COURT ORDERS - CHARLOTTE COUNTY, VA BOOK FIFTEEN 1805 - 1807
COURT ORDERS - CHARLOTTE COUNTY, VA
BOOK FIFTEEN 1805 - 1807
Submited by Tom McCargo 27 July 1999
4 May 1805
Pg 2 A grand Jury is impanelled: Francis Barnes, Foreman, James Robertson, Andrew North, Joshua Nicholas, Francis Roberts, Michiah Woods, Thomas North, Thomas A Stephenson, John Pugh, Jude Duffer, William Clay, Thomas Pettus, Martin Hancock, Miles Bottom, Thomas Johns, and Richard Watkins return the following presentments:
The surveyor of the road from John Roberts' to Horse pen Creek on the information of Francis Barnes and William Clay of our own body. (1)
William Hearvy (48) for disturbing divine worship at Little Concord Meeting on Tuesday the 30th April, last, on the information of Martin Hancock and Thomas North of our own body.(2)
John Rawlins for profane swearing four oaths at William Dupree's Store on Thursday the 2nd instance on the information of Francis Barnes and Francis Roberts of our own body.(3)
William Hearvy (48) for getting drunk at Little Concord Meeting on Tuesday the 30th April, last,the peace, on the information of Martin Hancock and Thomas North of our own body.
3 June 1805
Pg 26 Ordered that Reps Osborne, William Dupree, Thomas Brooke and John Petty . . . do appraise the slaves and personal estate of Stephen May . . . etc.
Pg 27 The last will and testament of John Rice was produced by Elizabeth Rice, the Executrix . . . she with John McCargo and Philip Goode, her securities . . . etc
Pg 2 Ordered that Francis Roberts, David McCargo, Thomas Roberts and John Roberts . . . do appraise the slaves and personal estate of Stephen May . . . etc.
1 July 1805
Pg 31 An indenture between William Brezindine & Mary his wife to David McCargo -- Recorded in Deed Book ? page ?? (???)
Pg 32 An indenture between David McCargo & Nancy, his wife to James McCargo -- Recorded in Deed Book ? page ?? (??)
Pg 33 An indenture between Wm Crenshaw & Catherine his wife on the one part and John McCargo of the other part was proved by the oaths of three witness subscribing thereto Recorded in Deed Book 9 page 130 (7/1/1805)
Pg 35 In a court held for Charlotte County the 1st day of July, 1800, for examination of Benjamin Saunders, who stands committed to the common jail of the county, on the suspicion of feloniously murdering Miles Finney.
The sd Benjamin Saunders was lead to the bar in custody of John D. Richardson, Deputy-Sheriff of sd county to whose custody for the cause aforesaid, he was before committed. Being charged with the facts, saith he is in no wise guilty thereof. . . . It is considered by the court that the sd prisoner is guilty of the crime for which he stands charged, and that he aught to be tried for the same at the next Prince Edward District Court, to be holden at the Court House of the sd county, on the first day of the next court and therefore he is remanded back to jail, and it is commanded the Sheriff, that he convey the sd prisoner to the District jail as soon as may be.
Robert Moseley, a witness before the court, on oath saith that on the 2nd day of June, last, he with the sd prisoner, and several others were cutting wheat in John Mim's field. Mr Farley and Mr. Finney came to the field where they were cutting and the company, except this deponent went to a house where spirits were kept. This deponent soon followed and found the company in good temper. This deponent mentioned that he had cause that morning to quarrel with Uncle Ben (meaning the prisoner) about the hub of a cart wheel. Mr. Farley also said he had cause to quarrel with him for not fixing the cradles for cutting the wheat. Then Mr Finney also said he had come to quarrel with him about some cart wheels; for, that the prisoner had been to his (Finney's) mill the day before, and had abused him very much, and wanted to know whether Finney was going to pay him trashy wheat for the wheels. Nothing more was then said, and the cutters returned to reaping. When they again returned to the house, Finney mentioned the subject of the wheel and said Saunders had abused him much and then pulled out a dollar and said he could pay him now to do the wheels and then to come to him and he would pay him more. The subject was then dropped and the company returned to cutting wheat. When Mr Mims and Saunders had cut their rows and this deponent nearly done his, he head Finney cry out "Hoora here a negro", and said he would cut Mr Saunders or any such dam'd rascal, and attempted to pull off his coat, but was prevented by this deponent, and swore he could and would whip Saunders. Mr. Saunders, who had stopped to whet his scythe, took it up and walked about 25 steps directly from this deponent and Finney, to the wheat. He then returned walking by the side of the wheat. Finney walked straight forward and appeared to be passing Saunders. When they came within about eight feet of each other, Finney again swore he could whip Saunders and would do it. Saunders told him to stand off twice, and called upon this deponent as witness, holding his scythe above his head, saying if Finney would touch him, he would cut him. This deponent called three time to Saunders, to let him (Finney) alone, for Finney was drunk and staggering and he, Saunders knew it. As this deponent spoke the third time, Saunders made one step forward and struck Finney with his scythe blade, above the calves of both legs. Finney moved about 15 feet, fell and expired in about 15 minutes. Both legs appeared to be cut to the bone. Saunders after giving the strokes, walked off, making a few stroke in the wheat, and at the end of the wheat, he shouldered his cradle and went towards home. This deponent called to him several times to stop and forewarned him from going from the field. Finney at the time he received the blow, had no weapon in his hands, and appeared to be passing Saunders, and this deponent thinks he had passed him a little and had made no attempt to strike Saunders. Further he saith not.
John Mims, a witness before the court, on oath saith that on the 2nd day of June, last, he and others, among who was Benjamin Saunders, were cutting wheat in his field, that Miles Finney had come to the field and he had some words between Finney and Saunders in the day, but did not suppose there was any serious quarrel. This deponent was about 100 yards or upwards from Finney and Saunders, when heard Mr. Moseley call him and say he believed Ben had killed Miles. This deponent immediately dropped his cradle and ran to the place and found Finney lieing very pale, badly cut in both legs, and he soon after expired. Further he saith not.(4)
Pg 36 An indenture between Levy Blankenship and William Dupree.
Pg 37 Lewis Dunn is appointed Surveyor of the Road whereof Hugh Wyllie was late surveyor, and it is ordered that he, with the same hands that worked the road under the sd Wyllie, do forthwith clear and keep the same in repair.
5 August 1805
Pg 39 Molly Ashworth Plaintiff vs Bibby Brooke and John Ashworth and Langston Bacon, the two last, adm'rs of Samuel Ashworth, dec'd, Defendants
By direction of the plaintiff's atty, the suit is ordered to be dismissed.
Pg 39 A grand Jury is impanelled: Charles Raine, Foreman, Robert Moore, Jesse Chaffin, Joshua Nicholas, Willaim Clay, Thomas Johns, John Wyatt, John McCargo, John Chastian, Thomas Cheany, Chillion Palmer, John Hunter, Thomas North, Benjamin Marshall, Robert Franklin, and John Hatchett.
Pg 42 Reps Osborne, Mack Goode, Francis Barnes and David McCargo, who were appointed to adjust and settle the account current of the estate of James Rice, dec'd, not having completed the same, on the motion of William Dupree, the adm'r with will annexed, of the sd James Rice, it is ordered that Edward Almond, Thomas Hardie, Thomas Cheaney and Collier Hutchenson, be added so that any three of these adjust and settle the account current of the sd estate.
Pg 46 Joseph Liggon, Plaintiff vs Frances Liggon, Defendant - a suit in chancery.
This cause came on to be heard on the plaintiff's bill, the answers of the defendant and a deposition of the witnesses and exhibits and arguments of counsel on both sides, whereupon it is ordered that the suit be dismissed and that the plaintiff pay to the defendant her cost in her behalf expended. From which judgement, plaintiff prayed an appeal to the third day of the next Superior Court of Chancery, to be held at the Capitol, in the City of Richmond; which is granted him, he giving bond & security. Whereupon he, with James Hamlett, his security . . . etc
Def's cost: atty 500 clk 1763
Pltf's cost: Atty 500 clk 3804 shf 84 tax 50 tax on appeal 200
Pg 46 Ordered that the Clerk certify to the Executive that an inquiry directed by the court be made that the negro woman, Fanny, condemned to suffer death for an attempt poison - whose execution is suspended by the Executive until the last Friday in the present month, is pregnant with child - five or six months advanced in her pregnancy.
Pg 53 Zachariah Brooke Plaintiff vs William Dupree, adm'r of with will annexed of James Rice, dec'd, Defendant - a suit in debt
On the motion of the defendant, by his atty, who pleaded the general issue, it is ordered that the judgement obtained in the office, against the defendant, on which a wit of inquiry was awarded, be set aside.
Came jury towit: Francis Jackson, James Daniel, John Hannon, Thomas Hearvy, John McCargo, John Warren, Robert Campbell, Gabriel Barnes, Thomas Oliver, John Key, Branch Anderson and Joseph Oliver . . . (the jury) do say, the defendant testator did assume in manner and form as the plaintiff hath against him complained, and assess the plaintiff's damaged occasioned thereby at £19, besides his costs, with interest at 6 percent from the tenth day of February, 1800.
Clk 354 shf 20 tax 50 wit 106 fifa 13 Aug 1805
On the motion of John McCargo, a witness for Zackariah Brooke in his suit against Wm Dupree, adm'r of John Rice, pay 106 for two days at court.
15 August 1805
Pg 60 A court held for the trial of Stephen, a negro man slave, the property of William Bouldin, charged with murdering Phil, a negro man slave, belonging to William Brezindine . . . with a knife or other sharp instrument made of iron or steel . . . did strike the sd Phil in the left breast, and did make one mortal wound, of the breath of two inches, three inches deep, and that further the sd Stephen, with a stick of the length of three feet, and one inch thick, which the sd Stephen in his right hand held, did further strike him upon the head and breast, of which sd wound the sd Ralph did linger and die. Being charged with the facts, saith he is in no wise guilty thereof. . . he was fully heard in his defense . . . On consideration of the court, it is the opinion of the court that the sd prisoner is guilty of manslaughter and is entitled to benefit of clergy, which he prays, and to him granted. Thereupon it is ordered that the prisoner, for the crime aforesaid be burnt in the hand at the bar in open court, and from there conducted to the common pillory and have his ears nailed to the post for thirty minutes each alternately, and then receive on his bare back thirty nine lashes well laid on and the be discharged and it is commanded the Sheriff, he cause execution immediately.
2 September 1805
Pg 64 Griffin Dodd, guardian of Amy Sullivant, orphan of John Sullivant, dec'd, came into court and presented his account against the said orphan's estate, who made oath to same and is ordered to be recorded.
Pg 64 John McCargo, guardian of Elizabeth Sullivant, orphan of John Sullivant, dec'd, came into court and presented his account against the said orphan's estate, who made oath to same and is ordered to be recorded.
Pg 71 Jameson and Richard Carson, surviving partners of Buchanan & Co Plaintiff vs John Simmons, William Cannady, William Bryant and Sally, his wife, Reuben Herndon, and Fannie, his wife, John Herndon, and Jenny, his wife, Caleb Cannady, John Green and Levice, his wife, heirs of John Cannady, dec'd, Plaintiffs vs Mary Byrd, widow of the late William Byrd, dec'd, and George and David Galespie - a suit in debt.(5)
The commissioners appointed by the court . . . make their report in the following words: . . . under the sd decree, did on the 4th day of March, last, after having given due notice, proceed to make sale of the land in the sd decree mentioned. When the same was cryed (sic) out to Mary Morton as the highest bidder at 16 shillings per acre, which price; 216 ½ acres, the quantity ascertained by survey, do make £173/04/00
. . .Sally Bryant, wife of William Bryant, a party to this suit, departed this life, since the suit was instituted.
Pg 71 An Indenture between William Brezindine, and Elizabeth, his wife, of the one party and David McCargo of the other . . . the sd Mary, being first privately examined, relinquishes her right to dowry thereof and ordered to be recorded.
Pg 72 An Indenture between David McCargo, and Nancy, his wife of the one party and James McCargo of the other . . . the sd Nancy, being first privately examined, relinquishes her right to dowry thereof and ordered to be recorded.
Pg 73 Petition of James Cook, setting forth that he is a Freeman, held in slavery by James Matthews, and prays that he may be permitted to commence suit in this court for his freedom, and that the sd James Matthews may be compelled to give bond & security to have your petitioner forthcoming, to answer the final judgement of the court. On hearing the same, and the facts stated being satisfactory to the court, the petitioner is allowed to sue in this court in the form proposed .(6)
7 October 1805
Pg 75 On the motion of Levi Blankenship,. . . certificate is granted him for obtaining ltrs of administration of the estate of Duke Hailey, dec'd, in due form, with will annexed ... he, with Thomas Chaffin, his security etc ... Priscilla Hailey, mother of the sd Duke Hailey, having first, by her letter addressed to this court relinquished her right od administration.
4 November 1805
Pg 78 Joseph B. Ingram & Martha his wife, formerly Martha May, Plaintiff vs Elizabeth May, Widow of Stephen May, dec'd, Betsy May, Fanny May, Priscilla May, Robert May and Willaim May, infant children of Stephen May, dec'd, Defendants - a suit in chancery
Pg 79 Martin Baker, Plaintiff vs Robert Jennings, Defendant - Case law
The jury selected to hear the case includes John McCargo.
Pg 81 William Ramsey, & Polly his wife, Plaintiffs vs Elizabeth Pugh, widow and adm'rx of Samuel Pugh, dec'd, Daniel M'Craw & Elizabeth, his wife, Abraham Pugh, Nancy Pugh, John Pugh, James Pugh, Joseph Pugh and Judith Pugh; which sd Nancy, John, Jams,Joseph and Judith are infants under the age of 21 years, Defendants - a suit in chancery.
7 December 1805
Pg 97 Thomas Petty and John Pollack ware lead to the bar in custody of Francis Scott,Jnr, Deputy-Sheriff of sd county to whose custody for the cause aforesaid, he was before committed. Being charged with the facts, saith they are in no wise guilty thereof. Whereupon divers witnesses were produced, sworn and examined, as well on behalf of the Commonwealth as the sd prisoner, On consideration thereof it is the opinion of the court that the prisoner Pollock is not guilty of the crime alleged against him and he is discharged. The sd prisoner Petty is guilty of the crime for which he stands charged, and that he aught to be tried for the same at the next Prince Edward District Court, and therefore he is remanded back to jail, and it is commanded the Sheriff, that he convey the sd prisoner to the District jail as soon as may be.
John McCargo & Lyod Portwood, witnesses before the court, on oath saith that they were called to serve on an inquest over the body of a negro man called John, in the possession of Thomas Petty, on Sunday the 24th of November, last. That they examined the body of the sd negro, which appeared to be severely beaten from the neck to the heels, with large switches; and that there was a bruise on the right breast, which beating and bruise they supposed produced the death of the sd negro. Thomas Petty confessed he had whipped the sd negro on the Friday afternoon before and that the negro died on Saturday morning. Further they saith not.
Reps Osborne, a witness before the court, saith that on Saturday morning the 23rd of November last, he met Thomas Petty, who informed him that he, Petty, was in pursuit of the deponent to go to his home. Being asked why, he said the negro man he hired had behaved do bad the day before that he had given him a whipping such as he called sever and that this was not the worst, the negro was since dead and wished the deponent to see him and advise him what to do. Further he saith not.
John McCargo, Lyod Portwood, Reps Osborne and Langston Bacon are bonded to appear as witnesses at Prince Edward District Court
6 January 1806
Pg 108 Ephriam Bouldin, father and natural guardian of Charles Bedford Bouldin, Plaintiff vs John Spenser, & Drusilla his wife, John Ferrell & Peggy, his wife, Hillery Moseley,& Nancy, his wife, James Hamlett & Mary, his wife, who are next of kin to Charles W. Bedford, dec'd; Defendants - On a motion to receive a nuncupative will.
The defendants being summoned to show cause why the nuncupative will of Charles W. Bedford, dec'd, ought not to be admitted to record, this day appeared by their counsels and opposed the validity of the sd will, suggesting that the words spoken by . . .Charles W. Bedford was not his nuncupative will. Whereupon sundry witnesses were sworn, examined and heard. John Roberts, one of the witnesses deposeth (having first released his legacy); -- about three days after the illness of Charles W. Bedford, he came into the deponent's piazza, where this deponent, Chastian Roberts and Robert Howell were setting and laid his head upon the deponent's knee. A few words passed relating to the testator's health and then he said; addressing himself to John Roberts, he was very sick, that this is the third time he has been attacked by this disorder, and he believed he should die -- if he did he would give the deponent the eighty dollars he owed him for the purchased of a grey mare -- to Chastain Roberts, forty dollars to buy a mourning ring -- to Robert Howell he gave his cloths -- to his sister Peggy, he gave fifty dollars to buy her a mourning ring -- the rest of his estate, both real and personal he gave to his nephew Charles Bedford Bouldin. Being asked by the deponent if he was in earnest he said he really was -- that this conversation was in his last illness, seven or eight days before his death
Question by the defendant's counsel: Did the testator say "I will give" or "I do give?" Answer -- he is not positive whether he said I will or I do give.
Question by the Plaintiff's atty: Was the testator at the time of the speaking the foregoing testamentary words in his perfect senses or not? Answer -- he was perfectly so.
Question by defense's counsel, "Did not the testator, about three days before his death, appear to rise out of a sleep, and ask the doctor if he was in his senses sufficiently to make a will?" -- Dr. Patterson answered and said he was, and that Francis Fitzgerald, who was present, could write his will - Bedford then said if he made a will it would look as if he should die, and turned over and appeared to fall into a doze of sleep.
.....to his nephew, Charles Bedford Bouldin - that this conversation passed at the period that John and Chastain Roberts have already stated - Question asked by defendant's attorney - "Did the Testator appear to be in earnest at the time of speaking the testamentary words ?" Answer "He appeared so when speaking of the legacy to Charles Bedford Bouldin, but not so in the legacies to the deponent and Chastain Roberts." - Further question by the defendant's attorney, "Did the testator appear to be serious on account of his illness ... That the sd Charles W. Bedford, before and after this conversation, was at time delirious and the witness says at the time he spake these words he was in his senses. The testator died on the 18th day of July, 1805.
Chastian Roberts, another witness on oath saith (having first released his legacy) that Charles W. Bedford came into his brother John's piazza when this deponent and Robert Howell were setting, and addressing himself to John Roberts by name, he said "Mr. Roberts, I am very sick" and believed he should die . . .(7) and the sd Bedford appeared to be in his senses at that time and was asked by John Roberts if he was in earnest. He said he was, but it is the opinion of the deponent that the testator was not in earnest and conceived the conversation on the part of the company, jocular and on part of the testator's also jocular, so far as respects the legacy to Howell and this deponent. The legacy to Charles Bedford Bouldin, he appeared to be in earnest. The testator died on the 18th day of July, 1805. During the conversation speaking the testamentary words, he laughed twice, once very loud, when speaking of Howell's and this deponent's legacy. Further examination of the witnesses and proceedings is continued until tomorrow. Ordered that the court be adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow.
The parties appeared by their counsels and question asked the witness Chastian Roberts by the defendant's atty -- Did Charles W. Bedford call any person present to take notice or bear testimony that the words he was about to speak, were his will? Answer -- He did not at the time of speaking, before or after.
Question asked by plaintiff's atty -- Did not the testator address himself to, when speaking the testamentary wards, to John Roberts by name? Answer -- He did not as well he recalled it.
Question by the defendant's atty --Were there any interval of time between his saying "Mr. Roberts, I am sick" and his laying his head on the knee of John Roberts? Answer -- There was no interval of time in the conversation, but he proceeded to utter the words immediately.
Further question by the defendant's atty -- Did not the testator, after speaking the testamentary words, go into his clerk's office and do business? Answer -- He did not recall that he did.
Question asked John Roberts by the defendant's atty -- Was the testator confined to his room after speaking the testamentary words? Answer -- He walked about the room and in the piazza, but did not recall that he ever went out of doors or did business afterwards and that the testator walked about his room the day he died.
Question also asked by the defendant's atty -- Did the testator appoint or nominate any person as his executor? Answer -- He did not.
Same question asked Chastain Roberts Answer -- He did not.
Robert Howell, another witness on oath saith (having first released his legacy) that he heard Charles W. Bedford say . . .(8) the deponent then asked the testator in jest what he would give him. He said in jest all his cloths, all the rest of his estate he gave to his nephew Charles Bedford Bouldin (9)
. . . appeared to be serious on the part of his illness or the disposition of his estate? Answer -- He appeared to be serious in making his will.
Further question by the defendant's atty -- Did the deponent conceive the testator to be serious when speaking the testamentary words devising to Charles Bedford Bouldin and Peggy Bedford; from the circumstances that he did not smile then, but smiled before? Answer -- He did.
Question by the plaintiff's atty -- Did not the testator have any other mark of being in earnest in the disposition of his estate, as well as that of not smiling? Answer -- He did.
Question of John Roberts by the defendant's atty -- Was not the testator capable of writing his will after speaking the testamentary words? Answer -- He was.
The parties admit the property in question to be of the value of 4,000 dollars & upwards and that Charles W. Bedford was taken sick at John Roberts' and died before returning to his habitation in the county of Charlotte, and the testator was upwards of 21 years age.
On hearing the testimony of the witnesses, and the argument of the parties, it is the opinion of the court that the words spoken by Charles W. Bedford is not his nuncupative will. Thereupon the motion of the sd Ephriam Bouldin to admit the same to record is over ruled.
1 February 1806
Pg 112 On the motion of Hillery Goode, a license is granted him to keep an ordinary at his house . . . he with James McCargo, his security . . .etc
6 March 1806
Pg 117 Isaac, a negro man slave belong to Francis Scott was led to the bar by Matthew Williams, Deputy-Sheriff . . . Joseph Venable prosecuting Be it remembered . . . this 3rd day of March 1806, Isaac, a negro man slave,. . . stands charged before the court, that he the sd Isaac did feloniously & wickedly & maliciously conspire to kill and murder, John Thomas, Merchant. The sd Isaac being arraigned of the premises, pleaded not guilty. Sundry witnesses were sworn, charged and examined . . . and he was fully heard in his defence (sic) by Thomas T. Bouldin, Gent. On consideration it is the opinion of the court the prisoner is not guilty in manner & form as alleged against him, therefore he is discharged.(10)
Pg 118 A Grand Jury is impanelled: Thomas Gaines, Foreman, Anthony North, John McCargo, Miles Bottom, Charles Raine, Elijah Clark, Benjamin Marshall, John Wyatt, Anthony Phillips, James Johnson, William Overstreet, Edmund Patrick, Francis Thorton, Ebenezer Vernon, John Green, Thomas Cheaney, John Roberts, Benjamin Wilkes, Willaim Woodfur, Thomas A Stephenson and William Brooke. Presentments are returned against:
The Surveyor of the Road from John Roberts' Tavern to the Horse pen Creek leading by Richard Stone's Tavern; by information of Willaim Brooke and Thomas Cheaney.
The Surveyor of the Road from Horse pen Creek to the county line, leading by Blankenship's old barn; by information of Willaim Brooke and Thomas Cheaney
The Surveyor of the Road from John Cox's Road to Thomas Redmon's, leading by Charlotte Court House; by information of John Roberts and Miles Bottom.
Found the indictment against George Brooks and Francis Brooks to be a true bill.
Pg 124 Francis Roberts is nominated to his excellency, the Governor, as an Ensign in the 1st Battalion of the Militia of the sd county in the place of John McCargo, who resigned.
Pg 124 Frances Smithson, formerly Francs Bayne, George S.Bayne, John D. Bayne and Daniel Bayne; Plaintiffs vs Edmund P. Bacon, guardian of Ellender Bayne, dec'd, Defendant - a suit in chancery
Ordered that the 200 acres of land, in the bill mentioned, of which Ellender Bayne died seized, lying in Charlotte county on the Horse pen Creek . . .be sold and one fourth of the proceeds be alloted to . . . each of the plaintiffs as heirs of Ellender Bayne, intestate.(11)
Pg 127 On the motion of Henry A. Watkins, it is ordered to be entered of record that he not finding it to be convenient to act in the office of magistrate until the present time -- disclaims all benefits of the office of Sheriff until it come his turn in rotation, counting his service as magistrate from the present time.
Pg 128 James Cook, Plaintiff vs James Matthews, Defendant - on a trespass, assault & battery and false imprisonment 2 September 1805
On the motion of the defendant who pleads by his atty, that the plaintiff is a slave not a freeman, and is not entitled to, the action, to which plea the plaintiff replies he is a freeman. Come a jury . . . and they do say the plaintiff is a freeman and not a slave, as in the pleading alleged, and that the plaintiff hath suffered damages by the occasion thereof to one penny, besides his costs..atty 2.50, clk 3.87, shf 1.68, tax .50 . . .etc.
2 June 1806
Pg 155 The commission for taking acknowledgment of Frances Brooke, wife of Zachariah Brooke, annexed to the indenture of Bargain & Sale between . . . and Matthew Williams on the other part.
Pg 156 Pleasant Robards &c Plaintiffs vs William Womack &c Defendants - Chancery
It appearing to the court that Elizabeth Hatchett, by her deed, did convey to William Hatchett, her grandson, one of the defendants in this suit, her interests in the estate of the intestate, William Womack. Ordered that the one-ninth of the sd estate, ordered to be retained in the hands of the com'rs, be paid to the sd William Hatchett, as heir of the sd Elizabeth Hatchett.
Pg 164 Hezikiah McCargo &c Plaintiffs vs Francis Roberts &c, Defendants - in Chancery filed 5 Nov 1804
Commissioner app't under the interlocutory order made in this suit made distribution as follows:
Allotted to Mary Magdalene Herndon, relict of the sd decedent -- 76/6/11 which is the sum paid her in sundry articles and she relinquishing all other claims to the decedent's estate;
allotted to Young Brezindine & Rittah, his wife -- a negro by the name of Phyllis and also the sum of £ 19/1/9;
allotted to William Herndon -- one negro by the name of Abraham and also the sum of £19/1/9;
allotted to Francis Roberts & Jane, his wife -- one negro named Isaac and also the sum of £19/1/9
allotted to Hezikiah McCargo & Tabby, his wife -- the sum of sixty pounds in lieu of a negro freed by the court and also the sum of £19/1/9;
allotted to John Herndon -- one negro named America and also the sum of £19/1/9;
allotted to Elijah Herndon -- one negro named Africa and also the sum of £19/1/9;
allotted to Benj. Herndon -- one negro named Phill and also the sum of £19/1/9;
allotted to Thomas Roberts & Sarah, his wife -- one negro named Jacob and also the sum of £19/1/9
Signed Mack Goode, Reps Osborbne, H. Elam 18 Jan 1806
2 July 1806
Pg 165 On the motion of William Bentley and Edward Moseley, Jnr, setting forth that they have erected their toll bridge over Staunton River, and have so far completed it as to admit of a safe passage for travelers and other things -- Ordered that Langston Bacon, Francis Barnes,Jnr, David McCargo, John Petty, Robert Moore, Archie Farley and Stephen Davis, or any five of them, do view the sd bridge, whether it is now safe for the passage of travelers & other things, and report to the court, a true state thereof.
Pg 165 Young Brezindine, and Rittah, his wife, Francis Roberts, and Jane, his wife, Hezikiah McCargo, and Tabby, his wife, Thomas Roberts, and Sarah, his wife; Plaintiffs vs William Herndon, John Herndon, Elijah Herndon, Benjamin Herndon and Mary Magdalene Herndon; Defendants - In Chancery
The defendant Willaim Herndon not having entered his appearance, altho solemnly called, and it appears to the satisfaction of the court, he is not an inhabitant of this state. . . .
Pg 172 The commissioners appointed to examine and report to the court, a state of the Military Courts-Martial of this county, from the year 1794 to this time, this day made their report in these words:
Respecting the military fines in this county, we have obtained the information our limited means would admit of -- In the first place, we state we could obtain no information of the fines due for the years 1794 or 1795. From the year 1795 to the year 1800, we refer the court to the note from the Auditor's Office, which is endorsed #1 -- We further state that from the last date, to the present time, we have seen in the hands of Chrisley Daniels, Clerk of the Courts-Martial, a list of fines for each year since 1799, which ought to have been returned annually to the Auditor's Office; the whole amounting to the sum of $2,160.15 -- these we were anxious to present to the court, but was unable to procure them -- With respect to the drafts and lists of insolvents mentioned in the letter, we beg leave to state that though the law since the year '99, required the Colonel to render annually, an amount of the drafts made by him to the Sheriff, they find but one, in the year 1804, which we refer #2 -- They further state that from the information of the Clerk of the Court-Martial, that the Sheriffs are possessed of lists of insolvents allowed by the Courts-Martial in each year, which they refuse to render up to the committee or to the court.
Upon the whole it appears to the committee, that considerable sum of money is due the public on account of the fines, and it is seriously our opinion, that unless the law is so amended to make the Clerks of the Courts-Martial answerable to some tribunal and constrained to make annual return of the lists of fines imposed by the Courts-Martial, the people will continue to be harassed with collection of large sums of money, which never reach the Public Treasury.
Signed Clement Carrington, Henry A. Watkins, Willaim Gaines
Ordered by the court top be certified to the Governor.
Pg 172 The last will and testament of Dudley Brooke, dec'd, was produced in court by John Brooke. On the motion of John Brooke, the executor therein named, administration with will annexed of the sd Dudley Brooke, dec'd, is granted to him, he giving security, whereupon, he with Robert Campbell, Thomas Scott, Daniel Marshall and Jack D. Harvie, his securities, entered into and acknowledged their bond according to law.
Pg 174 Ordered that John McCargo, James McCargo, William Dupree and David McCargo, do appraise the slaves and personal estate of Dudley Brooke . . etc
2 August 1806
Pg 176 In obedience to an order of this court, we the undersigned commissioners have viewed & examined the bridge erected by William Bentley & Edward Moseley across the Staunton River, from the lands of William Moseley in Charlotte County to the lands of William Bentley on the opposite side in Halifax County. We report our opinion that the same is completed so as to admit of safe and convenient passage of travelers and other things -- We furthermore report our opinion that the place upon which the sd bridge is erected is judicious, and that the work is strong and well executed. Signed: Langston Bacon, Francis Barnes, David McCargo, John Petty, Robert Moore, Archie Farley and Stephen Davis. Thereupon it is ordered that the ferry across the sd river called Bibbs' Ferry be discontinued and put down, agreeable to Act of Assembly.
Pg 176 A Grand Jury is impanelled, Francis Barnes, Foremen, and returns the following indictments:
Francis Brooke, for profane swearing four oaths on Saturday the 26th of July, last, at the late dwelling house of Dudley Brooke, by the information of Mace C. Spenser, sworn before the court and sent to the Grand Jury.(12)
John Roberts, for retailing spirituous liquors, contrary to law, on Saturday the 26th of July, last, at the late dwelling house of Dudley Brooke, by the information of Cryus Johnson and Robert Williams of our own body.
2 September 1806
Pg 195 An Indenture between Travis Brooke, of the one party and James Callicott of the other.
Pg 195 Thomas Brooke, Guardian of Travis Brooke, orphan of George Brooke, dec'd, came into court and produced a receipt of the sd Travis Brooke in full of his guardianship, which was ordered to record.
Pg 196 An Indenture between William Thweat, of the one party and Thomas Brooke of the other.
Pg 19 A bill to receive claims against the county levy:
A claim of Edward Osborne for summons a coroner's jury 315 cents -- for carrying Thomas Petty to jail -14 miles at 10 is 140 cents -- carrying John Pollock to jail -14 miles at 10 cents the mile is 140 cents -- making the whole 210 cents.
A claim of John Henry for guarding Thomas Petty, a criminal to the district jail-21 miles at 10 cents the mile is 210 cents -- and for his horse impressed to convey the prisoner to jail (blank) which was presented and read.
The claim of Williamson Price for dieting Thomas Petty and John Pollock- 7 days at 21 cents is 147 cents -- For dieting Isaac, a criminal 13 days at 21 cents is 273 cents -- For dieting a condemned criminal from 17 April 1805 to February 1806 322 days at 33 cents is 10626 cents --- making the whole 11046 cents.
4 October 1806
Pg 200 Philip Goode & John McCargo; Plaintiffs vs Elizabeth Rice; Defendant - a complaint praying counter security.
Pg 201 An Indenture between Hillery Moseley, of the one party and James Callicott of the other.
Pg 201 An Indenture between Benjamin Bedford, Littleberry Bedford, Archer Bedford, of the one part and Hillery Moseley of the other part with certificate of acknowledgement thereof in the County Court of Bourbon and the State of Kentucky.
2 November 1806
Pg 213 Dabbs vs Bell
John McCargo a juror
2 December 1806
Pg 233 Joseph Wyatt, Commanding Officer of the 26th Regiment of the Virginia Militia, rendered to the court the following account of drafts made by him on the Sheriff of Charlotte County, to be paid out of the master fines collected by him -- To James Arnold, Jnr, Fife Major, six dollars; George Berkley, Drum Major, six dollar; William White, Drummer, three dollars; William Blake, Jnr, Drummer, three dollars, Samuel L. White, Drummer, two dollars; Stephen Bedford, Adjutant, thirty dollars, Chisley Daniel, Clerk, thirty-six dollars; John D. Richardson, Provost Marshall, nine dollars; the total amount: ninety-five dollars. The foregoing was allowed by the Regimental Court Martial held on the 1st day of November, 1806, which was previous to the issuing the above mentioned order. Given under my hand this 16th day of November 1806. Joseph Wyatt, Lieutenant Colonel, Commanding
Pg 223 A commission for taking relinquishment of dower made a report on the privy examination of Sally Thweat, wife of William Thweat, annexed to the indenture between William Thweat and Thomas Brooke.
Pg 224 David McCargo came into court and produced credentials of his ordination and being in communion with the Baptist church and took the oath of allegiance and fidelity to the Commonwealth and entered into bond with Robert and Thomas Portwood his securities agreeable to law and on his motion he is hereby authorized to celebrate the rights( sic) of marriage agreeable to the forms and customs of the sd church.
Pg 225 The last will and testament of John Rawlins, dec'd, was produced in court . . .and proved by the oaths of two of the witnesses thereto subscribed. . .
Pg 226 The Commonwealth vs Thomas Ford -- on a compliant of bastardy.
The sd Thomas Ford this day appeared in discharge of his recognizance entered into the 26th day of November, 1806 to answer the complaint of the overseers of the poor, charged on the oath of Mary Hines, a single woman, of haven begotten a bastard, who was delivered of the same the 8th day of June, 1805. On the motion of Thomas Ford a commission is awarded him, to examine, and take the deposition of Martha Hines, a witness in this compliant.
Pg 228 On the motion of John B. Parsons, a claimant under the will of John Rawlins, dec'd, it is ordered that the Sheriff summons Langston Bacon and David McCargo, to appear at the next court to be held for the sd county, to show cause why they do not take probate of the will of the sd John Rawlins, in which they are named executors.
2 January 1807
Pg 233 James McCargo came into court and registers his ear mark of two half crops in each ear.
Pg 233 Ordered that the Sheriff summons Elizabeth Rawlins, the widow of John Rawlins, dec'd, to appear here at the next court to show cause why she doth not take probate of the sd will of which she is executrix.
Pg 235 Elizabeth Rawlins, widow of John Rawlins, dec'd, came into court and relinquished her right of dower in the 113 acres of land, conveyed by her husband in his lifetime to Hugh Wylie.
Pg 238 In a court held for Charlotte County the 29th day of January, 1807, for examination of Thomas White, who stands committed to the common jail of the county, charged with being guilty of stealing and carrying away sundry goods of Edmund Gains, of the value of ten dollars to wit: case of razors and strop, a bandanna handkerchief, a pair of scissors, a quart bottle, a pair of pincers, a pint basin, spoon and one thimble.
The sd Thomas White was lead to the bar in the custody of the sheriff of sd county to whose custody for the cause aforesaid, he was before committed. Being charged with the facts, saith he is in no wise guilty thereof. Whereupon divers witnesses were produced, sworn and examined, as well on behalf of the Commonwealth as the sd prisoner, and he was fully heard in his defense by counsel. It is the opinion of the court that he should be further prosecuted . . . that the sd crime is cognisable before the county court . . . that he is remanded to jail unless he enters into a recognizance with two securities, himself in one hundred dollars and also his securities in fifty dollars each, for his appearance at March court to answer the sd felony.
Pg 238 On the motion of William Dupree, certificate is granted him for ltrs of admr of the estate of John Rawlins, dec'd, in due form, with will annexed ... he with Francis Roberts, John Roberts and David McCargo, his securities etc ... Elizabeth Rawlins, widow of John Rawlins, by her letter addressed to this court first relinquished the right to administer the sd estate.
Pg 239 Ordered that Harrison Elam, Mack Goode, Reps Osborne and Langston Bacon, or any three of them, being first sworn for that purpose, do appraise in current money, the slaves and personal estate of John Rawlins, dec'd, whereof William Dupree is adm'r with will annexed, and report the same to the court.
Pg 239 On the motion of David McCargo, one of the executors named in the last will and testament of John Rawlins, dec'd, certificate is granted him for obtaining a probate of the sd will . . . he with William Dupree, Edward Almond and Francis Roberts, his securities . . . reserving liberty for the other executors to join the probate . . . when they shall think fit.
Pg 239 Ordered that Thomas Portwood, John McCargo, Loyd Portwood and Reps Osborne, or any three of them, being first sworn for that purpose, do appraise in current money, the slaves and personal estate of John Rawlins, dec'd, whereof David McCargo is adm'r with will annexed, and report the same to the court.
Pg 239 Elizabeth Hardy, an infant under the age of 21 years, sues by he next friend, Edward Almond; Plaintiff vs Sarah Hardy, widow of Thomas Hardy, and the sd Sarah as guardian of Henry Hardy, Thomas Hardy, Mary Hardy, Alexander Hardy and Sally Hardy, infants under the age of 21 years and sons and daughters of Thomas Hardy, dec'd; Defendants - a suit in chancery.
. . . ordered that the 102 ½ acres lying in Charlotte and the 40 acres lying in Mecklenburg county, which the sd Thomas Hardy died seized and possessed, be sold at public auction, and the proceeds arising from the sale be equally divided as well between the plaintiff as between each of the defendants, who are son and daughters of Thomas Hardy, who died intestate, first assigning to Sarah Hardy, the widow, her dower in the lands to be alloted to her out of the land lying in Mecklenburg.
2 February 1807
Pg 247 The last will and testament of James Callicott was presented in court by Little John McCargo one of the executors thereto named, and was proven by the oath of Francis Barnes, Snr, one of he witnesses thereto subscribed, to be acknowledged by the sd James Callicott, as his, last will and testament, in his presence and that he believed he was then in his perfect senses and memory. Thomas McCargo and Thomas Parish, the other subscribing witnesses, being sworn, saith James Callicott was not in his perfect senses and memory at the time of acknowledging the same in their presence. The motion for admitting the will to record is continued until the next court, for the court to advise thereon, and it is ordered that the sd estate be committed to the hands of the sd Little John McCargo and Bratchett Barnes, the executors named in the will, until further order of the court.
Pg 247 Philip Goode and John McCargo, Plaintiffs vs Elizabeth Rice, Adm'rx of John Rice, dec'd, Defendant -- on a complaint praying counter security.
On hearing the parties by their attys, the complaint is dismissed.
Pg 247 A grand Jury is impanelled; Charles Rain, Foreman, which includes John McCargo, returns several presentments against surveyors of the road and considers one indictment: "against Thomas White, for feloniously taking and carrying away from the house of Edward Gains of this county, one razor case, two razors, one razor strop, of the value of two dollars to be a true bill."
2 March 1807
Pg 254 Dabney Terry & Frances, his wife, Robert Haley, Matthew Haley, Polly Haley, Henry Haley, Archibald Haley Nancy Haley, Robert Sullivant and Isaac Sullivant, the sd. Robert & Isaac are infants under the age of 21 years and sue by Jerral Sullivant, their father Plaintiffs vs Susannah Haley, widow of Thomas Haley and Betsey Haley and Jincey Haley, infants under the age of 21 years; Defendants -- a suit in chancery.
. . . plaintiffs Robert and Isaac Sullivant, representatives of their deceased mother, Julia Sullivant, daughter of the sd intestate, Thomas Haley.
Pg 260 Joel Watkins, Gordon Spenser, Clement Carrington and Thomas Read are appointed to contract with some person to make such alterations in the lawyers bar, and magistrate' s seat as to them may seem necessary and proper and to purchase a stove and engage for the fixing of it in the court house room for public use, to be placed in such a situation as they may think best; also to examine into the sufficiency of the jail and to direct such repairs as they in their opinion may think necessary.
7 March 1807
Pg 264 A court held for examination of Josiah Walton, who stands committed to the common jail of the county, charged with stabing(sic) and wounding Joshua Roach. The sd Josiah was lead to the bar in the custody of John D. Richardson, Deputy Sheriff . . . and it appearing to then court by the testimony of several witnesses that the sd Josiah Roach has died of wounds since the commitment of the sd Josiah Walton to prison and the atty for the Commonwealth waving prosecution of the prisoner for stabing and wounding, it is ordered the prisoner be retained in custody. On hearing testimony offered for the Commonwealth, it is the opinion of the court that Josiah Walton aught to be committed for the murder aforesaid and he is accordingly committed for an examination of the sd offense on Saturday the 14th of this month.
14 March 1807
Pg 264 In a court held for Charlotte County the 14th day of March, 1800, for examination of Josiah Walton, who stands committed to the common jail of the county, on the suspicion of stabing & murdering Joshua Roach. The prisoner was lead to the bar in custody of the sheriff of sd county to whose custody he was before committed. Being charged with the facts, saith he is in not guilty thereof. Whereupon sundry witnesses were produced, sworn and examined, between the Commonwealth and the sd prisoner, and he was fully heard by counsel in his defense. On consideration thereof it is the opinion of the court that the sd prisoner is guilty of the murder of which he stands charged, and that he aught to be tried for the same at the next Prince Edward District Court. On the motion of the prisoner, by his atty . . . it is ordered that the prisoner be admitted to bail, on entering into a recognizance himself, in the penalty of ten thousand dollars and his securities in five thousand dollars each, for his personal appearance at the next District Court.
Archibald Dabb, a witness on oath saith he on the 2nd instance was called as a physician, to Joshua Roach's help, said to be stabbed by Josiah Walton, that on examining the wound, found that the knife was introduced very low, near the middle breast bone, the bone called in Latin, the sternum and took from thence a traverse downward to the left, being about eight or nine inches in length, of which four or five inches were through the cavity of the body and his intestines had come out. The sd Roach died on Friday night following being the sixth of the month and this deponent believes his death was occasioned by the aforesaid wound.
Curtis Haynes, a witness on oath saith he was on his horse the 2nd instance, not far from the Tavern at Charlotte Court House, that some man, a few feet before him walking, who he did not know, he saw Josiah Walton turn and strike at Joshua Roach and heard Roach cry out he was as a dead man, that Mr Walton had stabbed him. Walton then ran off and was pursued a small distance and taken by this deponent and others. This deponent does not recollect to have seen the stick which Roach had till the stab was given -- he then saw it fall from his, Roach's hand, as he believed, as if walking with it.
Thomas Elam a witness on oath saith on the evening of the 2nd instance, being Court Day, he was requested by Joshua Roach to apply to Josiah Walton to make friends with him -- that he did not like to be so long at variance with any person. The deponent made the application to Walton, who refused, and stepped back and drew his knife. The deponent then said he supposed there was as long knives as his -- Walton then stepped out the door. This deponent also jumped out and picked up a stone and continued to walk down the road . . .(13)
1. John Robert's 1797 license read; "at the place called
The Parson's Barn."
Collier Redmond, surveyor of the road leading from William T Watkins' store crossing Twilley's Creek to the Horsepen Creek, for not keeping the causeway of Twilley's Creek Bridge in order, by information of William P Daniels and Robert McCargo of our own body. Court Orders, Char Co., Bk 22-2
2. Little Concord was organized as a Presbyterian Meeting House in 1790, but for a period afterwards the church became inactive and its members became associated with the Hat Creek Church in Campbell County. . . .it was reorganized in 1820 as Little Concord until 1854 when it was changed to Concord. Charlotte Rich Indeed ps 138
3. A small Community grew up around Deupree's Store which was located about eight miles south of Drake's Branch, just off Route 360. William Deupree (varied spelling of the name appear in Char Co records) was a merchant certified as a 'man of good character' in 1822. . . . This store which was at the intersection of Routes 730 & 713, is no longer standing Charlotte, Rich Indeed Pg 317
4. The following witnesses were bound to appear at the District Court in Prince Edward County: Robert Moseley, John Mims and Francis Harris.
5. Charlotte - Rich Indeed pg 538: John Buchanan, Pedlar's license granted by Char Co -- 1818. Jameson & Richard Carson are not mentioned.
6. Charlotte - Rich Indeed pg 486: James Cook, Complexion, Black; age 65; born a slave; Freedom registered 8 Feb 1820
7. There follows the identical legacies stated in the testimony of John Roberts.
8. There follows the same testamentary words quoted by the two preceding witnesses.
9. At this point the micro-film becomes too faint to read. Beginning at the top of the next page.
10. Charlotte - Rich Indeed pg 541: Lists John Thomas' water grist mill located on Twitty's Creek in 1811. Also on Pgs 534 & 535 John Thomas Jr. and John Thomas are listed as having a merchant's license in 1790 & 1835.
11. Charlotte - Rich Indeed pg 518: Ordinary Licenses:
1775 John Bayne in his house on the land of John Pettus
12. Charlotte - Rich Indeed Pg 447 A deputy-sheriff under Gordon Spenser 1805 - 1806
13. At this point the micro-film becomes too faint to read.