Springfield-Greene
County LibraryMarch Term 1858
p 75.
Be it remembered that the Regular Term of the Greene Circuit Court began and held at the Court House in the City of Springfield on the first Monday in March 1857 - there was present
the Hon. Patrick H. Edwards Circuit Judge
Julian Frazier Circuit Attorney
Peter C. King, Sheriff and A.G. McCracken Clerk of Court
And now at this day comes P.C. King, Sheriff, and returns a writ of venire for a Grand Jury with the following names thereon as Grand Jurors, Viz - Joseph Moss, foreman; William Roberts; Richard S. Gott; Benjamin Shockley; William Gray; Greenberry Robinson; John H. Gibson; J.W. Wadlow; George McElhannon; John T. Bowls; Robert Dillard; John Yeakley; James Derrick; George W. Sloan; Alfred Davidson; G.D. Morrow and R.B. Edmonson, seventeen good and lawful men who being duly elected sworn and charged to well and truly inquire in and for the body of the County of Greene retired to consider of their presentments.
Ordered by the Court that the Sheriff have the windows of the Court Room glazed or otherwise repaired so as to exclude the wind by tomorrow morning.
Ordered by the Court that J.A. Foster and Henry Young be permitted to sign the Roll of Attorneys.
p 76.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Indictment Selling Liquor Without License
Joseph A. Stephens Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his Attorney and the Judge of the Circuit Court having been Counsel in this cause is ordered to the Circuit Court in Dallas County.
4
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 76/77.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Ennis Dixon Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his attorney and for a plea says he is guilty in manner and form as he stands charged in the Indictment and submits the cause to the Court whereupon the Court doth adjudge that the Defendant be fined the sum of ten dollars for the commission of the offense. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Defendant her said fine and also her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
p 77.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Eli Armstrong Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his attorney and for a plea says he is guilty in manner and form as he stands charged in the Indictment and submits the cause to the Court whereupon the Court doth adjudge that the Defendant be fined the sum of ten dollars for the commission of the offense. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Defendant her said fine and also her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
R.B. Coleman Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his attorney and for a plea says be is guilty in manner and form as he stands charged in the Indictment and submits the cause to the Court whereupon the Court doth adjudge that the Defendant be fined the sum of ten dollars for the commission of the offense. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Defendant her said fine and also her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
p 78.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
John Stuart Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his attorney and for a plea says he is guilty in manner and form as he stands charged in the Indictment and submits the cause to the Court whereupon the Court doth adjudge that the Defendant be fined the sum of ten dollars for the commission of the offense. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Defendant her said fine and also ber costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
John W. Harper
vs Appeal from J.P. by Defendant
N.C. Burns
Now at this day comes tbe said appellant and says be will not further prosecute his said appeal but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by
(continued)
5
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 78 (continued)
the Court that the said appeal be dismissed and that the said appellee have and recover his said Judgment and costs and that execution issue for the same.
p 78/79.
F.P. Wilson and wife Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Peter Ussery Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and by leave of the Court files his application for a Change of Venue in this cause to some other County because of the undue influence of the Plaintiff on the minds of the inhabitants of Greene County.
Court ordered alias writs be issued for Robert Trimble, Isaac Yeary and Samuel Gardner.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Betting on Election
H.M. Kirby, Samuel Hughes,
Jephtha Mason Defendants
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri and says that he will no further prosecute this suit so far as regards Jephtha Mason who is charged in the 2nd count in the Indictment but will suffer the same to be as to him to be dismissed and asks that he be held under his recognizance until another Indictment be found, which is by the Court ordered.
p 80.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Betting on Election
Henry McKinley and Samuel Hughes Defendants
Now at this day comes the Circuit attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri and also the Defendants by their attorney and for a plea says they are not guilty as charged in the Indictment and put themselves on the Country and the Circuit Attorney doth the like, whereupon comes a Jury, to wit:James Dollison, Joseph Miller, James Boone, E.L. McElhaney, B.H. Boone, Henry Fulbright, G.D. Haden, J.S. Gardner, Samuel Fulbright, J. Baughman, John Freeman and William Woodward, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue found, after hearing the evidence and receiving the instructions of the Court retire to consider of their verdict and again come into Court and return the following verdict, viz: "We the Jury find the Defendants guilty in manner and form as charged in the Indictment and assess the fine at $7.50 each, James Dollison, foreman." It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Defendants the said sum of $7.50 each and also his costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
p 81/82.
Several Indictments, #1 through #9, of State of Missouri vs Peyton Nowlin for Permitting slave to sell liquor - cause continued until next term of this Court.
#10 State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Permitting Slave to Sell Liquor
Peyton Nowlin Defendant
Now at this day conies the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his attorney who for a plea says he is not guilty in manner and form as charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the Country and
(continued)
6
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 82/83 (continued)
the Circuit Attorney doth the like whereupon cometh a Jury, to wit: Samuel Wood, A.F. Bigbee, David Freeman, R.M. Jones, J.J. Weaver, James Morris, William Lower, John L. Overstreet, William D. Miller, John Morton, Jabez Owen and M.L. Abernathy, twelve good and lawful men elected tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue joined after hearing the evidence and receiving the instructions of the Court retired to consider of their verdict and again come into Court and entered the following verdict, viz: "We the Jury find the Defendant guilty as charged in the Indictment and assess the fine at $20, R.M. Jones, foreman." It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Defendant the said sum of $20 as her fine and also her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
p 83. Tuesday March 2, 1857.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Betting on Election
Henry McKinley, Houston Cates Defendants
Now at this day the demurrer filed in this cause coming on to be heard and all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood the said demurrer is by the Court sustained. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by his bill of Indictment and that the Defendants be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
p 84.
The State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Felonious Assault
Thomas J.Epperson Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant in his own proper person and by his attorney and the Defendant having waived all defects in the said Bill of Indictment said for a plea he is not guilty in manner and form as charged and putS himself on the Country and the Circuit Attorney doth the like whereupon comes a Jury, viz: Josiah Ludy, S.M. Gresham, W.L. Nerrington, Jephtha Mason, W.L. Evans, J.G. Gardner, A.M. Julian, G.D. Haden, J.M. Morgan, Joseph Morris, Samuel H. Fagg and John L. Ramey, twelve good and lawful men duly elected tried and sworn to well and truly try the issues joined after hearing the evidence and argument of Counsel and receiving the Instructions of the Court retire to consider of their verdict and again come into Court and render the following verdict, viz: "We the Jury find the Defendant guilty as he stands charged in the Bill of Indictment and assess as a punishment for the commission of the offense a fine of $275.00, A.M. Julian, foreman." It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the Defendant her said fine of $275.00 and also her costs laid 0ut and expended for which let execution issue and that the Defendant remain in custody of the Sheriff until fine and costs be fully paid.
p 85.
# The State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Permitting Slave to Sell Liquor
Peyton Nowlin Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and by leave of the Court files his plea in Bar in this case.
7
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 85.
#1 State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without License
James Jenkins Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his attorney and says for a plea he is not guilty in manner and form as charged and puts himself upon the Country and the Circuit Attorney doth the like whereupon comes a Jury, viz: William Likins, Richard Abernathy, J.A. Morton, D.L. Fulbright, John Boone, James Boone, Robert Bedford, Daniel Chandler, M.L. Abernathy, J.K. Keltner, Adam Weaver, twelve good and lawful men duly elected tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue joined. After hearing the evidence and receiving the instructions of the Court retire to consider of their verdict and again come into Court and return the following verdict, viz: "We the Jury find the Defendant guilty in manner and form as he stands charged in the Indictment and assess a fine of $20 for the commission of the offense, John Boone, foreman." It is there fore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the Defendant the said sum of $20 his fine as also his costs laid Out and expended for which let execution issue.
p 86.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Felonious Assault
Thomas J. Epperson Defendant
Now at this day comes Thomas J.Epperson, Benjamin Cannefax and W.J. McDaniel who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand indebted unto the State of Missouri in the sum of $500 to be bond of their respective goods and chattles lands and tenements to be void on condition that the said Thomas J. Epperson shall make his personal appearance from day to day at the present term of this Court and not depart said Court without leave.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without License
James Jenkins Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and by leave of the Court files a motion for a new trial in this cause and all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood, said motion is by the Court overruled.
p 87.
#2 State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without License
James Jenkins Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his attorney and for a plea says he is guilty as he is charged in the Indictment and submits this cause to the Court and the Court adjudges that the Defendant be fined the sum of $20 for the commission of the offense. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the Defendant the said sum of $20 her fine and also her costs in this behalf laid out and expended for which let execution issue.
William Brown Plaintiff
vs Appeal from J.P. by Defendant
William F. Haden Defendant
Now at this day comes the parties by their attorneys and this cause is dismissed by
(cont)
8
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 87 (cont)
agreement of parties at Defendants costs. It is therefore considered that the Plaintiff have and recover of and from the Defendant his costs laid out and expended and that execution issue therefor.
p 88.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Felonious Assault
William D. Miller Defendant
Now at this day comes William Brown, H.C. McGorman and William Lower who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand justly indebted to the State of Missouri in the full sum of one hundred dollars each to be bond of their respective goods and chattles, lands and tenements to be void on condition that they make their personal appearance before the Judge of the Greene Circuit Court at a Court to be holden at the Court House in the city of Springfield on the first Monday in September 1858 and testify and the truth speak in a cause pending in said Court where the State of Missouri is Plaintiff and William D. Miller is Defendant and not depart said Court without leave.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Housebreaking
Tobias Batson Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf for the State of Missouri and also the Defendant by his attorney and for a plea says he is not guilty in manner and form as charged in the Bill of Indictment and puts himself on the Country and the Circuit Attorney doth the like, whereupon came a Jury, viz William W. Jeffries, William M. Horton, B. Moore, J. Moore, J.A. Miller, S. Fulbright, S.M. Gresham, S.M. East, J.M. Wilson, Peyton Nowlin, J.H. Martin and James Jones, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn to well and truly try the the issue joined after hearing the evidence and receiving the instructions of the Court retire to consider of their verdict and again return into Court and render the following verdict, viz: "We the Jury find the Defendant guilty in manner and form as charged in the Indictment and assess the fine at $5.00, B. Moore, foreman." It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the Defendant his said fine of $5.00 and also the costs laid out and expended for which let execution issue.
p 89.
Alexander Clapp & J.P. Clapp
Petition for Writ ad quad.
Now at this day come the petitioners and by leave of the Court file herein their petition praying for a writ of ad quod dam num for certain purposes specified in said petition and the said petition being by the Court seen and the premises fully understood. It is ordered and adjudged by the Court that the prayer of said petitioners be granted and that said writ of ad quod dam num be awarded to the Sheriff of Greene County requiring him to enquire by twelve good and lawful men on the third day of May 1858 what damages will accrue, if any, by the erection of said dam according to Law and that he, the said Sheriff, return the said verdict of said Jury into this Court at the next term of this Court.
Louisiana Haden, et al EXPARTEE. Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes Junius T. Campbell who is known to the Court as the former Sheriff of Greene County and the identical person whose name appears to Sheriff's
(continued)
9
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 89 (cont.)
Deed to J.W.D.L.F. Mack for the following described land, viz NE 1/4 of SW 1/4 of Sec 11 Township 29 Range 22, which was sold by order of the Greene Circuit Court at the July Term 1854 for the purpose of partition among the heirs of Joseph Weaver, deceased, and the said Junius "I". Campbell acknowledged that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein contained.
p 90.
Louisiana Haden et al. EXPARTEE. Petition for Partition
Now at this day comes Junius T. Campbell who is known to the Court as former Sheriff of Greene County and the identical person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing deed purporting to be a Sheriff's Deed to Allen Mitchell for the following described land, viz SE 1/4 of 1/4 of SW 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec 11 TWP 29 Range 22 sold by order of the Greene Circuit Court on petition of Louisiana Haden et al as real estate of Joseph Weaver, deceased, for the purpose of partition. And the said J.T. Campbell acknowledged that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein contained.
In the matter of the Estate of Martin Taylor, deceased
Petition for Partition
Now at this day came by their attorney Catherine Guinn, late widow of Martin Taylor, Jacob Humble and Mary Humble his wife, David Taylor by their attorney, Joseph Taylor, George Taylor and Ann Taylor by Kindred Rose their guatdian and presented their petition to the Circuit Court asking the Court to render Judgment for dower in land belonging to Martin, deceased, at the time of his death, and it appearing to the satisfaction of this Court that said Martin Taylor at the time of his death was seized and possessed of the following real estate, viz the W 1/2 of the NE 1/4 and the E 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Section 21 Township 28 Range 20 situated in Greene County Missouri wherefore it is considered by the Court that the prayer of the petition be granted and that the said Catherine Guinn, widow of said deceased have the one-third part of the above described land as her dower and that N.C. Chaffin, Sterling Smith and William Holland be appointed Commissioners to set apart said dower and that they report their proceeding to the present term of this Court. And the parties aforesaid in the petition aforesaid ask that the residue of said land be divided between the five heirs of Martin Taylor, deceased, viz: Jacob Humble and Mary his wife, David Taylor, Jacob Taylor, George Taylor and Ann Taylor and that each of said heirs be entitled to one-fifth part of said land. Whereupon it is considered by the Court that Judgments of partition be rendered according to the prayer of said petition and that the said heirs each be entitled to one-fifth part of said land after said dower is taken from and that the said N.C. Chaffin, Sterling Smith and William Holland be appointed Commissioners to make partition of the same and that they make report of their proceedings to the present term of this Court and that the said petitioners be taxed with the costs of this suit.
Louisiana Haden et al. Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes Junius T. Campbell who is known to the Court as the former Sheriff of Greene County and the identical person whose name appears to an instrument of writing purporting to be a Sheriff's Deed to R.B. Coleman for the following described parcel of land, viz SW 3/4 NW 3/4 of SE 1/4 Section 11 Township 29 Range 22 which said land was sold by order of the Greene Circuit Court for the purpose of partition and distribution among the heirs of Joseph Weaver, deceased, and the said Junius T. Campbell acknowledged that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein contained.
10
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 92
Cases continued to next Term
W.P. Cox vs Joseph Janis (or Jams)
Thomas Tiller adm. vs Sowell Adams
Elizabeth Holbrook vs Thomas Tiller adm
H.W. Akin vs William Townsend.
p 92/93.
John H. Miller Plaintiff
vs Civil action
Thomas J. Epperson Defendant
Now at this day comes the parties by their attorney and by consent of parties this cause is dismissed by each party paying his own cost. It is therefore considered by the Court that neither party have any thing by this suit and Judgment be rendered against each party for his own costs laid 0ut and expended issue therefor.
p 93/94.
#1 State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without License
William Webb Defendant
Now at this day this cause coming on to be heard and the said Defendant having paid the costs in this cause. The Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State by leave of the Court dismisses the same. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
p 94.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without License
William Webb Defendant
Now at this day this cause coming On to be heard and the said Defendant having paid the costs that have accrued the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri by leave of the Court dismisses the same. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said Suit and the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
James Raines Plaintiff
vs Appeal J.P. by Defendant
George W. Mitchell Defendant
Now at this day comes the said appellant and by leave of the Court dismisses his said appeal. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said appellant take nothing by his said appeal and that the said appellee have and recover his costs laid out and expended for which let execution issue.
Louisiana Haden et al. Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes Junius T. Campbell who is known to the Court as the former Sheriff of Greene County and the identical person whose name is subscribed to an instrument of writing purporting to be a Sheriff's Deed to Peter C. King for the following described land, viz: SW 1/4 of SW 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Sec 11 TWP 29 Range 22 which was sold as the real estate of James Weaver, deceased, for the purpose of partition among the heirs of said deceased by order of the Greene Circuit Court and the said J.T. Campbell acknowledged the same to be his act and deed for the uses and purposes therein contained.
11
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 95.
Louisiana Haden et al. EXPARTEE. Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes Junius T. Campbell who is known to the Court as the former Sheriff of Greene County and the identical person whose name is subscribed to an instrument of writing purporting to be a Sheriff's Deed to John S. Waddill for the following described land, viz: NW 1/4 SW 1/4 of SE 1/4 Section 11 Township 29 Range 22 which was sold by order of the Greene Circuit Court as the real estate of Joseph Weaver for the purpose of partition among the heirs of said deceased and the said Junius T. Campbell acknowledged that he executed and delivered the same as his act and deed for the uses therein contained.
Kindred Rose Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
John R. Edwards, George W. Mitchell,
William B. Edwards Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and the said Defendant being thrice solemnly called comes not but herein makes default and the petition of the Plaintiff being neither answered plead nor demurred to and said Defendants having been duly served with process at least 15 days before the present term of this Court and the demand being founded on an instrument of writing signed by the Defendants and the amount ascertained thereby. It is considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have Judgment by default against the said Defendants for the sum of $254 debt and $20.13 damages for detention thereof and that unless good cause shown to the contrary on or before the eighth day of this term of Court said Judgment will be made final.
p 96.
A.M. Huff Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Jabez Owen Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and the said Defendant being three times solemnly called comes not but herein makes default and neither pleading, answering nor demurring to Plaintiff petition and being served with personal process more than 15 days before the first day of the present term of this Court and the demand being founded on a promissory note signed by the said Defendant and the amount ascertained thereby the Court doth find that the said Defendant is indebted to the said Plaintiff in the sum of $280 for his debt and the sum of $8.16 damages for the detention thereof. It is therefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendant his said debt and damages and also his costs laid out and expended and that he have execution therefor.
p 96/97
Washington Merritt Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
John M. Chenoweth, H.S. Chenoweth, John S. Philips Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and the said Defendant being three times solemnly called comes not but herein makes default and neither pleading, answering nor demurring to Plaintiff petition and being served with personal process more than 20 days before present term of this Court and the demand being founded on a promissory note signed by the Defendants and the amount ascertained thereby the same is submitted to the Court and on examination doth find that the said Defendants are indebted to the said Plaintiff in the sum of $1000 for his debt and also the sum of $135.50 his damages for detention thereof. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendants the said debt and damage and also his costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
12
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
March Term 1858
p 98.
Mary A. Headlee, Mary F. Henderson,John W. Henderson and May A. Headlee as guardian of Margaret C. Headlee Emily W. Headlee, Tebetha J. Headlee
and Robert W. Headlee
EXPARTEE. Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes the said parties by their attorney and file by leave of the court their petition verified by affidavit setting forth that they are the heirs and distributees of James C. Headlee, deceased, and that he left as the sole heirs of his body Mary E. Henderson wife of John D. Henderson, Margaret C. Headlee, Emily W. Headlee, Tebitha J. Headlee, Robert W. Headlee. That said James C. Headlee was seized and possessed of the following real estate, to wit: the SE 1/4 of SE 1/4 of Sect 22 Twp 30 Range 21. That said Mary A. Headlee widow of said deceased is entitled to one-third part of said land during her natural life as dower. That said Mary E. Henderson and John D. Henderson are entitled to one-fifth part and that Margaret C., Emily W., Tebitha J., and Robert W. Headlee are each entitled to one-fifth part each. That said real estate is not susceptable of partition without great prejudice to the parties interested therein and therefore pray for an order to be made by the Court for the sale of said real estate and distribution of the proceeds thereof. And all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court understood. It is ordered adjudged and decreed by the Court that the Sheriff of Greene County sell said real estate as the Law directs and distribute the proceeds thereof amongst the parties interested as set forth in the said petition. That he sell the said real estate on a credit of 12 months.
p 99. March 4th 1858
p 99/100
Bank of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
William R. Butt, Jacob Baughman
and M.E. Langston Defendants
Now at this day comes the Defendants by their attorney and the Defendants being thrice solemnly called comes not but makes default and the Plaintiffs petition not being plead, answered or demurred to and the Defendants having been duly served with process more than 15 days before the first day of the Court and the demand being founded upon an instrument of writing signed by the Defendants and the amount ascertained thereby. It is considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have Judgment by default and the Court doth find from examination of the instrument sued on that the Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiff in the sum of $64. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the Defendants the said debt and also costs laid Out and expended and that he have execution thereof.
p 100.
Bank of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
William R. Butt, Allen Fielden,
John L. McCraw Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and the said Defendants being thrice solemnly called come not but hence makes default and being duly served with process and neither pleading answering nor demurring to Plaintiff's petition and the demand being founded on an instrument of writing signed by said Defendants and the amount ascertained thereby. It is considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have Judgment by default and the Court on examination of the instrument sued on doth find that the said Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiff in the sum of $210.08.
(continued)
13
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 100 (cont)
It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the Defendants his said debt and damages and also his costs laid out and expended and that she have execution therefor.
p 101.
L.A.D. Crenshaw
vs Civil Action
Jonathan Carthel
Now at this day comes the parties by attorney and the death of the Defendant in this cause is suggested to the Court and by consent of parties Joshua M. Carthal and A.F. Bigbee administrator of said Defendant are substituted as Defendants in this cause.
John Robertson Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Burford and Mathis Defendants
Now at this day comes the parties by their attorney and by leave of the Court this cause is dismissed at Plaintiff's costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that the Defendants have and recover of and from said Plaintiff his costs laid out and expended for which let execution issue.
p 102.
J.W. Clurg and Co Plaintiffs
vs Civil Action
John McElhannon Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by attorney and the Defendant in his own proper person and the consent the Defendant agrees that judgment be rendered against him in favor of said Plaintiff for the sum of $215.91 and costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendant the said sum of $215.91 and costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendant the said sum of $215.91 and also costs of suit laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
p 103.
Heirs John H. Smith Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes Peter C. King, Sheriff of Greene County, who is known to the Court as such and the identical person whose name is subscribed to an instrument of writing purporting to be a Sheriff's Deed to Jabez Owen for the following described land viz the SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 of Section 22 Township 28 Range 20 which was sold by order of the Greene Circuit Court for the purpose of partition among the heirs of John H. Smith and the said Peter C. King acknowledged that he executed the same as his voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein contained.
p 105.
Heirs of Joseph Rogers deceased. Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes Peter C. King, Sheriff of Greene County, who is known to the Court as such and the identical person whose name is subscribed to an instrument of writing purporting to be a Sheriff's Deed to A.S. Wallis for the following realestate, viz E 1/2 of SE 1/4 Sec 14 and NW 1/4 of SE 1/4 Sect 14 and W 1/2 of SW 1/4 Sect 13 TWP 31 Range 21, which was sold by orders of Greene Circuit Court for the purpose of partition as the real estate of Joseph Rogers deceased and the said Samuel Fulbright acknowledged
(cont)
14
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 105 (cont)
that he executed the same for the uses and purposes therein contained.
p 106.
Riley Kinman
vs Civil Action
B.W. Cannefax
Now at this day it is agreed by the parties that L.H. Freeman a Juror in this cause be released and that the trial proceed with the eleven remaining Jurors.
Ordered that James Derrick, A Grand Juror, be excused on account of sickness.
William H. Bedford Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
P.R. & D.C. Smith Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and by leave of the Court says he will no further prosecute his suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that the Defendants have and recover of and from the Plaintiff his costs laid out and expended and that he have execution therefor.
p 107.
Thomas Riddles
vs Civil Action
John H. Akin
Now at this day comes the parties and it appearing that the Judge of the Court having been of counsel in this cause it is ordered that this cause transferred to the Common Pleas Court of Greene County and that the Clerk of this Court transmit transcript of this cause to said Court.
p 108.
C.M. Murphy Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Barry Wilkes Defendant
Now at this day comes the parties by their attorneys and having announced themselves ready for trial thereupon comes a Jury, viz Moses Proctor, John McElhannon, R. Shipp, J.M. Bailey, F.M. Apperson, J.H. Akin, A.M. Julian, John A. Miller, James Jones, James Dollison, William L. Herrington and A.M. Townsend, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue joined between the parties and having heard the testimony when the Plaintiff by his attorney comes and says by leave of the Court he will not further prosecute his suit; will take a non-suit thereon. It is therefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiff take nothing by his suit and that the Defendant have and recover of the Plaintiff his costs laid out and expended for which let execution issue.
Riley Kinman Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
B.W. Cannefax Defendant
Now at this day come the Jury empannelled in this cause and having heard evidence completed and receiving the instructions of the Court retire to consider of their verdict and again come int0 court and say they cannot agree upon a verdict and byconsent of parties the said Jury are discharged.
15
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 109 filing of actions.
p 110
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Felonious Assault
Thomas J. Epperson Defendant
Now at this day comes Thomas J. Epperson, Benjamin W. Cannefax, William J. McDaniel and Newlan A. Davis who acknowledged themselves to owe and stand indebted to the State of Missouri in the sum of $500 to be bond of their respective goods and chattles lands and tenements to be void on condition that the said Thomas J. Epperson make his appearance before the Judges of the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri on the first day thereof at the Court House at the City of Jefferson at a Court to be holden on the first Monday in July 1858 to answer an appeal by him taken from the Greene Circuit Court on an indictment for a felonious assault and abide the Judgment of said Court and not depart there without leave.
p 110/111.
Henry F. Gray Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
John Walker Defendant
Now at this day comes the parties by their attorneys and having announced themselves ready for trial, thereupon came a Jury, viz: R. Shipp, W.M. Horton, J.R. Weaver, F.M. Apperson, J. Martin and James Vaughan, six good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue joined between the parties. Having heard a portion of the testimony and there not being time to complete the same, are permitted to disperse under the charge of the Court until tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock.
p 111.
N.R. Smith Plaintiff
vs
County Court of Greene County, Mo.
Now at this day comes here the Plaintiff, Nicholas R. Smith and suggests and shows to the Court here that the County Court of the County of Greene in the State of Missouri had heretofore audited and allowed to the said Plaintiff the sum of $380 as a compensation for services rendered by the said Plaintiff in designating and exploring such lands in the County of Greene as was contemplated bv an Act of Congress entitled An Act To Enable the State of Arkansas and other States to Examine The Swamplands Within their Courts and also by an act of the General Assembly of the State of Missouri entitled are act donating certain Swamp and Overplowed Lands to the Counties in which they lie, and whereas it further appears to this Court that the County Court of Greene ______ issue a warrant in favor of the said Smith for the sum of $380 on the Swamp Lands Fund drruled to the Treasurer of Greene County and whereas it further to the Court that the said Treasurer proposed the payment of said warrant of the County Court drawn on the Swamp Land Fund as aforesaid and it further appearing to the Court that William B. Farmer and James W. Gray two of the Justices of the County Court of Greene County have been notified by summons for 15 days before this sitting in this cause. It is therefore ordered by the Court that writs of Mandamus issue directed to the said William B. Freeman and James W. Gray requiring them to return said writs of Mandamus immediately and show cause if they could why said Mandamus should not be made perpetual.
16
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 112. March 6th 1858.
Louisiana Headlee et al Petition for Partition.
At this day it is ordered by the Court that L. Hendrick have for his services in this cause as a compensation as follows:
| On the first thousand dollars at 5 % | $50.00 |
| On the second thousand dollars at 2 1/2 % | $25.00 |
| On the balance $7706 at 2% | $154.12 |
| $229.12 |
17
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 115.
Amel Samson Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Theophilus Leathers Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by attorney and suggests the death of the Defendant since last term of this Court and on motion it is ordered that a siera facias issue to the Admin. of said Defendant to show cause why he should not be substituted as Defendant in this cause.
p 115/116.
H. F. Gray Plaintiff
vs Appeal J.P.
John Walker Defendant
Now at this day come again the Jury and having heard the evidence adduced and reviewed the instructions of the Court return to consider of their verdict and again come into Court and return the following verdict: "We the Jury find the issue for the Plaintiff and assesses the Defendant Ten dollars. J.R. Weaver, foreman". It is therefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiff have and recover of and from the Defendant the said John Walker and A.F. Smithson and A.N. Farmer his securities his said debt of $10 and also his costs laid out and expended and that he have execution therefor.
p 116/117/118.
Numda A. McGaugh
Newlin A. Davis, Wm. P. Davis,
Francus H. Dysart and Sarah A. his wife,
James M. Davis and Drucilla his wife,
Mariah J. Davis
Joshua T. Deeds by his guardian
Marcillus L. Davis by his guardian EXPARTEE Petition for Partition.
Now at this day comes the said petition Numda McGaugh, Newlin A. Davis, W.P. Davis, Francus H. Dysart and Sarah A. Dysart his wife, James M. Deeds and Drucilla Deeds his wife, Mariah J. Davis, Joshua T. Deeds by his guardian Newlin A. Davis, Marcellus L. Davis by his guardian John S. Kimbrough and present their mutual petition to the Court verified by affidavit representing that they have an undivided interest in the following described tracts of land viz: the S 1/2 of the W 1/2 of Lot No 3 NW f cl 1/4 Sect 1 TWP 29 Range 22 containing 19.97 acres. Also another tract viz: Beginning at the SWcorner of E 1/2 Lot 3 NE fcl 1/4 Sect 2 TWP 29 Range 22, thence North to middle river channel of a branch thence up with the meandus of said branch to its fork, thence up the Northern fork of sd branch to the Eastern boundry of said Sect No 2 thence South to the South boundry of said Lot thence West to the place of beginning.
Other tracts: E 1/2 Lot 2 Northwest fcl 1/4 Sect 1 TWP 29 Range 22 containing 39.93 acres.
W 1/2 Lot 2 NW fcl 1/4 Sect 1 TWP 29 Range 22 containing 38.98 acres.
E 1/2 Lot 2 NW fcl 1/4 Sec 2 TWP 29 Range 22 containing 39.57 acres.
And Lot 1 NW fcl 1/4 Sect 1 TWP 29 Range 22 containing 79 acres.
And Lot 1 NE fcl 1/4 Sect 5 TWP 26 Range 20 containing 80 acres.
And W 1/2 Lot 1 NW 1/4 Sec 4 TWP 26 Range 20 containing 40 acres.
And also an undivided 1/2 of part of Lot No 17 of Blk No 5 in the town of Springfield in the SW corner of said Lot fronting 12 feet on the Public Square and running North 1/2 through said Block, said real estate belonging to the estate of Joshua Davis deceased late of the County of Greene which land the said Davis acquired in his lifetime by purchase and the right to the undivided interest aforesaid being acquired as heirs
(cont)
18
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D JR
MARCH TERM 1858
p 116/117/118 cont.
at law of the said Joshua Davis deceased. That Francus H. Dysart and Sarah A Dysart his wife received as advancement from the said Joshua Davis on the first day of January 1851 a 40 acre tract of land worth $50. That the said Dysart and his wife in order to share equal with the balance of the Petitioners (all being children and grandchildren of said deceased shall bring in to holeh poleh the value of said land viz: $50 with interest thereon at the rate of 6% from said January 1851 to the present time. That they are the only parties interested in said lands either direct or indirect remote or contingent. That after the said Dysart and his wife shall bring in to holeh poleh the sum as aforesaid then the petitioners will be entitled each to an interest in said lands as follows viz: Numda A. McGaugh, Newlin A. Davis, William P. Davis, Mariah J. Davis, Joshua T. Deeds and Marcillus L. Davis are each entitled to oneeighth part of said land. That Francus H. Dysart and Sarah A. Dysart his wife are entitled to one-eighth, that James M. Deeds and Drucilla M. Deeds his wife are entitled to one-eighth part of said land. That from the nature and amount of the real estate sought to be divided and the number of owners that partition cannot be made in kind without great prejudice to the owners they pray the Court to make an order for the sale of said real estate without the appointment of Commissioners. And all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood and the Court finding that said lands cannot be divided without great prejudice and injury to the parties interested. It is therefore ordered adjudged and decreed by the Court that the following tracts of land, viz: E 1/2 Lot 2 NW fcl 1/4 W 1/2 Lot 2 NW fcl 1/4 Lot 1 NW fcl 1/4 Sect 1 TWP 29 Range 22 and E 1/2 Lot 2 NW fcl 1/4 Sec 2 TWP 29 Range 22 / S 1/2 of W 1/2 Lot 3 NW fcl 1/4 Sec 1 T 29 R 22 containing 19.97 acres also another tract viz: beginning at SW corner E 1/2 Lot 3 NE fcl 1/4 Sec 2 TWP 29 Range 22. Then North to middle main channel of branch, then up with the meandes of said branch to its fork, then up the Northern fork of said Branch to the Eastern Boundry said
Sect 2 then South to the South boundry of said Lot then West to place of beginning, also an undivided 1/2 of part of Lot No 17 Block No 5 in the town of Springfield in SW corner of said lot fronting 12 ft. on Public Square and running North 1/2 through said Block be sold by the Sheriff of Greene County as to Law directs. And the following parts of land viz: Lot 1 NE fc; 1/4 Sec 5 and W 1/2 Lot 1 NW fcl 1/4 Sect 4 TWP 26 Range 20, be sold by the Sheriff of County of Taney according to law and that said Sheriffs make return to this Court how they execute this order and that all the said land be sold on a credit of 12 months. And it is further ordered adjudged and decreed that after the said Dysart shall pay to the Sheriff of Greene County the aforesaid sum of $50 with interest thereon as specified in the proceeds including said $50, of the sale of said real estate after deducting all expenses and costs incurred wherein be distributed among the parties to this proceeding according to their respective interests as herein set forth.
p 118.
William Hargadan Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Henry McKinly Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and also the defendant in his own proper person and on confession and agreement of parties it is agreed that Judgment rendered in favor of the Plaintiff against said Defendant for the sum of $620 debt and $67.75 damages, it is therefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendant the said Debt and Damages and also his costs laid out and expended and that he have execution thereof.
19
Keyword Search | Greene County Records Home | Local History Home