Springfield-Greene
County LibraryJuly Term 1854.
Monday Morning July 17th 1854.
p 145.
Be it remembered that at a regular term of this Circuit Court began and held at the Court House in the town of Springfield on the seventeenth day of July 1854 were present The Honorable C.S. Yancey Circuit Judge E.B. Boone Circuit Attorney Junius T. Campbell Sheriff A.G. McCracken Clerk.
Now at this day the Sheriff returned into Court the following venire or panel of Grand Jurors, to wit: Joseph Burden who was by the Court appointed foreman (l)Jesse Faulkner (2), Stewart Warren (3), Hosea Mullins (4), John W. Wadlow (5), Jeptha Mason (6), John F. Semes (7), James Lee (8), William Braden (9), Lewis Atkins 10), Abraham Woody (11), H.S. Trantham (12), J.W. Thrower (13), R.A. Forbes (14) Greenbury Robertson (15), A. Hollingsworth (16), good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried and sworn retired to consider of their presentments.
p 146.
Daniel Chandler - Petition for Writ of adquod damnum.
Now at this day comes the petitioner and by leave of the Court files herein his petition praying for a Writ of adquod damnum for certain purposes appearing in said petition and said petition being by the Court seen and the matters and things therein contained fully understood. It is ordered and adjudged by the Court that the prayer of the petitioner be granted and that said Writ of adquod damnum be awarded to the Sheriff of Greene County to inquire by twelve good and lawful men what damage will accrue if any by the creation of said dam according to land and that the said Sheriff return the verdict of said Jury into this Court on the 22nd day of July 1854, being
the 7th day of this term or during the sitting of this Court, reduced to writing signed by each of said Jurors.
44
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 146.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Gaming
John Wilkinson Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri as well as the Defendant in his own proper person, who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty in the manner and form as he is charged in said Bill of Indictment, and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, and was by the Court fined ten dollars. It is therefore ordered by the Court that he make his fine by the payment of ten dollars together with the costs herein expended for all of which execution may issue with a capias clause attached.
p 146, 147.
Bedford R. Aldridge et al
Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes into Court here, Bedford R. Aldridge, William 0. Henslee and Melinda Henslee his wife, Micajah Aldridge for himself and as guardian for Louisa Francis Aldridge, Martha Catharine Aldridge, Elizabeth Jane Ann Aldridge, Rufus T. Aldridge and Nathaniel T. Aldridge, petitioners, who show to the Court here that they are heirs of Richard Aldridge, deceased, and that the said Richard Aldridge died intestate about the month of October 1853 seized of the following real estate, viz: the N 1/2 of Lot No. 3 of the SW fractional 1/4 of Sect 19 Township 30 Range 19 containing 40.19 acres and SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the S 1/2 of Lot No. 3 of the SW 1/4 of the S 1/2 of Lot No. 3 of the SW1/4 3/4 of Sect 19 Township 30 Range 19, containing 42.89 acres. Also the W 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Sect 19 Township 30 Range 19 containing 80 acres and the said petitioners by their mutual petition represent that they are each seized of the undivided one-eighth part of the above described land as tenants in coparunary after allowing the widow her Dower, and the said petitioners pray the Court for an order
making partition and division of said land if partition cannot be made in kind praying for an order of sail of said land for purpose of division of real estate giving to each of the heirs one-eighth part thereof and all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood and it appearing that partition cannot be made without great prejudice to the heirs it is ordered adjudged and decreed by the Court that sale be made of said land according to the prayer of the petitioners after setting off to the widow her dower in said land and that the proceeds be divided by giving to the said Bedford R. Aldridge, William 0. Henslee and Malinda Henslee his wife, Micajah Aldridge, Louise Francis Aldridge, Martha Catharine Aldridge, Elizabeth Jane Ann Aldridge, Rufus T. Aldridge and Nathaniel T. Aldridge, heirs and distributees of Richard Aldridge, deceased, one-eighth part of the above described real estate and that Jacob Bodenhamer, Samuel Piper and George Boulin be and they are hereby appointed Commissioners to assign to the widow her Dower and report on the third Monday in August 1854.
p 148.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Murder
J.A.G. Lee Defendant
(cause continued until next term)
45
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 148
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Felonious Assault
James Preston Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri as well as the Defendant in his own proper person and presents his petition praying for a Change of Venue in this cause verified by his affidavit as the law directs, for the reason that the minds of the inhabitants of the County of Greene are so prejudiced against him that he cann0t have a fair trial in said cause in said County. It is therefore ordered by the Court that a Change of Venue be awarded in said cause to the County of Taney.
p 148/149.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Felonious Assault
James Preston Defendant
Now at this day comes James Preston, as principal and William E. Isbell, Richard Y. Proctor and Abner Hamblen as his securities, and acknowledge themselves to owe and stand jointly and severally indebted to the State of Missouri in the just and full sum of $400 to be levied of their respective goods and chattels, lands and tenements to the use of said State to be recovered. The condition of the above recognizance is such that if the said James Preston shall be and make his personal appearance before the Judge of the Circuit Court of the county of Taney at the Court House in the town of Forsythe on the first day of the next term thereof to be holden on the fourth Monday after the fourth monday in September 1854, then and there to answer to an Indictment preferred against him by the Grand Jury for a felonious assault, and not depart the Court without leave then this recognizance to be void.
p 149/150
Stat:e of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Selling Liquor Without License
William Webb Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and files herein his motion to quash the Indictment in this cause and all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood, it is considered by the Court that the said motion be nd the same is hereby sustained. It is therefore ordered by the Court that Defendant go hence without day.
Following causes continued until next term:
State of Missouri vs William Webb and Philip Martin Gaming
State of Missouri vs N.A. Davis Felonious Assault
State of Missouri vs Isaiah Clayton Gaming.
p 150.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment Felonious Assault
Micajah Henslee Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri and moves the Court for an attachment against Cyrus Stark, a Witness who has been subpoenaed to attend at this term of the Court to testify as a Witness in behalf of the State and it appearing to the Court that said Witness has failed to obey said subpoena. It is therefore ordered by the Court that said motion be sustained and that said Writ issue.
46
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 150.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Adultery
Richard W. Robertson & Eliza Jackson Defendants
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri and by leave of the Court says that he will not further prosecute this Suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State take nothing by her said Writ and that the Defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Selling Whiskey Without License
Thomas Moore Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri and by leave of the Court says that he will not further prosecute this Suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State take nothing by her said Writ and that the Defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day.
p 151.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Gaming
John Harris Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri, as well as the Defendant by his attorney who for a plea says that he cannot deny but that he is guilty in the manner and form as charged in the said bill of Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court and was by the Court fined ten dollars.It is therefore ordered by the Court that he make his fine by the payment of ten dollars, together with the costs herein expended for all of which execution may issue with a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment Running Horse On Public Highway
Jefferson Shipman Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri as well as the Defendant by his attorney who for a plea says that he cannot deny but that he is guilty in the manner and form as charged in the bill of Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court and was by the Court fined five dollars. It is therefore ordered by the Court that he make his fine by the payment of five dollars, together with the costs herein expended for all of which execution may issue with a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Gaming
George Townlin Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri, as well as the Defendant by his attorney who for a plea says that he cannot deny but that he is guilty in the manner and form as charged in the said bill of Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court and was by the Court fined ten dollars.
It is therefore ordered by the Court that he make his fine by the payment of ten dollars, together with the costs herein expended for all of which execution may issue with a capias clause.
47
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 151/152.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Selling Whiskey To A Slave
Benjamin G. Andrews Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri, as well as the Defendant by his attorney, who by leave of the Court files herein a motion to quash the Indictment in this cause and all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood, it is considered by the Court that the said motion be sustained. It is therefore ordered by the Court that the State take nothing by her said Writ and that the Defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day.
p 152.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment Felonious Assault - Recognizance
James Preston Defendant
This day comes James Potter, Stephen Fattus and Larkin Holt who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand justly indebted to the State of Missouri in the sum of $50 each to be levied of their respective goods and chattels, lands and tenements, to be void however upon the following condition that if they be and appear before the Honorable Judge of Taney Circuit Court at the Court House in the town of Forsythe on the first day of the next term thereof, which will be holden on the fourth Monday after the fourth Monday in October, next, 1854 and not depart the same without leave, then this recognizance to be void otherwise to remain in full force.
p 152/153.
James M. Rogers, William C. Rogers, Greenbury
Rogers, John H. Rogers, Samuel E. Rogers,
Martha F. Rogers by her guardian Chatham Duke Plaintiffs
vs Petition for Partition
Thomas J. Rogers, H.M. Rogers Defendants
This day comes the Plaintiffs by their attorney and it appearing to the satisatisfaction of the Court that the said Defendants had been duly notified according to Law by a Publication in the SPRINGFIELD ADVERTISER, a weekly newspaper published in the State of Missouri and the premises being seen and fully understood the Court gave Judgment of partition according to the prayer of the petitioners of the following described real estate being the land belonging to the estate of Joseph Rogers, deceased, which land is situated in the County of Greene and state of Missouri and described as follows, to wit.. NE 1/4 of Sect 24, E 1/2 of SE 1/4 of Sect 14 and NW 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Sect 14, W 1/2 of SW 1/4 of Sect 13, all in Township 31 of Range 21. The Court finds that each of thePlaintiffs and the Defendants are entitled to one-eighth of said above described lands, and appointed the following persons Commissioners to make partition thereof and to report their proceedings to the present term of this Court, to wit: Elisha Headlee, John M. Dowell and William Ezell, who on the same day made the following report, to wit: State of Missouri, County of Greene, We the following undersigned commissioners appointed by the order of the Circuit Court of the said County to make partition of the real estate belonging to the estate of Joseph Rogers, deceased, between the heirs of said deceased, do report that in their opinion partition thereof cannot be made without great injury to the owners. Given under our hands this 18th day of July 1854 Elisha Headlee, John M. Dowell and William Ezell, which report was duly acknowledged before the Clerk of the Greene Circuit Court. Whereupon it is ordered by the Court that the said lands be sold by the Sheriff of Greene County at the next term of the Circuit Court of said County according to the statute regulating sales of real estate, on a credit of 12 months, requiring bond with approved security and that the proceeds
(continued)
48
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 152/153 (continued)
of said sale after paying expenses thereof shall be paid to said Plaintiffs and Defendants each one-eighth part and that the Clerk issue an order to the Sheriff of Greene County to sell said land in conformity to this order. Court then adjourned until Wednesday Morning July 19, 1854.
p 153. Wednesday Morning July 19, 1854
It is ordered by the Court that a rule issue for Asa Lyman to appear and show cause why he should not be fined for failing to appear when summoned to serve on a Jury.
p 153/154.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Murder
Willis Washam Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri and said Defendant was brought into Court in custody of the Sheriff and it being demanded of him how he would acquit himself of the offense alledged against him in the Indictment, in a plea says he is not guilty in manner and form as he stands charged in the Indictment and for trial puts himself on the Country and the Circuit Attorney doth the like. Thereupon comes a Jury, to wit: William Gray, Qualls Banfield, William White, James S. McQuerter, Samuel McClelland, Mark Bray, John Freeman, Thomas Green, Ezekiel Cook, Joseph Moss, John R. Earnest, Jabus R. Townsend, twelve good and lawful men duly elected, tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue joined in this cause and after hearing a portion of the evidence and not having time to complete the same, were ordered into the custody of the Sheriff until tomorrow morning.
p 154/155.
Susannah McMime, et al
Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes the petitioners, Susannah McMime, wife of Regin McMime, Bently Martin and Martha Jane Martin by their guardian, Andrew J. Nichols, and present their mutual petition to the Court, representing that they are the legal heirs of William Martin, deceased, who departed this life Sometime about the month of September in the year of 1853, in said County of Greene, that they hold in coparcenary the lands and real estate hereinafter mentioned, that all said petitions except said Regin McMime and said guardian are the children of said deceased, William Martin, that said children of the said William Martin, deceased, are each entitled to a child's part of said real estate, which real estate is the following, to wit: the NE 1/4 f the NW 1/4 of Sect 33-TWP 31 of Range 20. SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 of Sect 28 and SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 of Sect 33, TWP 31 Range 20. SE 1/4 of SE 1/4 Sect 29 and NE 1/4 of NW 1/4 and SW 1/4 of NW 1/4 of Sect 39, TWP 31 Range 20 W. Said petitioners also represent that it is the wish and desire of said children of said deceased to have a division and partition of said real estate, and also representing that it is manifest that a division of said real estate cannot be made amongst said petitioners without great prejudice to the owners, and praying that the same may be sold and the proceeds of said sale to be divided equally among said children, share and share alike. All and singular the premises being seen and by the Court here fully understood, it appears to the Court that the children of said deceased are equally entitled to said real estate, and it further appearing to the Court here that it will be to the advantage of said owners that sale be made of said real estate for the purpose of division thereof, and that partition cannot be otherwise made without great prejudice to the owners thereof.
(continued)
49
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 154/155 (continued)
It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed by the Court that the Sheriff of the County of Greene sell said real estate to the highest bidder at the Court House door in the town of Springfield during the sitting of the next term of the Circuit Court of said County, and that the proceeds of said sale be equally divided among the children of said deceased, William Martin.
p 155. Friday Morning July 21st 1854
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Murder
Willis Washam Defendant
This day comes again into Court the Jury empannelled on the third day of this term as well as the Defendant in custody of the Sheriff, and the said Jury after receiving the instructions of the Court retired to consider of their verdict.
p 156.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Felonious Assault
Micajah Henslee Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri in this behalf, and the said Defendant in his own proper person and it being demanded of him how he would acquit himself of the offense alledged against him in the Indictment, who for a plea says he is not guilty in the manner and form as he stands charged in the Indictment and for trial puts himself on the Country and the Circuit Attorney doth the like. Thereupon comes a Jury, to wit: John H. Akin, Henderson Collins, Gideon Combs, Washington Merritt, John Barham, Z. Young, Alfred Baker, Elisha White, Anderson Lattimer, Chesley Cannefax, Joseph Jones, Henry McKinley, twelve good and lawful men duly elected, tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue joined in this cause. After hearing the evidence and arguments of Counsel return the following verdict, to wit : "We the Jury find the Defendant not guilty as charged in the indictments, Henry McKinley, foreman." It is therefore considered by the Court that the Defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Inducing Witness
Not to Appear before Grand Jury.
Abraham Fine Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri, and says by leave of the Court he will n0t further prosecute her said suit, but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that said State take nothing by her said Writ and that the said Defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day.
p 157.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Preventing Witness From Appearing Before Grand Jury
Abraham Fine Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri, and says by leave of the Court he will not further prosecute her said Suit, but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that said State take nothing by her said Writ and that the said Defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day.
50
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 157.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Murder
Willis Washam Defendant
This day comes again into Court the Jury empannelled in this cause, as well as the Defendant in custody of the Sheriff, and the said Jury returned into Court the following veruict: "We the Jury find the Defendant guilty of Murder in the First Degree as he stands charged in the first count in the Indictment. E.C. Cook, foreman."
Saturday morning July 22, 1854
p 157, 158.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Murder
Willis Washam Defendant
This day again comes into Court in custody of the Sheriff, Willis Washam, who stands convicted of Murder by a Jury of his peers, and thereupon it is demanded of the said Willis Washam if he hath or knoweth anything to say, wherefore the Court here ought not, upon the premises and verdict aforesaid to proceed to Judgment against him who nothing further saith unless as he before hath said, whereupon all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood it is therefore considered by the Court here that the said Willis Washam be taken to the jail of Greene County from where he came and there to remain until the 25th day of August, 1854, between the hours of nine o'clock in the forenoon and five o'clock in the afTERMoon, then to be carried to the place of Public Execution, and there to be hanged by the neck until he be dead and that the Sheriff of Greene County stand charged with the execution of this sentence and that the clerk of the Court make out a warrant sealed as the Law directs and deliver it to the Sheriff of this County stating such conviction and sentence as the Law directs.
p 159.
McCreery, Essex and Co
vs Civil Action
Thomas Tiller, guardian of Elijah Perkins
Now at this day comes here into Court the said Plaintiffs by their attorney, A. Fenly, and the said Defendant, Thomas Tiller, and it appearing by agreement of the said parties, that prior to the July term 1853 of this Court a statement in writing was filed with the Clerk of this Court, authorizing the entry of Judgment by confession of the said Defendant in favor of the said Plaintiff, for the sum of two hundred and ninety three dollars and sixty three cents, due said Plaintiffs by the promissory note of the said Defendant executed by the said Elijah Perkins, and filed with the said statement, and it further appearing that the said statement in writing was lost or mislaid by the Clerk of this Court, and that an entry of Judgment of confession thereon was omitted at the July Term 1853 of this Court, and all and singular the matters and things being seen and heard by the Court, and fully understood, it is considered that the said Plaintiffs were entitled to entry of Judgment by confession against said
Defendant as in said statement authorised for the sum of two hundred and ninety three dollars and sixty three cents at the July term 1853 of this Court. And it is therefore ordered the said parties thereto consenting to the same that the following entry of Judgment by confession now be made in this cause as of the said proceeding July Term 1853, to wit:
McCreery, Essex and Co
vs Civil Action
(Continued)
51
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 159 (continued)
Thomas Tiller guardian of Elijah Perkins
Now at this day comes here into Court the said Plaintiffs by their attorney, and it appearing to the Court here that a statement in writing has been filed made and signed by the said Defendant and verified by his affidavit authorising the entry of Judgment thereon, in favor of the said Plaintiff for the sum of two hundred and ninety three dollars and sixty three cents due said Plaintiff by the promissory note of said Defendant executed by the said Elijah Perkins and filed with said statement and the Court being satisfied that the said Defendant executed the said Statement in writing and made the affidavit thereto annexed. It is considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover against the said Defendant the sum of two hundred and ninety three dollars and sixty three cents in manner and form aforesaid confessed, and their costs and charges in this behalf laid out and expended, and that execution issue therefor."
p 160.
Now at this day comes into Court the Grand Jury empannelled on Monday and returned or presented the following indictments:
State of Missouri vs John Foren and Adam Foren Indicted for disturbing religious Worship.
State of Missouri vs Robert Vinton and Edward Murphy Indicted for disturbing the Peace of a
Family In The Night.
State of Missouri vs Thomas House and Harriet House Indicted for Adultery.
State of Missouri vs John S. Mcquirtre Indicted for Trespass.
State of Missouri vs Jewel Bradbury and Sarah McNary Indicted for Adultery.
And also a report of the good condition of the Jail and having no further business were by the Court discharged.
Monday Morning July 24,1854.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment For Murder
Willis Washam Defendant
Now at this day comes again into Court, Willis Washam in his own proper person in custody of the Sheriff as well as the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri in this behalf, and by leave of the Court, Defendant files herein his motion for a new trial. And all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood, it is considered by the Court that said motion be overruled.
p 160/161.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Murder
Willis Washam Defendant
This day comes again into Court, the Defendant, Willis Washam, in custody of the Sheriff as well as the Circuit Attorney, who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri and by leave of the Court Defendant files herein his motion to arrest the Judgment heretofore rendered against him. And all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood, it is considered by the Court that said motion be overruled.
p 161.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Malicious Trespass
L.A.D. Crenshaw Defendant
(continued)
52
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 161 (cont)
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as well as the Defendant by his attorney who by leave of the Court files herein a motion to quash the Indictment in this cause. And all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood, it is considered by the Court that the said motion be sustained. It is therefore ordered by the Court that the State take nothing by her said Writ and that the Defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Gaming
James Sheshane Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as well as the Defendant by his attorney, who for a plea says that he is not guilty in the manner and form as he is charged in said Bill of Indictment and puts himself upon the Country for trial and the Circuit Attorney doth the like and there upon comes a Jury, to wit: Daniel Chandler, Daniel Payne, Edward Moore, W.D. Proctor, Wm. Ward, B.W. Cannefax, William Gray, Mortimore Freeman, Woodsen Howard, James R. Turner, George Hancock and John A. Stephens, twelve good and lawful men duly elected, tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue joined in this cause. After hearing the evidence and arguments of Counsel return the following verdict, to wit:
"We the Jury find the Defendant guilty as charged in the Indictment and assess as a punishment a fine of ten dollars. J.A. Stephens, foreman." It is therefore ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said Defendant make his fine by the payment of the sum of ten dollars together with the costs herein expended for all of which execution may issue.
p 162.
It is ordered by the Court that an attachment issue against Addison Tennis, returnable at the next term of this Court, to show cause why he did not attend at this term of the Court, as a witness in State cases.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Gaming
John Dickens Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri, and by leave of the Court says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore ordered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said Writ and that the said Defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day.
p 162/163.
Daniel Chandler Petition for writ of adquod damnum.
Now at this day comes the petitioner by his attorney and by leave of the Court files herein his petition praying for a Writ of adqucd damnum for certain purposes therein mentioned and the said petition being seen and the matters and things therein contained fully understood. It is ordered and adjudged by the Court that the prayer of the petitioner be granted and that the said Writ of adquod damnum be awarded to the Sheriff of Greene County, to enquire by twelve good and lawful men, what damage will accrue if any by the creation of said dam according to law and that he, the Sheriff, return the verdict of said Jury into this Court, and some day during the term thereof, reduced to writing, signed by each Juror.
53
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
JULY TERM 1854
p 163.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Disturbing
Peace of a Family in the night time.
Robert Vinton Defendant
This day comes William H. Otter, attorney for said Robert Vinton, and says that he cannot deny but that said Robert Vinton is guilty as he stands charged in said Indictment and pleads guilty thereto. And the Court thereupon assessed a fine against said Robert Vinton of ten dollars. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the State of Missouri recover of said Defendant, Robert Vinton the sum of ten dollars and also her costs herein expended for which execution may issue.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Gaming
Jackson Kessinger Defendant
This day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri and it appearing to the satisatisfaction of the Court that process has not been served on said Defendant and that he is not a resident of the county of Greene. It is therefore ordered that an alias capias issue directed to the Sheriff of Taney County.
p 164-nil.
p 165.
Junius T. Campbell, Sheriff
to Deed
John Dixon
This day comes Junius T. Campbell who is known to the Court to be the identical same person whose name appears on an instrument of writing purporting to be a Sheriff's Deed, and who is known to the Court to be the Sheriff of Greene County and acknowledged the same to be his act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
p 166.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment for Murder
Willis Washam Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri, as well as the Defendant in custody of the Sheriff, who asked the Court to suspend the execution of its Judgment until a hearing can be had in the Supreme Court, which motion was by the Court overruled and Defendant thereupon asked an appeal.
54
Keyword Search | Greene County Records Home | Local History Home