Wayne County, Tennessee

Circuit Court Minute Book 1

May 1851 - January 1857

Last Updated 31 March 2002

[NOTE: This is a complete transcription of the minute book.
The Page will be updated as the pages are transcribed.]

[Editor's Note: Previously published in the Wayne County Historian, beginning with Volume 9, Number 1 - March 1996. All transcriptions by Edgar D. Byler, III.]

The Circuit Court for Wayne County, Tennessee was established in 1818 along with the other county government offices of the county. The minute book for May 1851 - January 1857 is the first surviving minute book of the court. This is a full transcription of the record book. Please use your browser's "search" or "find" feature to search for a specific surname. Remember that as a full transcription, the original spellings and punctuation are retained. You may also use the Search Engine found on the Contents Page.


[on the front fly sheet of the book]

Dollars 10 - received Nashville Tenn'se Oct. 20, 1849 of John McDOUGAL Ten Dollars for this Book for the use of "The Circuit Court of Wayne County - W T Berry & Co

page 1 Monday May 26, 1851

State of Tennessee
Be it remembered that a circuit Court was begun and held in and for the County fo Wayne at the Court house in the town of Waynesboro on the fourth Monday being the twenty sixth day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty one there was present the Honourable Elijah WALKER Judge of the fourteenth judicial Circuit of the State of Tennessee presiding

Rial BREWER, Esq. Sheriff of Wayne County returned into Court the Venirefacias returnable to this term of the Court which venirefacias and the endorsements thereon are in the words and figures following to wit

State of Tennessee Wayne County
To the Sheriff of said County Greeting
Whereas at the March Term of said County Court of Wayne County it was ordered by the Court that the following good and lawful men of the County of Wayne be appointed and summonds by the Sheriff of Wayne County to be and attend at the next term of the Circuit Court to be held for the County of Wayne at the Court house in the town of Waynesboro on the fourth Monday in May next to wit Isham TURNBOUGH William BOWDEN, William M. GALLEGLY Matthew H. BURKS Richard H. WHITAKER Samuel L. BURNS John S BURNS Joacim DUGGER James ARNETT Nathaniel F. JOHNSON James E. McKNIGHT Andrew JACKSON John DOWNING John MARTIN Matthew J. SIMS Lewis B GANT Daniel McPHAUL Silvester B LINDSEY Samuel BRIMLEY Alexander C. McDOUGAL William RAY William THORNTON Sr. Amos HARDIN Gideon B HUGHES and that Joseph N. ROBNETT and Robert H. COOPER be appointed and summonds to attend and serve as constables to wait on the Court that that venirefacias issue returnable to said Court.

These are therefore to command you to summonds each of the above named persons to be and attend before the Judge of our next Circuit Court to be held for the County of Wayne at the Court house in the town of Waynesboro on the fourth Monday in May next to serve as aforesaid and this they shall in now wise omit under the penalty prescribed by law herein fail not and have you them and this writ and show how you shall have executed the same.

In witness whereof I, William JONES Clerk of the County Court of Wayne County hereto set my name and affix my seal of office at office the first Monday in March AD 1851 //s// William JONES Clerk {seal}

page 2 Monday May 26th 1851

Iss'd March 7th 1851

Sheriff Return
Came to hand same day issued Rial BREWER Sh'ff I have summonds all the within named persons within the time prescribed by law all of whom are freeholders or householders and citizens of Wayne County over the age of twenty one years May 20 1851 //s// Rial BREWER Sh'ff

And therefore from the jurors summoned as aforesaid the court proceeds as the statute in such case made and promoted directs to select and empannel a Grand Jury for said County of Wayne at this term when am elected. Lewis B. GANT John S . BURNS Samuel L. BURNS Samuel BROMLEY William BOWDEN John MARTIN Nathaniel F. JOHNSON Isham TURNBOUGH Amos HARDIN Richard H WHITAKER James ARNETT Matthew H BURKS & James E. McKNIGHT of whom the Court appoints Lewis B GANT foreman who together with the rest of the said Grand Jurors having been empanneled sworn and charged according to law to enquire for the body of the County of Wayne retire to consider of presentments.

Robert H. COOPER a constable of Wayne County summoned as aforesaid is sworn to attend the Grand Jury.

Ordered by the Court that Matthew J. SIMS Alexander C McDOUGAL and Gideon B. HUGHES Jurors summoned to attend at this term of the Court be discharged from attending on said Court sufficient cause apeparing to the Court for the same.

11. Absalom B. GANT & David COOK Executors of Hiram ROBERTS, Dec'd vs. Willoughby PUGH & Elijah H. PUGH} Debt
Came the parties by their attorneys and came also a jury of good and lawful men of the County of Wayne John DOWNING and eleven others who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues joined between the parties and a true verdict give according to to evidence and the jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that they find the issue in favour of the plaintiff and that the defendants have not paid the debt of five hundred dollars in the plaintiff's declaration mentioned and that they assess the plaintiff damages by reason of the [detention?] thereof to nineteen dollars and 75 cents. It is therefore considered by the court that the plaintiffs recover of the defendants their debt aforesaid and the damages aforesaid //

page 3 Monday May 26th 1851
assessed by the jury as aofresaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that execution issue.

2. William JENKINS & Martin EULISS Executors of Adam EULISS Dec'd vs. Henry GREESON} Appeal
This day came the parties by their attorneys whereupon this cause in cas it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this court sufficient cause appearing from the oral affidavit of said defendant. It is therefore considered by by the Court that the plaintiffs recover of the defendant the costs in this behalf at this term expended and that execution issue.

3. William JENKINS & Martin EULISS Executors of Adam EULISS Deceased vs Henry GREESON} Appeal
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon for sufficient cause appearing to the Court from the oral affidavit of said defendant. It is ordered by the court that this cause be continued until the next term of this court and that they plaintiff recover of said defendant the costs in this behald at this term expended and that execution issue

6. Neill S. BROWN Gau &c vs Jesse S. RUSS & others} Debt
This day came the parties by their attorneys whereupon this cause is continued by consent until the next term of this court.

4. Neill S. BROWN Gau. &c vs Rowland W. ALTOM et al} Debt
This day came the parties by their attorneys whereupon this cause is continued by consent of the parties until the next term of this court.

9. Thomas T. MABRY Admr. vs Catherine MABRY et al.} Petition to sell Slaves
Came the Petitioner by his attorney whereupon on motion of said Petitioners attorney it is ordered by the Court that the allegations in said petition contained be be refered to the Clerk of this Court and that he take proof and report thereon at the present term of this court.

page 4 Monday May 26th 1851

10. John MORRISON vs William HOLT et al} Petition to sell Land
Came the petitioner by his counsel and on motion of said petitioners counsel It is ordered by this Court that the allegations in said petition contained be refered to the Clerk of this Court and that he take proof and report thereon to the present term of this Court all other matters being reserved

37. State of Tennessee vs. Gray BRYANT} Presentment for Gaming
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the court enters a Nolleprosiqui in this cause it is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day[?delay?] and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court

38. State of Tennessee vs. Gray BRYANT & Andrew SNOW} Presentment for Gaming
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the Court enters a Nulleprosequi in this case It is therefore considered by the Court that said defendants be hereof discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court.

39 State of Tennessee vs. Gray BRYANT} Presentment for Gaming
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the Court enters a Nulliprosequi in this case It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court.

40 State of Tennessee vs Gray BRYANT} Presentment for Gaming
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the Court enters a Nulliprosequi in this case.//

page 5 Monday May 26th 1851
It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the state expended as may be allowed by the County Court.

41. State of Tennessee vs. Gray BRYANT} Presentment for Gaming
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the Court enters a Nolliprosequi in this case. It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court

42. State of Tennessee vs Gray BRYANT & Andrew SNOW} Presentment for Gaming.
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the Court enters a Nolliprosequi in this case. It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court

Ordered that Court be adjourned until tomorrow morning Eight Oclock //s// E WALKER

JmcD[in margin]

page 6 Tuesday May 27th 1851

Court met according to adjournment
Present as of yesterday Honourable Elijah WALKER Judge &c presiding

8. William DUNCAN vs William CHURCHWELL} Appeal
This day came the defendant by his attorney and on motion of said defendants attorney sufficient cause appearing to the Court for the same from the affidavit of said defendant It is ordered by the Court that the plaintiff be made to give security for the prosecution of his suit by the time the same is reached for trial or the same will be made sbsolute and the suit dismissed.

William R. WARNELL vs William ROPER [or ROSSER]}Appeal
Came the defendant by his attorney whereupon on motion of said defendants attorney for him. it is ordered by the Court that the defendant have leave to give security for the prosecution of the appearl in this behalf Thereupon came Joseph ROBINSON as security for said defendant and acknowl himself to be indebted to the said plaintiff William R. WARNELL in the sum of one hundred dollars to be levied of his goods and chattles lands and tenements but to be void if said defendant shall prosecute his appeal suit with effect or in case he fail therein that he pay such Judgement as may be rendered against him in this behalf.

7. James ANDERSON Adm'r &c vs. William COPELAND et al} Petitio to sell Land
Came the petitioner by his attorney whereupon on motion of said petitioners attorney it is ordered by the Court that the matters and things in the petition contained be refered to the Clerk and that he take proof and report thereupon to the present term of this court.

7. William POLLARD vs. Jonathan MORRIS} Debt
This day came the parties by their attorneys and came also a jury of good and lawful men of the County of Wayne to wit Cavel B. McLEAN and eleven others who being //

page 7 Tuesday May 27, 1851
duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try this issue joined between the parties and a true verdict give according to evidence and the jurors aforesaid on their oaths aforesaid do say they find the issues in favor of the plaintiff and that the defendant hath not paid the debt of five hundred and thirty one dollars & 74 cents in the plaintiffs declaration mentioned and they assess the plaintiffs damages by reason of the detention thereof to twenty dollars and 37 cents It is therefore considered by the Court that the plaintiff recover of the defendant his debt aforesaid and the damages aforesaid assessed by the Jury as aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that execution issue.

6. State of Tennessee vs. Henry G. MORRIS[?]} Presentment affray
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the state and with the assent of the Court enters a Nolleprosequi in this case it is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the state as may be allowed by the County Court and that the same be certified to the County Court for allowances.

10. State of Tennessee vs. Henry G. MORRIS[?] & Samuel GALYEON} Presentment affray
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the state and with the asset of the court enters a Nolliprosequi in this case It is therfore considered by the court that the defendants be hereof discharged and hence without day and taht the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court and that they same be certified to the County Court for allowance

12. State of Tennessee vs. William SCOTT} Indictment A & B & affray
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the state and with the assent of the court enters a Nulleprosequi in this case. It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendants be hereof discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the state expended as may be allowed by the County Court and that the same be certified for allowance.

page 8 Tuesday May 27th, 1851

14. State of Tennessee vs William DIXON}Presentment for Tipling
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the state and with the assent of the court enters a nolli prosequi in this cause It is therefore considered by the court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court and that the same be certified for allowance.

15. State of Tennessee vs. William DIXON} Presentment for Tipling
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the state and the defenda with the assent of the court enters a Nolliprosequi in this cause It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the state expended as may be allowed by the County Court and that the same be certified to the County for allowance.

Ordered by the Court that the attorney General have leave to file bills of Indictment against the following persons to wit. Rebecca KING for a [the next word could either be "nuisance" or "sausauce" or just about anything else since Mr. McDOUGAL's handwriting is so bad. It is difficult to determine whether he intends a letter to be an "a" or an "o" and his "n" , "s" and "r" all look alike at times. The researcher is encouraged to read the original if there is a question - editor] and a bill of indictment against Samuel LAWSON for wearing a Bowie Knife & a bill of indictment against John CLAYTON and Marsena WESTMORELAND for [word indecipherable]

30. State of Tennessee vs. David LITTLETON} Indictment for permitting slave to sell spirits
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the state and with the assent of the state Court enters a Nolle Prosequi in this cause. It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be herebpf discharged and go hence without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the state expended as may be allowed by the County Court and that the same be certified to the County Court for allowance.

State of Tennessee vs. Starks[?] MOORE} Presentment for Gaming.
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being charged on the present in this behalf pleads guilty thereto and for his deliverance puts himself upon the mercy of the court. It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined five dollars and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid as secured[?] or be otherwise discharged by due course //

page 9 Tuesday May 27th 1851
of law whoereupon came Isaac GRIGG as security for said defendant and confesses Judgement in favour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid It is therefore considered by the Court that that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue.

58. State of Tennessee vs. Buckley HAM} Indictment for Tipling
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person whereupon on motion of said defendant by his attorney sufficient cause appearing for the same from the oral affidavit of the defendant it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this Court Whereupon came said defendant and Rial BREWER who came into Court as security for said defendant acknowledged themselves to be indebted to the State of Tennessee in the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars each to be levied of their goods and chattles lands and tenements respectively for the use of the state but to be void on condition that said defendant Buckley HAM shall make his personal appearance before the Judge of the next Circuit Court to be held for Wayne County at the Court house in Waynesboro on the first Tuesday after the fourth Monday in September next and answer the State of Tennessee on the indictment in this behalf and not depart from said Court without leave of the same.

1. SIMONTON HENDERSON & BUCHANON vs. Absalom B. GANT & David COOK enns &c} Case
This day came the parties by their attorneys whereupon by consent of the parties this cause is continued until the next term of this court.

8. William DUNCAN vs. William CHURCHWELL} Appeal
came the defe This cause having been regularly reached for trail and the plaintiff having failed to appear and give security according to a rule heretofore made in this cause. It is therefore ordered by the court that the rule be made absolute and that this cause be dismissed and it is further considered by the Court that the defendant recover of said plaintiff the costs in this behalf expended & that execution issue


page 10 Tuesday May 27th 1851

Rial BREWER vs Henry H. HUNTER} Appeal
This day came the parties by their attorneys and came also a jury of good and lawful men of the County of Wayne to wit Cavel B. McLEAN James ROSE John DOWNING William THORNTON Sylvester B. LINDSEY Joacim DUGGER Jonathan MORRIS Brinkley HOPSON Andrew JACKSON William RAY John F. HALL & Buckley HAM when being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the matters of controversy between the parties and a true verdict give according to evidence and the jurors aforesaid on their oaths aforesaid do say they find in favour of the defendant It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go hence and that the he recover of the plaintiff the costs in this behalf expended and the whereupon the plaintiff by his attorney by leave of the Court enteres a motion for a new trail in this cause and on consideration of said motion is it considered by the Court that said motion be overruled It is therefore further considered by the Court that the defendant be hereof discharged and that he recover of the plaintiff the costs in this behalf expended and that execution issue Therefore the plaintiff prays an appeal to the next term of the Supreme Court of the State of Tennessee to be held at the City of Nashville which is granted him he having given bond and security according to law and tenders here in open Court his bill of exceptions and prays that the same be signed sealed enrolled and made a part of the record of this case which is accordingly done.

50. State of Tennessee vs. Samuel LAWSON Indictment for A & B
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being charged on the indictment in this pleads guity thereto and for his deliverance puts himself upon the country mercy of the court. It is therefore considered by the Court that said defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined two dollars and fifty cents and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the find aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and the remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law therefore came Alexander M. CRAVEN[?] as security for said defendant and confesses Judgement infavour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid It is therefore considered by the //

page 11 Tuesday May 27th 1851
Court that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

52. State of Tennessee vs. Benjamin F. BROOKS} Indictment for Trespass
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant beging charged on the Indictment in this behalf pleads guilty thereto and for his delivery puts himself on the mercy of the Court. It is therfore considered by the court that the defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined two dollars and fifty cents and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came John W. BERRY and Rial BREWER as security for said defendant and confess judgement in favour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said securities as of said defendant the tine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

1. Absalom B. BURKS [or BANKS] vs. Archibald L. ROBERTSON} Case
Came the plaintiff by his attorney and on motion of said plaintiffs attorney David M. SPAIN as addtional security for the prosecution of this suit asknowledged himself to be jointly and severally bound as security for said plaintiff with Lewis LINVILLE the security in the prosecution bond in this behalf in the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars to be levied of his goods and chattles, lands and tenements but to be void on condition that said plaintiff shall prosecute his said suit with effect as in case he fail therein shall pay the costs [word indecipherable] on such failure

2. State of Tennessee vs. Fielder WEST} Presentment A & B
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendants in proper person and said defendant being charged on the presentment in his behalf pleads //

Page 12 Tuesday May 27th 1851
guilty thereto and for his deliverance puts himself upon the mercy of the Court. It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined two dollars and fifty cents and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law. Whereupon came William WEST and Rial BREWER as securities for said defendant and confess Judgement infavour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said Securities as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue.

51. State of Tennessee vs. Henry HOLLIS} Indictment affray
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant beging charged on the indictment in this behalf pleads guilty thereto and for his deliverance puts himself upon the mercy of the Court. It is therefore considered by the court that the defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined two dollars and fifty cents and and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law thereupon came Andrew J. BREWER as security for said defendant and confess judgement infoavour of the state of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid. It is therefore considered by the court that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

45. State of Tennessee vs. Thornton WILSON } Presentment Gaming
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and aid defendant being charged upon the presentment in this behalf pleads guilty thereto and for his delivery puts himself upon the Mercy of the Court it is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined five dollars and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of //

page 13 Tuesday May 27th 1851
law Whereupon came James WILSON as security for said defendant and confesses Judgement infavour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

43. State of Tennessee vs. George W DAVIS} Presentment for affray
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being charged on the presentment in this behalf pleads guilty thereto and for his deliverance puts himself upon the mercy of the Court. It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant George DAVIS for the offense aforesaid be fined fifty cents and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or b otherwise discharged by due course of law. Whereupon came Alexander M. CRAVEN as security for said defendant and confesses judgement infavour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

62. State of Tennessee vs James BREWER} Indictment assault & battery & affray
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being charged on the indictment in this behalf pleads guilty thereto and for his deliverance puts himself upon the mercy of the court. It is therefore considered by the Court that said defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined ten dollars and fifty cents and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the find aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law. Therefore came Rial BREWER as security for said defendant and confesses judgement infavour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover as will of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

Page 14 Tuesday May 27th 1851

Ordered by the Court that Alexander NORMAN be fined ten dollars for a contem of court It is further considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover of said Alexander NORMAN the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that execution issue.

57. State of Tennessee vs. John F. PITTS} Presentment Overseer of Road
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being charged on the presentment in this behalf pleads guilty thereto and for his deliverance puts himself on the mercy of the court. It is therefore considered by the court that the defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined two dollars and fifty cents and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law. Thereupon came a jury David J. JONES as security for said defendant and confesses Judgement infavour of the State of tennessee of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid it is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said Secrity as of said defendant the tine and costs aforesaid and taht execution issue

51. State of Tennessee vs. Peter BRYANT} Indictment for afray
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being charged upon the indictment in this behalf pleads not guilty thereto and for his trial puts himself upon the country and the attorney General doth the like Whereupon came a jury of good and lawful men of the County of Wayne to wit David R. ADAMS William RAY Isaac MORRIS John BRYSON James H. STRICKLAND Henry CASTEEL James SUTTON James C. BRIDGES David (or Daniel) T. CARTER Andrew P. COOK Jesse S. ROSS Abraham MONTAGUE who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue of travence between the State and said defendant and a true verdict give according to evidence and the jurors aforesaid on their oaths aforesaid do say the defendant is not guilty in manner and form as charged in the indictment in this behalf. It is therefore considered by the court that the defendant be hereof discharged and go ehnce without day and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court

Page 15, Tuesday May 27th 1851

The Grand Jury came into court in a body under the care of their of their sworn officers and returned into court a bill of Indictment against Samuel LAWSON for an assault and battery and billof Indictment against Andrew HUDDLESTON for for an assault and battery each of which bills of indictment is endorsed by the foreman of the Grand Jury a true bill and the Grand Jury being in court as aforesaid returned into court a bill of indictment against Daniel C. WALKER and Newton WALKER for Larceny which last mentioned bill of indictment and the endorsements thereon are in the words and figures following to wit

State of Tennessee Wayne Countyž Circuit Court May Term in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty one The Grand Jury of the State of Tennessee duly elected empanneled sworn and charged to inquire for the body of the County of Wayne aforesaid upon their oath present that Daniel C. WALKER late of said County, Carpenter late of said County Yeoman and Newton WALKER late of said County laborer on the first day of October in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty with force and arms in said County one cow of the value of twelve dollars the proper goods and chattles and property of Nancy MOORE then and there being found felonously did steal take and carry away contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and proceeded and against the peace and dignity of the State.

And the Grand Jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do further present that the said Daniel C. WALKER and Newton WALKER on the day and year afores last aforesaid with force and arms in the County of Wayne aforesaid one cow of the value of twelve dollars the proper goods and chattles and property of Isaac MORRIS then and there being found feloniously did steal take and carry away contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and proceeded and against the peace and dignity of the State //s// Robert A. Hill Attorney General &c.
Isaac MORRIS Prosecutor
Isaac MORRIS John BRYSON Susan SIGNER George W. CARTER John CARTER B. H. CARTER Sworn in open court and sent to give evidence to the Grand Jury May 27th 1851 Jno McDOUGAL Clk
A True Bill
Lewis B. GANT foreman of the Grand Jury

The Grnd Jury then return to consider of other presentments

Page 16 Tuesday May 27th 1851

State of Tennessee vs. Peter PRINCE }Indictment for Lewdness
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being charged on the indictment in this behalf pleads not guilty thereto and for his trail puts himself upon the country and the attorney General doth likewise Therefore came a jury of good and lawful men of the County of Wayne to wit William M. GALLEGLY Joacim DUGGER John L. CYPERT John DOWNING James ROSE Sylvester B. LINDSEY William THORNTON Cavel B. McLEAN Andrew JACKSON Thomas S. CURTIS Zebulon M. JOHNSON and Felix WEST Who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue of traverse between the State of Tennessee and said defendant and a true verdict give according to evidence and the jurors aforesaid on their oaths aforesaid do say that the defendant is guilty in manner and form as charged in the indictment in this behalf It is therefore considered by the Court that said defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined one dollar and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that he remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came Jeremiah PRINCE as security for said defendant and confesses judgement infavour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid It is therefore considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

Ordered that Court be adjourned until tomorrow morning Eight Oclock //s// E. WALKER


Go to next installment

Return to County Records Page

Return to Contents Page