Springfield-Greene
County LibrarySeptember Term 1856
First Day
Be it remembered that at 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 September 1856. There was present the Hon. Charles S. Yancey Judge of the 13th Judicial Circuit, Peter C. King Sheriff of said County and A.G. McCracken Clerk of said Court.
The Sheriff returned in to Court the following as a panel for a Grand Jury, Vis: David Appleby, foreman 1. Hope H. Skiers 2. Isaac N. Jones 3. Lewis Pipkin 4. Hosea Mullings 5. William B. Edwards 6. Josiah Ludy 7. John McElhannon 8. N.R. Smith 9. A. Wood 10. Richmond Johnson 11. Alfred Davidson 12. Thomas M. Chapman 13. W.A. Gantt 14. J. Ashmore 15, John H. Gibson 16. David Melton 17. Robert Batson 18, Eighteen good and lawful men who being duly elected charged and sworn to well and truly enquire within and for the body of the County of Greene, retired to consider of their presentments.
145
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
p 393.
Ordered by the Court that Samuel Fulbright former Sheriff of Greene County transfer and hand over all business in his hand pertaining sales of real estate for partition to Peter C. King present Sheriff to be proceeded on by him according to Law.
p 394.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Assault
Francis Gideon Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Adultery
Joel Bradberry Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Felonious Assault
James P. Dinkins Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said Suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
p 395.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Philip Martin Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will n0t further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
John Wilkerson Defendant
Now at 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 he is guilty as charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the Court whereupon the Court doth fine the Defendant the sum of ten dollars for the commission of the offense. It is considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the Defendant the said sum of ten dollars her fine as also her cost laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
146
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 396.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Hurt Wilkerson Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said Suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Hurt Wilkerson 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Hurt Wilkerson Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said Suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
Now at this day comes John McElhannon a Grand Juror this day empannelled and asks to be discharged from said Jury and all and singular the premises being seen, he is by the Court discharged.
p 397.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Playing Cards on Sunday
John W. Walker & James Crisenberry Defendants
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as also the Defendants by their attorney who for a plea says they cannot deny but that they are guilty as they stand charged in the Indictment and put themselves on the mercy of the Court whereupon the Court doth fine the Defendants in the sum of one dollar each for the commission of the offense. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover her said fine from said Defendants together wit h her costs laid out and expended for all of which execution issue containing a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Felonious Assault
Thomas J. Epperson Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf and the said Thomas J. Epperson being three times solemnly called comes not but herein makes default,
(continued)
147
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 397 (cont.)
and the said John W. Hancock and Elija Gray his recognizance being also thrice solemnly and required to bring in the body of the said Thomas J. Epperson and they also therein fail so to do whereupon the recognizance entered into by the said Thomas J. Epperson John W. Hancock and Elijah Gray for his appearance at this term of this Court to answer said Indictment has been forfeited. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Thomas J. Epperson, John W. Hancock and Elijah Gray the said sum of five hundred dollars the amount of said recognizance and that a writ of sirce facias issue returnable on the first day of the next term of the Court causing the said Thomas J. Epperson, John W. Hancock and Elijah Gray to show cause why an execution should not issue.
p 398, 399.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Reese Gott 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
p 399.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without A License
Peter L. Anderson 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
Ordered by the Court that R.A.C. Mack and James W. Mack be allowed to sign the roll of Attorney.
p 399/400.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Hurt Wilkerson Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri and also the Defendant by attorney and having announced themselves ready for trial the said Defendant for a plea says he is not guilty as charged in the Indictment and puts himself on the Country and the Circuit Attorney doth the like whereupon comes a Jury, to wit: Daniel Chandler, William Rose, E.P. Gott, William M. Wharton, N.M. Gillespie, John Young, R.C. Deeds, William M. Abernathy, J.H. Fagg, John Overstreet, William Thompson and M. Rose, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn to well and
(cont)
148
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 399, 400 (cont.)
truly try the issue joined between the parties. After hearing the evidence returned to consider of their verdict and again return into Court and render the following verdict, viz: "We the Jury find the Defendant guilty and assess the fine at ten dollars - John Young, foreman." It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the Defendant the said fine of ten dollars and also her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
p 400.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Martin G. May 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without A License
Thomas Frazier 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant the sum of five 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
p 401.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
John W. Walker 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Robert Moore and John W. Walker Defendants
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
149
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
p 402.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
John Wilkerson 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without A License
Martin G. May 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant the sum of twenty 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without A License
Peyton Nowlin 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands charged in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant the sum of five 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 Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
p 403.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Daniel Garrison 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 who for a plea says he cannot deny but that he is guilty as he stands in the Indictment and puts himself upon the mercy of the Court, whereupon the Court doth fine the said Defendant the sum of ten dollars for the commission of the offense. It is therefore considered by the Court tbat the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the Defendant the said fine and her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Gaming
Isaiah Clayton Defendant
(continued)
150
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 403 (cont)
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecuteS in this behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said Suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without A License
Magruder Tannehill Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without a License
D.C. Oakley Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
p 404.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without a License
Mitchell McCarty Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri and says he will not further prosecute her said Suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Malicious Trespass
Tobias Batson Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and by leave of the Court files his affidavit asking a continuance of this cause for the want of material evidence, and all and singular the premises being seen and by the Court this cause is continued until the next term of this Court.
p 405.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Bigamy
Manerva DeWitt Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri and asks the Court to continue this cause for want of evidence whereupon the Court considering that due diligence had not been made to obtain said evidence and refused a continuance, and the Circuit Attorney declining to enter a molle prasequio in this cause and try the same. It is ordered by the Court that the same be stricken from the Docket. 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.
151
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 405.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Selling Liquor Without a License
John A. Stephens 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 who having announced themselves ready for trial and the Defendant for a plea saith he is not guilty and puts himself upon theCountry and the Circuit Attorney doth the like whereupon cometh a Jury, to wit: F.M. Curdy, B.T. Potter, N.M. Gillespie, G.M. Freeman, I.A.I. Lea, Morgan Sage, John Williamson, William R. Freeman , Samuel Agnew, John A Miller, Willis Perryman and W.M. Wharton, twelve lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn to well and truly try the issue joined after hearing the evidence and argument of counsel retire to consider of their verdict and again return into Court the following verdict "We the Jury find the Defendant not guilty as charged in the Indictment, N.H. Gillespie, foreman." It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her said suit and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
p 406.
Samuel Fulbright, Sheriff
to Deed
Joseph Rogers
Now at this day comes Samuel F'ulbright 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 Greenberry Rogers for the following described land, vis - E 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of Sect 24 TWP 31 Range 21 and the said Samuel Fulbright acknowledged the same to be his act and deed for the uses and purposes therein contained.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Felonious Assault
William D. Miller Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant by his attorney and having announced themselves ready for trial the Defendant for a plea saith he is not guilty and puts himself on the Country and the Circuit Attorney doth the like, whereupon cometh a Jury Viz: Daniel Chandler, Charles McClure, N.J. Harris, Martin Brashears, William King, William Henslee, Benjamin Stites, James M. __urter, E.R. Fulbright, John Breedlove, A. Blankenship, H. Potte, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn to well and truly try the issues joined. After hearing a portion of the evidence, the further hearing of said cause was postponed until tomorrow morning.
p 407.
William Thompson Et al Petition for Partition.
Now at this day come William Thompson, James A. Thompson, A. Thompson, Charles Barham, Marcus Barham, Thomas Barham by L.B. Hall their guardian and file their petition showing to the Court that the said William Thompson and James Thompson are tenants in coparunary with the said Charles Barham and Marcus Barham minor heirs of Lewis D. Barham deceased of the following real estate, viz: the E 1/2 of Lot No 6 of the NW fr. 1/4 of Sect 6 TWP 29 Range 24 containing 40 acres. The Court doth find that said William and James Thompson are the joint owners of one undivided fourth part of said land by purchase from William D. Dunn and that said Charles Barham, Thomas Barham and Marcus Barham minor heirs as aforesaid are each entitled to one undivided 3/4 part of said land. And it being shown to the satisfaction of the Court that said land is not susceptable of being partitioned among the several parties interested without great prejudice to the interest of said
(continued)
152
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 407 (cont)
parties. It is therefore ordered adjudged and decreed by the Court that the said land be sold by the Sheriff of Greene County at the Court House door in the city of Springfield during the sitting of the Greene Circuit Court for said County which commences on the first Monday in March 1857 and that he advertise the same as the Law requires and that the proceeds of said sale be distributed to those interested according to their respect ive interests.
p 408 - nil
p 409.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Felonious Assault
William D. Miller Defendant
Now at this day again came the Jury empannelled in this cause and having heard all the testimony and arguments of Counsel and having received the instructions of the Court return to consider of their verdict and again return int0 Court and render the following verdict viz: "We of 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 $500, Benjamin Kile, foreman." It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the said Defendant her said fine of $500 and also her costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue containing a capias clause.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Grand Larceny
George Smith Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant, George Smith and Hiram Smith, who acknowledge them to owe and stand justly indebted unto the State of Missouri in the full sum of $500 each to be levied of their respective goods and chattles, lands and tenements to be void upon condition that the said George Smith shall make his personal appearance before the Judge of the Greene Court in the City of Springfield at the present term thereof from day to day to answer to a Bill of Indictment preferred against him by the Grand Jury of said County for Grand Larceny and not depart said Court without leave.
p 410. Thursday September 4th 1856.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Betting on Election
Joseph C. Moody Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutCs in this behalf for the State of Missouri and says that he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her Bill of Indictment and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Forgery
James Sage Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in this behalf for the State of Missouri and says that he will not further prosecute her said suit but will suffer the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Missouri take nothing by her Bill of Indictment and that the Defendant be discharged hereof and go hence without day.
153
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856.
p 410.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs
Joshua Robards Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri as well as the Defendant and the Grand Jury having failed to find a Bill of Indictment against the said Defendant, he is by the Court discharged from the custody of the Sheriff and allowed to go hence without day.
p 411 nil-
p 412.
James Bufford Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
John Upshaw Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and agrees to dismiss this suit and allow a Judgment against him by the Defendants paying the costs of this suit. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff do forever abandon any cause of action against said Defendant for the causes alledged in his petition and that the
said Plaintiff have and recover of the Defendant his costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Contempt
William J. Cannefax Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney and shows to the satisfaction of the Court that the said William J. Cannefax had been duly supboenaed to testify before the Grand Jury at the present term of this Court and had failed so to do. It is therefore ordered that an attachment issue returnable on the first day of the next term of this Court for the said William J. Cannefax so that he answer said contempt.
Ordered by the Court that the Sheriff furnish one dozen chairs for the use of the Court Room.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Forgery
James W. Sage Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant and by leave of the Court files his petition for a Change of Venue to some other Judicial Circuit because the Judge of this Court is so prejudiced against him that he cannot have a fair trial which is by the Court granted and ordered that this cause be transferred to Webster County in the Fourteenth Judicial Circuit.
p 413.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Forgery
James Sage Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri as also the Defendant James Sage and Morgan Sage who acknowledged themselves to owe and stand justly indebted to the State of Missouri in the sum of $500 to be levied of their respective goods and chattles, lands and tenements to be void on condition that the said James Sage shall make his personal appearance before the Judge of the Webster Circuit Court at Hazelwood the place of holding said Court in said County on the first day of said Court which commences on the second Monday after the 4th monday in September 1856 to
(continued)
154
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 413. (continued)
answer to a Bill of Indictment preferred against him by the Grand Jury of Greene County and not depart said Court without leave.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Forgery
James Sage Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri and also James S. Moss and John Young who acknowledged themselves to stand indebted unto the State of Missouri in the sum of $50 each, to be bond of their respective goods and chattles lands and tenements to be void on condition that they be and appear before the Judge of the Webster Circuit Court at Hazlewood, the place of holding said Court in said County on the second Monday after the fourth Monday in September 1856 then and there to testify and the truth to speak in a cause pending before said Court wherein the State of Missouri is Plaintiff and James Sage is Defendant and not depart said Court without leave.
p 414.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Grand Larceny
George W. Smith Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri as also A. Hollingsworth, William Lair and H.D. Ruffin who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand justly indebted unto the State of Missouri in the sum of S50 each to be bond of their respective goods and chattles lands and tenements to be void upon condition that they make their personal appearance before the Judge of the Polk County Court at the Court House in the town of Bolivar on the first Monday after the fourth Monday in September 1856 then and there to testify in a cause pending where the State of Missouri is Plaintiff and George W. Smith is Defendant and not depart said Court without leave.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Grand Larceny
George W. Smith Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes in behalf of the State of Missouri as also Joshua Robards and Hezekiah Robards who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand justly indebted unto the State of Missouri in the suin of $50 each to be void upon condition that the said Joshua Robards will make his personal appearance before the Judge of the Polk Circuit Court at the Court House in the town of Bolivar on the first Monday after the fourth Monday in September 1856 and testify in cause pending in said Court within the State of Missouri as Plaintiff and George W. Smith Defendant and not depart said Court without leave.
B.T. Potter et al Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Thadeus Sharpenstein et al Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiffs by their attorney and by leave of the Court files their petition for a Change of Venue to some other County in the Judicial Court and by leave of the Court there is a Change of Venue awarded to the County of Barry in the State of Missouri by the Plaintiff's paying the costs of this term of this Court. It is therefore ordered by the Court that the Defendant have his costs laid out and expended at this term of this Court for which let execution issue.
155
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 415.
Samuel Fulbright
to Deed
John F. Morton
Now at this day comes Samuel Fulbright 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 John F. Morton for the following described land the W 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Sect 1 TWP 20 Range 21 and the said Samuel Fulbright acknowledged the same to be his act and deed for the uses and purposes therein contained.
p 416.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Grand Larceny
George Smith Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant in his own proper person and the said State by his attorney in this behalf prosecuting comes also, and the said Defendant herein files his petition for a change of venue in the cause to some other Judicial Circuit for the reason that the mind of the Judge is so prejudiced against him that he cannot have a fair trial in this cause. And the premises being seen and by the Court fully understood. It is therefore ordered by the Court that the same be granted and the same is hereby awarded to the County of Polk in the 7th Judicial Circuit. It is further ordered by the Court that the Sheriff of Greene County be and he is hereby required to move the body of the said Smith to the jail of the said County of Polk and deliver him to the keeper thereof together with the process by virtue of which he is imprisoned who is hereby required to remove the said Smith and him safely keep so that the said Smith be forthcoming in the Circuit Court of said County of Polk at the next term thereof.
p 417. Friday September 5th 1896
Washington B. Anderson Plaintiff
vs Civil Action
Jabez Owen and John W. Hancock Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendants had been duly served with process at least twenty days before the present term of this Court and the Defendants being thrice solemnly called come not and the demand being founded on an instrument of writing signed by the Defendants and the amount ascertained thereby. The Court doth find that the said Defendants are indebted to the said Plaintiff in the sum of $465 for his debt and also the sum of $21 for his damages by reason of 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 c0sts laid 0ut and expended for which let execution issue.
p 418-nil.
P 419.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs Grand Larceny
George Smith Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State and also the said George Smith and Hiram Smith who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand justly indebted unto the State of Missouri in the sum of $800 to be bond of the respective goods and chattles, lands and tenements to be void on condition that the said George Smith shall make his personal appearance before the Judge of the Polk Circuit Court in the town
of Bolivar in the said County on the first Monday after the fourth Monday in September
(continued)
156
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES
Book D.
SEPTEMBER TERM 1856
p 419 (cont)
1856 then and there to answer to a bill of indictment preferred against him for Grand Larceny and not depart said Court without leave.
J.L. Stafford Plaintiff
vs Appeal from J.P.
B.P. Smith Defendant
Now at this day comes the parties by attorney and by leave of the Court the said Plaintiff appellant in this cause dismisses this suit nune prutune. 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 of and from the said appellant Joseph L. Stafford, Thomas H. Moore, Joseph R. McCormick, securities in the appeal bond his costs laid out and expended for all of which let execution issue.
p 420.
Jeremiah Wilson Plaintiff
vs
Charles T. Drumright & James Vaughan Defendants
Now at this day comes again the parties aforesaid and this cause again coming to be heard for the purpose of carrying into effect the determination of the cause by the Supreme Court and therefore the Court directs the following issues to be tried by a Jury that is to say:
First What was the value of the land sold by Drumright to Vaughan at the tinle of the sale.
Second Did Drumright before the commencement of this suit offer to settle with Wilson and account to him for the value of the land sold and to reconvey the residence.
And thereupon came a Jury, to wit: E.P. Gott, W.B. Anderson, W.J. Coleman, W.H. Blakey, Alsey Oneal, D.D. Berry, William Robertson, W.M. Abernathy, M. Bassinett, M. Townsend, C.B. Owen, Wallace Blackman, twelve good and lawful men elected and sworn to try the issue joined, who having heard the evidence do find - as to the first issue We the Jury find the land worth $1.25 per acre at the time of the sale. As to the second issue We the Jury find the said Drumright did offer to settle with Wilson, and before the commencement of this and also to convey to Wilson the remaining 80 acres of said, and therefore this cause is continued until tomorrow morning.
p 421.
Ordered by the Court that for good cause shown to the Court that Abraham Woody be discharged from the Grand Jury impanneled this Court.
p 422.
Samuel Fulbright
to Deed
Henry McKinly
Now at this day comes Samuel Fulbright 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 Henry McKinly for the following described real estate, viz- the W 1/2 of the NE 1/4 and the E 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Sect 4 TWP 30 Range 24 containing 160 acres and the said Samuel Fulbright acknowledged that he executed and delivered the same for the uses and purposes therein contained.
157
Keyword Search | Greene County Records Home | Local History Home