Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the Court here fully understood the Court do find as to the first ifsueissue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said Defendant did undertake and promise in man ner and form as the said plaintiff have above thereof com- -plained against him and as to second ifsueissue within joined be- -tween the parties aforesaid the Court do find that said Thomas Jones was not discharged as an Insolvent Debtor from prison to wit in Philadalphia in manner and form as he the said Thomas Jones hath above thereof in his said second plea al- -ledged and they afsefsassess the damage of the said plaintiff by them sustained by reason of the non performance of the promises and undertakings in the declaration mentioned to the sum of six Hundred and Twelve Dollars and Twelve cents therefore it is considered that the seire Peter Hertzog and Alexander McCaraper recover against the said Thomas Jones their damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Court afsefsassess and also their costs and charges by them about their suit in this behalf expended and the said plaintiffs agrees to take their expectation against the goods and chattels, Goods and Tenements of the said Thomas Jones and not against his body.

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premices are by them submitted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the Court here fully understood The Court do find as to the IfsueIssue within joined between the parties aforesaid that there is such a second of the said recovery remained in the said Court of Law of the County of Goodland in the common wealth of Virginia as he the said George Greenhorn hath above in his said Declaration alledged Therefore it is considered that the said George Greenhorn recover against the said Warner Lewis his said debt of one hun- dred and thirty three Dollars and seventy five cents and two third of a cent and also the further sum of six Dollars and eighty five cents for his damages by him sustained by reason of the declaration of said Debt together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof Execution

Pleas filed in the following cases to wit Miriam Edward vs Heram Delainer Alexis Edwards vs John B N Pruth William Edale vs Stephein Neeton

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the Court here fully un- derstood the Court do find as to the ifsueissue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said Theodore Hunt on the Twelfth day in of February Eighteen Hundred and Twenty did not pay the said Isaac Patterson the said sum of One Hundred Dollars in the said jointing obligatory mentioned to wit at the County of St Louis aforesaid Therefore it is considered that the said Isaac Patterson recover against the said Theodore Hunt his said debt of One Hundred Dollars and also the further sum of three Dollars and fifty seven cents for his Damages by him sustained by reason of the detention of said Debt together with his costs and charges by him about their suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof Execution

Now at this day come the parties afore -said by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the Court here fully understood the court do find as to the ifsueissue within Joined between the parties aforesaid that the said Defendant did undertake and promise in manner and form as the said Frederick A Brad -ford hath above thereof complained against him the said Thomp- -son P Williams and they the damage of the said plaintiffs by him sustained by reason of the non performance of the promises and undertakings in the declaration mentioned to the sum of One hun- -dred and ninety eight Dollars and eighty six cents therefore it is considered that the said Frederick A Bradford recover against the said Thompson P Williams his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Court afsefsedassessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expanded and that he have thereof Execution.

on motion of the attorney for plaintiffs it is ordered that the said Defendant be notified that an action of Debt here been commenced against him by the said William Chambers on two notes for one hundred Dollars each that a writ of attachment has ifsuedissued against his Estate and that unlefsunless he appear by himself or attorney on or before the third day of the next term of the Court & file special said to the action aforesaid that a Judgment will he entered against him and his said Estate sold to satisfy the same and it is further ordered that a copy of this motion be entered for Four Weeks succefsivelysuccessively in some newspaper published in the Town of and at least Twenty day prior to the next Term of this Court.

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and thereupon come a Jury to wit Stephen R Wiggins, Nathan Seymore, George Wallace, james J Purdy, Hubert Guion, Jacob Twoler, Janice Freeman James Loper, John P Lore, Elkanah Euqlish, Elyah Beebe and Stephen Neetor Twelve good and Lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and Tried to try the ifsueissue within Joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say that the said Oliver C Smith one of the Defendants is guilty of the said trespafstrespass and ejectment in manner and form as the said plaintiffs have in their said declaration alledged and they afsefsassess the damages of said plaintiffs to the sum of one cent and the Jury aforesaid do further find that the said defendant Rufus Easton is not guilty of the said supposed trespafstrespass and Ejectment in manner and form as the said plaintiffs have in their declaration alledged wherefore the Defendants by their attorney move the Court to grant them a new Trial and file their reasons therefore

Now at this day come again as well the Circuit attorney who prosecutes as aforesaid on the said Cyrus Curtis in his own proper person Therefore it is considered that the said Cyrus Curtis pay to the United States for the use of the County of St Louis the sum of Ten Dollars as a for the difference and also the costs of the prosecution and that he stand committed until the sentence of the Court be complied with

Bill Manceland to the use of vs John B Smith pleas filled Adams G vs . Varel pleas filed John Rothich vs Lawrence Might plea filed Doran & McCabe vs. John B N Smith plea filed

Now at this day come the said plaintiffs by their attorney aforesaid and say they will not further prosecute their said action against the Defendant but voluntarily suffer the same to be discontinued, therefore it is considered that the said Lakenan Shawhire take nothing by their said suit and that the said Obediah Reynolds go thereof without day and it is further consid ered that the said Obediah Reynolds recover against the said Lekenah Hawkins his costs and charges by him about his defence in that behalf expended and that he have thereof Execution.

The Defendant by his attorney files his bill of exception which is signed by the Court and ordered to be made a part of the record

continued

continued

Alias awarded

Court adjourned till tomorrow morning Nine Oclock

Saturday September 8th 1820 Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present same Judge

Now at this day come the said Eleazer Block in his own proper person and the said Richard R Venably also in his own proper person comes and defends the wrong and injury wherefore and says he cannot deny the action aforesaid of him the said Eleazer nor but that he hath sustained damage by reason of the nonperformance of the promises and undertakings in the declaration mentioned to the sum of three thousands three hundred and Eighty dollars and ten cents therefore it is considered that the said Eleazer Block recover against the said Richard R Venably his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid confefsesconfesses and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof Execution and the said plaintiff agrees to a stay of Execution for six months

On motion of the defendant by his attorney it is ordered that this action be dismifseddismissed because bond for the security of costs has not been filed accor ding to loaw

Plea & Demurer filed Court adjourned til Monday morning 9 O clock

Monday September 11th 1820 Court met pursuant to adjournment Present same Judge

Now at this day come the said plaintiffs by their attorney and the said Antoine Rencontio in his own proper person comes and defends the and saying which and say he cannot deny the action aforesaid of their the said Joseph G Francois nor but that they have sustained Damage by reason of the non performance of the promises and undertakings in the declaration mentioned to the sum of five Hundred and seventy eight Dollars and thirty eight cents. Therefore it is considered that the said Joseph Francois Robedone recover against

Now at this day come the parties afore- -said by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury also all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the court by the court here fully understood The court do find as to the ifsueissue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said Defendant did undertake and promise in manner and form as the said plaintiffs hath above thereof complained against him and they afsefsassess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the non performance of the promises and undertakings in the declaration mentioned to the sum of Two Hundred and ninety one Dollars and sixty and one half cents, Therefore it is considered that the said James Rankin recover against the said Samuel Hammond his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Court afsefsedassessed and also his costs and charges by him about suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof Execution.

Now at this day come the said parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and thereupon also come a Jury to wit James Bayard Theodore McGill Jacob Eastuin James Irwin, William Bobb, Jeremiah Connor Hugh Rawkin George H Kennedy John Keeuker Wepel F.F. Border and George Young twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to the ifsueissue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say that the said Defendant did undertake and promise in manner and form as the said Michael and Francis Lepow merchants in company trading and doing under the name style and from of Michael and Francis Lepow have above thereof complained against him and they afsefsassess the damage of the said plaintiffs by them sustained by reason of the non performance of the promises and undertakings in the decla- ration mentioned to the sum of Five Hundred and fourteen Dollars and thirty eight cents Therefore it is considered that the said Michael and Francis Lepow recover against the said H Price their damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Jury afsefsedassessed and also their costs and charges by them about their suit in this behalf expended and that they have thereof Execution-

John G Potter vs James C Phelan continued

Court adjourned til to morrow morning nine oclock

notice of this application has been published for at least four weeks in one of the newspapers printed in St Louis, the court there- apon appoint William Rector Thomas Bridge and Joseph C Moww and commifsionerscommisioners to divide the said tract of Land into three equal parts having respect to the quality and value of the said Land, and that they afsignassign the parts so divided to the parties aforesaid and also make a return thereof in waiting under their hands to the next term of the Court particularly describing the lots or portions allowed to each respective owner.

Court adjourned til tomorrow morning 10 O'Clock

Wednesday December 20th 1820 Court met pursuant to adjournment present same Judge

The defendant by his attorney moves the Court to enter a judgement of discontinuance in this case which on mature deliberation and after hearing the arguments of counsel is by the Court overruled.

The defendant by his attorney moves the Court to enter a judgement of discontin- uance in this case which on mature deliberation and after hearing the arguments of counsel is by the Court over ruled

The defendant by his attorney moves the Court to enter a judgement of dis- continuance in this case which on mature deliberation and after hearing the arguments of counsel is by the Court overruled.

The defendant by his attorney moves the Court to enter a judgment of discontin- uance in this case which on mature deliberation and after hearing the arguments of counsel is by the coourt overruled

William Reetor administrator of the said plaintiff appears here in Court by his attorney and prays that the said suit may be recieved and prosecuted in his name as administrator as aforesaid which is granted and the said suit recieved accordingly

On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that the seire facias ifsueissue returnable to third Monday of January next to the administrator of the said John Little does to shewn cause why the suit should not be revived and stand against him as administrator as aforesaid

On motion of the attorney for the plaintiffs it is ruled that the said Defendants be notified that an action of Covenant damages three thousand dollars has been commisioned against them by the said Benjamin OFallon and William Clark that a writ of attachment has ifsuedissued against their estate and that unlefsunless they be and appear by themselves on attorney and file special bail to the action aforedaid on or before the third day of the next Term of this Court that a Judgment will be entered against them and their said Estate sold to satisfy the same and it is further ordered that a copy of this notice be inserted for at least four weeks successivelysuccessively in some newspaper published in the Town of St Louis and at least Twenty days before the next Term

On motion of the attorney for the plaintiff it is ruled that the said Defendants be notified that an action of suit for the sum of three hundred and ninety dollars has been commanded against them by the said Benjamin OFallon that a suit of attachment has ifsuedissued against their estate and that unlefsunless they be and appear by their said attorney and file special bail to the action aforesaid on or before the third day of the next term of this Court that a Judgment will be entered against them and their said Estate sold to satisfy the same and it is further ordered that a copy of this notice be inserted for at least four weeks suc- cessively in some newspaper published in the Town of St Louis and at least Twenty days before the next Term

On motion of Joshua Barton Esquire it is ruled that the Execution ifsuedissued in this case will be Quashed and the money made thereon will be paid over to the Bank of St Louis unlefsunless good cause be shewn to the contrary on or before Saturday next

On motion of the attorney for the plaintiffs it is ruled that a Dedimus ifsueissue to any Judge or Justice of the peace of the County of St Louis to take the Depositions of witnefseswitnesses to be read on the trial of the above cause on the part of the plaintiffs

William & John Adams vs Patrick Dillon plea filed

Andrews & Williams vs Langust Bright plea filed

John Simmonds vs A Porter Demurer filed

Jeremiah Johnson vs Aaron P Caues admin plea filed

Thomas vs Thomas McKnight Demurer filed

Ragas Collins vs Jacob Warner Joinder in Demurer filed

The Grand Jury returns into Court the following bill of Indictment

The State of Missouri vs James Hammond True Bill There being no further buisinefsbuisiness before the Grand Jury they are by the Court discharged

Continued on appeal

On motion of the attorney for the Defendant it is ruled that a Dedimus ifsueissue to any Judge or Justice of the peace of the city of New Orleans to take the Deposition of witnefseswitnesses to be reas on the trial of the above cause on the part of the Defendant.

Pryon Juarles vs. John R Guy plea filed

Stephen R Wigg vs R East plea filed

James Amola vs Murphy plea filed

Martin Fox vs David Delauny plea filed

Clarissa Wiggin adm of Rufus Easton repleader awarded Joseph C Brown sheriff of the county of St Louis acknowledges here in Court the execution of a sleeve from him as sheriff to Isaac N Piggoti for a Lot of Ground situate in the Town of St Louis Number ten hundred on the west by Lot Number Eleven the property of Mr Francis Leolard on the south by a crofscross steel which seperates it from a lot of Prion Luarles on the East by lot Number nine the property of Robert Simpson and on the north by lot number three the property of Robert Simp -son which said lot was sold by virtue of three units of Execu -tion ifsuedissued from the office of the clerk of this court one in favor of Wm H Pocke one in favor of Thomas Fletcher and one in favor of Charles W Hunter against Rufus Easton and was sold on Friday the Twenty second day of December 1820 at the Court House door and whilst the Court was in sepion and was purchased by the said Isaac Pig- goti he being the highest and last bidder for the sum of Thirty five Dollars.

Bank of Edwardville vs Justus Port continued

John T. Nash vs Rufus Easton plea filed

On motion of Charles J Hempstead attorney for the Defendant it is ordered that the sheriff of the county of St Louis be directed to StVrain from selling the real estate of said Defendant under the full order of the courtperform to the first of next

Paued Wm Auditor vs Wm & Elias Neetor Demurer to use of filed

John B Larpy vs Joseph Laevois plea filed

Philip Nilladow vs Jown B N Smith plea filed

John W Melow vs Thomas W Thurston plea filed

Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney aforesaid and the said Defendant altho solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid of him the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against him the said Defendant wherefore the said Thomas Shandly ought to recover against the said Absalom Theese his damages by him sustained by reason of the non performance of the provinces and undertakings in the declaration mentioned but because it is unknown to the Court what damage the said Thomas Shandly hath sustained by reason of the premises Therefore it is commanded to the sheriff of St Louis County that he summon twelve good and lawful men of his County to the next term of this Court then and there diligently to enquire what damage the said Thomas Shaundly hath sustained by reason of the non performance of the said promises and undertakings and the same day is given to the said Absalow Theese

On motion of the attorney for the Defendants leave is given them to amend their pleadings in this case

Paue Wm Anderson vs Holbrook Q Gay plea filed

John Littles admn vs James Griever plea filed

Langust vs William Eardale plea filed

John Mulanphy vs Pine Chouteau plea filed

James Loper vs Thomas Hempstead & Coll Price plea filed

Thomas Hanly vs Alavia L Ward plea filed

Samuel Bridge vs Abraham Galtatin plea filed

Elias Neeton vs Alexander McNair plea filed

James Tanner vs Midsow H Price plea filed

Elias Neeton vs Alexander McNair plea filed

John Lindell vs same plea filed

same vs same plea filed

Lewis William vs James Lakeuaw plea filed

Court adjourned til to morrow morning half after nine oclock

Tuesday April 10th 1821 Court met pursuant to adjournment Present same Judges

On motion of the attorney for the plaintiff it is ruled that a Dedimus ifsueissue to any Judge or Justice of the peace of the County of St Louis to take the Deposition of witnefseswitnesses to be read on the trial of the about cause on the part of the plaintiff

Gratiots adm vs John McKnight plea filed

N.B. Topher vs David Delauny rep filed by consent

Gustavus A Daweow vs Griffith's adm Demurer filed

Monday April 16th 1821 Court met pursuant to adjournment present same Judge

Joseph C Brown of the County of St Louis acknowledges here in Court the execution of a Deed from him as sheriff to John Finyney for a lot of ground lying in the Town of North St Louis designated on the plot of said by Lot number eighty Two being the common size of lots in general Laid off in said Town which said Lot was sold by virtue of an Execution ifsuedissuedfrom the office of the Clerk of this Court in favor of Wm Chambers Wm Christy and Thos. Wright against Edward Hockerrnith and was sold on the twenty first day of December 1820 at the Court House door and whilst the Court was in sefsionsession and was purchased by the said John Finny he being the rightful and last bidder for the sum of seven dollars and fifty cents.

Joseph C Brown sheriff of the County of St Louis acknowledges here in Court the Execution of a deed from him as sheriff to Peter Fraysorse for a track a Land containing Eighty Aspens (more or lefsless) being two by forty aspens lying in the fields of St Louis see commifsionerscommissioners certificate No 1410. Jacques Clarnogan apilee of Hortis asine of Dodier Livre Terrence No 2. page 35 which said tract of Land was sold by virtue of an Execution ifsuedissued from the office of the clerk of this Court in favor of Rufus Easton against the Execution of Jacques Lelanogan deceased and was sold on Tuesday the Eighth day of August 1820 and the Court House door and whilst the Court was in repion and was purchased by the said Peter Faysouse he being the highest and last bidder for the sum of one hundred and sixty nine Dollars.

The order made in this case on the 1st day of April instant is by the Court ordered to the expunged and the following entry substituted in its place Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties re- quiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submit -ted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the Court here fully understood the Court do find as to the ifsueissue within joined between the parties aforesaid do find that the said Defendant did not asign and promise in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and or as it does not appear to the Court what Judgment can be rendered in this case on the ifsueissue and finding aforesaid and that the said ifsueissue in immaterial there- fore it is considered by the court that the pleadings in this case accept the declarations be set aside & that the defendant plead a plea adapted to the nature of this action

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the Court here fully understood The Court do find as to the ifsueissue within Joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant did afsumeassume and undertake in manner and form as the plaintiffs against him hath complained and they afsefsassess the damage of the said plaintiffs by them sustained by reason of the non performance of the promises and undertakings in the declaration mentioned to the sum of Five Hundred and thirty three Dollars and seventy five cents therefore it is considered that the said John Holderman, Peter Holderman, William Thnod and Alexander Scott recover against the said Thompson H Fichlin their damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Court afsefsedassessed and also their costs and charges by them about their suit in this behalf expended and that they have thereof Execution.

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submit -ted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the Court do find as to the ifsueissue within Joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant did undertake and promise in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and they afsefsassess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the non performance of the promises and undertakings in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one hundred and five Dollars and seventy nine cents Therefore it is considered that the said John A Jones recover against the said William P Harris his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court afsefsedassessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof Execu- -tion

Now at this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and gives the Court here to understand and be informed that since the last continuance of this cause the Defendant died which allegation is not denied whereupon the said plaintiff prays that a seire facias may ifsueissue returnable to the next term of this Court against the Legal representation of said deceased to shew cause if any they call why said suit should not be revieved against them which is ordered to ifsueissue accordingly

Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney aforesaid and gives the court here to understand & be informed that since the last continuance of this cause the Defendant died which allegation is not denied but admitted to be true whereupon this suit sbates in consequence Thereof.