Lauderdale County, Alabama

Abstracted by Milly Wright on 6 Aug 2007 and submitted for use on these pages 12 Aug 2007.
 

Note: Included are cases of interest that give information on heirs, places of residence, locations of family property, deaths, marriages, divorces, slaves, etc.. Not included are  cases where only the names of those on the docket are given, nor cases that provide no  personal or legal information.

Page 179
Lewis C Moore & Wife vs Baylor B Barker et al

(purchase money for NE and NW/4 of S4 T3 R11, and E/2 NE/4 S5 T3 R11 ... for which purchase money the lands were sold to Baylor B Barker & Henry W Sample and which sd purchase money is $2200. ... making of a deed by the complainants Lewis C Moore and Atlantic P Moore jointly attested by two witnesses, to Baylor B Barker and Henry W 
Sample conveying the life estate of the said Atlantic P Moore to the lands herein before described ... ... and in case the said Atlantic P Moore shall have no child or children or lawful issue at her natural death then the revertion of the 
said tract of land to return to the said Hugh McVay and his right heirs ... May 16th 1855

Page 180
May 17, 1855
Barbee Branin & Co. vs Young & Long et al

Came the parties by their solicitors, and application was made, for a decree proconfesso against, Samuel E Young, Daniel W Long and Elizabeth Long, S_n? S Bucklin and Wm Pratt and Daniel S Pratt ...

Page 184
May 18, 1855
Basil Willbanks vs Wm Butler et al

The following decree was rendered and read by the Chancellor. This cause came on to be heard on Bill answer decree pro con and pray, and after due consideration it is ordered adjudged and decreed, that all the right title claim or interest either at law or in equity, vested in James Tomlinson in his life time or in the deft’s as the widow heirs or 
representatives of said James Tomlinson, now deceased, in or to a certain tract or parcel of land, situate in Lauderdale County in the State of Alabama, Known and designated as the SE/4 of the NE/4 of S2 T3 R8 West, be and the same is hereby divested out of them the said widow, heirs & representatives, and out of each of them and vested in the 
complainant Basil Willbanks. It is further ordered adjudged and decreed, that complainant pay the costs of this suit to be taxed by the Register.

Page 185
May 19, 1855
Barber Brannin & Co. vs Young & Long et al

Came the parties by their solicitors and said cause was submitted for decree and decree rendered, as follows: Came on this cause to be heard, on the Bill of complts, the answer of Chamberlain ? Baily, H T Curd ?, C B Cooper, J B Wilder?, A B Vanwinkle, & Cassiday & Hopkins, Decree pro con against the Defts Saml E Young, Daniel W & Elizabeth Long & Pratt Bucklin and the Exhibits. It is ordered adjudged and decreed by the Court that the three notes of said Young & Long to complainants all bearing date 27th April 1853 for the sum of $587.36 each payable on two & three years after date respectively, be and the same are hereby declared to be due on the 29th April 1854, subject to such credits as they may be entitled by payment of said Young & Long. ...

Page 187
... being the same lands which were deeded to sd Daniel W Long by Wm Garner, which land lies in the sd County of Lauderdale, on the waters of Manbone and Second creeks, and adjoining to and bounded by the lands of 
James S Martin, Robert R Turpin Government lands (hills) and Andrew Carr, and more particularly designated, as the W/2 of the NW/4 of Sec 21 in T1 of Range 14 West containing 79.88 acres, and 15 acres being the land purchased of G? B Price from J S Martin, it being part of the E/2 of the above described quarter section beginning on the west bank of Second Creek, where the line crosses the same, according? the sd quarter, thence up the meandering of Second Creek to the mouth of Manbone, thence up the same to the 1st bluff of rocks on the East side, thence across said creek to the two sour woods on the banks, thence northwardly along the bluff of the same? to the line of the 16th 
section, thence west to the dividing line between the East & West halves of said quarter, thence south to the place of beginning. Also the SW/4 Sec 16 T1 of R14 West, containing 160 acres. And also all the stock of dry goods, groceries, queensware, hardware, tin, etc. of the said Young & Long, now on hand amounting to $1300., if there be any, or so much thereof as may be necessary to pay said debt & costs of this suit to be hereafter ascertained. ...

It is further ordered & decreed, that the title to said Negro woman Fanny be divested out of said defendants and invested in said Complainants and their Co Creditors as joint owners in pro portion to their respective shares of the $800. allowed for her as her value, and that the Register ascertain what will be the proportion of each creditor 
in said Issue?, the same to be credited on the claim of each as of the 25th day of December 1854. ...

Page 188
May 19, 1855
Juliet Ammonet by her next friend Andrew Ammonet vs William W Forbes et al

Came the parties by their solicitors and the following decree was rendered and read by the Chancellor, as follows. This cause on at the present term of this court and was heard on bill & answer, and the complainant Juliet Ammonet as well as the defendants May L Mitchell, Wiley F Mitchell, Francis E Ammonet, Susan Y Ammonet & William C Ammonet, having filed in this cause their written comment, that Andrew Ammonet be appointed trustee of the property and funds, without giving bond & security.

After due consideration, It is ordered adjudged and decreed, that Andrew Ammonet, be and he is hereby appointed Trustee of the property and funds placed in the hands of Wm W Forbes as Trustee for complainants and her 
children, by a decree of the Circuit Court for Buckingham County in the State of Virginia on ? day 17th September 1853 set up as a court of chancery which said decree is attached to complainants bill, marked Exhibit A, which said property and money the said Trustee shall hold for the purposes specified in the sd decree. ...

Page 189
May 24, 1855
John D Williams et al vs James P Williams et al

Came the parties by their solicitors and a decree was rendered and read of the Chancellor, as follows.

This cause was heard on the original & amended and supplemental bills answers & proof. The parties by their solicitors in open court agree that the award of arbitrators, signed by Geo. G Armistead and Samuel Vaughan given in evidence, shall be the basis of a decree in this cause, and that a decree shall be rendered in accordance with said award, of arbitrators and agreement, therefore the court being of opinion that the decree agreed upon will not be of opinion that the ? agreed upon will not be in conflict with the interests of the infants; render the following decree.

It is ordered adjudged and decreed that the title to the following negroes to wit Franklin & Harriet be and the same is hereby vested in Virginia Williams, seperately and that John D Williams pay to James P Williams as the guardian of sd Virginia Williams the sum of five dollars, for which Execution may issue in the name of sd James P Williams as guardian of sd Virginia Williams against said John D Williams.

It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that the title to the negroes Sarah Winston Selina and __ be vested in John D Williams seperately.

It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that the title to the negroes Judy & her child and Mentzer be vested in Francis R Pearson, seperately and that James M. Pearson as trustee for his wife recover in right of his wife Francis N. Pearson from James P Williams, guardian of Lucy Williams the sum of Eighty dollars for which an execution may issue against sd James P Williams.

It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that the title to the negroes Lewis & Charity vest in Samuel Williams seperately and that James P Williams, as the guardian of Samuel Williams recover from James P Williams as the guardian of Lucy Williams the sum of fifteen dollars and from John D Williams forty dollars, for which last sum an execution may issue.

It is further ordered adjudged and decreed, that the title to the negroes Emily Winston Jr? John and his wife in Lucinda P Williams, otherwise called Lucy Williams.

It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that the complainants pay the costs of this suit to be taxed by the Register.

Page 193
May 24, 1855
John S Simpson Administrator, Abraham Cole vs Charles T Cole et als

Came the parties by their solicitors and this cause is ordered to be revived, on motion, the defendants having had due notice thereof and here in open court consenting thereto, in the name of John S Simpson, Administrator of Abraham Cole, dec’d, and the following heirs at law of said Abraham to wit, Minney?? Estep and her husband James Estep, Jane Wilson and her husband John Wilson, Elizabeth A Wilson and her husband Heary J Wilson, Martha E Romine and her husband Milledge Romine, Sarah M Estep and her husband John Estep, & James A Cole - all of whom are of full age - And Mary F Cole, Oliver Cole, Esther Cole, Solomon Cole all of whom are minors and sue by their next friend John S Simpson.

Page 193
May 24, 1855
John S Simpson Admr of Abraham Cole dec’d & others vs Charles T Cole & others

...Register read to the Court his report setting forth that upon enquiry & proof he believes that the interests of said infant parties to this suit will be promoted by said decree agreed upon and that the sale of the land proposed is the best thing that can be done for the interest of said infant defendants. ... Land: NW/4 of S24 and E/2 of SE/4 of S23 all 
in T2 R7 west, with all and singular the appurtenances thereunto belonging ...

Page 200
May 21, 1856
Harriet Lassiter vs Nathan Boddie

In this cause a decree was rendered by the Chancellor. On consideration whereof, It is ordered adjudged & decreed that all the right title and interest which complainant has or had at the filing of the Bill and and to negro woman named Roset, and her three children, Susan Harriett and Mary and the future increase of said negro woman be divested out of complainant and invested in the Defendant Nathan Boddie.

It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that Defendant pay the costs of this suit for which execution may issue. May 21st 1856 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 203
May 21, 1856
#151
Mary A Andrews vs Richard J Andrews

Came the parties by their solicitors, and on motion of complainant, it is ordered that it be referred to the Register to ascertain and report whether the securities on the Repleny? Bond of Deft Richard J Andrews are sufficient. Interlocutory order made and to be entered on the minutes. 

In this cause the Register having reported the ? Bond of the defendant Richard J Andrews to be insufficient, and there being no exceptions to said report, It is ordered that the same be in all things confirmed. It is further ordered that unless the Deft Richard J Andrews give a new repleny? Bond with good and sufficient securities within fourteen days 
from the adjournment of this court, payable & conditioned as the law directs & approved by the Register, the Register of this Court do issue an attachment, directed to any sheriff of the State of Alabama, commanding him to attach the slaves, Sarah and her children Anthony, Angeline, Issabella, Jenny, George, John, Hannah and two infant children 
of woman Sarah and have said slaves to satisfy such further proceedings as may be had in this cause at the next term of this court, unless replenied? according to law in such case provided. Continued. May 21st 1856 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 205
May 23, 1856
Phillip J Irions Executor of Thomas A Lansford vs Abigail D Lansford et als.

Land in T2 R13 - 710 acres. - In sections 11, 12, 13, 14
Slaves belonging to the estate to be sold

Page 213
May 19, 1857
#149
Jephtha D Ham vs Lucinda J Ham

The Chancellor rendered the following decree in said cause. “It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the bonds of matrimony existing between complainant and defendant be dissolved and the complainant divorced a vinculo matrimonii from the said defendant.

It is further decreed that complainant pay the costs of this suit to be taxed by the Register.

John Foster, Chancellor May 19, 1857

Page 214
May 19, 1857
#157
Jane E. Anderson by her next friend vs Joseph Anderson alias Godier Henderson

The Chancellor rendered the following decree in said cause. “It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the bonds of matrimony heretofore solemnised between complainant and defendant be dissolved, and the complainant be divorced a vinculo matrimonii from the defendant, Joseph Anderson alias Godier Henderson.

It is further decreed that complainant’s next friend, James Douglas, pay the costs of this suit, to be taxed by the Register.

May 19, 1857 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 215
May 20, 1857
#151
Mary A. Andrews by her next friend vs Richard J. Andrews

Came the parties by their solicitors and an Amendment of the Bill made by consent. Complainant moved to suppress the following depositions of Respondents, to wit: Neander H. Rice, Lewis Nelson, Lidia Nelson, John Butler, Adam Weaver, Robert Shane, W. H. Walker, W. B. McGuire, Saml Flannegan, and W. T. Haney on the following agreed state of facts. Complainant & her next friend & solicitor reside out of this District, the interrogatories were filed in the Office of the Register and remained there over ten and less than twenty days before a commission issued. Said motion overruled. J. Foster, Chancellor

Page 217
May 21, 1857
#152
Phillip J Irons Ex’r vs A. D. Lansford et al

...It is further ordered that upon the expiration of the time provided for the keeping of the negro woman Fanny, the Executor let her to the lowest bidder until the next term of this court.

Page 220
May 22, 1857
#150
Tabitha E. Butts by her next friend vs Jacob J. Butts

Came the complainant by her solicitor and an order of publication of testimony was granted. And said Complainant submitted the following depositions to wit: Of Margaret T. Butts, Alexander Russell, R. M. Patton, W. T. Hawkins, S. A. M. Wood, B. S. Johnson, L. Fenner, J. A. Ransel, M. M. Reinhart, N. Rosine & W. Saunders, & a certificate of marriage from the Probate Court of Lauderdale County, Ala.

Page 221
May 22, 1857
Tabitha E. Butts by her next friend vs Jacob J. Butts

In said cause the following decree was rendered. “It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the bonds of matrimony heretofore existing between complainant and defendant be dissolved, the Complainant divorce a vinculo matrimonii from the said defendant.

It is further ordered, adjudged and decreed that complainant’s next friend, J. A. Smith pay the costs of this suit, for which execution may issue.

May 22, 1857 John Foster, Chancellor.

Page 221
May 22, 1857
Johnson Trousdale vs Eliza P. Trousdale

Came the parties by their solicitors and leave is given complainant to amend his bill. Complainant to pay all costs of Amendment.

Page 221
May 22, 1857
#153
Johnson Trousdale vs Eliza P. Trousdale

1st
The following Amendment to the Bill was made by Complainant: “Your Orator Johnson Trousdale by way of Amendment to his original Bill filed in this Court on the 19th day of November 1856, States and charges That 
soon after his marriage as stated in the Original Bill, on the 2nd day of June 1856, he started with his said Eliza for his home, and during the day, the said Eliza becoming quite sick . . .

Your orator prays as in his original Bill, that the said Eliza be made a party defendant hereto, that a subpoena issue, and that she answer the allegations of this bill, that the bonds of matrimony existing between him and the said Eliza be dissolved by the decree of this Honorable Court, and that said marriage be declared by your Honor null and void.

Ed. A. O’Neal
Solicitor for Complainant

Page 225
May 29, 1857
#153
Johnson Trousdale vs Eliza P. Trousdale

Came the parties by their solicitors, and on motion of complainant it is ordered that leave be given him to take? testimony and this cause is continued.

Page 229
May 18, 1858
#141
Martha J A Johnson by her next friend vs William Lassiter et al

Came the parties by their solicitors and this cause was set for hearing; The complainant brings forward the following testimony; Elizabeth Willett, R W Clausell, Ann Clausell, William Baugh, Thomas J Harwell, Joseph Ijames, Elizabeth Ijames, also the following transcripts: “Letters of Gurardianship and Bond of Defendant Lassiter, Transcript of 
division of slaves of Estate of Samuel Harwell, transcript of marriage of complainant and Stephen T Johnson, The court allowed the decree pro confesso against Thomas U Lassiter amended ? pro time? In this cause the 
Defendant introduced the testimony of Gabriel Bumpass and Turner Walston.

Page 229
May 18, 1858
#161
Lucretia E Holmes By her next friend vs Thomas M Holmes

In this cause the following decree was rendered and read by the Chancellor. It is ordered adjudged and decreed that the bonds of matrimony existing between Complainants & Defendants, be dissolved, & the Complainant Lucretia E Holmes, divorced a vinculo matrimonii from her husband Thomas M Holmes.

It is further ordered and decreed that the defendant pay the costs of this suit for which Execution may issue.

May 18th 1858 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 230
May 18, 1858
#171
Selena M Barclay By her next friend vs Robert Barclay

In this case the following decree was rendered and read by the Chancellor, “It is ordered adjudged and decreed that the marriage between the Complainant and Defendant is null and void ab initio and the complainant is released from all the disabilities and obligations of said marriage.

It is further ordered & decreed that complainant and her next friend pay the costs of this suit, for which Execution may issue.

May 18th 1858 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 231
May 18, 1858
#151
Mary A Andrews By her next friend vs Richard T. Andrews

In this cause the testimony of Complainant and defendant was officed? a motion was made by Deft to supress the deposition of Joseph G Harmond & W L Toone which was sustained by the Chancellor. A motion was also made 
to suppress the deposition of Samuel Flannegan on the ground that he was the security of Deft on the replevy? (replenery?) bond, which was overruled for the reason that the motion to suppress same deposition at a former term on another ground had been made and overruled (this ground not being taken & complt having notice of present intent? by the ? of the replery? bond) The Complt bring forward the following testimony, Transcript & Exhibits, 
to wit: testimony of Milton P Long, Hannah Wheeler, Thomas G Ezell, William Richardson & Thomas G Tyas, also depositions from Limestone County, of Alcony Stinnett, Wm P Long? & Alexander L McKinney. Also Transcript of Bill answer & final decree, from Limestone County marked L. M. O. .Transcript Judgment of supreme court, Exhibit X to Bill, agreement of solicitors marked W & Deed made by Defendant to Complainant on 12th September 1855. The Defendant brings forward the testimony of: John Butler, Adam Weaver, Robert Shane, Neander H Rice, Samuel Flannegan, William T Haney, George S. Newton, Lewis Nelson, Lidia Nelson, William H Walker, William B 
McGuire, Nancy M David, Susan Christopher, Thomas G Ezell, John Heusey?, R S Scroggin, Wiley E Wheeler & W. B. Patterson, also agreement marked Exhibit Marked ST.

Page 235
May 20, 1858
#153
Johnson Trousdale vs Eliza P Trousdale

The testimony in this cause was published by consent.

Page 237
May 21, 1858
#151
Mary A Andrews vs Richard T Andrews

In this cause the following decree was read and rendered by the Chancellor.

It is ordered adjudged and decreed that all the right title and interest which the defendant has in the negroes Osbourn and Elizabeth be divested out of him and invested in complainant to her sole and seperate use, and 
that the defendant within ten days from the adjournment of this Court Execute and deliver to the Register of the Chancery Court for this district a conveyance by him to complainant of said Negroes.

It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that said Defendant shall within ten days from the adjournment of this Court, surrender and deliver to the Complainant the slaves Sarah Ann and her children, Anthony Angeline Isabells Jenny, George John & Hannah Osbourn & Elizabeth, and that the said Defendant be deprived of all possession and 
controll over said negroes, and that the said complainant be invested with the controll of said negroes to her sole seperate use, and with the right to hold manage & enjoy the same free from the interferance of the said Defendant, and the said Defendant is perpetually enjoined from any further acts of interfering with or controll over said negroes 
inconsistent with the wishes of complainant.

It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that the complainant is entitled to recover of the defendant the value of the services of said 
negroes, and the money the said Defendant has received is due him for the hire of such of them as he has hired out since the 7th day of August 1854, down to the time where he surrenders possession of said Negroes, and it is ordered that it be refered to the Register to state and report to the next term of this Court an account showing the value of the hire of said negroes, during said time. If the Defendant has hired out any of said negroes he will be chargeable with the amount received or that is due him for hire. The Register will compute interest on the value of the services of the negroes while in the possession of Defendant from the End of each year to the date of his report.

It is further ordered, that all further questions be reserved until the coming in of the Register’s Report. (Note in margin about decree) May 20th 1858 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 238
May 20, 1858
#153
Johnson Trousdale vs Eliza P Trousdale

In this cause the complainants bring forward the following testimony James Kyle, B. F. Crittenden, John E Moore, Wiley T Hawkins, S A M Wood, M Harkins, Thomas Mattingly, J W Stewart, John M Hays, M Davenport, Benjamin Taylor, Susan Taylor, James W Stewart & John M Hays.

The defendant brings forward the testimony of J W Frierson, John B Hays, A M Barclay, B F Newsom W H Newson, Thomas Mattingly, Catherine Webb. Also the following depositions by the Complainant Fray P Webb, Sarah Franklin and Eliza Lewis, Wm R Porter.

And said cause was submitted for hearing on Bill answer Exhibits argument & proof.

Page 239
May 18, 1858
#170
Hilliard C Harmon vs Dolly B B Harmon

In this cause the following decree was rendered and read by the Chancellor: It is ordered adjudged and decreed that the bonds of matrimony existing between Complainants and defendants be dissolved, and the complainant Hilliard C Harmon be divorced, a venculo matrimonii from his wife the said Dolly B B Harmon. It is further ordered and decreed 
that the Complts pay the costs of this suit for which Execution may issue. May 18th 1858 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 240
May 20, 1858
#172
Telpha Rodgers by her next friend vs David C Rodgers

In this cause the following decree was rendered & read by the Chancellor: It is ordered adjudged & decreed that the bonds of matrimony existing between complainants and defendants, be dissolved and the complainant Telpha Rodgers divorced a venculo matrimonii from her husband David C Rodgers. It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that the defendant be deprived of all controll over the children born of said marriage, to wit Thomas J & Newton C Rodgers and that the care custody & controll of said children be intrusted to the said Complainant.

It is further ordered adjudged & decreed that Complainant’s next friend pay the costs of this suit for which Execution may issue. May 20th 1858 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 240
May 20, 1858
#173
Henry E Hinds vs Jane Hinds
In this cause the following decree was rendered & read by the Chancellor, It is ordered adjudged and decreed that the bonds of matrimony existing between Complainants and defendants be dissolved, and the Complainant Henry E Hinds divorced a venculo matrimonii, from the said Defendant Jane Hinds.

It is further ordered & decreed that Complainant pay the costs of this suit for which Execution may issue.
May 20th 1858 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 240
May 20, 1858
#155
Stewart Wilson Exr et al vs Francis Butler et al

... Mentioned (Legatees): John Butler, Polly Richardson and her husband Sumerel? Richardson, Hervey Butler, Elizabeth Phillips, Chisholm Butler, Gabriel Butler, Susan Barnett and her husband Abner Barnett, Frances Bray and her husband Wm Bray, Sarah Niles and her husband George H Niles.

... It is further ordered that said complainants as executors etc pay the costs of this court, and when they shallhave fully complied, with this decree they are discharged as Executors of the last will & testament of said Gabriel Butler deceased. May 20th 1858 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 242
May 21, 1858
#153
Johnson Trousdale vs Eliza P Trousdale

In this cause the following decree was rendered and read by the Chancellor,

It is ordered adjudged and decreed that complainant’s Bill stand dismissed out of this court. It is further ordered and decreed that Complainant pay the costs of this suit to be taxed by the Register for which Execution may issue.
May 21st 1858 John Foster, Chancellor

(This case was continued on May 16, 1859.

Page 245
At a Court of Chancery held for the 26th District composed of the County of Lauderdale in the state of Alabama, at the Court house thereof in the town of Florence on the third Monday of May being the 16th day of said month ... 1859. Hon. John Foster, Chancellor of the Northern division of said state.

Page 245
May 16, 1859
#133
James Jackson et al vs Thomas Kirkman et al

Legacies to heirs of James Jackson

Page 247
May 16, 1859
#154
William C Kilgore vs A P Neeley

In this cause the testimony was opened by consent, and the complainant offers the following testimony: of D C Waldrip, Larkin? Garrett, Daniel G Ussory, Robert Anderson, Josiah J Bryan & __ Price. The defendant offers the testimony of Milton? McClure, Wilson King, James Shoud?, Alexander T Dobbins, M C Baldridge, James D Neely, D J Cannon, Thomas Gamble, Larkin Gibson, Peter Pereyear, Allen Sholer, William Hough, Martin Smith, Wm D Hays, R J Andrews & M C Bacdridge?

Page 247
May 16, 1859
Elizabeth Hannay by her next friend vs A M Hannay

Continued by consent
(Possibly a divorce case)

Page 248
May 16, 1859
#166
Sidney C Posey & Pugh Houston Exr etc. vs Josephine Bryan et al

In this cause the testimony was published, and the Complainants offered the testimony of Littleberry Underwood, Louis Powers, Dorsey Winbourne, Temple Tunley? & Empson Thompson.

And also in said cause the following decree was read and ordered to be enrolled, It is ordered adjudged and decreed, that this Court will take jurisdiction of the case made by the Bill.

It is further ordered that it be refered to the Register to state and report to the present term an account between the Complainants and the Estate of Joseph Thompson deceased, in which he will charge them, with all wherewith by law they are chargeable & give them credit for all proper disbursements. The Register will allow the Complainants as a 
credit for draining of Sinking Creek what the same were reasonably worth.

All further questions are reserved for the coming in of the Registers report May 16th 1859 John Foster, Chancellor

Page 250
May 16, 1859
#180
Anna Hough vs Wm Hough

In this cause the motion of complainant the same stands dismissed at the complainant’s costs.

Page 250
May 16, 1859
#182
Louis B Curton vs Elizabeth Curton

On this cause the testimony was published. And the Complainant offered the following testimony of N H Rice, Ransome Peeden, Wiley T Hawkins, James J Bailey, Richard A Bailey & V M Benham.

Page 253
May 17, 1859
#160
Thomas J Harwell et al vs John M Harris et al

In said cause an order was made to publish testimony.

The complainants offer the following testimony: of Elijah Fowler, Jesse Denson, Jesse Oakley, Joseph Ijames, Walter G Cenn?, Benjamin F Karsner, John A Smith, Richard B Baugh, Robert B McKnight, Thomas Dewberry, Baylor B Barker, Exhibits & agreements on file.

Defendants offer the testimony of James P. Oakley & Wm B L Thrasher.

Page 253
May 17, 1859
#182
Louis B Curton vs Elizabeth Curton

In said cause the Chancellor rendered the following decree.

It is ordered adjudged and decreed that the bonds of matrimony existing between Complainants and Defendants be dissolved & the complainant divorced a vinculo matrimonii from the said defendant. It is further ordered adjudged and decreed that Complainant pay the costs of this suit. John Foster Chancellor May 17th, 1859.

Page 254
May 17, 1859

This day appeared in open court David J Mitchell who made application to be admitted to practice as an Attorney in the several courts in this state, and the said application being found, on examination made in open court, duly qualified in knowledge of the law of real property, of the law of personal property, of the law of pleading & evidence, of the commercial law of the criminal law of chancery & chancery pleading, and of the Statute laws of this state, and it being shown by evidence satisfactory to the court that said applicant is of good moral character - It is therefore ordered that the said David Mitchell is of good moral character & possesses the necessary qualifications of learning & ability to practice in the several courts of this state the & said David J Mitchell having taken filed the oath to support the constitution of this state & of the United States & not to violate the duties enjoined on him by law he is hereby admitted & licenced to practice in all the courts of this state except the Supreme Court. John Foster Chancellor

Page 258
May 19, 1859
#186
Garrick Campbell Admr vs John T Farmer et al

Came the parties by their solicitors, and the testimony in said cause was opened by consent; The Complainants offered the testimony of John Gracy, W T Hawkins, N H Rice, Daniel McKee, Robert Howell, N W Walker, S C Posey, Wm B Wood & John E Moore. The Defendants offered the testimony of Wm Hays, V M Benham, Ed Brown, John A Kennedy, John W Chisholm, S T W Ives, Julius House, & Thomas T Pettus.

Page 262
May 21, 1859
#166
Sidney C Posey & Pugh Houston Executors of Joseph Thompson dec’d vs Josephone T Bryan et al

... It appears by said report thatthe shares of Josephine Thompson - now Josephine Bryan & Sam’l M Thompson respectively in the hands of the executors for distribution is 20,873.48 and that Sidney C Posey has paid to her with the written approbation of her husband six thousand six hundred & twenty five dollars and that she has received from Pugh Houston with the like approbation of her said husband fourteen thousand two hundred and forty nine dollars and forty eight cents, Thus paying her in full up to the present time. ... Funds remaining in hands of executors

Pugh Houston has filed his resignation of the office of executor on account of non residence he is subject to a decree for payment of what is in his hands belonging to Saml M Thompson ...

Page 263

On the 1st day of this term (May 1859) this cause was submitted without argument to the court for a decree as to the several matters of equity mentioned in the bill of complainant ... under the will of the sd Joseph Thompson dec’d.

The complainants in the 14th paragraph of their bill shew that two negro men were sold by them during their management of said estate for being refractory - one in the year 1850 named Isaac for 800 Dollars and another named Ned on the 13th March 1855 for 1175 dollars on 12 months credit - which money was not invested in other negroes to supply their places - because those were slaves sufficient to work the plantation without them, looking to good husbandry - and ask for the sanction of the court as to the non investment.

In the opinion of the court the executors acted in not supplying the slaves in place of those sold for the best interests of the Estate and their cause in reference to this subject is hereby sanctioned and approved and the Register is ordered in accounting to charge against the executor receiving the money for said slaves respectively - the price for which they were sold with equitable interest.

By the 15th Section of the Complainant’s bill they set forth that from 200 to 500 acres of the plantation of sd defendants as legatees was submerged by ponds and the overflow of a creek called Sinking Creek so as to render it unfit for cultivation, greatly injuring the plantation, killing a large quantity of valuable timber & causing the place to be unhealthy. That many persons living adjacent to that creek united to drain it & reclaim the overflowed lands that? united with others in this object believing it would be highly beneficial to the estate and subscribed & paid to the work of drainage 1333 33/100 dollars which drainage alltho not entirely computed according to contract has 
reclaimed already a large portion of the submerged lands of the place worth at least 20 dollars per acre, and improving the general health - on this point evidence has been taken & the court is satisfied that the outlay of 1333 33/100 dollars was judiciously expended promoting the interest of the estate both in reclaiming land & making the place more healthy. It is therefore ordered that the said sum shall be credited to the executors in accounting before the Register.

As to the executors purchase of 600 acres of land from Hardy Hightower and letting Temple Turnley have 200 acres of it as set forth in the bill ...

Reasons for not investing all the estate funds not required for other uses as directed by the will ...

Josephine Thompson has intermarried with Wm P Bryan who has made himself a party defendant ...