Abstract of Circuit Court Record Books January - July 1866

GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

January Term 1866
Book G

p 502.
Ordered that the Court adjourn until Monday Morning 9 o'clock. S.H. Boyd Cir Judge

p 503. Sixth day of January Term
Court met persuant to adjournment. Present as on Saturday.

J.E. Winfield Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
George C. See Defendant
Now at this day comes the parties by their attorneys and the demurer of the Plaintiff to the answer of the Defendant heretofore filed in this cause coming on to be heard and the Court having seen and fully understood the prenises therein said demurer is by the Court sustained and said Defendant has leave to make further plea in this cause.

State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs                                                   #12 Indictment, Obstructing Highway
Daniel Chandler Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes on behalf of the State of Missouri and also the Defendant by his attorney and this cause coming on to be heard on the motion of the Defendant heretofore filed to arrest the Judgment in this cause and the Court being fully advised of the premises therein said motion is by the Court sustained and said Indictment is by the Court quashed on account of the insufficiency thereof.

State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs                                                   Manslaughter
George W. Cooper Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes on behalf of the State of Missouri and Francis Tidwell and Nancy Tidwell who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand indebted to the State of Missouri in the sum of $100 each to be levied of their goods and chattels, lands and tenements to be void on condition that they be and appear before the Judge of the Greene County Circuit Court at the Court House in the town of Springfield in said County of Greene on the second Monday in July 1866 and then and there testify in the above cause on part of the State and not depart said Court without leave.

Martin Brashears Plaintiff
vs                                                   #206 Civil Action
Cyreneus W. Warren Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and by leave of the Court files his motion to strike out a part of the Defendant's answer in this cause.

p 504.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
M.D. Smith Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State and the Defendant by his attorney who by leave of the Court files his petition in this cause stating that he, the Defendant, is in the custody of the Sheriff of Greene County, Missouri, and asking to be discharged from the custody of the Sheriff aforesaid under and by virtue of an Act of the Legislature of the State of Missouri and this cause coming on to be heard on the petition of the Plaintiff and the Court being fully advised of and concerning the premises said petition is bu the Court sustained and it is ordered by the Court
(continued)

31
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 504 (cont.)
that said Defendant be discharged from the custody of the Sheriff of Greene County and go hence without day from further arrest of said Sheriff under, by virtue of the Judgment upon which this fine was rendered, and that a fee bill issue in this cause for the costs against the State.

Motions filed:
George Cutberth vs John Sullivan -- 330 Motion makes Plaintiff secure costs.
George Cutberth vs John Sullivan -- #30 Defendant files demurer
Robert Spence vs George Gillis -- Motion to abate proceedings.

p 504/505.
G.H. Irvin Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
John McQuerter and
W.B. Edwards garnishee Defendants
Now at this day comes W.B. Edwards a garnishee in this cause and by leave of the Court files his answer in this cause and this cause coming on for a final hearing upon the answer of said W.B, Edwards as garnishee, the Court doth find from an examination of the answer of said garnishee that he is justly indebted to the Defendant John McQuerter in the sum of fifteen dollars which is admitted in the answer of said garnishee. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the said garnishee W,B, Edwards be allowed the sum of five dollars for his answer in this behalf and that a judgment be entered up in favor of the Plaintiff George H, Irvin for the sum of ten dollars, the balance admitted to be in the hands of the garnishee, after deducting from the amount acknowledged to be in his hands, the costs of his answer in this behalf and that the Plaintiff, George H, Irvin, have an execution for the said sum of ten dollars against said garnishee, W.B, Edwards.

p 505.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs                                                   Grand Larceny
Charles Rose Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes for the State of Missouri and also the said Defendant, Charles Rose, in person and by attorney; and being arraigned before the Court, and the indictment having been read to him in Open Court; he, the said Charles Rose, did then and there for a plea say he was guilty in manner and form as charged in the Bill of Indictment. Whereupon the Court doth find that the said Defendant, Charles Rose, is guilty; and doth assess as a punishment on said Defendant imprisonment in the penetentiary of the State of Missouri for the period of two years, It is therefore considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said Defendant, Charles Rose, be confined in the penetentiary of the State of Missouri for the period of two years; and that the Sheriff of Greene County without delay convey him, the said Charles Rose, to the State Penetentiary at Jefferson City, Missouri,and deliver him to the Keeper thereof to be by him confined as aforesaid; and that the State of Missouri have and recover of and from the Defendant his cost in this behalf laid out and expended and that she have an execution therefor.

p 506.
It is ordered by the Court that the following named cases be entered on the Docket for the present Term of this Court, viz

S.H. Boyd vs Bank of Missouri
M.J. Hubble vs W.J, McDaniel
(continued)

32
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 506 (continued)
M.J. Hubble vs Eugene Fribourg
State of Missouri vs John S. Bigbee No. 1
State of Missouri vs John S. Bigbee No. 2
State of Missouri vs Blades

Ordered that Court adjourn until 9 o'clock tomorrow morning, S.H, Boyd Cir Judge

Tuesday, January 9th 1866
Court met persuant to adjournment. Present as on yesterday.

State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs                                                   Recognizance
A.W. Derry Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes and A.W. Derry as principal and Jacob J. Derry and Andrew J. Moreland as his securities who acknowledge themselves to owe and stand indebted unto the State of Missouri in the sum of eight hundred dollars to be levied of their goods and chattels, lands and tenements, to be void on condition that the said A.W. Derry who stands Indicted in the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri, for Grand Larceny be and makes his personal appearance before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Greene County at the Court House in the city of Springfield in said County on the second Monday in July 1866 and answer to said Indictment and not depart said Court without leave,

Bodenhamer Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Sowell Adams Defendant
Now at this day this cause being called by the Court and the Plaintiff being called comes not. It is therefore ordered by the Court that said cause be stricken from off the Civil Docket for want of prosecution and that the said Defendant have and recover of and from the Plaintiff his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

p 507.
J.M. Bailey Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Branham H. Woodson Defendant
Now at this day this cause being called by the Court and the Plaintiff being called comes not but made default. It is therefore ordered by the Court that said cause be stricken from off the Civil Docket for want of prosecution and that the said Defendant have and recover of and from the Plaintiff his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the Same,

Heirs and Legal Representatives of
Alexander Bates Plaintiffs
vs                                                   Civil Action
J.J. Weaver Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and the Plaintiff being called comes not, It is therefore considered by the Court that this cause be dismissed at the costs of the Plaintiffs and that the said Defendant have and recover of and from said Plaintiffs his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

33
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
January 9th 1866.
p 507.
J.S. Coleman Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Jones Defendant
Now at this day the above cause being called and the Plaintiff therein being called comes not. It is therefore considered by the Court that the same be stricken from the Docket for want of prosecution, and that the Defendant have and recover of and from said Plaintiffs his cost of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

p 507/508.
W.A. Carr Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
T.J. Abernathy Defendant
Now at this day this cause being called by the Court and the Plaintiff being called comes not but makes default. It is therefore considered by the Court that the same be stricken from the Docket for want of prosecution, and that the Defendant have and recover of and from said Plaintiffs his cost of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

p 508.
Crow McCreary and Co Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
John H. Miller Defendant
Now at this day this cause being called by the Court and the Plaintiffs being called come not. It is therefore ordered by the Court that this cause be stricken from the Docket for want of prosecution, and that the Defendant have and recover of and from the said Plaintiffs his cost of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

John R. Cox Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
D.C. Brewster Defendant
Now at this day this cause being called by the Court and the Plaintiffs being called come not. It is therefore ordered by the Court that this cause be stricken from the Docket for want of prosecution, and that the Defendant have and recover of and from the said Plaintiffs his cost of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

Barton Cammeron Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
James Smith Defendant
Now at this day this cause being called by the Court and the Plaintiffs being called come not. It is therefore ordered by the Court that this cause be stricken from the Docket for want of prosecution, and that the Defendant have and recover of and from the said Plaintiffs his cost of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

p 508/509.
S.M. Crews Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
David E. Tutt Defendant
(continued)

34
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 508/509 (continued)
Now at this day this cause being by the Court called and the Plaintiff therein being called comes not. It is ordered by the Court that this cause be stricken from the Docket on account of the death suggested of the Defendant and also for want of prosecution in this cause and that the Defendant have and recover of and from said Plaintiff his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution therefor.

p 509.
Crow McCreary & Co Plaintiff
vs                                                   Attachment
Abernathy & Co. Defendant
Now at this day this cause coming on to be heard, on motion of the Plaintiff's attorney it is ordered by the Court that an alias writ issue in this cause for said Defendants returnable at the next term of this Court until which time this cause is continued.

George R. Barrett Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Benjamin F. Hardin Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and on his application it is ordered by the Court that the administrator of George R. Barrett, deceased, be and he is hereby substituted as a party Plaintiff in this cause.

Pearce Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Jackson & Jones Defendants
Now at this day this cause coming on to be heard and the Plaintiff and Defendant both appearing by their attorneys by leave of the Court and by leave of the parties this cause is continued until the next regular term of this Court,

Martin Brashears Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Cyrenius W. Warren Defendant
Now at this day this cause coming on to be heard on the motion of the Plaintiff heretofore filed in this cause, asking the Court to strike out a part of the Defendant's answer and all and singular the premises therein being by the Court seen and fully understood said motion is by the Court sustained and Defendant's answer, or so much thereof as asked for by Plaintiffs, be stricken out.

p 510.
Wilkerson Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Davis Defendant
Now at this day this cause coming on to be heard and the Plaintiff being called comes not, whereupon it is ordered by the Court that the same be dismissed at the cost of the Plaintiff for want of prosecution and that the Defendant have and recover of and from said Plaintiff his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have execution therefor.

Fidellio S. Jones, Administration
estate of Wilson Hackney Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
William C. Price Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that an Interlocutory Judgment has been rendered in this cause at the
(continued)

35
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 510 (continued)
last term of this Court and the Defendant being thrice called comes not nor has he answered said petition, and the Plaintiff not requiring a Jury and the action being founded on an instrument of writing for the direct payment of money the Court doth find that the Defendant is indebted to the said Plaintiff in the sum of $430.73 debt, that the Plaintiff has sustained damages in the sum of $212.51 and also costs of this suit and the Court doth further find that the said Defendant did for the purpose of Securing the payment of the money specified in said note executed the said Wilson Hackney his mortgage deed to the following described Lots in the Town of Springfield, Greene County, Missouri, viz: Lots one, two, three and four in Block five in Price's Addition to the town of Springfield. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendant the said sum of $430.73 debt and $212.51 and his costs and damages to be levied of Lots numbered one, two, three and four in Block five in Price's Addition to the City of Springfield it being the property mortgaged and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the mortgaged property is not sufficient to satisfy the debt, damage and costs, It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that if said mortgaged property be insufficient to satisfy this judgment that the residue of said judgment be levied on the following real estate of the Defendant which was attached by the Sheriff of this County on the 18th day of May 1865, Lots one, two, three and four in Block numbered two, in price's Addition and it is further ordered that a special execution issue in this cause according to this decree.

p 511.
Motions:
James W. Adcock vs J.H. Caynor et al -- Defendant files answer.
Davis, et al vs W.F. Bodenhamer -- Cause continued.
Martin Brashears vs Cyrenius W. Warren -- Plaintiff files replication.
Oliver H. Scott vs Martin J, Hubble -- Defendant files answer.

p 512.
J.R. Danforth
vs                                                   Civil Action
Evans & Co
Now at this day this cause be dismissed at the Plaintiff's costs and that the Defendants have and recover of and from said Plaintiffs his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution therefor.

p 513.
Ordered by the Court that the following cases be entered on the Docket of this Court R.J. McElhaney vs John Lair

Campbell vs T.G. Newbill
John Wood vs John Lair et al

Campbell & Parris
vs                                                   Civil Action
R.B. Coleman
Now at this day this cause coming on to be heard and the Plaintiff appearing by his attorney it is ordered on his application that a Writ of Summons issue in this cause to Elisha Headlee, Public Administrator of Greene County, Missouri, in charge of the estate of Richard B. Coleman, deceased, summoning him to appear as a party Defendant in this cause and make answer in this behalf.

36
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT

CASESBOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 513.
John D. Hines Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Act ion
S.A. Edmonson Defendant
Now at this day this cause is dismissed for the want of prosecution and the Defendant have and recover of and from the Plaintiff his costs of suit laid out and expended and that he have an execution therefor, and that said Plaintiff have leave to withdraw the original instrument sued on by leaving a certified copy of the same with Clerk of the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri.

p 544.
Motions:
James S. Hankins vs Sarah Hankins et al Sarah Hankins and Henry L. Trantham -- file separate answers.

Orville Lyon vs Mick Morgan -- leave granted Defendant to plead.

Martha Shelton admin estate Elizabeth Rucker vs Sample Orr, Henry Sheppard, John S. Kimbrough -- Plaintiff files Petition.

Bank of Missouri vs Breedlove et al -- alias writ filed.

p 514/515.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs                                                   Selling Liquor Without License
John Mills Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and by leave of the Court files herein his petition showing that he is in the custody of the Sheriff of Greene County, Missouri, for the nonpayment of fines and costs in the above cause and pray the Court to be permitted to take the benefit of an Act for the Relief of Insolvent Debtors or persons confined on criminal process, whereupon it is ordered by the Court that the Sheriff bring the said John Mills before the Court on the _____ _____ 1866 and that such orders be made in the premises as the Court may see proper.

p 515/516.
Morris M. McClure Plaintiff
vs                                                   Final Judgment
August Liebman Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by publication in the Springfield Journal, a weekly newspaper published in said County for at least four weeks the last insertion thereof being at least four weeks before the commencement of the present term of this Court as appears by the affidavit of J.W. Bowern, publisher, of dates October 23rd and 30th and November 6th and 13th 1865 and said Defendant having failed to plead, answer or demur to the petition of the Plaintiff and this cause being submitted to the Court, the Court doth find from an examination of the same that the said cause of action is founded on an instrument of writing whereby said Defendant is indebted to the said Plaintiff in the sun of $52.26 debt and also the sum of $32.42 for damages. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the Defendant his said debt, damages and costs and that he have an execution for the same.

37
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
P 516.
Elisha Headlee, Public Administrator Plaintiff
vs                                                   Final Judgment
B.E, Burns and Peter Burns Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and by leave of Court dismisses this cause as to B.E. Burns.

p 516/517.
Elisha Headlee, Public Administrator Plaintiff
vs                                                   Final Judgment
Peter Burns Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by delivering to him a copy of the Writ and True Copy of the original petition in this cause at least 15 days before this Court which appears by the Sheriff's return thereon dated September 20th 1865 and having failed to plead, answer or demur to the Plaintiff's petition, and this cause being submitted to the Court, the Court setting as a Jury find from an examination of the same that the said cause of action is founded on an instrument of writing Signed by the Defendant for the direct payment of money dated April 7th 1860, due 8 months after the date thereof with interest at the rate of 10% per annum until paid for the sum of $677.50 debt and $311.91 damage and his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended, It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the Plaintiff have and recover of and from said Defendant her said debt, damages and costs of suit and that he have an execution therefor.

p 517/518,
Thomas Tiller, Admin Pendentition
of estate of John Adams, deceased Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Ishmael Lee & Tambert Whitlock
& Thomas J. Whitlock Defendants
Now at this day comes the parties by their respective attorneys, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that Defendants had been duly served with process more than 15 days before the July Term of this Court and that the interlocutory judgment had been rendered at the July Term of this Court for the year A.D. 1865 against said Defendants and neither party requiring a Jury said cause is submitted to the Court setting as a Jury, that each of the Defendants had issued the note mentioned in the petition of Plaintiff, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that on the 19th day of July A.D. 1862 one of the Defendants, to wit, Ishmael Lee, made, executed and delivered to the Plaintiff his certain mortgage deed for the purpose of better securing the Plaintiff the payment of the above mentioned note, in Plaintiff's petition mentioned, to the following described land, to wit the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 23 Township 30 Range 22, and the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 27 Township 31 Range 22, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that said notes remain wholly unpaid and are yet due to Plaintiff, and the Court doth further find that the said Defendants are indebted to the said Plaintiffs in the sum of $550 debt and the sum of $302 for damages, It is therefore considered by the Court that the Equity of Redemption in and to the above described lands be and the same is foreclosed, and that the same be sold, or so much thereof as will be sufficient to satisfy said debt, damage and costs and that a special fi fa be entered by the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the County of Greene directing the Sheriff of said County commanding him to sell said land or so much thereof as will be sufficient to satisfy said debt, damages and costs and it is also further adjudged by the Court that if the above described lands be insufficient to pay said debt, damages and costs, that the balance of said debt, damages and costs be levied of any other property of the said Defendants and that he, the said Defendant, have an execution of this judgment.

38
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 518.
Warren H. Graves Plaintiff
vs                                                   #48 Civil Action
William C. Price Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by advertisement in the Missouri Weekly Patriot for four weeks successively the last insertion thereof at least four weeks before the commencement of the present term of this Court and having failed to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition, it is therefore considered by the Court that said Plaintiff have judgment by default interlocutory, but it not appearing to the Court what decree, judgment or relief said Plaintiff is entitled to. It is ordered by the Court that an inquiry of damages be had at the July term of this Court to ascertain what amount of damages said Plaintiff is entitled to until which time this cause is continued.

J.E. Dotson Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Nathaniel Anderson Defendant
Now at this day this cause being by the Court called and the Plaintiff being called comes not but makes default herein. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the same be stricken from the Docket and that the Defendant have and recover of and from said Plaintiff his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution therefor.

Robert Spencer Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
George Gillis Defendant
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and by leave of Court the Defendant has leave until the third day of the July Term of this Court 1866 to file his answer in the above entitled cause to Plaintiff's petition.

p 519.
Cutberth Plaintiff (George?)
vs                                                   #30 Civil Action
John Sullivan Defendant
Now at this day this cause coming on to be heard on the demurer of the Defendant here tofore filed to the Plaintiff's petition and all and singular the premises being by the Court seen and fully understood said demurer is by the Court sustained and leave given said Plaintiff to insert the words Defendants, and change the name Emma Cutberth to Emily Cutberth.

p 519/520.
John S. Kimbrough Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Joseph B. Kimbrough Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that said Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by publication in the Missouri Weekly Patriot as appears by the affidavit of William J.Teed, publisher, for four weeks successively the last insertion thereof being at least four weeks before the commencement of the present term of this Court, and said Defendant failing to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition and the same being submitted to the Court the Court doth find that on the 13th day of April 1865 a Writ of Attachment issued in cause from the Clerk of the Greene Circuit Court and was by the Sheriff of
(continued)

39
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 519/520 (cont.)
Greene County, Missouri, on the 13th day of April 1865 levied upon the following described real estate of the said Defendant, viz Beginning at the NE corner of Lot 59, Block 17, in Kimbrough's Addition to Springfield, Missouri, running thence South with the alley 76 1/2 feet, thence West 20 feet, thence North 761/2 feet to Walnut Street, thence East 20 feet on Walnut Street to the place of beginning. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendant his said debt, damages and costs of suit and that he have a special execution to sell the lands attached herein,

p 520.
M.H. Sewell & W.C. Wadlow Plaintiffs
vs                                                   Civil Action
Allen Edmonson & J.J. Edmonson Defendants
Now at this day comes the parties by attorneys and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that said Defendants have been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by delivery to them of a copy of the Writ and a True Copy of the original petition in this Cause at least fifteen days before the first day of the present Term of this Court by the Sheriff of Greene County, Missouri, all of which appears by his return on said Writ of Summons and it further appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that said petition of the Plaintiff was founded on an instrument of writing signed by said defendants for the direct payment of money. The Court from an examination of the same find that said Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiffs in the sum of $375,29 debt and $241.12 damages. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the said Defendants have and recover of and from the Plaintiffs her said debt damages and costs and that he have an execution therefor, (underlined believe to be reversed)

p 520/521.
Sheppard & Murray Plaintiffs
vs                                                   Civil Action
Allen Edmonson, et al Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendants had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by delivering to them a true copy of the Writ and a certified copy of the original petition at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present Term of this Court and said Defendants failing to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition, the same is taken as confessed and the Court from their finding from an examination of the same that the claim of Plaintiffs is founded on an instrument of writing signed by said Defendants for the direct payment of money to said Plaintiffs and this cause being submitted to the Court, the Court Setting as a Jury find that said Defendants are indebted to Plaintiffs in the sum of $154 for debt and the further sum of $77 for damages and costs of suit laid out and expended. It is therefore considered by the Court that the Plaintiffs have and recover of and from the said Defendants her said debt, damages and costs of suit and that he have an execution thereof.

p 522.
J.D. Vanbiber Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Jemima Zumalt Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by publication in the Weekly Missouri Patriot, a newspaper published in said County for four weeks successively, the last insertion thereof being at least before the commencement of the present term of this Court and the Court doth further find that on the 17th
(cont.)

40
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 522 (cont.)
day of July 1865 a Writ of Attachment was issued in this cause by the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri, which said Writ of Attachment was by the Sheriff of Greene County on the 17th day of July 1865 levied upon the following real estate of the Defendant, viz E 1/2 of the NW 1/4 Section 24 Township 30 Range 24, Greene County, Missouri, and said Defendant failing to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition and the same being submitted to the Court, the Court setting as a Jury find from an examination of the same that said Defendant is justly indebted to the Plaintiff in the sum of $34,l3 1/2debt and the sum of $19.75 damages and his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the Plaintiff have and recover of and from said Defendants his said debt, damages and costs and that he have a special execution against the property attached in this cause.

p 522/523.
William R. Robertson Plaintiff
vs                                                   Final Judgment
John S. Blanchard Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by delivering to him a true copy of the Writ and a certified copy of the original petition at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present term of this Court and the same being submitted to the Court, the Court setting as a Jury find from an examination of the same that said Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiffs on an instrument of writing signed by said Defendants in the sum of $500 debt and $21.70 for his damages and his cost of suit in this behalf laid out and expended. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from Defendant his said debt, damages and costs of suit and that he have an execution therefor.

p 523/524.
John Hagan, admin of
John G. Galbreath, deceased Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Andrew L. Galbreath Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that said Defendant had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit as appears by the Sheriff's return to the Writ of Summons in said cause, by reading the same to and in the hearing of the said Defendant, at least fifteen days before the commencement of the present term of this Court, and the said cause being subnitted to the Court, the Court setting as a Jury find from an examination of the same that said cause of action is founded on an instrument of writing signed by said Defendant for the direct payment of money. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the said Plaintiff have and recover of and from the said Defendant the sum of $282.82 for debt and also the sum of $22.42 for damage and also his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution therefor.

p 524.
R.Q. Banfield Plaintiff
vs                                                   Order of Publication
John Daniel Defendant
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Greene County and files his petition and affidavit stating among other things that the Defendant is not a resident of the State of Missouri. It is therefore ordered by the Judge aforesaid that Publication be made in the Springfield Journal, a weekly
(continued)

41
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 524 (cont.)
Newspaper published in said County of Greene for four weeks successively notifying the said Defendant that an action has been commenced against him by petition and publication in the Circuit Court of Greene County, Missouri, founded on claim for damages for the sum of ____dollars and that unless he, the said John Daniel, be and appear at the next Term of this Court to be holden at the Court House in Springfield, Greene County, Missouri, on the second Monday in July 1866 and on or before the third day thereof if said Term shall so long continue (if not then before the end of said time) and plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition the same will be taken as true and a judgment rendered against him and it is further ordered by the Court that a copy hereof be published in the Springfield Journal, a weekly newspaper published in this state for four weeks successively the last insertion thereof being at least four weeks before the commencement of the next term of this Court.

p 524/525.
James Baker Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
N.F. & S.M. Jones Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by his attorney and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that said Defendants had been duly notified of the commencement of this suit by publication in the Springfield Missouri Patriot, a newspaper published weekly in said County of Greene for four weeks successively the last insertion thereof being at least four weeks before the commencement of the present term of this Court and the Court doth find from an examination of the Plaintiff's petition that the said Defendants, N.F. & S.M. Jones were wrightful owners of and legally seized of possession of the following described real estate viz N 1/2 Lot No. 4 in Erinbroughs 2nd addition to the City of Springfield, Greene County, Missouri and the Court further finds that the 23rd day of April 1860 said defendants entered into a contract with one William Shipley for the sale of real estate to him which contract was duly executed and signed by said Defendants whereby said Defendants obligated themselves to make and execute the said William M. Shipley a good and sufficient Deed to said real estate with the usual covenants of general warrantee for a title to the above described real estate to be complete on or before the 25th day of December A.D. 1861 upon the payment of the sum of three hundred and ten dollars with interest on the same at the rate of ten percent per annum until paid. And the Court doth further find upon an examination of the said petition that the said William M, Shipley entered into and took possession of said real estate and erected improvements thereon amounting to the sum of one thousand dollars and that said William M. Shipley afterwards conveyed said real estate by assignment to one Homer T. Fellows and that on the first day of June A.D. 1864 said Fellows as Trustee of the said Shipley and by virtue of an assignment made to him by said Shipley sold said real estate to one A.T. Budlong and assigned to him the said Budlong by endorsement the written contract of the said Defendants and that on the second day of January 1865 said Budlong sold and conveyed said real estate with the improvements thereon to the said Plaintiffs and that said Plaintiff James Baker took possession of said real estate and made additional improvements thereon, and the Court being fully advised of and concerning said premises. It is therefore adjudged and decreed by the Court that the title of and to said real estate above mentioned be and the same is hereby vested in the said Plaintiff james Baker his heirs and legal representatives forever upon the payment of $310 and interest by Plaintiff in the Court within twenty days from this date and that the said Plaintiff James Baker have and recover of and from the said Defendants his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

42
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 525/526.
Bank of Missouri Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action and Judgment
John Boyd, John Thurman
and Hugh Boyd et al Defendants
Now at this day comes the Plaintiff in the above cause by his attorney and dismisses as to Hugh and John Boyd and this cause being submitted to the Court, the Court setting as a Jury, doth find from an examination of the same that said Defendant, John Thurman, had been duly notified of the Commencement of this suit by publication in the Springfield Journal, a newspaper published in said County for four weeks successively the last insertion thereof being at least four weeks before the commencement of the present Term of this Court and said Defendant, John Thurman, failing to plead, answer or demur to Plaintiff's petition, the sane is taken as confessed and this cause being submitted to the Court, the Court setting as a Jury, doth find from an examination of the same that this cause of action is founded on an instrument of writing for the direct payment of money and the Court doth find that the said Defendant, John Thurman, is indebted to the Plaintiff in the sum of $125 debt and the further sum of $46 for damages. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that the Plaintiff have and recover of and from said Defendant her said debt, damage and costs of suit laid out and expended and that she have an execution for the same.

p 526/527.
State of Missouri Plaintiff
vs                                                   Indictment
William V. Daugherty Defendant
Now at this day comes the Circuit Attorney who prosecutes and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that William V. Daugherty, the above named Defendant as principal and Willie Daugherty and J.T. Smith, his securities, entered in their recognizance in the sum of $300 to be levied of their goods and chattels, lands and tenements, to be voided on condition that the said William V. Daugherty makes his personal appearance before the Judge of the Circuit Court of Greene County on the first Monday in January 1866 and answer to an Indictment to be preferred against him for Grand Larceny by the Grand Jury and said Defendant being thrice called comes not but makes default herein and the said Willie Daugherty and John T. Smith, his said securities being called and required to bring the said William V. Daugherty in to Court come not nor do they bring the said Defendant into Court. Whereupon it is considered and adjudged by the Court that said recognizance be forfeited to the State of Missouri and that a scire facias issue in this cause to Willie Daugherty and John T. Smith, securities of said Defendant requiring them to be and appear at the July term of the Circuit Court of Greene County, A.D. 1866 and show cause if any why the forfeiture of the recognizance in this cause should not be made final.

p 527.
Ordered that Court adjourn until tomorrow morning 9 o'clock. S.H. Boyd Cir. Judge.

Wednesday, January 10, 1866.
Court met persuant to adjournment. Present as on Yesterday.

James Gaskins Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Wiley Oneal, et al Defendants
Now at this day comes the Defendant by his attorney and by leave of Court files herein his motion to dismiss the proceedings in this cause.

43
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
Wednesday January 10, 1866.

p 527.
John Ford Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
Joel Fagg &B.G. Andrews Garnishee
Now at this day comes the Defendant, Benjamin G. Andrews, Garnishee in this cause, by his attorney and by leave of Court files herein his answer to the interrogatories of the Plaintiff in this cause.

Massey and McAdams Plaintiffs
vs                                                   Civil Action
J. Owens Defendant
Now at this day this cause being called by the Court and the Plaintiff therein being called comes not. It is thereupon ordered by the Court that this cause be stricken from off of the Docket for want of prosecution and that the Defendant have and recover of and from said Plaintiff his costs of suit in this behalf laid out and expended and that he have an execution for the same.

William J. McDaniel Plaintiff
vs                                                   Civil Action
T.A. Reed, William F. Bodenhamer Defendants
Now at this day it is ordered by the Court that the above cause be entered on the Civil Docket for this term.

p 528.
Charles Haden
vs                                                   Sheriff's Deed
B.W. Henslee, John H. Caynor & W.J. McDaniel
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson and acknowledges a Sheriff's Deed in Open Court to the following described land one undivided fifth part of a lot beginning at the NE corner of Section 23 Township 20 Range 22W running thence West 23 poles 81/2 links, thence South about 250 feet for a beginning point, said beginning point being the center of the branch Jordan, running thence South 350 feet to a point on Olive Street SE corner of Tobacco Factory owned by J.H. Caynor and Co., thence West along Olive Street 80 feet, thence North 350 feet on center of branch Jordan, then East along the center of said branch to the beginning, all in Section 23 T0wnship 29 Range 22 to B.W. Henslee, John H. Caynor and William J. McDaniel and that he executes the same for the use and purposes therein contained.

John W. Danforth, admin of
James R. Danforth
vs                                                   Sheriff's Deed
N.F. & G.M. Jones
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, into Open Court and acknowledges a Deed to William J. McDaniel to the following real estate, to wit, North onehalf of Lot 9 in Block 2 Kimbrough's Second Addition to Springfield, Greene County, Missouri and that he executed and delivered the same for the purposes therein contained.

44
GREENE COUNTY, MISSOURI, CIRCUIT COURT CASES

BOOK G
JANUARY TERM 1866
p 528.
Anderson Johnson
vs                                                   Sheriff's Deed
Phillip Kagarice
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson and acknowledges a Sheriff's Deed in Open Court to John M. Richardson to the following real estate vis beginning at the SE corner of the East half of the SE 1/4 of Section 23 Township 29 Range 22, thence North 8 poles, thence West 20 poles, thence South 8 poles, thence East 20 poles to the beginning all lying and being in Greene County, Missouri, and that he executed and delivered the same as his voluntary act and deed as Sheriff of Greene County in Open Court for the use and purposes therein mentioned which said acknowledged is ordered by the Court to be duly entered on the records of this Court which is accordingly done.

p 529.
John L. Holland
vs                                                   Sheriff's Deed
Thomas D. Wooten, Turner Goodall
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County and acknowledged in Open Court a Sheriff's Deed to Sydney S. Ingram to the following described real estate to wit the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 36 Township 29 Range 22W and also the SE 1/4 of NW 1/4 and the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 and the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 all in Section 36 Township 29 Range 22W in Greene County, Missouri, and that he executed and delivered the same for the uses and purposes therein contained which said land was sold under execution issued in the above entitled cause.

State of Missouri
vs                                                   Sheriff's Deed
James W. Blakey, William H. Blakey
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County and acknowledged in Open Court the execution of a Sheriff's Deed from him to the Bank of Missouri to the following described Real Estate viz NW3/4 of SW 1/4 and the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 Section 11 Township 28 Range 22 in Greene County, Missouri, and that he executed the same for the use and purposes therein mentioned which said land was sold under an execution issued in the above entitled cause.

John W. Danforth, admin estate
James R. Danforth
vs                                                   Sheriff's Deed T.B. Holland
N.F. & G.M. Jones
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County and acknowledged in Open Court the execution of a Sheriff's Deed to T.B. Holland to the following described real estate viz the undivided onehalf of Lot Number 46 in Block 13 in the City of Springfield, Greene County, Missouri, and that he executed and delivered the same for the uses and purposes therein mentioned which said land was sold under and execution issued in the above entitled cause.

p 529/530.
John W. Danforth, admin estate
James R. Danforth
vs                                                   Sheriff's Deed Henry Sheppard
N.F. Jones and G.M. Jones
Now at this day comes John A. Patterson, Sheriff of Greene County, and acknowledged in Open Court a Sheriff's Deed to Henry Sheppard for the following real estate , to wit

45

January Term Continued
Table of Contents