 Range 22 and E 1/2 SW 1/4 Section 13 Township 29 Range 22 and N 1/2 SE 1/4 Section 13 Township 29 Range 22 and SW 1/4 Section 18 Township 29 Range 21 and NW 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 7 Township 29 Range 21 and NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 22 Township 30 Range 21 and NW 1/4 NE 1/4 and E 1/2 NW 1/4 and NE 1/4 pf NE 1/4 Section 23 Township 21 Range 21 and NW 1/4 Section 18 Township 21 and NWfcl 1/4 Section 19 Township 29 Range 21 and S 1/2 Section 14 Township 30 Range 24 and W 1/2 of SW 1/4 Section 13 Township 30 Range 24 and W 1/2 NW 1/4 and W 1/2 SW 1/4 Section 24 Township 30 Range 24 and E 1/2 NW 1/4 Section 25 Township 30 Range 24 N 1/2 Lot 29 Block 9 City of Springfield and E 1/2 Lot 17 and Lot 64 and 6 in Block 9 and 3 acres of Section 23 Township 29 Range 22 adjoining Lots 32,33 Springfield on West Street and strip 40 wide off South side Section 8 Township 29 Range 24 and 1/4 acre in W 1/2 SE 1/4 Section 14 Township 29 Range 22 and said Defendants having failed to plead, answer ordemur to Plaintiff's petition the same is taken as true. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the Plaintiff have judgment interlocutory by default. But it not appearing to the Court what judgment or relief Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants. It is ordered that an inquiry be had at the next term of this Court to ascertain the same to which time this cause is adjourned.
p 565/566.
Joseph E. Winfield Plaintiff
vs Final Judgment
George C. See & George W. Cooper Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and this cause coming on to be heard and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendants had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit at least fifteen days before the first day of the present term of this Court by the Sheriff leaving with him a true copy of the Writ and a True Copy of the Original Petition and the Defendants appearing by their attorneys and filing their answer in this cause the petition of Plaintiff's. Said answer was by the Court stricken out and this action being founded on an instrument of writing signed by Defendants for the direct payment of money whereby the amount thereof is ascertained. The Court doth find from an examination of the same that said Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiff in the sum of $297.23 debt and also the sum of $20.29 damages and his costs of suit in this behalf laid 0ut and expended. It is therefore ordered, considered and adjudged by the Court that the Plaintiff have and recover of and from said Defendants his said debt, damage and costs and that an execution issue therefor.
Rufus A. McClure, John McClure
& Morris M. McClure
vs Sheriff's Deed. S.N. Ingram
Turner Goodall, Thomas D. Wooten
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Sydney N. Ingram for the following lands viz the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of
(continued)
65
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 566.
the NW 1/4 and SE 1/4 of SW 1/4 and SW 1/4 of NW 1/4 and SW 1/4 of SE 1/4 and NW 1/4 SE 1/4 all in Section 36 Township 29 Range 22, also NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Section 28 Township 28 Range 21W sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same for the use and purposes herein contained.
p 567.
Rufus McClure, John McClure
and Morris M. McClure
vs Sheriff's Deed. H.J. Lindenbower
Turner Goodall, Thomas W. Wooten.
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Harrison J. Lindenbower for the following described land, to wit being a part of Lot No thirty seven Block No 9, beginning 18 feet North of the SW corner of said Lot, thence North 18 feet, thence East 40 feet, thence South 18 feet, thence West 40 feet to the beginning, lying and being in Springfield, Greene County, Missouri, sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause, and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein mentioned.
Bank of Missouri
vs Sheriff's Deed, C.A. Haden
Ephraim R. Fulbright
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Charles A. Haden for the following sescribed real estate to wit NW 1/4 of SW 1/4 and SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 Section 16 Township 29 Range 22, sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause, and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
p 567/568.
John L. Holland
vs Sheriff's Deed. Charles W. Scholten
John Robbinson
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Charles W. Scholten for the following described real estate to wit beginning 11 poles East and 2 rods and 4 links South of the NE corner of SE 1/4 Section 23 Township 29 Range 22W, at SE corner of L.W. Scholten's Lot No 8 thence East 5 rods and 12 links, thence North 14 rods and 13 links, thence West 5 rods and 12 links, thence South 14 rods and 13 links to the beginning containing 80 Square Rods, sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause, and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
p 568.
James R. Danforth
vs Sheriff's Deed. T.W. Cecil
N.S. & F.M. Jones
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Thomas W. Cecil for the following described real estate to wit S 1/2 of Lot 5 Block 2 in Kimbrough's Second Addition to the City of Springfield, Greene County, Mo., sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause,
(continued)
66
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 568 (cont)
and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
Reuben A.M. Rose
vs Sheriff's Deed. S.H. Julian
William C.Price
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Stephen H. Julian for the following described real estate, viz Lots No l, 2, 3 & 4 Block No 2 in Price's Addition to the City of Springfield, Greene County, Mo., sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause, and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the Same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
p 568/569.
Sheppard & Kimbrough
vs Sheriff's Deed. H. Sheppard
C.A. Dysart
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Henry Sheppard for the following real estate to wit the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 and the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 Section 32 Township 31 Range 22 sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause, and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
p 569.
Greene County, for use of and
benefit of Township 29 Range 20
vs Sheriff's Deed. Bank Missouri
H.H. Cunningham, J.A. Cunningham
and J.W. McCarty
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to The Bank of Missouri for the following described real estate to wit NE 1/4 of SW 1/4 and SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 of Section 16 and NE 1/4 NE 1/4 and NW 1/4 NE 1/4 and SW 1/4 NE 1/4 and SE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 22 all in Township 29 Range 20W, sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause, and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
Lucy Acock
vs Sheriff's Deed. T.J. Whitlock
Ishmael Lee
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Thomas J. Whitlock for the following described real estate to wit NW 1/4 SE 1/4 and SE 1/4 SW 1/4 all in Section 15 Township 30 and Range 22 W. Sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause, and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
67
GREEN COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 569/570.
Lucinda Boyd
vs Sheriff's Deed L. Boyd
Robert K. Boyd
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to Lucinda Boyd for the following described real estate, to wit: E 1/2 of the NE 1/4 Section 19 Township 30 Range 24, also the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 Section 18 Township 30 Range 24, also the W 1/2 of the SE 1/4 Section 19 Township 30 of Range 24 and the S 1/2 of Lots one and two of the SWfc1 1/4 of Section 19 Township 30 Range 24 Greene County Missouri which was sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
p 570
Robert P. Faulkner
vs Sheriff's Deed, R.P. Faulkner
Peter C. King
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and presents a Sheriff's Deed made by him to R.P. Faulkner the following real estate, to Wit: the undivided 1/2 of lots No two and three and the NWfcl 1/4 of Section 6 Township 29 Range 20W excepting 13 acres off the North part of Lot No three, Greene County, Missouri, sold under and by virtue of an execution in the above entitled cause and the said John A. Patterson acknowledges that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the use and purposes therein contained.
Garroutte, Samuel,
Petition for partition
vs Sheriff's Deed
P.T. Dodds
Now at this day comes Henry Matlock, former Sheriff of Greene County, Missouri, and presents a Deed made by him to P.D. Dodds. The SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 26 Township 28 Range 24 situate in Greene County, sold under and by virtue of an order of the Court for partition in the above entitled cause and the said John A. Patterson, Sheriff, acknowledged that he executed the same for the purpose therein mentioned.
Rest of pages 570 571 572 are Divorces Previously extracted.
p 573.
Joseph Winfield Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
George C. See, George W. Cochrane Defendants
Now at this day this cause coming on to be heard on the demurer of the Plaintiff to the amended answer of the Defendantheretofore filed in this cause, and all and singular the premises therein being by the Court seen and fully understood, said demurer is by the Court sustained and the amended answer of the Defendant stricken out and leave is given said Plaintiff to cancel the stamps attached to the original instrument sued on in this cause.
It is considered by the Court that all suits on bonds, bills and notes pending in this Court be set for the sixth day of the term for trial and that all other cases shall be set on the Civil Docket at the proportionate rate of twenty cases per day.
68
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 573.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment
John W. Faught Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes on behalf of the State of Missouri and also the Defendant by his attorney and leave of the Court the forfeiture heretofore taken in this cause is set aside.
Elisha Headlee, Public Admin. Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
James G. Franklin, J.G. Dollison et al Defendants
Now at this day comes James Dollison, one of the above named Defendants, by his attorney, and leave is given said Defendant to file his additional answer in this cause by the adjourned term of this Court to be held on the fourth Monday in May 1866.
p 574.
M.J. Hubble Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
J. Vaughan, J.B. Winger Defendants
Now at this day comes the Defendants by their attorney, and leave is given said Defendants until the first day of the adjourned term to be holden on the fourt Monday in May 1866 to file an additional answer in this cause by their giving the Plaintiff a true copy of the Same by the first day of March 1866.
M.J. Hubble Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
W.J. McDaniel Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and leave is given said Defendant until the first day of the adjourned term to be holden on the fourth Monday in May 1866 to file additional answer in this cause by giving said Plaintiff a true copy of the sane by the first day in March 1866.
M.J. Hubble Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
James Vaughan, M.M. McClure Defendants
Now at this day comes the Defendants by their attorney and leave is given said Defendants until the first day of the adjourned term to be holden on the fourth Monday in May 1866 to file additional answer in this cause by giving Plaintiff a true copy of the Same by the first day in March 1866.
p 575.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Nolle by Grand Jury
Francis M. Jones Defendant
Now at this day comes the Grand Jury into Court and through their foreman make the following return in this cause, viz: "Not a True Bill". It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the said Francis M. Jones and F.W. Scholten, William L. Mack and Samuel Thorpe be and they are hereby discharged from their said recognizance in this cause and that said Defendant, F.M. Jones, be discharged hereof and go hence without day, and that a Fee Bill issue against the State for the costs in this cause.
69
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 575.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Recognizance of Witnesses
John W. Faught Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State and T.B. Holland and D.P. Farris who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand indebted to the State of Missouri in the sum of $50 each to be levied of their goods and chattels, lands and tenements to be void on condition that they be and appear before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Christian County in the State of Missouri on the second Monday in March 1866 at the Court House in the town of Ozark, Christian County, Missouri, and then and there testify in the above entitled cause on the part of the State of Missouri and not to depart said Court without leave, then this to be void, else to remain in full force and virtue in Law.
p 576.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Recognizance
Meredith Hughes Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the Defendant Meredith Hughes as principal and F.E. Waterson and M.H. Mack as his securities who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand indebted to the State of Missouri in the sum of $800 to be levied of their goods and chattels, lands and tenements to be void on condition that the said Meredith Hughes makes his appearance before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Greene County at the July Term thereof A.D. 1866 at the Court House in Springfield, Greene County, Missouri on the first day of said Term and answer to said
Indictment, otherwise this recognizance to be and remain in full force and virtue in Law.
p 576/577.
A. Hollinsworth Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
F. Lotspeich, A. Cotten Defendants
Now at this day A. Cotten, one of the Defendants in the above entitled cause by his attorney and on his application leave is granted said Defendant to file his amended answer in this cause until the first day of adjourned term to be holden on the fourth Monday in May A.D. 1866.
p 577.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Plea, Guilty.
D.G. Hart Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State and also the Defendant by attorney who for a plea says he is guilty as charged in the Bill of Indictment, whereupon the Court doth assess as a fine upon said Defendant the sun of one dollar for the commission of the offense, and it is further appearing to the Court that the person of the Defendant, D.G. Hart, was not present and in Court subject to the order of this Court. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the securities of said Defendant, D.G. Hart, A.C.C. McElhannon, Charles P. Clarke and J.H. Jenkins pay said fine and costs of this suit and that an execution issue for the same.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Recognizance
John Rube Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State and John Rube
(continued)
70
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 577 (cont)
as principal and William J. Teed and George Wiley as his Securities, who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand indebted unto the State of Missouri in the sum of $500 to be levied of their goods and chattels, lands and tenements, to be void on condition that the said John Rube who stands indicted before the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri for Grand Larceny be and makes his personal appearance before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri, at the Court House in Springfield, Missouri, on the second Monday in July 1866 and answer to said Indictment and not depart said. Court without leave then this recognizance to be void.
p 578.
Smith and McCullah admins
John Smith, deceased Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Eli S. Parris, et al Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiffs by their attorney and on the application of the Plaintiffs an alias Writ is ordered to issue in this cause for Defendants to the Sheriff of Lawrence County, Missouri, returnable at the July Term 1866 of this Court.
Martin Brashears Plaintiff
vs Acknowledgment Deed
C.W. Warren Defendant
Now at this day comes Martin J. Brashears and his wife Louisa Brashears into Open Court and acknowledge the execution and delivery of a Deed to Cyrenius W. Warren for the following described real estate to wit: NW 1/4 of SW 1/4 of Section 22 Township 29 Range 21, also the NE 1/4 of SW 1/4 of Section 22 Township 29, the said Defendant C.W. Warren having paid the money on the same into Court, and the said Louisa Brashears acknowledges that she relinquishes her dower in the real estate therein mentioned freely and without compulsion or undue influence of her said husband.
p 579.
F.W. Sholten Plaintiff
vs Interlocutory Judgment
Jacob Shultz, et al Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by publication in the Springfield Journal, a weekly newspaper published in said County for eight weeks successively the last insertion thereof being at least four weeks before the commencement of the present term of this Court and the said Defendants having failed to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition the same is taken as true. It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed by the Court that the said Plaintiff have Judgment Interlocutory in this cause but it not appearing to the Court what judgment decree or other relief said Plaintiff is entitled to. It is therefore considered by the Court that an inquiry be had at the next term of this Court to ascertain the same, until which time this cause is continued.
p 579/580.
Warren G. Graves Plaintiff
vs Interlocutory Judgment
William C. Price Defendant
Now at this time comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the said Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by publication in the Missouri Weekly Patriot, a weekly newspaper published in Greene County, Missouri for eight weeks successively, the last insertion thereof being at least
(continued)
71
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 579/580 (cont)
four weeks before the commencement of the present Term of this Court and it further appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that on the 25th day of May 1865, a Writ of Attachment was issued from the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Greene County on the 26th day of May 1865 levied upon the following real estate of the Defendant, viz Lot No 1,2,3,4 in Block No I and Lots No 1,2,3,4, in Block No 2, also lots 1,2,3,4 in Block No 3, also Lots 1,2,3,41 in Block 4 in Price's Addition to the City of Springfield Greene County, Missouri, also all of said Price's interest in Lot 62, Block 18, in the City of Springfield, Missouri, and said Defendant having failed to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition, the same is taken as true. It is therefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiff have a Judgment Interlocutory by default in this cause, but it not appearing to the Court what Judgment or other relief said Plaintiff is entitled to recover of and from said Defendant. It is therefore ordered by the Court that an inquiry be had at the next term of this Court to ascertain the same and that this cause be continued until the July Term A.D. 1866 of this Court.
p 580/581.
Denny Turner & Nathaniel Turner Plaintiffs
vs Interlocutory Judgment
Thomas E. Paul, Pub. Admin of
Webster County, having in charge
the estate of Thomas Compton, Deceased
and John L. McCracken Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiffs by their attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendants had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit as appears from the Sheriff's return to the Writs of Summons by reading Said Writs of Summons to and in the hearing of said Defendants and leaving a true copy of the original petition with said Defendants at least 15 days before the commencement of the present term of this Court and said Defendants having failed to plead, answer or demur to the Petition of the Plaintiff. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiffs have an Interlocutory Judgment by default in this cause but it not appearing to the Court what Judgment or other relief said Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants. It is therefore ordered by the Court that an inquiry be had at the July Term 1866 of this Court to ascertain the same and that this cause be continued until said term of this Court.
p 581.
Joseph Wade Plaintiff
vs Order of Publication
Elisha Davis & W.W. Carpenter Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff in the above entitled cause by his attorney before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri, and files his petition and affidavit stating among other things that the above named Defendants, E.W. Davis and W.W. Carpenter, are not residents of this State. It is therefore ordered by the Court that publication be made, notifying said Defendants that an action has been commenced against them by petition and publication in the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri, founded on a claim for damages for the wrongful and unlawful taking and detention of the property of Plaintiff and the wrongful and unlawful imprisonment of said Plaintiff, whereby said Plaintiff says he is damaged to the amount of five thousand dollars and that said Defendants, E.W. Davis and W.W. Carpenter, be and appear at the Court House in Springfield, Greene County, Missouri at the next term of this Court and on the first day of said term to be holden on the second Monday in July 1866 and on or before the third day of said term if the same shall so long continue and if not then before the end of the term, and plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's Petition, the Same will be taken
(continued)
72
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 581 (continued)
as confessed and a Judgment rendered against them and their property to satisfy the same. And it is further ordered by the Court that a copy hereof be published in the Weekly Springfield Journal, a newspaper published in said County for four weeks successively the last insertion thereof to be at least four weeks before the commencement of the next term of this Court.
p 582.
Ordered by the Court that the examination of James Thompson as an applicant for admission to the Bar as an Attorney be continued until the adjourned term may 4th Monday 1866 or some time during vacation.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Recognizance
Pelt A. Craft Defendant
Now at this day comes the Grand Jury into Court and their foreman makes the following return in this cause, to wit: "Not a True Bill." Whereupon it is ordered by the Court that said Defendants be discharged hereof and go hence without day from further answering in this cause and that the said Defendants have and recover of and from the prosecutors, Martin and Martha Kirk, their costs of suit in this behalf and that they have an execution therefor.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Discharged From Custody
John Mills Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and files his petition showing that he is in the custody of the Sheriff of Greene County, Missouri, for nonpayment of fines and costs in the above entitled cause and prays to be permitted to take the benefit of an Act For the Relief of Insolvent Persons Confined on Criminal Process, whereupon the Court doth adjudge consider and decree upon an examination of the petition of said Defendant that he be discharged from any further custody or confinement of the Sheriff in consequence of the judgmentheretofore rendered against him in the above entitled cause and that he be discharged from arrest in this cause and go hence without day.
Now at this day comes Charles Howicke and by leave of the Court files his petition praying that he be made a naturalized citizen of the United States all and singular the Premises being seen and heard and fully understood by the Court, the Court doth find that the said Charles Howicke is a native of _____, that he has been a resident of the United States for nine years last past. The Court doth further find that the said Charles Howicke has been for one year and eight months in the Military Service of the United States and has an honorable discharge therefrom. It is therefore decreed Ordered and adjudged by the Court that an order of naturalization be issued to the said Charles Howicke and that upon his taking the Oath prescribed by Act of Congress in such cases he be admitted to all the rights and privileges of a Citizen of the United States.
p. 583
Now at this day comes Frederick Johnson and by leave of the Court files his petition praying that he be made a naturalized citizen of the United States all and singular the presents being seen heard and fully understood by the Court. The Court doth find that the said Frederick Johnson is a native of _____, that he has been a resident of the United States for nine years and of the State of Missouri for eight years last past
The Court doth further find that the said Frederick Johnson has been for three years in the Military Service of the United States and has an Honorable Discharge therefrom. It is therefore decreed, ordered and adjudged by the Court that an order of Naturalization be issued to the said Frederick Johnson and that upon his taking the oath prescribed by
(continued)
73
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 583. (continued)
Act of Congress in such cases he be admitted to all the rights and privileges of a Citizen of the United States.
p 584.
James S. Barrett Plaintiff
vs
J.J. Baker and William Baker Defendants
Now at this day comes the said Plaintiff and by leave of the Court dismisses this cause as to William Baker, one of the Defendants.
p 585.
James Barrett Plaintiff
vs Final Judgment
Jefferson J. Baker Defendant
Now at this day comes the said Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by reading to him a true copy of the Writ and delivering to the said Defendant a Certified Copy of the Original Petition at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present term of this Court and the same being submitted to the Court, the Court sitting as a Jury doth find from an examination of the Law that said Defendant is indebted to the said Plaintiff on an instrument of writing for the direct payment of money in the sum of $271.80 for his debt and $135.31 for his damages for the detention thereof and his costs in this behalf expended. It is therefore decreed and ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said
Defendant his said debt, damages and costs to be levied of his goods and chattels, lands and tenements and that execution issue therefor.
p 585/586.
David N. Dryden, public admin of
Christian County, Mo., having in charge
the estate of James Cook, Sr., deceased Plaintiff
vs Final Judgment
James J. Vaughan & L. Payne Defendants
Now at this day comes the said Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendants have been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by delivery to the said L. Payne, Defendant first served, a True Copy of the Writ and also a Certified Copy of the Original Petition at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present term of this Court, and the same being submitted to the Court, the Court sitting as a Jury doth find from an examination of the same that the said Defendants are indebted to the said Plaintiff on an instrument in writing for the direct payment of money in the sum of $121.10 for his debt and $82.22 for his damages for the detention thereof and his costs in this behalf expended. It is therefore decreed ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendants his said debt, damages and costs to be levied of his goods and chat
tels, lands and tenements and that execution issue therefor.
p 586/587.
Henry Matlock Plaintiff
against Final Judgment
John W. Payne, Daniel Payne,
William H. Payne & David W. Payne Defendants
Now at this day comes the said Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the said Defendants Daniel Payne, David W. Payne and William H. Payne have been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by reading to them the
(cont.)
74
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G.
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 586/587 (cont.)
Writ and delivering to Daniel Payne, the party first served, a Certified Copy of the Original Petition at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present term of this Court and further that the said Defendant, John W. Payne, was a nonresident of the State of Missouri so that the ordinary process of Law could not be served upon him, and that he had been duly notified of the commencement of the same by publication in the Springfield Journal, a weekly newspaper published in the County of Greene and State of Missouri, for four weeks successively the last insertion to be at least four weeks before the next term of this Court and the same being submitted to the Court, the Court sitting as a Jury doth find from an examination of the Same that the said Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiff on an instrument of writing for the direct payment of money in the sum of $1940 for his debt and $518.50 for his damages for the detention of the same and his costs in this behalf expended. It is therefore decreed, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendants his said debt damages and costs to be levied of their goods and chattels, lands and tenements and that execution issue therefor. It is further considered and adjudged by the Court that H.J. Lindenbower, Esq., attorney for the Plaintiff be allowed the sum of $130 for his professional service in the above entitled cause to be deducted from the total amount of the debt and damages assessed by the Court as aforesaid.
p 587/588/589.
Chapman W. Bodenhamer,
Catherine Goss & her husband, Peter B.
Bodenhamer,Margaret A. Wharton & John S.
Wharton, her husband, Joseph J. Bodenhamer,
Jacob E. Bodenhamer, Martin V.
Bodenhamer, Andrew J. Bodenhamer,
Thomas B. Bodenhamer & Joseph J.
Bodenhamer, admin of the estate
of John A. Bodenhamer, deceased Plaintiffs
against Petition for Partition
William F. Bodenhamer, Nettie Gault
& Walter A.Gault, her husband
Phillip G. Bodenhamer, Christian S. Bodenhamer,
minor heirs of Mary M. Neaves,
Mary M. Bodenhamer, Thomas J. Neaves,
John Neaves, Christian Neaves
& Emma Neaves Defendants
Now at this day come the Plaintiffs in the above entitled cause by their attorney and by leave of the Court file their petition and affidavit stating among other things that Defendants Christian S. Bodenhamer and Thomas J. Neaves are nonresidents of the State of Missouri so that the ordinary process of Law cannot be served upon them. It is therefore ordered by the Court that publication be made notifying said Defendants that an action has been commenced against them by petition in the Circuit Court for Greene County in the State of Missouri for the partition and division of the following real estate situate, lying and being in said County, and known and described as follows, to wit the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section No 13 Township 29 Range 21, containing 40 acres; & the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section No 14 Township 29 Range 20, containing 40 acres; the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 16 Township 29 Range 20, containing 40 acres; the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 Section 14 Township 29 Range 21, containing 40 acres; the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 Section 13 Township 29 Range 21, containing 40 acres; the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 Section 13 Township 29 Range 21, containing 40 acres;
(continued)
75
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 587/588/589 (continued)
the W 1/2 of the SE 1/4 & NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Section 11 & E 1/2 of SW 1/4 & NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 12 Township 29 Range 21, containing 240 acres; the SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 Section 13 Township 29 Range 21, containing 40 acres; the W 1/3 of the NW 1/4 Section 13 and E 1/4 of SW 1/4 Section 13 Township 29 Range 21, containing 160 acres; the SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 Section 16 township 29 Range 20, containing 40 acres; the NE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Section 14 Township 29 Range 21, containing 40 acres; the SE 1/4 of SE 1/4 Section 11 Township 29 Range 21, containing 40 acres; and the NE 1/4 Section 19 Township 28 Range 23, containing 160 acres In all containing 960 acres and that unless said Defendants be and appear at the next term of said Court to be holden at the Court House in the city of Springfield in County and State aforesaid on the ___ Monday in July A.D. 1866 and on or before the __ day there of (if the term shall so long continue and if not then before the end of the term) and plead, answer or demur to said Plaintiffs petition the same will be taken as confessed and judgment by default will be rendered against them and partition made of said land in accordance with the prayer of said petitioners It is further ordered by the Court that a copy hereof be published in the "Missouri Weekly Patriot," a newspaper published in this State for four weeks successively the last insertion to be at least four weeks before the commencement of the next term of said Court.
p 589.
Bank of State of Missouri Plaintiff
against Final Judgment
William B. Edwards, J.A. Hampton
(whose full Christian name is unknown to Ptf)
John R. Edwards and J.W. Gibson
(Whose full Christian name is unknown to Ptf)
Now at this day comes the said Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendants have been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by delivering to them a true copy of the Writ and also by delivering to the Defendant, William B. Edwards, the party first served, a certified copy of the original petition at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present term of this Court and the same being submitted to the Court, the Court sitting as a Jury doth find from an examination of the same that the said Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiff on an instrument of writing for the direct payment of money in the sum of $280 for his debt and the sum of $57.24 for his damages for the detention thereof together with his costs in this behalf expended. It is therefore decreed, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendants his said debt, damages and costs to be levied of their goods and chattels, lands and tenements, and that execution issue therefor.
p 589/590.
Elisha Headlee, public admin of Greene
County, Missouri, and having in charge
the estate of Stephen Dorrell, deceased Plaintiff
vs Interlocutory Judgment
George W. Dorrell Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant has been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by publication in the "Missouri Weekly Patrior," a newspaper published and having general circulation in said County of Greene, for four weeks successively, the last insertion thereof being at least four weeks before the commencement of the present term of this Court, and the Defendant having failed to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's
(continued)
76
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 589/590 (continued)
petition, the same is taken as true. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the Plaintiff have an interlocutory judgment against said Defendant, but it not appearing to the Court what judgment decree or other relief the Plaintiff is entitled to recover, it is ordered that an inquiry be had at the next term of this Court to ascertain the same, unto which time this cause is adjourned and continued.
p 590/591.
Allen Rose Plaintiff
vs Order of Publication
Marshall Murray Defendant
Now at this day comes the said Plaintiff by his attorney before the Judge of the Circuit Court for Greene County, Missouri and files his petition and it appearing from the return of the Sheriff that the above named Defendant, Marshall Murray, is a nonresident of the State of Missouri so that the ordinary process of Law cannot be served upon him. It is therefore ordered by the Court that publication be made notifying the said Defendant that an action has been commenced against him by petition and publication in the Circuit Court for Greene County, Missouri, founded on a claim for damages for the wrongful and unlawful taking and detention of the property of the Plaintiff whereby said Plaintiff says he is damaged in the sum of three hundred dollars and that unless the said Defendant Marshall Murray be and appear at the Court House in Springfield, Greene County, Missouri, on the first day of the next term of this Court to be begun and held on the second Monday in July 1866 and on or before the third day of said term if the same shall so long continue (if not, then before the end of the term) and plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition the same will be taken as confessed and a judgment rendered against him and his property sold to satisfy the same and it is further ordered by the Court that a copy hereof be published in the "Missouri Weekly Patrior", a newspaper published in said County in Missouri for four weeks Successively the last insertion thereof to be at least four weeks before the commencement of the next term of this Court.
p 591.
Firle & Shoebel Plaintiffs
vs Final Judgment
James Rains Defendant
Now at this day this cause comes on to be heard on appeal from John S. Bigbee, Justice of the Peace in and for the Township of Campbell, Greene County, Missouri, the said Plaintiffs appear by their attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the said Defendant, James Rains, has been duly notified of the commencement of this suit and the same being submitted to the Court, the Court sitting as a Jury doth find from an examination of the same that the said Defendant is indebted to the said Plaintiffs on account in the sum of $60 for his debt and $5 for his damage for the detention of the same, and their costs in this behalf expended. It is therefore decreed and ordered by the Court that the said Plaintiffs have and recover of and from the said Defendant their said debt damages and costs and that execution issue therefor.
Bank of the State of Missouri Plaintiff
against Continuance
John Breedlove, Vinton & Hornbeak
a firm copartners under said name
and style composed of Samuel S.
Vinton and William C. Hornbeak Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and on application of the Plaintiff an alias summons is ordered to issue for William C. Hornbeak, one of the Defendants, directed to the Sheriff of Greene County and returnable at the July term 1866 of this Court.
77
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
BOOK G
P 592
Bank of the State of Missouri Plaintiff
against Continuance
John Breedlove, Vinton & Hornbeak, a
firm of copartners under said name and
style composed of Samuel S. Vinton
and William C. Hornbeak Defendants
Now at this day comes the said Plaintiff by his attorney and on application of the Plaintiff it is ordered that this cause be continued until the next term of this Court.
Ordered that Court adjourn in continuation of the present term until the fourth Monday in May.
78
Keyword Search | Greene County Records Home | Local History Home