Probate Minutes - 1876-1879 - Volume A-2


Page 1

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

State of Texas

Collin County Be it Remembered that there was begun

And holden at the Court House in the City of McKinney on Monday the 17th day of July 1876 (being the 3rd Monday thereof) the 1st Regular Term of the Hon. County Court of Collin County of Civil and Probate business. Present and presiding Hon. T. C. GARDNER (?) County judge, J. M. BENGE Co. Clerk and W. W. MORNETT sheriff, where the following Proceedings were had to wit.

 

[in margin is written No. 1689]

GRAHAM & HIGHTOW[ER]?

vs. Now comes Defendant and

demands a Jury in the trial

CARR ROBINSON ESTAT[E] of this Cause grade (?) & trial Set for

the 1st Thursday---

 

[in margin is written 1525]

GEORGE WHITE

vs. Monday July 17th 1876

W. A. HEARN Now comes the Plaintiff and Says he

Will no further prosecute his suit it is therefore considered by the court that the Plaintiff

take nothing and that the Defendant go hence without day and that he have receive of the Plaintiff

the cost in this behalf expended. It is further ordered that executive issue in favor of the officers of Court against each party respectively for the Court by them in the behalf expended.

 

[written in margin 1685]

JOHN C. EASTON

vs. Monday July 1876

DAVID STIFF Now on this day this cause

is continued by the Plaintiff.

 

[written in margin No. (?) 1772]

SAHLINE SINGER & CO.

v.                                            Monday July 17, 1876

A. CROZIER & CO. This day comes into Parties by their Attorney and the….

 

Page 2

 

Defendant with aranos (?) the answer by him heretofore filed and Says nothing in bar of the Plaintiff action wherefore the said SAHLINE SINGER & CO. ought to receive against the said A. CROZIER & CO., L. W. OGLESBY & WM. M. LEE their damages by occasion of the Promises and it appearing to the Court that the Course of action is legitimate and provided (proven?) by an instrument of writing It is ordered that the clerk of this Court do assess the damages Sustained by said Plaintiffs and the Said Clerk now here having assessed the damages of said at the sum of Three Hundred & Seventy Three Dollars & Fifteen cents. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiffs SHALINE SINGER & CO. shall and recover of the said Defendants A. CROZIER, L. W. OGLESBY & WM. M. LEE the Sum of Three Hundred, and Seventy Three Dollars & fifteen cents with Interest at Eight per cent per annum together with all cost in this behalf expended for which let execution issue And it further appearing to the Court that the said Plaintiffs SAHLINE SINGER & CO. as Principal and ESTES & BARNEY as (unreadable) entered into Bond in this Cause as the law required in the Sum of Twenty five Dollars that the plaintiff would pay the least of this suit. It is therefore ordered by the Court that execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each of said parties respectively for the Cost of them in this behalf expended.

 

[written in margin is 1780]

WHEELER MELOCK & CO. July 17, 1876

vs.

HENRY LEE Et al Now on this day this cause

is continued for service.

 

[written in margin is 1787]

LEE & OGLESBY Monday July 17, 1876

vs.

S. H. RECTOR Now comes the Plaintiff and say that they will no further

Prosecute this suit. It is therefore considered by the…

 

Page 3

 

County Court Collin County…July Term 1876

 

…Court that the Plaintiffs take nothing by their suit and that the Defendant go hence without day and that he have and recover of the Plaintiffs his cost in this behalf expended and that he have his Execution. It is further ordered that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each part respectively for the Cost by him in this behalf incurred.

 

CHARLES THORP

vs. Monday, July 17, 1876

C. N. ABBOTT

Now on this day Comes the Plaintiff and Says that he will no further prosecute this suit. It is therefore considered by the court that the plaintiff take nothing by this suit and that the Defendant go hence without day and that he have and recover [nothing] from and of the Plaintiff his cost in his behalf---expended and that he have his Execution and it is further ordered that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each party respectively for the Cost by him in this behalf incurred.

 

JOHN D. PARK

vs. Monday July 17, 1876

WATTON (?) & TRAVIS Now on this day comes the Plaintiff by their Attorney and the Defendant with drams (?) the answer by him heretofore filed and says nothing in bar of the Plaintiff action whenfore the said Plaintiff JOHN D. PARK ought to recover against the said PETE WATTON (MATTON?) and J. A. T. TRAVIS his damages by occasion of the Promises and it appearing to the Court that the Pause (?) of action is legitimate and proven by an instrument of writing. It is ordered that the Clerk of this Court do assess the damages Sustained by said Plff. And the Said Clerk now here having assessed…

 

Page 4

 

…the damages aforesaid at the Sum of Two (?) Hundred and forty Dollars and one cent, and It is therefore considered by the Court that the said JOHN D. PARK do have and recover of Said Defendant PETER WALLON [MALLON] and J. A. P. TRAVIS the sum of Two Hundred & forty Dollars & one cent, with Interest at the rate of 10—percent per annum together with all cost in the behalf expended for which let execution issue. And it is further ordered by the Court that execution issue against each party respectively for the cost by them incurred in this cause.

 

[Written in margin: Record Aug 6th of W. C. GRAVES (?) two hundred and thirty one 35/100 dollars in full of this judgment. R. DeARMOND atty. for plaintiff.]

 

[Written in margin: 1740]

THROCKMORTON & BROWN(?)

vs. Monday, July 17, 1876

Wm. M. RICE Now on this day come the Plaintiff and Say they will no further

Prosecute this suit. It is therefore consider(ed) by the Court that the Plaintiff take nothing by their Suit and that the Defendant go hence without day and that he have and recover of the Defendant his cost in this behalf expended and that he have his Execution. It is further ordered that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each part respectively for the cost by them in this behalf expended.

 

[Written in margin: 1756]

C. RUSSELL &c

vs. Monday, July 17, 1876

G. W. FITZHUGH Et al Now on this day come the parties by their Attorneys and file the following agree Judgment To wit “We agree that Judgment May be entered against the Defendants in the above cause for the Sum of Five Hundred & Twenty one & 85/100 Dollars and cost of suit.

K. R. CRAIG for Plffs.

RICHARD MATTBIE

Atty for Defts.

 

It is therefore ordered by the Court that the Ptffs. C. RUSSELL, JOE RUSSELL, THOS. RUSSELL, GEO. L. RUSSELL and ARLIN (?) R. RAMSON do have and recover of the Defendants G. W. FITZHUGH, DAVID MAY & R. P….

 

Page 5

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

McDOWELL (this last name marked out) the said Sum of Five Hundred and twenty one Dollars and Eighty five cents with 10 per cent Interest per annum, from this date together with all cost here (?) expended from which let execution issue. And it is further ordered by the Court that Execution issue against each party respectively for the Cost by them incurred in this Cause.

 

[Written in margin: 1776]

THROCKMORTON BROWN & BRO.

vs. Monday, July 17, 1876

M. R. CLARK et al Now on this day come the parties and file the following

agree[ment] by and between the parties Pltts. & Defts. that the above entitled cause be dismissed & Pltiff. payable cost. THROCKMORTON BROWN & BRO.

R. C. CLARK M. R. CLARK

A. C. CLARK

It is therefore ordered by the Court that the Defendants have and Recover of the Plaintiff THROCKMORTON BROWN & BRO. all cost by them in this behalf expended for which let Execution issue and it is further ordered by the Court that Execution of said parties respectively for the Cost by them incurred in this cause.

 

LONG & ALLSTATTER (?)

vs. Monday, July 17, 1876

W. C. GROVER (?) Now on this day comes the Pltff. by his Attorney and the Defendant having failed to appear and answered in his (?) behalf but wholly (?) made default, wherefore the said LONG & ALLSTATTER (?) ought to recover against the said W. D. GROVER (?) their---damages by occasion of the promises and it appearing to the Court that the cause of action is legitimate and proved by an instrument of writing it is…

 

Page 6

 

…that the Clerk as issued the damages Sustained by Said Plaintiffs and the said Clerk no__ here (?) having assessed the damages aforesaid at the Sum of Two Hundred and Ten Dollars & Eighty five cents. It is herefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiffs JOHN LONG and Wm. ALLSTATTER do have and recover of the said Defendant W. C. GROVER the sum of Two Hundred & Ten Dollars & Eighty five cents with Interest there at the rate of 10 per cent per annum from this date together with his cost in this behalf expenses and that he have his Execution. It is further ordered that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each party respectively for the cost by them in this behalf incurred.

 

J. P. HUNTER

vs. Monday, July 17, 1876

ESTES BERRY &c Now on this day come the Plaintiff by his attorney and Sugests (suggests?) the Death of G. T. (?) BERRY one of the Defendants, and the Pltff. has leave to amend his Petition.

 

THOMAS H. EMMERON & BRO.

vs. Monday, July 17, 1876

A. CROZIER &c Now on this day come the Parties by their Attorneys and the Defendants with draws (?) the answer by him heretofore filed ands says Nothing in bar of the Plaintiff’s action wherefore the said THOMAS H. EMMERSON & BRO. a Banking Farm Confosicer (?) of THOS. H. EMMERSON & T. F. (?) EMMERSON ought to recover against the said Defendants A. CROZIER, JOHN CROZIER, B. F. MATHEWS & B. S. SHELBOURN their damages by occasion of the promises and it appearing to the Court that the cause of action if legitimate and proven by an instrument of writing it is ordered that the Clerk do assess the damages sustained by said Plaintiff and the said Clerk now have (?) having assessed the damages of said (?) at the Sum of One Thousand & Sixty Six Dollars & Sixty Two (?)…

 

[Written in margin: Paid by Ogleby’s note $605.43 Six hundred & 43/00 Oct. 5 1877. Thos. H. Emmerson]

 

Page 7

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

…Cents. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff THOMAS H. EMMERSON & T. T. EMMERSON do have and received of the Said defendants A. CROZIER, JOHN CROZIER, B. F. MATHEWS & B. S. SHELBOURN the sum of one Thousand and Sixty Six Dollars & Sixty two cents with Interest at the rate of 5 per month from this date together with cost of suit in this behalf expended and that they have their Execution. And that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each party respectively for the cost of them in this behalf incurrence.

 

[Written in margin: fifty (?) dollars to us paid. We receive (?) This Judgment and receipt payment in five (?) This 29 Day of Oct 1877. Thos. H. Emmerson.]

 

[Written in margin: 1718]

 

A. CROZIER Etc.

vs. Monday, July 17, 1876

F. W. DUNAWAY Now on this day the Parties by their Attorneys and, the Defendants (unreadable) draws the answer heretofore filed by him and says nothing in bar of the plaintiff action wherefore the said Plaintiff afirno (a firm?) composed of A. CROZIER, W. M. LEE and L. W. OGLESBY oglet (?) to recover against the defendant F. W. DUNAWAY their damages of the occasion of the said plaintiff do have and recover of the said defendants the sum of Two Hundred and Seventy Dollars with Interest thereon at the rate of 12 per cent per annum together with all cost in this behalf expended and that they have their Execution. It is further ordered that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each party respectively for Costs by their incurrence and it appearing to the Court that a writ of attachment heretofore issued in this Cause was on the 6th day of May A. D. 1875 by the Sheriff of McLennan County levied afar the following described property of the Defendants, a tract or parcel of land situated in McLennan County, Texas in the N W Corner of 8 League of 11 Leagues lying West of Brazos River.

Beginning at the N W Cor. Of said 8 Leagues of land a Monnied (?) with a glass Bottle buried within…

 

Page 8

 

…are the N W Side and near the old Austin Road from Waco for the N W Cor. Thence running S 25º E, with the back line of said 8 Leagues 1790 varas Thence North 60º E 480 vs Thence N 28º W with N. line of said 8 League Survey Thence (unreadable) said line South 62º West 480 varas to the place of Beginning. It is therefore (?) ordered, adjudged & deemed that said attachment lien be foreclosed and that the Clerk of the Court do issue an order of sale directed (?) to the Sheriff or any constable of McLennan County commanding him to sell the above described property or so much of as may be Sufficient for the satisfaction of the Judgment incurrence (?) in this cause.

 

Ordered that the Court adjourn until tomorrow morning 8 o’clock.

 

Tuesday morning July 18, 1876 Court met pursuant to adjournment, officers of court as were (?) yesterday.

 

[Written in margin: 1738]

WM. FOREMAN

vs. Tuesday, July 28, 1876

F. W. FURGURSON Now on this day comes the Plaintiff by his Attorney and Say that he will no further prosecute this suit. It is therefore considered by the court that the Plaintiff take nothing by his suit and that the Defendant go hence without day and that he have and recover from the Plaintiff his cost in this suit expenses and that he have his Execution. And that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each of said parties respectively for the Court by them incurrence.

 

[Written in margin:1785]

C. RUSSELL &c

vs. Tuesday, July 28, 1876

T. T. SKIDMORE Now on this day comes the Pltff. has leave to amend his petition.

 

Page 9

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

[Written in margin: 1844]

 

RICHARD A. ADAMS

vs. Tuesday, July 28, 1876

R. H. BROWN Now on this day the Plaintiff has leave to amend his Petition & this cause continnce (continence?) by Plaintiff.

 

SARAH GALLUP minor

vs. Tuesday, July 28, 1876

GEO. W. GALLUP Now on this day comes on to be heard the above entitled cause and it appearing to the court that the defendant GEO W. GALLUP had accepted service on the original petition and agreed in writing that the same be partitioned and divided as prayed for in the petition it is therefore ordered adjudged and accrued by the court that the land described in plaintiff’s petition to wit a part of the J. H. GOUGH Head Right Survey situated in Collin County on the waters of Rowletts Creek and beginning at the stake in south line of said survey and the corner of piece of land conveyed by J. H. & SARA GOUGH to W. M. GOUGH Thence North 80º W 260 poles a stake. Thence North 76º E 61 82 poles a stake in Bank of Creek. Thence up creek with its encumbers to a stake in the W line of sur. 4- poles the N W cor. of said sur. and cor. of 26 acres tract deeded by J. H. and S. GOUGH to A. B. GOUGH Thence South with East line 280 poles to the S W cor. Thence E 64 12/100 poles the beginning containing one hundred and three acres also another tract in said sur. Beginning A. B. GOUGH’S S. E. cor. a stake from which a Spanish oak mked. x brs. N 85 ½ º W 2 96/100 poles Thence north 26 poles to a stake in north line of said sur. Thence East with said W Line 32 20/100 poles a stake the half mile cor. sur. Thence South 45 56/100 poles to creek. Thence with…

 

Page 10

 

…meanders of creek to the beginning be portioned and divided between plaintiff and defendant setting apart to said plaintiff SARAH GALLUP three fourths of the same considering quality and value of the same and one fourth of the said land be set apart to defendant GEOGE W. GALLUP considering quality and value of the same and that T. B. WILSON, J. M. MARSHALL, C. M. CRISTIE & E. T. ELKIN be and are hereby appointed commissioners to partition and divide the same and make their report to the present term of this court.

 

Ordered that the Court adjourn until Tomorrow morning 8 O’clock.

 

Wednesday morning 8 o’clock Court met pursuant to adjournment present officers of court as on yesterday.

 

NATHANIEL W. PERKINS

vs. Wednesday, July 18, 1876

R. H. TAYLOR Now on this day the Pltff. has permission to amend his Petition.

 

WHEALER WHELOCK &c

vs. Wednesday, July 19,[sic]1876

L. B. VENIBLE (?) Et al Now on this day this cause is continued for service

 

WHEELER MELLICK &c

vs. Wednesday, July 19, [sic]1876

W. B. SMOOT Et al Now on this day the Plaintiff has leave to amend his petition and continued for service, on JACOB H. GR____?

 

ORR and LINDSAY

vs. Wednesday, July 19, [sic] 1876

W. M. LEE & L. W. OGLESBY Now on this day comes the Plaintiffs by their attorneys and the Defendants…

 

Page 11

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

…having failed to appear and answer in this cause but wholly made at (?) fault wherefore the said ORR & LINDSAY a firm composed of Wm. C. ORR and DECURAY (?) B. LINDSAY ought to recover against the said Wm. M. LEE and L. W. OGLESBY their damages by occasion of the promises and it appearing to the court that the cause of action is legitimate and proved by an instrument of writing it is ordered that the clerk assess the damages sustained by said plaintiffs and the said Clerk non here (?) having assessed the damages aforesaid at the sum of Six Hundred & Eighty Three & (unreadable) Dollars it is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff do have and recover of the said defendants W. M. LEE and L. W. OGLESBY the Sum of Six Hundred & Thirty Three & 88/00 Dollars with Interest at 15 per cent from this date--- together with all cost in this behalf expended and that they have their Execution. It is further ordered that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each party respectively by their in this behalf incurrence.

 

E. D. ELKIN

Admr.

Now on this day comes on to be heard

Est. W. F. ELKIN the notion of Pltff. to allow the sheriff to announce his Return on Notice of Final settlement of sale Estate which motion is granted by the court.

 

MARKS & KEMPUR

vs. Wednesday, July 19, 1876

WILSON & RUSSELL Now on this day this cause is continued for service

 

THOS. H. EMMERSON Wednesday, July 19, 1876

vs. Now on this day the Deft. has leave to amend his answer.

D. A. OGLE

 

Page 12

 

W. R. DUNCAN

vs. Wednesday, July 19, 1876

H. H. SHOEMAKER Now on this day comes the Plaintiff by his Attorney and, the Defendant having failed to appear and answer in this behalf but wholly made default wherefore the said W. R. DUNCAN ought to recover against the said H. H. SHOEMAKER his damages by occasion of the promises and it appearing to the Court that the cause of action if legitimate and proven by an instrument of writing it is ordered that the Clerk do assess the damages sustained by said plaintiff W. R. DUNCAN and the said Clerk non here (?) having assessed the damages aforesaid at the sum of Three Hundred & Sixty Three & 33/100 Dollars, it is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff do have and recover of the said Defendant H. H. SHOEMAKER the Sum of Three Hundred & Sixty Thee & 33/100 Dollars with Interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum from this date together with his cost in this behalf expended and that he have his Execution. It is further ordered that Execution issue in favor of the officers of Court against each party respectively for the Cost be them in this behalf incurred.

 

M. A. GOODWIN

vs. Wednesday, July 19, 1876

Estate of H. O’HEAGECOXE Now on this day the Plaintiff has leave to amend petition.

 

Estate of

W. A. DOAK Now on this day comes on (?) is be heard the R. MURCHISON (?) to be appointed Administrator of the Estate of W. A. DOAK Deceased and said application being fully understood by the Court it is ordered by the Court that letters of Administration issue to him And…

 

Page 13

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

…that he enters into Bond with good and Sufficient Security in the Sum of Six Hundred Dollars Conditioned according to law.

 

Estate of W. D. DOAK Decd. Wednesday, July 19, 1876

Now on this day comes R. MURCHISON (?) and files his Bond as Administrator of the Estate of W. D. DOAK Deceased, in the sum of Six Hundred Dollars, and it appearing to the Court that [is?] correct, it is ordered that the same be approved, and recorded.

 

Wednesday, July 19, 1876

Estate of JAMES STEWART

Now on this day comes J. M. STEWART and prays the Court for the appointment as Administrator of the Estate of JAMES STEWART Deceased, and said application being fully understood by the Court it is ordered that Letters of Administration issued to him and that he enter into Bond with good and Sufficient Sureties in the Sum of Two Thousand Dollars Conditioned according to law.

 

Estate of JAMES STEWART

Now on this day comes J. M. STEWART Administrator of the Estate of JAMES STEWART Decd. and files his Bond as Administrator of said Estate in the sum of Two Thousand Dollars, and it appearing to the Court that the same is in all things correct it is ordered that the same be approved & Recorded.

 

JAMES M. STEWART

vs. Wednesday, July 19, 1879

Estate EDITH M. STEWART Now on this day comes on to be heard the application of JAMES M. STEWART for the appointment as Guardian of the Estate of EDITH M. STEWART a minor and it appearing to the Court that due Notice of the…

 

Page 14

 

…It is ordered that he be appointed Guardian of said minor and that he enter into Bond, in the sum of Sixteen Hundred Dollars, with good and Sufficient Sureties conditioned according to law.

 

Estate of STEPHEN DUPEY Minor

Now on this day comes GEORGE W. COFFMAN, and prays the Court to be appointed Guardian of the Estate of STEPHEN DUPEY a minor, and it appearing to the Court that due Notice of the same has been given, it is ordered that the prayer be granted and that the said G. W. COFFMAN enter into Bond in the sum of Fourteen Hundred Dollars with one or more good and Sufficient Sureties conditioned according to law.

 

Estate of HENRY O. HEDGCOXE decd.

Now on this day came on to be heard the report of the administrator of the said estate A. J. ATKINSON, showing the condition of said Estate and reporting sale of a mule belonging thereto at private sale for cash and praying for the purposes of paying the debts of said Estate an order to sell at private sale and for cash all the personal property of said estate and one undivided half of a certain foot (?) of land belonging thereto situated in the City of McKinney Collin County Texas and described as follows to wit Beginning at the SW corner of a lot of land divided by BUFORD HENRY & wife to S. M. BENGE on the north side of Louisiana Street thence north 40 feet Thence east one foot thence south 40 ft. Thence east one foot thence south 40 feet thence west one foot to the place of beginning and also for an order to sell on a credit of six months a certain tract of 320 acres in Young County Texas the property of said Estate and it appearing to the sat-…

 

Page 15

 

County Court Collin County July Term

 

…isfaction of the Court that all parties legally interested in said Estate have been duly served with notice thereof and said matters and things being considered and examined by the court it is ordered that said report be approved & the sale of mule appearing to have been for the full value said sale is confirmed, it is further ordered that the administrator for the purposes of paying the debts of said Estate do sell at private sale and for cash the personal property, and interest of said Estate in above described one foot of land also that he sell the above refered [referred?] to tract of land in Young County on a credit of Six months, advertisement of sale of said land in Young County, to be upon due advertisement in Young & Collin Counties and the sale to be made at the door of the Court house in McKinney Collin County.

 

R. T. FOSTER

vs. Wednesday, July 19, 1876

JNO. ROTTAN & B. W. RHINE This day came the plaintiff by his attorney’s and the defendant having failed to appear answer in this cause but wholly made default and no Jury being demanded by the parties the Court proceeded to hear the evidence in said cause and after hearing heard (sic) evidence the court assessed the damages of the plaintiff at the sum of two hundred & forty two 11/100 Dollars it is therefore ordered adjudged by the court that the plaintiff have and record of the defendants the sum of two hundred & forty two 11/100 Dollars with interest thereon at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from the date of this Judgment together with his cost in this behalf expended &…

 

Page 16

 

…that he have his execution in favor of the officers of the court against each party respectively for the costs by him in this behalf in assessed.

 

I. & A. SEISFELD

vs. Wednesday, July 19/1876

FARIS & BRYANT Now on this day this cause came on for trial and the parties not having demanded a Jury it was submitted to the Court whereupon came the parties by their attorneys except the deft C. W. BRYANT who failed to appear and answer but wholly made default and announced themselves ready for trial. The pleadings of the parties plaintiffs & Defts., the evidence and agreement of cause being heard and fully understood by the Court it is considered by the Court that the Pltffs. ought to recover Judgment against defts. Whereupon it is ordered adjudged and decreed that the Judgment heretofore entered in this cause to wit a Judgment rendered by the District Court of Collin County on the 1st day of August A. D. 1874 in form of Plffs. I. & A. SEISFELD and against defts. JAMES FARIS and J. W. BRYANT be wholly vacated and set aside. That all proceedings under and by virtue of said Judgment to wit the sale made by the Sheriff of Collin County by virtue of the execution issued upon said Judgment out of the district court aforesaid & the sheriff’s return thereon be annulled & set aside. That Plaintiffs I. SEISFIELD & A. SEISFELD have and recover of and from the defts. JAMES FARIS and C. W. BRYANT the sum of one hundred & forty & 62/100 Dollars principle together with the further sum of fifty four & 08/100 Dollars…

 

Page 17

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

…interest and ale (?) cost in this behalf expended [unreadable] with the sum of twelve dollars heretofore paid on the execution aforesaid for which let execution issue.

It is further ordered that execution issue – in favor of the officers of court against each part respectively for the cost by them incurred.

 

Estate of CHANDLER & McDONALD

Now on this day came on to be heard the application of the heirs of THOMAS CHANDLER decd. for the distribution of the Estate belonging to the said CHANDLER and the Court after hearing the evidence ordered and declared the property of said decedent be distributed as follows to wit, that said estate be divided into seven shares, that one seventh or one share be set apart to MARY F. THOMPSON and ARCH THOMPSON her husband. JULIA CHAMBERS and her husband TAYLOR CHAMBERS, FULLER CHAMBERS, LITHE CHAMBERS and MRS. MARTHA MASON and her husband (blank) MASON, one share or one seventh to L. J. CARUTH and her husband I. A. CARUTH, One seventh or one share to W. S. SCOBY, One seventh or one share to D. E. CLARK & her husband (blank) CLARK, One seventh or one share to A. E. CHANDLER, One seventh or one share to S. A. WALKER and one share or one seventh or one share of the estate to E. M CHANDLER and one the same day and term the original and amended report for final settlement of EDWARD CHAMBERS administrator of CHANDLER & McDONALD coming on to be heard & it appearing to the Court that there was a necessity for further administration on said Estates it was ordered and…

 

Page 18

 

…decreed by the court that said report be approved and that upon filing by the administrator aforesaid with the clerk of this court proper voucher from the parties here in before mentioned as the distributes of said THOMAS CHAMBERS that said administration be closed and that said administrator be discharged of his trust and now said vouchers having been filed it is therefore ordered adjudged and decreed by the court that administration be closed and that said administrator be discharged of the trust.

 

Estate of HENRY O. HEDGCOXE deceased

This day came on to be heard the report of A. J. ATKINSON administrator of said estate of the sale of the following described tract of land the property of said estate situated in the city of McKinney Collin Co. Texas and described and bounded as follows part lot No. 52 in Block No. 7 as they are known & described in the plot of said city Beginning at the SE of said lot no. 52 in said Block No. 7 thence north 40 feet its NE corner thence West 16 7/12 feet a stake in the north boundary line of said lot thence south 40 feet a stake in the south boundary line of said lot thence east with said line 16 7/12 feet to the place of beginning, said sale reported to have been made by said administrator at the Court House door in the City of McKinney on the first Tuesday in May 1876 within the hours prescribed by law and after legal advertisement thereof. Said sale made to pay a balance of Judgment in District Court of Collin County Texas rendered on 22 Dec 1874 in favor of the plaintiff in the case of THOS. H. EMERSON & BRO. vs. S. C….

 

Page 19

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

ANDERSON et al in which case said Estate was a party defendant and that Said THOS. H. EMERSON & BRO. being the highest and best bidder at said sale and became the purchaser thereof for the sum of $300 (?) which amount is to stand as a credit upon the said judgment and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that said sale was in all respects legally and fairly make it is ordered that said report be accepted and approved and said sale confirmed and it is further ordered that the administrator do execute and deliver a deed for said land to the said purchaser THOS. H. EMERSON & BRO. upon their complying with their bid by entry of a credit upon said Judgment for the amount of purchase money aforesaid as of date of said sale.

 

Friday July 21st 1876

 

Estate CLAUDUS (?) and MARGARET E. PEGUES minors

This day came on to be heard the application of SELY TAPP guardian of the persons and Estate of CLAUDUS and MARGARET E. PEGUES to sell the following described land to wit an undivided one half interest in two tracts situated in Collin County first tract containing 86 33/ acres filed notes of which as follows. Part of a survey of 471 acres of land on the waters of Rowlet’s Creek made for GEO. H. PEGUES by virtue of his Peters Colony Headright certificate. Beginning at the North East corner of MARY SCOTT 640 acres survey Thence North 16 chains to the north line of the ISAAC HERRING’S Headright survey thence East with said line fifty three chains and Eighty seven links to the NE corner of said 471 acre survey. Thence south with the east line thereof 16 chains thence west fifty three chains &…

 

Page 20

 

…87 lks. to the beginning. Second tract as follows, situated in the same county and state on the waters of Muddy and being part of a survey made in the name of the heirs of L. K. PEGUES. Beginning at the NW corner of said survey Thence East 7 chs. And fifty lks. to a post from which a Boris d’arc marked x brs. South 7 º W 30 lks. Thence South 53 chains to the south line of said survey to a post from which an Elm marked x brs. North 51 ½ º East 12 lks. another Elm mks. X brs. North 25 º West 28 lks. Thence West seven chns. & fifty lks. to East line of said survey. Thence North 53 chains to the place of beginning. The object being to remove the proceeds of said land when sold to Madison County State of Illinois, the Residence of said SELY TAPP and her Wards and it appearing to the court that due notice has been given of said guardian’s application to sell and that a similar provisions exist in the law of the state of Illinois in favor of guardians and wards residing in other states permitting and providing for the removal of property thereupon it is ordered and directed by the court that SELY TAPP guardian as aforesaid proceed to sell the interest of said minors in said above described tract of land at private sale one half for cash the remainder on 6 months time and when sold to report the same to this court for it further orders and decrees in the premises.

 

Ex parte

H. M. MARKHAM

Now on this day comes H. M. MARKHAM and files an inventory of the Community Property of himself and Deceased Wife and it appearing to the Court that said Inventory is made in accordance with law, it is ordered that the same be approved.

 

Page 21

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

Exparte MARTHA (?) E. DUPEY Wednesday, July 19, 1876

Now on this day comes MARTHA E. DUPEY and files Inventory of the Community Property of herself and deceased Husband and it appearing to the Court that the same is correct and in accordance with law, it is ordered that the same be approved and recorded, and she enter into bond with good and sufficient sureties in the sum of Four Hundred and seventy Dollars conditioned according to law. And the said MARTHA E. DUPEY having now filed said Bond, and it appearing to the court that the same is correct it is ordered that the same be approved and Recorded.

 

THOMAS J. ESTES

vs.

Estate of SUSAN JULIA and Wednesday, July 19, 1876

JOHN W. ESTES Minors Now on this day comes THOMAS J. ESTES and prays the Court for the appointment as guardian of the Person and Estate of SUSAN JULIA & JOHN W. ESTES Minors and it appearing to the Court that due Notice of the same has been given according to law, it is ordered that the said THOMAS J. ESTES be appointed Guardian of said Minors and that Letters of Guardianship issue to him upon his filing Bond with good and sufficient Sureties in the sum of One thousand Dollars for each Ward conditioned according to law.

 

Ordered that the Court adjourn until Tomorrow morning 8 o’clock.

 

Thursday Morning 8 o’clock court met pursuant to adjournment, officer of court as in yesterday.

 

ANN (?) INGRAM

vs. Thursday July 12, 1876

G. T. ARMSTRONG Now on this day this cause is continued by consent.

 

Page 22

 

Z. E. RANNEY

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

W. W. MERRETT (?) Now on this day this cause is continued by consent.

 

J. D. NEWSOME

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

J. D. PAGE Now on this day this cause is continued by consent.

 

J. R. O’BRIEN

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

UNION MILL CO. Now on this day this cause is continued by defendant.

 

F. M. HUNN

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

JOHN HALL Now on this day this cause is continued by consent.

 

J. T. BRADLEY

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

HOUSTON & T. C. R. W. CO. Now on this day this cause is continued by Defendant.

 

F. M. HUNN

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

JOHN HALL Now on this day this cause is continued by consent.

 

J. T. BRADLEY

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

HOUSTON & T. C. R. W. CO. Now on this day this cause is continued by consent.

 

M. A. TAYLOR

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

S. C. ANDERSON Now on this day this cause is continued by consent.

 

HOWELL & ESTES

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

R. H. PARKER Now on this day this cause is continued by the Defendant.

 

JOHN P. HUNTER

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

ESTES BERING (?) & CO. Now on this day this cause is continued by Ptff.

 

Page 23

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

[Written in margin: 1855]

THOMAS H. EMERSON & BRO.

vs. Thursday, July 20, 1876

D. A. OGLE Now on this day the above entitled cause came on to be heard and both parties appearing by their attorneys and announced themselves ready for trial and no jury being demanded the Court proceeded to try the cause and after hearing the evidence in said cause and the agreement of counsel gave judgment for the plaintiffs for the sum of forty Dollars as their damages in said cause and the further sum of fifteen Dollars as reasonable attorneys fees in the case and it appearing to the court that this case was an appeal to this court from the justice court of Precinct No. (blank) Collin County Texas and it further appearing that the Judgment rendered by this Court was for a greater amount than that rendered in the Justice Court it is ordered by the court that the plaintiffs recover of the defendant 10 per cent upon the amount of the Judgment of this court as damages. It is therefore ordered adjudged and decreed by the court that the plaintiffs have and recover of the defendants in this case and the obligors (?) on the appeal bond D. A. OGLE, D. B. DAVIS , T. J. McDONALD in this case filed the sum of forty dollars with interest thereon at the rate of five per cent per month from the date of this Judgment until paid and the sum of fifteen dollars as attorneys fees in the case and the further sum of four dollars as damages in said suit together with all cost expenses in this court and in the Justice court and that they have their execution against the defendants in this case and the obligors in the appeal D. A. OGLE, D. B. DAVIS & THOS. J. McDONALD filed in this case. It is further ordered that execution issue for the use of the officers of the court against each party respectively for the cost by them in this behalf.

 

Page 24

 

[Written in margin: 1689]

GRAHAM & HOUGHTON

vs. Thursday, July 20/1876

CARR ROBINSON et al Now on this day came the plffs. & defts by their attorneys and announced themselves ready for trail and the defts. having demanded a Jury, there upon came a Jury of good & lawfull (sic) men to wit T. C. McKINNEY and five others who were duly empaneled (sic) charged and sworned (sic) well and truly to try the issue between the parties and after hearing the evidence argument of the counsel & charge of the court retired to consider their verdict and after mature deliberation returned into court the following verdict, We the Jury find for the defendant—T. C. McKINNEY, Foreman.

 

It is therefore considered by the court that the Defendants D. CARR, C. ROBINSON & R. MURCHINSON go without day & that they recover of the plaintiffs GRAHAM & HOUGHTON all cost in this behalf expended for which let execution issue. It is further ordered by the court that Execution issue in favor of the officers of the court against each party respectively for the cost by them in this behalf incurred.

 

J. & A. SEISFIELD

vs. Thursday, July 18, 1876

FARIS & BRYANT Now on this day comes the…

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

Page 25

 

…Parties by their Attorney on to be heard the Defts. Motion to strike out Plaintiff Demurr (sic) and the argument of the counsel then (?) being heard it is the opinion of the Court that the law for the Plaintiff and that said Motion be annulled, to which writing (?) of the Court the writing (?) the Defts. excepts.

 

J. &. A. SEISFIELD

vs. Thursday, July 18, 1876

FARIS & BRYANT Now on this day comes on to be heard the Defendants [unreadable] motion for a New (?) trial in the above entitle cause, which motion being fully understood by the Court it is overruled to which ruling of the Court the Defendant FARIS excepts and gives Notices of an appeal to the Court of Appeals.

 

H. R. SANFORD

vs. MARKED OUT

JOHN GOODWIN

 

R. M. BOND

vs. Monday, July 27 (?), 1876

R. H. PARKER Now on this day the parties by their attorneys and the defendants withdraws his answer heretofore filed by him and says nothing in bar of the plaintiff action whereof the said Plaintiff R. M. BOND ought to recover against the Deft. R. H. PARKER his damages by the occasion of the premises it is therefore considered…

 

Page 26

 

…by the court that the said Plaintiff do have and recover of the said Defendant the sum of Two Hundred and Eleven & 82/100 Dollars with interest there on at the rate of ten per cent per annum from date of this Judgment together with all cost in this behalf expended and that he have his execution. It is further ordered by the court that execution issue in favor of the officers of the court against each party respectively for the cost by him incurred. And it appearing to the court that the defft. R. H. PARKER in order to secure the payment of the note here sued on executed and delivered to the plaintiff R. M. BOND on the 4th day May 1875 a mortgage on the following personal property to wit One Dun Horse mule 7 years old 15 ½ hands high branded O on the left shoulder. One Black mare mule 7 years old Branded RHP on left shoulder, one black Black (sic) Horse mule 4 yrs. old Branded RHP on left shoulder. It is therefore adjudged by the court that said mortgage be foreclosed and that the clerk of this court do issue an order of sale directed to the sheriff of Collin county commanding him to sell the above described property or so much thereof as may be sufficient for the satisfaction of Judgment rendered in the Court and it further appearing to the court that the writ of sequestration issued in above cause on the 11 day of Jan. (?) 1876 and was by the sheriff on the 13th day of January executed by seizing and taking into his possession the following described property to wit on Black…

 

Page 27

 

County Court Collin County July Term

 

…mare mule 6 years old, 15 ½ hands high, branded on the left shoulder, One bay mare mule about 7 years old branded on the left shoulder RHP and on the 13 day of January 1876 R. H. PARKER as principle and SALLIE PARKER and G. W. SIMPSON as sureties entered into bond in the sum of two Hundred and fifty Dollars to [unreadable] said property, it is therefore ordered adjudged and decreed by the court that plaintiff R. M. BOND have and recover of the said R. H. PARKER and SALLIE PARKER & G. W. SIMPSON sureties on said bond the sum of One hundred and twenty five dollars the value of said property as assessed by the sheriff W. W. MERRIT in the re_____ bond. And that he have his execution.

 

ALEX BERRY

Admr. De Bonis Non Friday July 21/1876

Est. D. WETSEL Decd. On this day come the administrator and reports a contract of sale made under a former order of the district court, with JOHN H. BATES for 320 acres of land the Headright survey of said D. WETSEL deceased at the price of ($6.75) Six 75/00 Dollars per acre cash in lawfull (sic) currency on the execution of the deed and the court after having heard oral testimony in this case of a [unreadable] duly sworn before it being satisfied that said sale is made for a fair price. It is ordered that the same be approved and confirmed and that said administrator be ordered to make title to said purchaser according to law on his payment of the purchase money as above stipulated.

 

Page 28

 

SELY TAPP Guardian

Estate of

CLAUDIUS & MARGARET E. PEGUES Friday, July 21/76

Minor Now comes SELY TAPP Guardian of CLAUDIUS & MARGARET E. PEGUES and makes the following report of [unreadable] of land heretofore directed by an order of this court at it present term to wit. She has sold to J. C. WHITE one hundred half cash and remainder on Six months time the one half interest owned by her wards in the following described two tracts of land to wit, situate—in Collin County, Beginning at the NE Corner of the G. H. PEGUES 401 (?) acre tract Thence west on the North from dary (?) line of said survey 25 chs. To the NE Corner of 46 3/10 acres sold to W. H. CHADDICK a bois d’arc stake thence south 16 chs. Chaddick’s SE Corner Thence East 25 Chs. to the East boundary line of the said Pegues survey Thence North with the East boundary line then of 16 chs. to the beginning containing 40 acres more or less at ten dollars per acre. Also situated in same County and state being part of a 114 acre tract surveyed in the name of the heirs of L. R. PEGUES Beginning at the NW Corner of said survey Thence East 7 chs. and 50 lks. to a post from a bois d’arc mkd. X brs. S 24 e 4 LKS and another bois d’arc mkd. X brs S 71 W 30 lks Thence South 53 chains to the S line of said Survey to a post from which an Elm mkd x brs n 51 ½ E 12 lks another Elm mkd x brs N 25 W 38 lks. thence West 7 chs. & 50 lks to East line of said survey. Thence North 53 chains to the place of beginning containing 38 acres sold at five Dollars per acre whole amount sold to while as the interest of said minors amounting to two hundred and ninety-five…

 

[Scrap of Paper]

And it appearing to the court that the facts set forth in said report are true it is ordered by the court that said sale be and the same are hereby confirmed and the Guardian SELY TAPP is hereby directed to execute and deliver deeds to the purchasers for the land Sold to them respectively in accordance with the terms of Sale mentioned in Said report.

 

Page 29

 

County Court Collin County July Term 1876

 

…dollars, sold to W. H. CHADDWICK on same terms the following described land to wit situate[ed] in Collin County, Beginning at the NE Corner of the MARY SCOTT survey Thence North 16 chains to the N boundary line of the G. H. PEGUES survey of 471 acres Thence East on said North boundary line 28 chs 87 lks. Thence South 16 chs. a stake Thence West 28 chs. 87 lks to the beginning containing 46 3/10 acres more or less sold at $10.00 ten Dollars per acre making amount due said minors for their interest in said 46 3/10 acres two hundred and thirty-one 50/100 Dollars. Reporter represents that these sales have been fairly made and for a price and asks that said sales be confirmed and reporter ordered to make title to the purchasers upon their compliance with the terms of the sale.

 

J. M. TUCKER

Admr. Friday, July 21, 1876

Est. of H. H. TUCKER Now on this day came on to be heard the application of J. M. TUCKER admr. of the Estate of H. H. TUCKER for the approval of the compromise entered into by and between himself and J. L. McMILLON of a suit pending in District Court of Denton Co. No. 911 where as J. M. TUCKER decd. is plaintiff and said J. L. McMILLON is deft. for 240 acres of land out of HENRY TUCKER survey in said county and also for an order to pay to said McMILLON the sum of $930.00 gold or its equalant (equivalent?) in currency, received and used by H. H. TUCKER in his lifetime, and cost (?) of said lawsuit and taxes paid by said McMILLON

 

Page 30

 

…on said land which being fully understood by the court it [is] ordered adjudged and decreed by the court that said compromise be in all things approved and confirmed and said J. M. TUCKER admr. be and is hereby authorized and ordered to pay said McMILLON the sum of $930.00 with interest at 8
% from date of payment to his intestate upon condition that said McMILLON shall first deliver to him as admr. De Bonis Non of heirs TUCKER decd. the bond for title Executed by his intestate H. H. TUCKER decd. and recovery (?) to him said admr. the aforesaid land.

 

M. A. GOODWIN

vs. Friday, July 21, 1876

Est. H. O. HEDGECOXE Now on this day the Deft. has leave to amend his Answer.

M. (?) L. BRIGHT

vs. Friday, July 21, 1876

Est. T. (?) & L. E. STIMSON Now on this day comes M. L. BRIGHT and prays the Court to be appointed Guardian of the Estate of THOMAS M. STIMSON and LILLIE E. STIMSON minors and it appearing to the court that due Notice has been given according to law, it is ordered that Said M. L. BRIGHT be appointed Guardian of said Minors THOS. M. & LILLIE E. STIMSON and that he enter into Bond in the sum of Four Hundred Dollars for each of said Wards, with good and Sufficient Sureties conditioned according to law.

 

Page 31

 

V. H. AELINE (?)

Admrx. Friday, July 21, 1876

Est. M. W. AELINE (?) Now on this day comes the Admrx. of said Estate and moves the Court to grant her leave to file addition Inventory which was granted.

 

JOHN COX

Admr. July 21, 1876

Est. S. J. STIMPSON Now on this day comes JOHN COX Administrator of the Estate of S. J. STIMPSON and files his additional Inventory of said Estate ordered by the Court that the same be approved and Recorded.

 

LUCY ANN JACKSON

Guardian Friday, July 21, 1876

Est. HENRY P. LONG Minor Now this day comes LUCY ANN JACKSON Guardian of the Estate of HENRY P. LONG and files a New Bond and it appearing to the Court that said Bond is in accordance with law it is ordered that the same be approved & Recorded.

 

Ordered that the court adjourn until nine o’clock tomorrow morning.

 

Saturday morning nine o’clock court met pursuant to adjournment officers of court as on yesterday.

 

SARA GALLUP

Pr J. I. C. GOUGH July 22nd 1876

Pro chem. anni (?) Now on this day came following report on to be heard of T. B. WILSON, F. M.

GEO. W. GALLUP MARSHALL and E. F. ELKIN commissioners to partition the land described in plaintiffs petition between the parties at the present term…

 

Page 32

 

to wit [map not reproduce here of J. H. GOUGH SURVEY and divisions thereof]

SARAH GALLUP To the Hon. T. C. GOODNER Judge of the County Court of Collin County, Texas,

vs. We the undersigned commissioners appointed at the present term of your honors

GEO. W. GALLUP Court to partition and divide the land described in the order to us directed between the plaintiff and Defendant. Would respect fully ask to make the following report. After a carefull (sic) survey of the land and examination of same with a view to value we find there to be 95 acres in both tracts instead of 110 ½ acres as called for in the order. We proceed to divide as follows. To SARAH V. GALLUP 59 ½ acres in two tracts. First tract, Beginning at a stake in the S line of J. H. GOUGH Headright survey of 551 acres at the SW cor. of a tract of land conveyed by J. H. GOUGH and wife to W. M. GOUGH. Thence N 8º W 40 85/00 Chs. to a stake 16 lks. N of corner of hedge. Thence s 72 ½ ºW 11 25/100 Chs. a stake in the W line of the GOUGH survey. Thence S therewith 37 45/100 chs. to the SW corner thereof Thence E 16 3/100 chs. to the beginning. Second tract containing 7 ½ acres and beginning at the SE cor.[corner] of A. B. GOUGH’S tract a stake on the N. Bank of Rowlet’s Creek from which a Spanish oak 15 in. in dia. Mkd. X brs. N 85 ½ º W lks. Thence North 6 50/100 chs a stake on the north line of the GOUGH survey. Thence E there with 8 4/100 Chs. a stake the half mile corner from…

 

Page 33

 

…which a double Spanish oak 10 x 16 in[ches] in dia[meter] mkd. [marked] x brs. N 30º W 5 lks. [links] Thence S 39/100 chs. [chains] to a stake on the N. Bank of Rowlett’s Creek. Thence up the same with the meanders thereof to the beginning containing in the aggregate 59 ½ acres valued at $1000.00. To GEO. W. GALLUP 35 1.2 acres described as follows Beginning at a stake 16 lks. N of the NW corner of Hedge the same being the SW corner of a 25 acre tract conveyed by F. M. WILDER to GEORGE W. GALLUP. Thence N 8º W 23 74/100 chs. a stake the NW cor. of said 25 acre tract. Thence N 76º E 15 chs. a stake near the bank of creek. Thence N 1 45/100 chs. the centre of Rowlet’s creek. Thence up the same with the meanders thereof to the W line of the GAUGH survey and 10 chs. S of it NW cor. Thence S there with 32 55/100 chs. a stake thence N 72 ½ ºE 11 25/100 chs to the beginning containing 35 ½ acres valued at $333 33/100.

Recapitulation

SARAH GALLUP gets 59 ½ acres valued $1000.00

GEO. W. GALLUP gets 35 ½ acres valued $ 333.33

Total value $1333.33

And for further description reference is made to the (unreadable) all of which is respectfully submitted, signed this July the 22nd 1876.

T. B. WILSON

F. M. MARSHALL COMMISSIONERS

E. F. ELKINS

 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this July 22nd 1876.

J. M. Benge Clk.

And it appearing to the court that the partition of said land was fairly made by said commissioners in conformity to the order of this court at its present term. It is therefore ordered, adjourned…

 

Page 34

 

& decreed that said report be in all things confirmed and is hereby the Judgment of this court and the titles to the property that is set apart to each party in the above report respectively be vested in said party as shown by said report and the title to the said property as is set apart to each be directed out of the other and vested in the party-set apart to and said Pltff. to pay ¾ cost and defft.1/4 cost for which let execution issue.

 

Estate of CARRIE HUFFMAN July 22/1876

Minor W. A. HUFFMAN Guardian

Now on this day came on to be heard the application of W. A. HUFFMAN guardian of the Estate of CARRIE HUFFMAN minor for the sale of the following described tract of land to wit, 60 acres of land off the MICHAEL LEE survey situated in Collin County. Beginning at the N
E cor. of the MICHAEL LEE survey a bois d’arc stake from which an Elm 10 in dia. Mkd X brs S 45º E 40 lks Thence S 14 chs & 46 lks a stake Thence W 41 chs & 50 lks a stake Thence N 15 chs and E 40 lks Thence S 14 chs & 46 lks a stake Thence W 41 chs & 50 lks a stake Thence N 15 chs and 6 lks a stake on the N line of the said LEE survey Thence E 71 chs & 50 lks to the beginning. And it appearing to the court that it is necessary for said land to be sold for the support, maintained and education of said minor it is therefore ordered adjudged and decreed by the court that W. A. HUFFMAN guardian as aforesaid proceed to sell said land at public or private sale on a credit of Six months taking note with good personal security and mortgage on land to secure payment and if sold at public outcry the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 





All rights to materials within this collection are held by respective individual with the exception of public domain items. The materials contained within this collection are made available online for educational and/or personal research purposes only.
Updated: July 13, 2010
Copyright © 2002-2016
Sue Patterson