WAYNE COUNTY, TENNESSEE

CIRCUIT COURT MINUTE BOOK MAY 1851 - JANUARY 1857

Third Installment

Page 65 Thursday September 25, 1851

Court met according to adjournment.
Present as of yesterday the Hon'l Elijah WALKER Judge &c presiding

Absalom B. BURKS vs Archibald L. ROBERTSON§ Case
This day came the parties by therer attorneys whereupon by consent of the parties it is ordered by the Court that each party have leave to take depositions Generally both in and out of the County of Wayne by giving the adverse party five days notice if taken in the County of Wayne and ten days notice if taken out of said County and of the time and place of taking such depositions

4. The State of Tennessee vs Cornelius BUSBY§ Present. For Tipling
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant and William P. KENDRICK 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 Dolalrs 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 Cornelius BUSBY shall make his personal appearance before the judge of the next Circuit Court to be held for Wayne County at the Court house in the town of Waynesboro on the first Tuesday after the fourth Monday in January next and answer the State of Tennessee upon the presentment in this behalf and not depart from said Court without leave of the same.

State of Tennessee vs John FOREHAND§ Indictment for Malicious Mischief [Ex. ]
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 the defendant for the offence aforesaid be fined five dollars and be imprisoned two hours in the jail of Wayne County and that the state of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that execution issue

page 66 Thursday September 25 1851

State of Tennessee vs Stanford SUTTON§ Indictment for Arson
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant being conducted to the bar of the Court in custody of the Shff in proper person and said by consent of said attorney General and of said defendant it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this Court. Ordered that said defendant be remanded to the jail of Wayne County from whence he was brought. And therefore came William J. YOUNG Washinton CARTER Henry MORRIS, George W. COBB Alexander DAVIS George W. YOUNG Jacob B. BIFFLE Henry H. HUNTER and acknowledged themselves to be indebted to the State of Tennessee in the Sum of two hundred and fifty dollars each to be levied on their goods and chattles lands and tenements respectively for the use of the State but to be void on Condition that they each make their his personal the said William J. YOUNG, Washington CARTER, Henry MORRIS, George W. COBB, Alexander DAVIS, George W. YOUNG, Jacob B. BIFFLE, Henry H. HUNTER shall each make his personal appearance before the Judge of this next Circuit Court to be held in the town on the first Tuesday after the fourth Monday in January next the said William J. YOUNG to prosecute and give evidence and the said Washington CARTER, Henry MORRIS George W. COBB Alexander DAVIS George W. YOUNG Jacob B. BIFFLE and Henry H. HUNTER to testify and give evidence upon the indictment in this behalf and not depart from said Court without leave of same.

State of Tennessee vs Elijah D. BIFFLE & Winchester STOWE§ Sci Fa [Ex ]
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendants in proper person whereupon by consent of the attorney General the forfeiture in this case is set aside and the defendants assume the costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that the forfeiture in this case be set aside and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendants the costs in this behalf expended assessed as aforesaid and that execution issue

State of Tennessee vs George W. DUREN§ Sci Fa
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and //

page 67 Thursday September 15, 1851
the defendant in proper person whereupon the attorney General agrees that the forfeiture in this case be set aside and the defendant assumes the costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that this forfeiture in this case be set aside and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the costs in this behalf expended assessed as aforesaid and that execution issue [Ex. ]

State of Tennessee vs Andrew J. RISNER§ Presentment for Tipling [Ex. ]
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being charged upon 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 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 be committed and remain the custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law. Whereupon came William MELTON 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.

State of Tennessee vs Andrew J. RISNER§ Presentment for Tipling [Ex. ]
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 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 MELTON as security for said defendant and confesses judgement in fav of the State of Tennessee for the fine and costs aforesaid. It is therefore considered by the Court that the State recover as well of said Security as of said defendant the fine & costs aforesaid & that execution issue

page 68 Thursday September 25 1851

State of Tennessee vs Francis J. GLAUCK§ Indictment for Larceny
The attorney General presented the following account for keeping the jury in this case which on motion of said attorney General is ordered to be spread on the minutes of the Court and taxed in the bill of costs in this case which amount is in the words and figures following towit

State of Tennessee Dr.
To Walker & West
1851 Sept 23 & 4 To Board of Jury two days $16.00
Sworn to & subscribed in open Court Sept 25 1851 J.McDOUGAL Clk
Correctly taxed R. A. HILL attorney Gen'l

46. State of Tennessee vs Willey BRANTLEY§ Presentment for Tipling
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person whereupon said defendant by leave of the Court withdraws his plea of not guilty in this case and pleads guilty to the charge in the presentment in this behalf and for his deliverance puts himself upon the mercy of the Court. It is therefore considered by the Court that said defendant for the offence 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 [Ex. ]

58. State of Tennessee vs S. W. ROACH and William ROACH§Presentment for affray
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendants in proper person and said defendants being charged on the presentment in this behalf plead not guilty thereto and for their deliverance put themselves upon the mercy of the Court it is therefore considered by the Court that the defendants for the offense aforesaid be fined twenty five cents each and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendants the fines aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that they remain in custody unless the fines and costs aforesaid are paid or secured or otherwise dicharged by due course of law. Whereupon came John F. EDWARDS and Joseph PITTS as surities for said defendants 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 defendants the fines and costs aforesaid & that execution issue [Ex ]

page 69 Thursday September 25th 1851

12. James WALKER vs Eli F. EDMISTON§ Case
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon by consent of the parties it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this Court

13. Eli F. EDMISTON vs James WALKER et al§ Case
Came the parties by their attorneys and by consent of the parties it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this Court

William POLLARD vs Jonathan MORRIS§ Debt
This day came the defendant by his attorney and prays an appeal to the next term of the Supreme Court of errors and appeals of the State of Tennessee at Nashville to be held for the State of Tennessee at the Court house in the City of Nashville on the first Monday in December next which is granted him he having given bond and security as the law directs

State of Tennessee vs Francis J. GLAUCK§ Indictment for Larceny
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant being conducted to the bar of the Court in custody of the Sheriff of Wayne County And it is therefore forthwith demanded of the said Francis J. GLAUCK if he has or knows any thing to say why the court shall not proceed to judgement and execution thereof against him according to law, who nothing further saith than as before he hath said It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Francis J. GLAUCK for the offense aforesaid do undergo confinement at hard labor in the jail and penitentiary house of the State of Tennessee for the term of one year commencing from the time of his delivery to the keeper of said jail and penitentiary house that he be rendered infamous and incapable of being examined as a witness in any of the Courts of this State and that he pay the Costs of this prosecution for which execution may issue It is further ordered by the Court that the Sheriff of Wayne County deliver the said Francis F. GLAUCK to the keeper of said Jail and Penitentiary House as soon as praticable [Ex ]

page 70 Thursday September 25 1851

The Grand Jury came into Court in a body under the care of their sworn officer and returned into Court a bill of indictment against James POOL for obtaining money by false pretenses which said bill of Indictment and endoresements thereon are in the words and figures following to wit

State of Tennessee Wayne County§ Circuit Court September Term in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty one The Grand Jurors of the State of Tennessee duly elected empannelled sworn and charged to enquire for the body of the County of Wayne upon their oath present that James POOL late of said County laborer on the twenty second day of July in the year of our Lord one Thousand eight hundred and fifty one in the County of Wayne aforesaid unlawfully feloniously fraudulently and falsely did pretend to one Rial BREWER that he the said ames POOL lived at John McFFALLS and that he the said James POOL had a negro woman and child at said John McFALLS that said John McFALLS owned him the said James POOL the sum of sixty dollars the said John McFALL then and there resided in said County of Wayne that he the said James POOL wanted to borrow two dollars and fifty cents and that he would pay it back to said Rial BREWER the next day by means of which false fraudulent and felonious pretenses the said James POOL did then and there from unlawfully and feloniously obtain from said Rial BREWER one bank note of the denomination of two dollars of the value of two dollars and fifty cents in specie of the value of fifty cents with intent then and there feloniously to defraud the said Rial BREWER of the same Whereas in truth and in fact the said James POOL did not live at said John McFALLS and whereas in truth and in fact the said James POOL did not have at John McFALLS a negro woman and child and whereas in truth and in fact said James POOL did not then intend to pay said sum to said Rial BREWER contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State. //s// Robert A. HILL Atto General &c
Rial BREWER a Prosecutor
Rial BREWER sworn in open Court and sent to the Grand Jury to give evidence this September 25th 1851 John McDOUGAL Clerk
A Tue Bill W. J. YOUNG foreman of the Grand Jury

And the Grand Jury being in court as aforesaid returned into Court a bill of Indictment against William DUREN[?] for disturbing public worship and a bill of indictment against Ebenezer STAGGS & Gideon L. BREWER for assault and battery each of which said bills of Indictment is endorsed by the foreman of the Grand Jury "A True Bill And the //

page 71 Thursday September 25, 1851
the Grand Jury being in Court as aforesaid returned into Court a presentment against Martin HARDIN for gaming and Horse Racing a presentment against Cornelius BAILEY for Gaming and Horse racing a presentment again William GRIFFEN for gaming and horse racing a presentment against Samuel SMITH for Gaming and horse racing a presentment against Albert FALLIN alias A. M. FALLEN for Gaming and Horse racing a presentment against Mark HARDIN for Gaming &c a presentment against Jonathan I. BIFFLE for Gaming &c a presentment against John HICKERSON for Gaming &c a presentment against Thomas MORROW or MOSURE[?] for Gaming &c a presentment against Richard STOCKARD for Gaming & horse racing a presentment against William C. BURNS for Gaming and horse racing a presentment against Samuel L. BURNS for Gaming & horse racing a presentment against John KYLE for Gaming & horse racing a presentment against George R. BIFFLE for Gaming & horse racing a presentment against Andrew BLAIR for Gaming & horse racing a presentment against Michael CHOAT alias Mike CHOAT for Gaming & horse racing a presentment agains Holmes FALLIN for Gaming & horse racing a presentment against William ROACH for Gaming &c a presentment against William BIFFLE for Gaming &c a presentment against David SKILLEN alias David SKILLERN Gaming &c a Presentment against Isaac MORRIS Overseer of Road a presentment against Leonard HICKERSON for Gaming & horse racing two presentments against Jackson RISNER for Tipling a presentment against Garrison BUCH for Gaming & horse racing a presentment against Green WILSON for Gaming & horse racing a presentment againt Green WILSON overseer of road three presentments against Marian HAM for Tipling a presentment against Garrison BUSH for obstructing public road a presentment against Michael CHOAT Overseer of road a presentment against Moses PRINCE Overseer of Road a presentment against Wilson McLAREN[?] for Gaming &c a presentment against Frank STOWE alias Jonathan F. STOWE obstructing public Road a presentment against Thomas KELLEY for Gaming &c a presentment against Amos LAWSON and John A. MARTIN for an affray a presentment against William M. LAFFERTY for Gaming &c a presentment against James WILSON for Gaming &c a presentment against Jeremiah GRIGGS overseer of road a presentment against Nicholas SKILLEN alias Nicholas SKILLERN for Gaming &c a presentment against Joseph W. CRINER for Gaming &c a presentment against James ARNETT for Gaming &c and a presentment against John L. FOWLER overseer of a Road each of which presentments is signed by every member of the Grand Jury & then return to consider of other presentments

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

page 72 Friday September 26, 1851

Court met according to adjournment
Present as of yesterday the Hon'l Elijah WALKER Judge &c presiding

State of Tennessee vs John L. FOWLER§ Presentment Overseer of Road
Came the defendant John L. FOWLER and Archibald G. McDOUGAL as his security and 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 John L. FOWLER shall make his personal appearance before the Judge of the next Circuit Court to be held for the County of Wayne at the Court house in the town of Waynesboro on the first Tuesday after the fourth Monday in January next and answer the State of Tennessee upon the presentment in this behalf and not depart from said Court without leave of the Court

State of Tennessee vs Lucinda STUCKER§ Indictment for Lewdness
William B. ROSS Jailer of Wayne County presented the following account which on motion of the attorney General is allowed ordered to be spread on the minutes of the Court and taxed in the bill of costs in this case which account is in the words and figures following to wit

County of Wayne Tn William R. ROSS Jailer of Wayne County Dr. for keeping Lucinda STUCKER in said Jail on an indictment for Lewdness from the 29th day of August 1851 to the 24th day of September 1851 27 days @ 37½ $10.12½ 2 Turnkeys 3½ 1.00 $11.12½ Sworn to & subscribed in open Court Sept 25 1851 John McDOUGAL Clerk W. B. ROSS Correctly taxed R. A. HILL Atte Gen'l.

State of Tennessee vs Francis J. GLAUCK§ Indictment for Larceny
William B. ROSS Jailor of Wayne County presented the following account in his case which on motion of the attorney is ordered to be spread upon the minutes of the Court and taxed in the bill of costs in this case which said account is in the words and figures following to wit "State of Tennessee to William D. ROSS Jailor of Wayne County Dr. for keeing F. J. GLAUCK in said Jail on a charge of Larceny from the 30th day of August 1851 to the 25th day of September 1851 27 days @ 37½ $10.12½ 9 Turnkeys 3½ 4.50 $14.62½ Sworn to & subscribed in open Court September 25, 1851, J. McDOUGAL Clerk Wm. B. ROSS Correctly taxed R. A. HILL atte' Gen'l

page 73 Friday September 26, 1851

State of Tennessee vs John FOREHAND§ Indictment for Malicious Mischief
William B. ROSS presented the following account which on motion of the attorney General is ordered to be spread upon the minutes of the Court and taxed in the bill of costs in this case which said account is in the words and figures following to wit

County of Wayne to William B. ROSS Jailor of Wayne County Dr
For keeping John FOREHAND in said jail on an indictment for malicious mischief from the 15th of July 1851 to the 25th day of August 1851 73 days @ 37½ $27.37½ 4 Turnkeys # 3½ 2.00 $29.37½ W. B. ROSS Sworn to & subscribed in open Court Sept 25 1851 J. McDOUGAL Clerk Correctly taxed R. A. HILL Atto Gen'l.

State of Tennessee vs Peter PRINCE & Thomas PRINCE [editor's note: question on this surname. McDOUGAL's handwriting is difficult to read even at best. He spreads his letters out without defining them. His "o" looks like a "u" and without knowing a specific word, it is difficult to determine whether he intended to write a "m" , "n" , "u", or "o". So this surname could be PRINCE or PRINN or PRIM]§ It appearing to the Court that the defendant Peter PRINCE was convicted of a misdemeanor and a judgement entered against him and the said Thomas PRINCE as his security at the May Term 1851 of this Court and that for a fine and costs and that an Execution was issued against them and placed [the term "made out" appears in the margin here] in the hands of the Sheriff of Wayne County which execution was by said Sheriff returned to the present term of this Court endorsed by said Sheriff "no property found in my County to levy this fifa on" It is therefore on motion of the attorney General ordered by the Court that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as follows to wit

Clerk McDOUGAL Indictment charge & plea 50
Issuing capeus 75, issuing 2 states subpoenas 25 [cannot read the following entry] 25, 1.25
Two pro....[?] states witness attendance 12½ Entering judgement 75 judgement for cost 25 1.12½
order to convict 25 judgement against security 25 order for Execution 25 75
two copies of costs 50, issuing Execution 37½ Recording cause 16½ 2.50
Copy of Judgement order & bill of costs for County Court 1.00         $7.12½
Sol. R. A. HILL tx fee 5.00
Shff. BREWER Executing Capeus $1. taking Recognizance 25 Executing 2 states Subpoenas 50 1.75
State witness S. J. DAVIS 3 days $2.25 44 Miles 1.76 4.01             $18.88½

State of Tennessee vs John STRICKLIN§
It appearing to the Court that the defendant was convicted of a misdemeanor at the May Term 1851 of this Court and a judgement rendered [term "made out" in margin] against him for a fine and costs upon which Judgement an Execution was issued and placed in the hands of Rial BREWER Sheriff of Wayne County which said Execution was returned to the present term of this Court endorsed by said Sheriff "No property found in my County" It is therefore on motion of the attorney General ordered by the Court that the County of Wayne pay said costs on the part of the State expended as follows to wit and that the same be certified to the County Court for allowance //

page 74 Friday September 26, 1851
Clerk McDOUGAL Indictment charging and plea 50 issuing capeus 75 1.25
Issuing 9 states subpoenas 112½ 9 states witnesses attendance 56¼ 168¾
Empannelling jury 12½ ntering judgement 75 judgement for cost 25 112½
Order to convict 25 two copies of costs 50 issuing Execution 37½ 112½
Recording cause 162½ Copy of Judgement order & bill of costs for County Court $1. 2.62½
Atto Genl. R. A. HILL tax fee 5.00
Shff BREWER Executing capeus $1 Executing States subpoenas 1.50 2.50
Empannelling jury 12½ calling suit 4. Commitment 50 Recognisant 50 1.16½ 3.66½
Shff ACKLEN Executing 3 States subpoenas 150 1 75
James MARTIN 2 days $150 50 Miles $2. = 3.50 John HASE 2 days $150 to Miles $2 = $3.50 $7.00        $4806¼

The Grand Jury Came into Court in a body under the case of their sworn officer and in a body and returned into a bill of Indictment against James ROSE for trading with Slave and a bill of indictment against Edward GOBBLE alias Edward GOULD for trading with slave 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 the following presentments to wit two against Marion HAM for Tipling, a presentment against Andrew BLAIR for Gaming &c one against Moses PRINCE Overseer of Road one against James NELSON for GAMING two against Thomas BRATTON for Tipling one against Isaac ALLEN Jr Overseer of Road one against Robert J. CYPERT for betting on election one against Nathaniel G. BROWN for betting on election one against William C. BURNS for Gaming & horse racing one against Brinkley HOPSON for treating for votes one against John DIXON for treating voters &c one against Marion HAM for tipling and one against Michael CHOAT overseer of Road and there being no further business before the Grand Jury they were discharged from further attendance on the Court.

Ordered that Court be adjourned until Court in course //s// E. WALKER

page 75 Monday January 26th 1852

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

Rial BREWER Esquire Sheriff of the County of Wayne returned into Court the venirafacias returnable to the present term of this Court which said venirefacias is in the words and figures following to wit

State of Tennessee Wayne County
To the Sheriff of said County Greeting
Whereas at the October Term of the County Court of Wayne County 1851 It was ordered by the Court that the following good and lawful men of the County of Wayne and State of Tennessee be appointed and summonsed by the Sheriff of said County to be and attend at the next term of the Circuit Court to be held for the County of Wayne aforesaid at the Court house in the town of Waynesboro on the fourth Monday in January next to wit William HARDIN Spencer LOYD Edward B. THROGMORTON Andrew WILLIAMS Thomas FRANKLIN Washington CARTER Stephen BIVINS George W. BARKER William BENHAM Elijah D. BIFFLE George KYLE Samuel MARTIN Christopher C. COOK Carroll H. HUGHLING Anderson PHILIPS Thomas ADAMS Wallis HAYSE Solomon BREWER Jr. Andrew J. BREWER Micajah McGEE John B. DIXON Josiah DARBEY George G. HERRON John SPEER King PRATER and that Jocob B. BIFFLE and James B. DAVIS be appointed and Summonsed to attend as constables and wait on the Court and that Venirefacias issue returnable to said Circuit Court These are therefore to command you the said Sheriff to summon 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 January next at 9 oclock A.M. then and there to serve as aforesaid and this they shall in no wise omit under the penalty prescribed by law herein fail not and have you then there this writ
In witness whereof I, William JONES, Clerk of said County Court hereto set my name and seal of office at office the first Monday in October A.D. 1851 //s// William JONES Clerk [seal] Issd. October 27, 1851, Sheriff Return

page 76 Monday January 26, 1852

Came to hand the same day issued Rial BREWER Seff
I have Summoned all the within named person 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 January 26, 1852 //s// R. BREWER Shff.

And thereupon from the persons summoned as aforesaid the Court proceeds as the Statute in such case made and provided directs to select and empannel a Grand Judy for said County of Wayne at this term where are elected Washington CARTER Edward B THROGMORTON King PRATER John SPEER Samuel MARTIN Stephen BIVINS Christopher C. COOK William HARDIN Andrew WILLIAMS George W. BARKER Carroll H. HUGHLING Solomon BREWER Jr Micajah McGEE of whom the Court appoints Washington CARTER foreman who together with the rest of the Grand Jurors having been empannelled sworn and charged according to law to enquire for the body of the County of Wayne retire to consider of presentments.
Charles C. ROSS [or RUSS] a constable of Wayne County is sworn to attend the Grand Jury

Ordered by the Court that Thomas ADAMS, Anderson PHILIPS and Thomas FRANKLIN Jurors summoned to attend at the present term of this Court sufficient cause appearing to the Court for the same

12. The President Directors and Company of the Central Turnpike Company vs William CHAFFIN§ Appeal
This day ame the parties by their attorneys whereupon it is considered by the Court that this cause be continued on account of the incompetency of the Court to try the same

13. The President Directors and Company of the Central Turnpike Company vs Thomas G. PAINTER§ Appeal
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon It is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued for want of a competent Court to try the same

14. William POLLARD vs James L. SNOWDEN§ Appeal
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon It is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this court for want of a competent Court to try the same

page 77 Monday January 26th 1852

15. John N. EDWARDS vs Clement A. RICHARDSON§Appeal
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon it is ordered by that this cause be continued for want of a competant court to try the same.

16. The President Directors & Company of the Central Turnpike Company vs William POLLARD§ Appeal
Came the parties by their attorney whereupon it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of the Court for want of a competent court to try the same

20. John W. WALKER vs James L. SNOWDEN§ Appeal
This day came the parties by their attorneys whereupon it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this court on account of the incompetency of the Court to try the same

21. William POLLARD vs Stephen LEE§ Appeal
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this court for want of a competent Court to try the same.

[Editor's Note: The above references to the "incompetency" of the court caused some question. A local attorney was contacted and he suggested that the judge in the case was recusing himself because of either his connection with one of the parties or because of his connection to the above turnpike company]

1. William JENKINS & Martin EULESS Executors of Adam EULESS Dec'd vs Henry GREESON§ Appeal
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon motion of plaintiffs by their attorney It is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this Court as an affidavit of the plaintiffs and that the defendant recover of the plaintiffs the costs in this behalf at this term expended and that execution issue [Ex ]

2. William JENKINS & Martin EULESS Exer's of Adam EULESS Dec'd vs Henry GREESON§ Appeal
This day came the parties by their attorneys Whereupon on motion of the plaintiffs by their attorney it is ordered by the Court that this cause be continued until the next term of this Court as an affidavit of the plaintiffs and that the defendant recover of said plaintiffs the costs in this behalf at this term expended and that execution issue [Ex ]

page 78 Monday January 26th 1852

3. Neill S. BROWN Gov. &c vs R. W. ALTOM et al§ Debt
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon this cause is continued by consent until the next term of this court

6. Neill S. BROWN Governor &c vs Jesse S. ROSS et al§ Debt
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon by consent of the parties this cause is continued until the next term of this court

7. James WALKER vs Eli F. EDMISTON§ Case
This day came the parties by their attorneys whereupon this suit is compromised between the parties and the plaintiff agrees to dismiss his suit and to pay one half of the costs and the defendant assumes the other half the costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and that each party recover of the other the one half the costs in this behalf expended assessed as aforesaid and that execution issue [Ex ]

8. Eli F. EDMISTON vs James WALKER & son§ Case
Came the parties by their attorneys whereupon the plaintiff agrees to dismiss his suit and to pay one half the costs and the defendants assume the other half of said costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and that each party recover of the other the one half the costs in this behalf assessed as aforesaid and that execution issue [Ex. ]

John MORROW & Stephen BIVENS Admrs of the Estate of Thos. MORROW Dec'd vs Mary MORROW et al§ Petition to Sell Land
Came the petitioners by their counsel and it appearing to the Court that a Subpoena to answer has been issued and executed on all the defendants has failed to appear and answer the allegations in the petition contained It is ordered that the alligation in said petitioned contained be taken for confessed as to said Mary MORROW and set for hearing exparte as to her and that the matters and things in said petition contained be referred to the Clerk of this Court and that he take proof and report to this term of the court all other matters being reserved &c

page 79 Monday January 26, 1852

56. State of Tennessee vs John L. FOWLER§ Overseer Presentment
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 for the offense aforesaid be fined one 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law whereupon came Thomas M. JONES 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 [ex ]

80. State of Tennessee vs Samuel L. BURNS§ 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 upon 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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came Thomas Kelley 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 the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of the defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue [Ex ]

5 69 State of Tennessee vs Thomas KELLEY§ 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 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 for //

page 80 Monday January 26th 1852
office 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came Samuel L BURNS as security for said defendant and confesses Judgement infavour of the State of Tennessee for the fine and cost 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 [Ex ]

Eli BYNUM Solomon JOBE & John C BLACKBURN vs Jonathan C. ELLIOTT§ Appeal
This day came the defendant and Jonathan C. ELLIOTT and by leave of the Court is made a party defendant to this suirt and thereupon the said defendant Jonathan C. ELLIOTT acknowledged himself to be indebted to the plaintiffs in the sum of one hundred dollars to be levied of his goods and chattles lands and tenements but to be void on condition that said defendant shall defend this suit successfully or in case he fail therein that he pay the costs incident on such failure

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

Page 81 Tuesday January 27, 1852

Court met according to adjournment
Present as of yesterday Hon'l Elijah WALKER Judge &c presiding

18 State of Tennessee vs Headly COBURN§ Presentment for Tipling
Came the Attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the Court enters a nulleprosqui in this case. It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and the defendant be hereof discharged and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court. [Ex. ]

19 State of Tennessee vs Headly COBURN§ Presentment for Tipling
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of of the State Enters a Nulleprosequi in this case and the dedfendant assumes the Costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the costs in this behalf expended assessed as aforesaid and that execution issue [Ex. ]

20 State of Tennessee vs Headly COBURN § Presentment for Tipling
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and by leave of the Court enters a Nulleprosequi in this case It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and that the State of Tennessee recoverer of said defendant the costs in this behalf expended assessed as aforesaid and that execution issue [Ex. ]

2 State of Tennessee vs Jack LYONS§ Indictment for Inticing Slave to leave owner
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 this cause be dismissed and the defendant hereof discharged and that the State of Tennessee pay the costs on the part of the State in this behalf expended and that the same be certified to the Comptroller for allowance [Ex. ]

6 State of Tennessee vs George TOWNS[?]§ Presentment for Gaming
This day came the attorney General [Ex. ] //

page 82 Tuesday January 27th 1852
who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the State enters a Nulleprosequi in this case It is therefpre considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and the defendant hereof discharged 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 of for allowance

7. State of Tennessee vs George TOWNS§ Presentment for Gaming
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and with the assent of the County enters a Nulleprosequi in this case. It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and that the defendant be hereof discharged 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 [Ex ]

10. State of Tennessee vs Joseph GLADDEN§ Presentment for 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 this cause be dismissed 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. [Ex ]

11. State of Tennessee vs John OVERTON§ Indictment for Bigamy
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 this cause be dismissed and the defendant hereof discharged and that the State of Tennessee pay the costs in this behalf expended and that the same be certified to the Comptroller for allowance [Ex ]

32. State of Tennessee vs Vardeman SHELBY§ Indictment for keeping a Bawdy house
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant with the assent of the Court enters a Nulleprosequi in this case It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and the defendant hereof discharged and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court for allowance and that the same be certified to the Courty Court for allowance [Ex. ]

36. State of Tennessee vs Henry YAW[?] & Jane BREWER§ Indictment for Lewdness
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 this cause be dismissed and the defendant hereof discharged 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 [Ex ]

58. State of Tennessee vs William DUCE[?]§ Indictment for Disturbing public Worship
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 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 one dollar and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf and that execution issue [Ex ]

66 State of Tennessee vs Thomas MARINER[?] 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 cause It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and the defendant hereof discharged and that the County of Wayne pay such costs on the part of the State expended as may be allowed by the County Court & that the same be certified for allowance [Ex ]

Page 84 Tuesday January 27th 1852

87 State of Tennessee vs Brinkley HOPSON§ Presentment for Treating electors for v[?]
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 cause and the defendant assumes the costs It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and that the State of Tennessee recovered of the defendant the costs in this behalf expended assessed as aforesaid and that execution issue [Ex ]

93 State of Tennessee vs Nathaniel Y. BROWN§ Presentment betting on Election
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person whereupon by consent of the the attorney General and of said defendant this cause is continued until the friday next

92 State of Tennessee vs Robert J. CYPERT§ Presentment for betting on Election
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person whereupon by consent of the attorney General and of said defendant this cause is continued until friday next.

90. State of Tennessee vs Marion HAM§ Presentment for Tipling
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 this cause be dismissed and the defendant hereof discharged 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 [Ex ]

97. State of Tennessee vs Marion HAM§ Presentment for Tipling
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 for the offense aforesaid [Ex ] //

Page 85 Tuesday Janaury 27th 1852
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 the remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Thereupon came Rial BREWER as security for said defendant and confessed 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

78 State of Tennessee vs Marion HAM§ Presentment for Tipling
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 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 the remain in custody unless the fine and costs are paid or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law, whereupon 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 recovere as well of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue [Ex ]

57 State of Tennessee vs Jeremiah GRIGGS§ 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 upon the mercy of the Court. It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant for the offense aforesaid be fined twenty five 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 George GRIGGS as security for said defendant and confesses [Ex. ] //

Page 86 Tuesday January 27th 1852
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

State of Tennessee vs John DIXON§ Presentment for Treating voters with Spiritous liquors
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 and the defendant assumes the costs It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the costs in this behalf expended and that execution issue [Ex. ]

49. State of Tennessee vs John KYLE§ 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 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 said 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law whereupon came George KYLE 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 [Ex ]

ordered by the Court that John YOUNG and Holmes[?]FALLIN be fined twenty five dollars each for a contempt of the court and it is considered by the Court that the State of Tennessee recover of each of s said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended and that execution issue

Ordered by the Court that Holmes FALLIN be fined twenty five dollars for the contempt of court and that the State of Tennessee recover of said defendant the fine aforesaid also the costs in this behalf expended & that execution issue

Page 87 Tuesday January 27th 1852

John MORROW & Stephen BIVENS Admrs. of Thomas MORROW Dec'd vs Mary MORROW & others§ Petition to sell land
Be it remembered that this cause came on for further hearing this 27th day of January 1852 before the Honourable Elijah WALKER judge &c upon the petition answers replications under pro confessor and the report of the Clerk and Master of this Court and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the assets of the estate of said Thomas MORROW deceased have all be applied to the satisfaction of bonafide debts against said estate and that there are still outstanding debts against said estate which said petitioners have no means in their hands to satisfy and that it is necessary to sell said tract of land mentioned in the pleadings in this cause to pay outstanding debts It is therefore ordered adjudged and decreed by the Court that the Clerk and Master of this Court sill said tract of land at the Court house door in Waynesboro upon a credit of twelve months after giving at least forty days notice in writing at three or more public places in said County of Wayne one of which shall be at the Court house door the purchaser giving bond & good security and a lien retained upon said land until said purchase money is paid and that he report at the next term of this Court all other matters being reserved &c

State of Tennessee vs Stanford SUTTON§ Indictment for Arson
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and came also a jury of good and lawful men of the County of Wayne to wit John B. DIXON, Spencer LOYD Zebulon M. JOHNSON Josiah DARBY Wallis HAYSE James ROSE Harrison BURKS Alexander C. McDOUGAL Cornelius BAILEY Lewis W. ROACH John HOLLIS & James ARNET 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 evidence being heard and a part of the argument of counsel the jurors aforesaid by consent of the attorney General and of said defendant are permitted to disperse under the charge of the Court until tomorrow morning Eight o'clock

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

Page 88 Wednesday January 28, 1852

Court met according to adjournment
Present as of yesterday the Hon'l Elijah WALKER Judge &c presiding

The Attorney General presented the execution in the following cases and exect

It appearing to the court that Indictments or presentment were preferred against the following persons for misdemeanors and that they were convicted and judgements entered against them for costs upon which Judgements executions have been issued and placed in the hands of the Sheriff of Wayne County which said executions were returned to the present term of this Court endorsed by the Sheriff "no property found in my county whereon to levy" It is therefore on motion of the attorney General considered by the Court that the County of Wayne pay said costs in said cases respectively as follows to wit

State of Tennessee vs Hardin H. GOODMAN§ Indictment Made out 1852
Clerk five dollars and 81¼ cents
Indictment charging & plea 50 Recording Entry of [something] 5 [something] 25 1.75
Empanneling jury 12½ Entering judgement 75. Order to commit. 25. 112½
order releasing part of fine 25. 3 states witness probates[?] 18¾ 43¾
two copies of costs 50. Issuing Executions 37½ Recording cause 162½ 250
Copy of Judgement order & copy of costs for County Court 100          $6.81¼
Solicitor S. E. ROSE tax fee $250 Shff BENHAM calling suit 4 Empanneling jury 12½ 266½
Jailor H. MORRIS keeping defendant in jail Days. Turnkeys
Const. J. H. GRIMES Executing 3 states subpoenas 75 .75
Shff C. G. PARKER Executing states warrant 50 Justice T. Franklin [something something] 58 100
States Witness Willis PAN 2 days 150. 26 Miles 104 = 254 Levi BURNS 1 day $1.32 miles 128 = 228 4.82
William MOPPIN 1 day $1.32 Miles 128 = 228

State of Tennessee vs John FOREHAND§ Indictment for Malicious Mischief Made out 1852
Clerk McDOUGAL Indictment charging & plea 50
Recording entering & filing two recognanzes 50
4 probates states witness attendance 25 entering judgement 75 100
judgement for costs 25 order to commit 25 order for Execution 25 75
two copies of costs 50 issuing Execution 37½ Recording cause 162½ 250
Copy of judgement costs for County Court 25        $5.50
Sol R. A. HILL tax fee $2.50 Shff. BREWER commitment 50 Releasment 50 - 100 3.50
Jailor ROSS Keeping defendant in jail 73 days $27.38½ 4 Turnkeys $2 27.37½
Justice A. MONTAGUE convictting defendant 50 50
Const. J. F. HALL Executing warrant 50 Executing States subpoena 4 $1 1.50
State Witnesses J. A. Grimes 2 days $1.50 1 days before justice 25. 1.75
E. B. KEATON 2 days 1.50 1 day before justice 25 1.75
Elijah McMAHAN 2 days 150 1 day before justice 25 1.75
J. CANARD 2 days 1.50 30 miles 1.20 1 day before justice 25 2.95       58.7½

State of Tennessee vs Lucinda STUCKER§ Indictment for Lewdness Made out 1852
Clerk McDOUGAL  //

page 89 Wednesday January 28th 1852
Clerk McDOUGAL Indictment charging & plea 50 issuing 2 capias 1.50 2.00
Issuing 2 States subpoenas 25, Empannelling jury 12½ Entering judgement 75 1.12½
Judgement for costs 25, 1 probate States witness attendance 6¼ 31¼
order for Execution 25 two copies of cost 50 issuing Execution 37½ Recording cause 162½ 2.75
Copy of Costs and order for County Court 50      6.68¾
Sol. R. A. HILL tax fee $2.50 2.50
Shff BREWER Executing 2 States subpoenas 50 commitment 50 Releasement 50 1.50
Shff G. SMITH Executing capias $1 100
Jailor W. B. ROSS keeping defendant in jail 27 days $10.12½ 2 Turnkeys $1. 11.12½
States Witness J. F. STOWE one day 75       $ 23.56½

State of Tennessee vs. Frederick JOHNSON§Presentment for affray Made our 1852
Clerk McDOUGAL issuing capia 75
Presentment charing & pleas 50 issuing 1 states spa 12½ 62½
Running Entering & filing Recognizances 25 Empannelling jury 12½ 37½
Order for Execution 25, two copies of costs 50, Issuing Execution 37½ Recording Cause 162½ 2.75
Copy of order and bill of costs for County court 50        $6.25
Sol. R. A. HILL tax fee $2.50 2.50
Sheriff BREWER Executing capias $1 taking Recendezous[?] 25 Executing states subpoena 25 1.50
1 commitment 50 1 Releasement 50 $1.00
Calling suit & Emplannelling Jury 12½ 16½
Jailor W B ROSS Keeping defendent in Jail 4 days $1.50 & 2 turnkes $2 $2.50
Clerk Issuing 2 sufenders subpeonas 25

State of Tennessee vs Thomas HENSON§ Presentment for Tipling Made Out 1852
Clerk McDOUGAL Presentment charging & plea 50
Entering judgement 75 judgement for cost 25 1.00
Order for execution 25 two copies of costs 50, issuing Execution 37½ 112½
Recording cause 162½ Copy of order & bill of cost for County Court 50 212½       $4.75
Sol. R. A. HILL tax fee $2.50 Shff BREWER Commitment 50 Releasement 50 3.50       8.25

State of Tennessee vs Willie BRANTLEY§ Presentment for Tipling
Clerk McDOUGAL Presentment charging & plea 50
Issuing capias 75 issuing 2 states subpoenas 25 100
two probates States witness attendance 12½, Running entering & filing Recognizances 25 37½
Empannelling jury 12½ Entering judgement 75 judgement for costs 2 112½
order to commit 25 two copies of costs 50 order for Execution 25 1.00
Issuing Execution 37½ Recording case 162½ Copy of order & costs for County court 50 2.50
$6.50
Sol. R. A. HILL tax fee $2.50 2.50
Shff BREWER Executing capias $1. Taking Recognizance 25, Executing 1 states subpoena 25 1.50
Empannelling jury 12½ calling suit 4 commitment 50 releasement 50 116½ 116½
States witness Rial BREWER 2 days $1.50 28 Miles 112 - 262 W. WEST 2 days 1.50 30 Miles 120=270 $5.32
Jailor W. B. ROSS keeping deft in jail 3 days $112½ 2 turnkeys $1. 212½

Page 90 Wednesday January 28th, 1852

State of Tennessee vs Willie BRANTLEY§ Presentment for Tipling
Clerk McDOUGAL Presentment charging & plea 50
Issuing capias 75, issuing 2 states subpoenas 25 1.00
2 probates States Witness attendance 12½ Running Entering & filing Recognizance 25 37½
Empannelling jury 12½ Enterint mistrail 25 taking & entering Recognizance 25 62½
order withdrawing plea not guilty 25 Entering plea of guilty 25 50
Entering judgement 75 judgement for cost 25 order to commit 25 1.25
2 copies of costs 50 issuing Execution 37½ Recording cause 162½ 2.50
Copy of order & bill of costs for County Cort 50       7.25
Sol. R. A. HILL tax fee 2.50
Shff BREWER Executing capias $1. taking Recognizance 25 1.25
Executing 2 States Subpoenas 50 commitment 50 Releasement 50 calling suit & jury 12½ 166½
291½
State Witness John HAYSE 2 days 150

State of Tennessee vs Francis J. GLAUCK§ Indictment for Larceny
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and on motion of said attorney General It appearing to the Court that the defendant has been committed convicted of a felony and a judgement entered against him for costs upon which judgement an Execution was issued and placed in the hands of Rial BREWER Sheriff of the County of Wayne which said Execution was returned to the present term of this Court endorsed by said Sheriff "no property found in my County whereon to Levy" It is therefore ordered by the Court that the State of Tennessee pay the costs in this behalf on the part of the state expended as follows and that to wit

Clerk McDOUGAL indictment charging & plea 50 Running Entering & filing Recognizance 25 75
Empannelling jury 12½ Entering judgement 75 judgement for costs 25 112½
Recording Indictment 25 two orders Remanding prisoner 50 75
6 probates States Witness attendance 37½ issuing 4 states subpoenas 50 87½
copy of Judgement for sheriff 25 order for Execution 25 50
2 copies of costs 50 issuing Execution 37½ Recording cause 162½ 2.50
Copy of order & bill of costs for County Court Comptroller 1.00
7.50
Sol. R. A. HILL tax fee $10 10.00
Shff Brewer Empannelling jury 12½ calling suit 4 16½
Shff HAMMOND Executing States Subpoenas 25 W. H. BARLOW Executing States Subpoenas 50 75
Jailor ROSS keeping deft in jail 27 days 10.12½ 9 Turnkeys 4.50 14.62½
Walker & West keeping jury in the case two days @ $8 per day 16.00
States Witness S. R. FAUST 1 day $1. 60 Miles 2.40 3.40
Asa PRINCE 1 day 75 Stephen THOMSON 1 day 75 1.50
James S. SNOWDEN 2 days 1.50 J. B. BIFFLE 2 days 1.50 3.00
William C. BURNS 2 days 1.50 Shff ACKLIN 2 arrests 1.00 serve 3 States witness .75 3.25
W. CARTER Justice convicting deft. 50

State of Tennessee vs Stanford SUTTON§ Indictment for Arson
This day came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the defendant in proper person and said defendant being came also the jurors who on yesterday were 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 to wit John B. DIXON Spencer LOYD Zebulon M. JOHNSON Josiah DARBY Wallis HAYSE James ROSE Harrison BURKS Alexander C. McDOUGAL Cornelius BUSBY Lewis W. ROACH John HOLLIS James ARNETT and the arguement of counsel being closed and the charge of the Court delivered the Jurors aforesaid on their oaths aforesaid do say that the defendant is not guilty of arnson 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 hence without day and that the State of Tennessee pay the costs on the part of the State expended and that the same be certified to the County Court Comptroller for allowance

87 State of Tennessee vs Jeremiah GRIGGS§ Presentment overseer
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 for the offense aforesaid be fined twenty five 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 George GRIGGS 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

State of Tennessee vs Green WILSON§ Presentment for Gaming &c Overseer [Ex ]
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  //

Page 92 Wednesday January 28 1852
It is therefore considered by the Court that the 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 Edward A. RUTLEDGE as security for said defendant and confesses Judgement infavor 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

71 State of Tennessee vs Joseph PITTS§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex. ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law whereupon came William C. BURNS 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 the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of the defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

Ordered by the Court that the fine entered against John YOUNG on yesterday for a contempt of court be released and he hereof discharged

40 State of Tennessee vs Martin HARDIN§ Presentment for Gaming [Ex ]
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 not guilty thereto and for his trail puts himself upon the country and the attorney loth the like whereupon came a jury of good and lawful men of the County of //

Page 93 Wednesday January 28th, 1852
Wayne towit Eljah D. BIFFLE William BENHAM George KYLE James C. BIFFLE Joseph BREWER David I. KENCADE Reuben EAST George G. HERRON Stephen THOMISON Gideon W. SMITH & William D. SCOTT 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 presentment in this behalf It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law whereupon came Jonathan I. BIFFLE 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 the State of Tennessee recover as well of said surity as of the defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

State of Tennessee vs Jonathan I. BIFFLE§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came William M. LAFFERTY 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 the State of Tennessee recover as well of said security as of said defendant the fine and costs aforesaid and that execution issue

State of Tennessee vs William M. LAFFERTY§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex ]
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 deliv- //

Page 94 Wednesday January 28th 1852
liverance puts himself upon the mercy of the Court It is therefore considered by the Court that the defendant hereof discharged 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came Jonathan I. BIFFLE as the 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

State of Tennessee vs Leonard HICKERSON§ Presentment for Gaming [Ex. ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came John HICKERSON as the 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

41 State of Tennessee vs John HICKERSON§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex. ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came Leonard HICKERSON as the Security for said defendant //

Page 95 Wednesday January 28th, 1852
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

State of Tennessee vs William C. BURNS§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex. ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came William R. JONES as the 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

State of Tennessee vs David S. SKILLERN§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex. ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came Elijah D. BIFFLE as the 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

State of Tennessee vs Michael CHOAT§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex. ]
Came the attorney General who prosecutes on behalf of the State and the //

Page 96 Wednesday January 28th 1852
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came Elijah D. BIFFLE as the 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

State of Tennessee vs Ezekiel HOBBS§
The Grand Jury Came into Court in a body under the care of their sworn officer and returned into court a bill of Indictment against Ezekiel HOBBS for Larceny which said bill of Indictment and the endorsement thereon are in the words and figures following to wit

State of Tennessee Wayne County§ Circuit Court January term in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty two The grand Juriors of the State of Tennessee duly elected empannelled and sworn and charged to inquire for the body of the County of Wayne aforesaid upon their oath present that Ezekiel HOBBS late of said County laborer on the twenty ninth day of December in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty one with farce in said County Fifty bundles of fodder of the value of fifty cents the proper goods and chattles and property of Green BECKHAM then and there being found feloniously did steal take and carry away contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State. And the Grand jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do further present that the said Ezekiel HOBBS on the day and year last aforesaid with force and arms in the County of Wayne aforesaid two barrels of corn of the value of three dollars the proper goods and chattles and property of the said Green BECKHAM then and there being found feloniously did steal take and carry away contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State  And the Grand Jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do further present that said Ezekiel //

Page 97 Wednesday January 28th 1852
HOBBS on the day and year last aforesaid with force and arms in the County of Wayne aforesaid one hog of the value of six dollars the proper goods and chattles and property of said Green BECKHAM then and there being found feloniously did steal take and carry away contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State
Robert A. HILL Attorney General
John M. BECKHAM Prosecutor
John M. BECKHAM Hartwell BECKHAM Green BECKHAM Finley S. BECKHAM and T. B. WHITE Sworn in open Court and sent to the Grand Jury to give evidence this January 28th 1852 John McDOUGAL Clerk
A true bill Washington CARTER foreman of the Grand Jury

And the Grand Jury being in Court as aforesaid returned into Court the following presentment towit one against Peter BRYANT alias Peter PRYAN for Gaming and against James BROMLEY for Gaming one against James WILSON for Gaming one against John LOYD for Gaming one against Henry MAY for Gaming one against William BASKINS for Gaming one against George H. REA alias George H. RHEA for neglect as Overseer of road one against Richard OLIVE for Gaming one against Michael WILSON for Gaming and one against Marcus COOK for neglect as overseer of a road each of which presentment is signed by the requisite number of the Grand Jury and then retire to consider of other presentment.

State of Tennessee vs William BURNS§ Presentment for Gaming [Ex ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came Joseph W. CRINER and Jefferson HICKERSON as the 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

Page 98 Wednesday January 28 1852

85 State of Tennessee vs James KYLE§ Indictment A & B
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 the like whereupon came a jury of good and lawful men of the County of Wayne to wit Cyrus TYREE and Eleven others 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 day that 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 hence 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.

42 State of Tennessee vs Fielden CHURCHWELL§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex. ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came James N. STAGGS as the 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

State of Tennessee vs James ARNETT§ Presentment for Gaming [Ex. ]
Came the attorney General who prosecutes //

Page 99 Wednesday January 28th 1852
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon came William C. BURNS as the 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

21 State of Tennessee vs Jefferson HICKERSON§ 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 and John HICKERSON who came into Court as security for said defendant and acknowledged themselves to be indebted to the State of Tennessee in the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars 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 Jefferson HICKERSON shall make his personal appearance 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 in June next and answer the State of Tennessee on the presentment in this behalf and not depart without leave of the Court

State of Tennessee vs Green WILSON§ Presentment for Gaming &c [Ex. ]
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 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 or secured or be otherwise discharged by due course of law Whereupon James ARNETT 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


Go to next installment

Return to previous installment

Return to County Records Page

Return to Contents Page