Court News Items from Local Newspapers
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Smithville, Va., Thursday,
December 14, 1899
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
A list of deeds, and
of fines returned by justices, and other writings recorded during the month of
November presented and approved.
Rev. R.H. Mark, of this M.E. circuit, authorized to
celebrate the rites of matrimony.
The last will and testament of H.S. Hudgins, deceased,
presented and proved and Mary B. Hudgins, the executrix named, was allowed to
qualify; bond $1,000.
Ex parte, in case of Susan Newcombe, continued from November
term; the will of Wm. Newcombe presented and proved and ordered to record.
On motion of Thos. H. Colly, the owner of 105 acres of land
on Cub Creek, formerly belonging to estate of J.H. Spraggins, it was ordered
that the lieu of the Commonwealth for taxes for the years 1879 and 1880 be
released, the same having been paid.
On motion of Clem Green, colored, it was ordered that the
half acre of land at Drakes Branch, standing in the name of "Gallilean
Fishermen," be exempt from taxation, the same being held for religious
purposes.
On motion of the Attorney for the Commonwealth, the case of
Com. vs. W.R. Lipscombe, on appeal from magistrate's court, be dismissed, the
judgment of magistrate's court having been paid.
On motion of J.F. Wingo, the Commissioner of the Lower
district was directed to change the tract of land of one and one-fourth acres
from the names of J.F. Wingo and M.E. Wood to J.F. Wingo.
Application of Benny Bailey for license to sell spirituous
liquors on the road from Harrisburg to Drakes Branch, three miles from
Smithville, and S.L. Owen, at Hugh and Henry Hall, for same at Drakes Branch,
were refused.
The following accounts were allowed and certified to the
Auditor of Public Accounts; J.T. Paulett, for board of Solomon Booker, a
lunatic in jail, $1.50; L.Cox & Son, Treasurer's notice, $5; W.D., Norvell,
$1; J.H. Ward, $2.74.
The Court appointed Chas. E. Bouldin assessor of lands in
the Upper District, and A.S. Barksdale assessor in the Lower District of the
county.
Court adjourned to January term, 1900.
Source:
The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA., Thursday, April 5 1928.
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
SEINERS - TAKE NOTICE!!!
We, the undersigned
landowners along Roanoke Creek, situated in Central District and Roanoke
District, Charlotte County, Virginia, do hereby agree to prohibit all persons
from seining for any fish in theaters of the said Roanoke Creek, and Ward's
Ford Creek, or any of the ponds along or adjacent thereto, running through or
upon their lands. This agreement to binding for a period of three years
from date.
Given under our hands
this 4th day of April, 1928.
D.Q. EGGLESTON
W.R. LIPSCOMB
M.W. GAINES
C.W. TUCKER
R.B. JACKSON
T.H. CHAPPELL
B. GREEN
J.B. VAUGHAN
M.K. GREEN
Bouldin, Chappell &
Pettus
J.F. MORTON
JOHN F. WINGO
JOEL H. WATKINS
Source: The Charlotte Gazette,
Charlotte Court House, VA, Thursday, June 4, 1874
Submitted by: Bea Adams King
Circuit
Court
Judge Asa D. Dickenson, presiding
The May
term of this court commenced in this village on Monday, May 25th.
The first case called was that of Commonwealth vs. W.B. Foster. The Grand
Jury at the Feb. term had found an indictment against W.B. Foster, A.W.
Redmond, Henry Redmond and john Ellis for the murder of a colored man named
Haskins Mosely in May, 1865. The indictment which was a lengthy document,
charges in four counts Foster and Redmond as being principals and accessories
to the killing.
The
following jurors were sworn: Chas. Clark, Wm. M. Wilson, Geo. Cox, Wm.
Puckett, Jas. M. Hamlet, John C. Daniel, Geo. Deaner, John G. Clark, Wm.
H.
Deaner, G.W. Connelly, Wm. G. Smith, and N.H. Price.
???????
of the jurors, the ?????? Tuesday morning.
The jury being called, the prisoner, W.B. Foster elected to be tried
separately. The indictment was then read, to which his counsel demurred,
which demurrer was overruled, when the prisoner pleaded "not guilty."
The
commonwealth proceeded to call Ann High, Glasgow Redmond, Clairbone Elam and
John Palmer, colored.
Col.
Barksdale for the defense objected to the swearing of the witnesses as being
incompetent because they were negros and former slaves and moved to quash the
indictment, on the ground that the law under which the witnesses were
introduced was ex-poste facto.
After
argument by counsel on both sides, Judge Dickenson overruled the objection and
denied the motion, and the trial proceeded, counsel for the accused giving
notice they should claim the right to file exceptions.
TESTIMONY
FOR PROSECUTION
Ann High,
called. Was the slave of W.B. Foster, in the spring of 1865, and was
living at his house when the Yankees came through here. Foster has some
meat hid out; Henry Redmond hid it. When they went to get it, some of the
meat was gone. Some of it was found in the possession of Haskins Mosley.
Heard Haskins tell Foster Henry let him have it, and I heard Foster tell Henry
that Haskins had told him that he - Henry - had let him have it. Sunday
night, Foster, Abner, Redmond, Henry and John Ellis, all went to Mr. Moss'
after Haskins, and brought him to Foster's house. Mrs. F. asked Foster,
what he was going to do with that nigger? He said, "I will keep him
till morning, and then carry him to the Yankees." They kept him in
the yard till after supper, then they, carried him to the woods, where they
whipped him till he couldn't holler. Then Foster sent Henry to the house
after fire, and told him to bring some leaves. Henry brought the fire and
the leaves and I heard Haskins say, "Lord, Lord, you've done whipped me,
and now you going to burn me!" It was little after sundown when they
brought Haskins to Foster's and kept him till after supper. This was
after dark. They carried him behind the nigger house, not fifty yards from
the house where I was. They whipped him. I did not see but two folks
whipping him. I took them to be Foster and Henry. The white man was
in his shirt sleeves. Could hear them talking, and could hear the
licks. They were in the edge of the woods. Both were laying on the
licks. Can't tell whether he was stripped or not. He was on a place
like a rail-pen. I reckon they were whipping him two hours. They
whipped him a smart while after he quit hollering. The last words I heard
were, "Lord, Lord, as much as you've done, now you're going to burn
me." Saw them carry fire and leaves, and carry the leaves and
sprinkle on the old man, and set them afire. I then left.
The next
morning, Monday, before breakfast, Miss Susan called me and asked, "Ann,
what did they do with that nigger last night?" I told her they
killed him. She said "Lord a mercy! what did they do with
him?" I said, they put him in the gully. Tuesday they had us
up to know who knew of it. Next day, Mr. Foster said to
me,"-----old----- if you don't go and dig him up from where you saw him
put, I'll kill you and put you there." I saw the old man in the
gully. It was a smart way from the house, 200 yds. or more; the pines
were very thick, but the gully was not very deep. They pulled in some
dirt and bushes. Saw him in the gully when I went after the calves.
His feet were out; could see his big toes. Twas Tuesday Foster has us up
to know which one of us knew Haskins was killed. Told him did and could
carry him to the gully. Glasgow was there and old uncle Isaac. It
was at Foster's house.
I told Miss Susan Monday the man was killed. When Foster told me to
dig him up, I took my hoe and went ahead of him, but he had been moved. I
saw no evidence that he had been moved, made no examination, saw no marks where
he was carried to the gully.
Knew
Haskins; he was a middle-aged man, ginger-cake-color, brighter than I am, with
hair kinky like mine. Often saw him. Had but one hand, his left
hand was cut off above the wrist. He used to pass my house going to see
his wife at Mr. Moss'. He had six children. Have never seen him
since the time he was killed till the bones were dug up. Live now in
Halifax. This was done in Charlotte here. I saw Foster, Abner, John
and Henry come in the yard with Haskins, and saw all four go to the place of whipping,
but I don't know they all stayed. Foster left house in his shirt
sleeves. I was standing in corner of the chimney, a few bushes between me
and them.
Cross-ex.
Am wife of Sam High. Abner R., took out warrant. Foster had Sam put
in jail for stealing tobacco. Didn't know what was done with Sam. I
did not go to Mr. Gaines to make this complaint. Gave some
testimony.
These things happened 1st year of surrender - about planting time - I
think in May. Have heard Foster swear. Heard he belonged to the
church. I belong to the Devil's church, and think he'll have me.
I issued the warrant
on Mr. Woods application, on her evidence.
W.H.
Woods. On Court day I heard something which led me to believe that Ann
High knew something of this murder. I also heard thro' Abner
Redmond.
Ann was not a voluntary informer.
Glasgow
Redmond. Belonged to Ben. Redmond in spring of 1865, and lived at W.B.
Foster's. Sunday Mr. Foster was looking for his meat, and went to
Mr.
Moss'. That night he called for Abner Redmond, John and Henry to go after
Haskins. I was standing in the gate, after supper, when they came.
After I had gone to bed, my wife waked me up, hearing a noise, and told me to
go and see what it was. To oblige her I got up, and saw all four; old man
Haskins was lying on ground. I saw John whipping him with a piece of
trace. I heard Mr. Foster say "call him." I could not
understand what the old man said.
Foster then told Henry to bring fire, and they put leaves on him and
fire.
Foster told John to call him. He said "Haskins! Haskins!"
the old man groaned out something. Foster said, "d--n him, he is
possuming. Strap him."
Foster then got on the rails, and shook them. The old man rose up and
fell back. Foster then set out on a trot for his house. John Ellis
then said to Henry, "now the old man is dead, what going to do with
him?" After a few minutes they put him on two rails and carried him
to another place, fifty yards from where the bones were found. This was
on Mr. Foster's land, and on Monday it wasn't plowed up. Monday all hands
were sent to Ben Redmond's; Henry claimed sick, and didn't go. Tuesday
found the land plowed up. I stayed at Foster's till corn was
gathered. Have not seen Haskins since.
Cross
ex. My last master was Ben Redmond. Was whipped for going to
Yankees. Abner Redmond had me whipped; Foster tried to have it
stopped. Henry hid the meat. Heard some was found at Haskins', and
that he said Henry let him have it. The only thing I saw Foster do was
when the old man raised up, Foster hit him with a piece of rail, but not hard
enough to hurt him and then Foster ran away. Didn't tell the Yankees
anything about Foster. I went to Roanoke, and stayed two days.
Abner Redmond had me whipped because I went away. Never told the Yankees
anything about it until after Mr. McCargo and Brooks had the trial. Was
afraid. It was two miles from Foster's to Moss'. Foster had his
coat on at the time; it was a dark one. Henry had Foster bro't before Dr.
Brown and Col. Carrington on a dispute about some money, which was decided for
Foster. Henry and John stayed there short time after the fuss about
Henry's daughter. Henry died in Richmond.
Clairbone
Elam, called. Lived at Mr. Moss'. Haskins Mosely worked at saw-mill
near Wylliesburg; his wife cooked for Mrs. Moss. Sunday night before the first
holiday nine year's ago, Mr. Foster and Henry Redmond came there, and took
Haskins, and asked him about the meat. They tied him by one
hand.
He said he did not know anything about it, except one piece he got from
Henry. They quizzed him about it till he owned the meat was in the
granery.
Mr. Moss
told me to go up, but there was no meat there. They burst open the lower
part of the door. Henry had a bar in his hand. Redmond told him he
must tell him where the meat was. He then said it was in the smoke house;
I told him he was lying. Finally he said it was at his own house.
They then made a noose of the other end of the rope, and threw it over the old
man's neck, when Abner Redmond got on his horse, and dragged the old man
off.
Redmond then knocked him with his fists. He told him if he didn't tell
where the meat was he was afraid Redmond would kill him, and if he didn't tell,
he would kill him any how.
Cross
ex. When Redmond put the rope around his neck and started, it choke the
old man down; he struggled and knocked him down several panels of the
fence. I told Mr. Moss about this; he died several years ago. The
times were so particular, I was afraid to tell of it; was afraid if I did, that
Mr.
Foster and Redmond would put me to where they had Haskins. Mr. Foster and
Mr.
????????. Mr. Moss said he was afraid of Mr. Redmond. and would not go
where they had Haskins; told me to go.
John
Palmer, called. Was waiter at Alleck Roberts' 1/2 to 3/4 of a mile from
Mr. F's on a by-road from Mr. Moss to Mr. Foster's. Have nothing against
Foster or Redmond, I asked where they were going. They said to old man
Mosely's. Nearly an hour after that, heard a great noise at the creek;
heard the water go back and forth in recess; seemed like they were ducking some
one; hears some one say, "O Lord, please master, let me alone."
When they came back, the rope was around the old man's neck and arm, and I
heard Redmond say to Henry "touch him up!" He did touch him up,
smartly, and they then went out of sight. They came by my house about
daylight down. It might be an hour and a half before they came back;
stayed at the creek, should think, an hour. The old man was on his feet
walking when they came back, and when Henry touched him up with his poke, he
sure walked faster. [The witness seemed to be very much amused at the
scene which his testimony revived.]
Dr. Joel
Watkins, called. Am a physician and was present at the coroner's
investigation when the bones were found. There was nothing peculiar about
them except the hand of the left arm had been cut off. The bones were
those of a colored man. There was some brush, I think sweet gum, about
the body, as if it had been dragged there. There was no coffin, nor was
it a place which would have been selected for a decent grave. The body
was found in a ditch in a low ground of Mr. Foster's land. No sign of a
grave about it.
There was another ditch some eight or ten feet distant. [The bones were
here produced in Court and identified as those which were found in the low
grounds.]
THIRD DAY
- WEDNESDAY - 27TH
J.W.
Watson, called. Was coroner at the finding of the bones. Worked
Saturday without success. On the south side of the old ditch came to
something hard, and finally found the bones. When jury came had them
taken up and put in a bag. The same that Dr. Watkins has here
exhibited. The left hand was off. No appearance of a decent
interment. There was a grape vine around one arm, and a withe around the
body. The witness testified as to the position of the old and new
ditches, and the place where the body was found.
The
prosecution here rested the case.
The
witnesses for the defence were then called, the first being Col. John Booker,
of Richmond. Have been Mr. Foster's commission merchant, and have know
him some 15 or twenty years. His general character as far as I know is
that of a peaceable and quiet citizen. His business transactions with me
have been in all respects honorable to the present time. Have never made
any enquires of his neighbors respecting him; but have never heard anything
said against him.
E.B.
Davis, called. Am constable and auctioneer. Agree with Mr. Booker
in his testimony. Never heard anything said against Mr. Foster, as a
peaceable, quiet and industrious man. Judge him to be industrious form
passing his farm. Live 12 or 14 miles from him. Don't know what his
neighbors think of him. Never have heard of his having any difficulty
with his neighbors.
Dr. John
Brooks, called. Am a physician. Have known Foster since he was a
boy. His general character is that of a peaceable, respectable, honest
citizen. Have had good opportunities of knowing him. Have heard
some rumors respecting his family - the Redmonds - and some family
difficulties.
Col. H.A.
Carrington, called. Am Clerk of the Courts of the County of
Charlotte. Have never known of any difficulty between Mr. Foster and his
neighbors. Was provisional justice in 1865, and tried some 800
cases. There was a complaint at that time made by some negroes against
Mr. F., with reference to some accounts, and an examination made; but Mr. F.,
was sustained. At that time colored troops were here, as well as Yankee
troops. The first regiment which came was commanded by a Massachusetts
officer, who sent a force to protect my horses and other property. Mr.
F., was never before the Courts. Knew him as I have known all other
citizens. Never heard any of his neighbor speak against him till some ten
days ago.
John H.
Thompson, called. Live within seven miles of Mr. Foster. Have never
heard anything prejudicial to him, except some difficulties with his
brother-in-law. His old neighbors give him a good character.
Jas. L.
Garden, called. Have lived in the neighborhood four years. Apart
from difficulties with the Redmonds, he never heard anything against Mr.
Foster.
W.N.
Coleman, called. Have known Mr. Foster as a kind neighbor, a peaceable,
and even a timid man. I was a prisoner, till the 20th day of June,
1865.
Have heard that the Redmonds made trouble for Mr. Foster.
The
Counsel for the defence have rested the case.
ARGUMENT
FOR PROSECUTION
The
Commonwealth's At., W.H. Woods, then proceeded to an exposition of the law
defining murder, as to its different phases and penalties, and also to a brief
and rapid review of the facts as shown by the testimony. It appears that
W.B. Foster, the prisoner at the bar, in the spring of 1865, had entrusted some
of his meat to Henry Redmond, a headman on his plantation, for the purpose of
secreting it. Some of this meat had been found in the possession of a
one-armed colored man, named Haskins Mosely, who alleged that he purchased it
of Henry. Foster then taking Abner Redmond, his brother-in-law, and Henry
Redmond and John Ellis, two colored men, goes to the house of Mr.
Moss, where Haskins was, binds and drags him away, then attempts to drown him
in the creek, most cruelly whips him until life is nearly extinct, then thrown
him into a gully, orders leaves and fire to be brought, strikes his helpless
victims back in his dying agonies, and thus consumates one of the most fiendish
and atrocious murders ever committed. Years pass by, the evidence and
witnesses of the crime had been well nigh forgotten, when vengeance which is
ever on the track of the guilty, discloses the crime, opens the dead man's
grave, and presents before this jury his very bones, the handless arm, the
withe around the body - mute but certain evidences of the fearful
crime.
The solemn oath you have taken, gentlemen of the jury, the great interests of
society, the stern demand of justice, all require that you should render a
verdict in accordance with the testimony and facts.
ARGUMENT
FOR THE DEFENCE
J.M.
Bouldin, junior counsel for the accused, then proceeded to make the opening
argument for the defence.
Your
honor please and gentleman of the jury, you are called upon to perform the most
solemn duty ever given to twelve men this side the grave. The fate of a
fellow being is in your keeping, and it rests with you to say whether he shall
live or die. I am persuaded you will discharge this solumn trust with
pure hands and clear consciences. When, does the Commonwealth charge this
terrible tragedy took place? Nine years ago upon a holy Sabbath night in
May, 1865, just after the noble legions of Lee had laid down their arms at
Appomattox, and with sorrowing hearts and bowed heads had returned, to find
their homes desolate, their household shrines desecrated, their lands a
waste. Fear was in every heart. Who could tell at night that the
morning might not bring tidings of a servile war? Of Virginia then it
might be said:
"The
wild dove hath her nest, the fox his cave, Mankind their country; Virginia but
a grave."
Our
slaves had been suddenly liberated, our Courts destroyed, and our towns and
villages garrisoned by federal troops, white and black. It was in this
dark hour, that it is said the prisoner committed this fearful crime. Was
it possible for him to commit it? Under such circumstances, would any
sane man have attempted it? If he had done it, would those who are now
hounding him, with the opportunities they then had, have remained silent, and
for nine long years? But they tell you they were afraid.
Afraid? My God! of what? Afraid? when this very village
circumstance stamps this foul charge as a fabrication and a lie.
But upon
what kind of testimony does the Commonwealth attempt to sustain this
charge? That of men of his own race and color? O, no; but upon the
purjured statements of four negro slaves! His Honor has seen fit to admit
this testimony, and I shall not argue against his instructions. But
thanks to a just and righteous God, this jury are judges of the testimony, and
they alone are to say what it is worth. I would not have the meanest
wretch that crawls convicted upon the testimony of such creatures. For
nine long years, no one has had the hardihood to make this charge. Not
until all those who could have aided the prisoner are in their graves, do we
hear of this prosecution. Susan Foster is in her grave; Reuben Moss has
gone; their voices are hushed in death; and now four negro slaves, after nine
years, come forward to charge upon the prisoner this fearful crime! And
she who started the charge, who stands here and boasts of her infamy and shame,
she never opened her lips until Foster testified against her husband for
stealing his tobacco!
In a
strain of mingled invective and impassioned eloquence, the counsel proceeded to
show the falsity, inconsistency and worthlessness of the testimony.
Throughout the argument was able, and the appeal forcible. Its conclusion
was grand. The jury must remember the great interests of Society, of
justice, as well as of the prisoner are in their charge. Can they condemn
the prisoner, and those interests not suffer? To what condition would
society be reduced, if on the testimony of his former slaves, any citizen may
be condemned for imaginary crimes, committed years ago? Listen to the
appeal of your own dear ones, of your fellow citizens, of our old Commonwealth,
of all the interests of Justice and of truth, to save a persecuted
brother and a suffering people, from the fearful consequences of malignant
hate. God grant to him and to us all a just and safe deliverance.
ARGUMENT
OF COL. E. BARKSDALE, jr.
May it
please your Honor and gentlemen of the jury, the circumstances attending this
trial are most remarkable. An attempt is being made to deprive a respectable
citizen of his life, by the testimony of his former slaves, and on the charge
of a crime said to have been committed nine years ago! The very thought
is monstrous. If the testimony which had been given was credible, yet
should the jury on their oaths acquit the prisoner, because the witnesses were
not competent to testify of the alleged facts, at the time they are said to
have occurred. His Honor has admitted the testimony, yet he would not say
it should be believed, and tho' it were possible to introduce like evidence to
rebut it, the defence would not rely upon negro testimony.
It was
first necessary that the prosecution should prove that a murder had been
committed, that W.B. Foster, the prisoner at the bar, committed it, that he
only had the motive, and the opportunity, that nobody else could have done it;
and all these facts should be proved beyond the possibility of reasonable
doubt. Yet have they done this? Is there not a question whether
this old man Mosely was murdered at all? No doubt that Foster murdered
him?
Can the jury suppose that an intelligent man would commit such a crime, and
then place the evidence of it on his own low lands, where he must ditch and
plow, and the fact of his guilt be revealed? If they can believe that
Foster committed this crime, if crime there was, then they must believe him a
fit subject for a lunatic asylum rather than the gallows. Who had the
motive for the murder? Henry had been entrusted with the bacon.
Foster got Henry and Haskins together to settle the question who had it.
It was Henry and not Foster who had the motive; but if Elam could be believed,
neither of the, nor yet Abner or John, could have done it. The stronger
probability is that the old man wandered off, and if killed at all, it was by
some straggling Yankees.
But is it
morally certain he was murdered? Who ever heard of it? If such a
crime had been committed, in those times which one witness calls so particular,
would not information have been lodged with the Freedman's Bureau?
Would not somebody have heard of it? Yet up to the time that this old
witch - Ann High - who says she belongs to the Devil's church - and I believe
she does - made this complaint, nobody had ever heard of it. If this
murder had actually been committed, would those witnesses so long have remained
silent?
and would Foster, if guilty, have aroused the anger of the purjured
creature? Then the character of this testimony. One tells you
Foster was in his shirt sleeves, another that he had a dark coat on; one witness
said there were four persons engaged in this business, another saw but three,
while another declares there were only two! If Elam told the truth as to
the rope-ing and ducking, could Palmer have told the truth about touching the
old man up?
The whole is but a tissue of inconsistencies. If Foster had committed
this crime, and these negroes knew it, he would not be here to-day.
Palmer tells you that he told Mr. Moss about it; a good, law-abiding citizen
knew a great crime had been committed, yet he takes no notice of it!
Nobody knew of it, but these creatures, and nobody would ever have heard of it,
but for Foster's recent attempt to protect his own property.
After a
most scathing review of the testimony for the prosecution, the counsel
proceeded to allude to the general character of the prisoner, the testimony of
his neighbors and friends, and the utter improbability that a quiet,
intelligent, honorable man, such as he had proved himself to be, could be
guilty of such a crime. He closed with an earnest appeal to the jury to
see to it that they did not open the flood-gates of all infamy and abuse by
sending a fellow-citizen to his fatal doom on the testimony of such
questionable witnesses - that they did not violate their solemn oaths by
condemning an innocent man on so imperfect and contradictory and incredible
testimony.
ARGUMENT
OF HON. T.S. FLOURNOY
Hon. T.
S. Flournoy, senior counsel for the prisoner, then arose to conclude the
defence. He at first passed in rapid review on the character of the witnesses
which had been relied upon for the prosecution, and those called for the
defense, and then proceeded to a consideration of some of the circumstances
connected with the alleged crime. It was committed nine years
ago?
Why has it slept so long? When the witnesses are asked why they didn't
speak out earlier, they tell you they were afraid. Afraid? Of who? Our
lands had been devastated, our Courts destroyed, hostile forces had been all
around us, and regiments of both white and colored troops were in our very
midst, to keep our people in subjection at the very point of the bayonet.
A freedman's bureau or commission had been established, and Col. Carrington
tells you that more than 800 cases were brought by negroes before him to
settle. In one instance, Glasgow brought Henry as a witness against the
very prisoner at the bar, for some supposed damage. And yet he tells you
he was afraid of Foster! The fear did come upon the negro; the fear came
upon us. Well do I remember the scenes which were enacted in my own yard
and at my own house.
But nine
long years have passed, and now when Foster has caused the arrest of the
husband and daughter of this creature - Ann High - she becomes for the first
time an informer of the crime. She denies this fact. Yet how did
Mr. Woods else come to the knowledge of it? Had he known it, would he
have been so long derelict in his duty in regard to it? But why is it
that only at this late day, and through such witnesses as have been produced
here, that this crime is revealed? Where is the wife and children of the
murdered man
- living as it is said they are here in this very county - why are they not
here to testify? Where is Mr. Moss and why did he not reveal his
knowledge of this guilty act? Mr. Roberts - who if so atrocious a crime
had been committed must have known about it - why is not he here to
testify? Where are all the many other credible witnesses, who, if such a
crime had been committed, should have ere this hour revealed it, or been here
to-day to testify.
Such witnesses never existed, or such facts, or such a crime; save in the
imagination of Ann High and the rest.
I impeach
their testimony because of their natural and normal condition, which is that of
a savage beast. To-day they sell their own children. I would not
believe them for their natural mendacity, and for the fiendish hate which has
been instilled into them. Sooner than consign a respectable man to the
gallows or the penitentiary upon the testimony of such creatures, I would sit
upon my seat till it might grow to me.
With
mingled invective and scorn the learned counsel procured to analyze the
testimony as to the alleged facts, alluding to a case of a man from Kentucky
convicted in Pittsylvania of passing counterfeit money. The people in Ky.,
asked that some one be sent to that State to ascertain his real
character. They did so, and all became convinced that he was
liberated. He closed with a most moving appeal to the jury to send the
prisoner at the bar home to his family, to his children, that together they
might again discharge the sacred duty of strewing flowers upon their mother's
grave, rather than to consign him to a felon's doom.
CLOSING
PLEA OF THE COMMONWEALTH
P.W.
McKinney, of Farmville, who at the request of the Com. Attorney had been
associated with him in the conduct of the case now arose for the closing
argument for the prosecution. May it please your Honor and gentleman of
jury, were it in my power or yours, the prisoner at the bar would have no
hindrances in the discharge of the loving service to which the learned counsel
has so movingly alluded. If he is restrained in his liberty, if his life
is forfeited, it is because he has invoked his doom upon his own head. By
no act of mine or yours can he be harmed, but by his own, and not upon you but
upon himself must the responsibility rest.
Counsel
has told you even if you believe this testimony, you ought still to acquit the
prisoner, because the testimony ought not to have been admitted.
But His Honor has told you these are competent witnesses, and it is for
you to decide whether they are to be believed. What have you to do with
the law which makes them witnesses? You have sworn try this case on the
testimony given, and it is your duty to hold the scale of justice in equal poise,
to remember the oath you have taken, the interests of society reposed in your
hands, and to render such a verdict as shall be justified by the facts which
have been proved before you.
After a
brief review of the law relating to the crime of murder, the facts as shown by
the testimony were recited in a clear, lucid manner - the going to the old
man's house, the return to Foster's, the whipping, the burning, the midnight
burial, the removal, the ploughed field, the finding of the bones, all up to
the present hour, until one seemed to feel that he stood in the presence of a
great crime, the victim confronting the murderer.
There is
a point, said the able counsel, at which the burden of proof is lifted from the
prosecution. The last that was seen of Haskins Mosley he was in the
custody of the prisoner. What did he do with him? What became of
him? Failing to show that the presumption of the law is that he was
murdered, and the prisoner was his murderer. I care not if the witnesses
belong to the devil's church, if that race will lie and steal, civil rights
bill and all - I care not for them. The very circumstances of this case,
show that a fearful crime has been committed, and point with unerring certainty
to the prisoner as the guilty man. What matters all the minor points upon
which counsel have so persistently dwelt? What clothes Foster had on -
who of you, gentlemen, can remember the color of your coat or gravat, at the
last Presidential canvass? An hour or two more or less in time amounts to
little. Such discrepancies must exist when witnesses tell the
truth. But when all the hands are sent away, Henry only the partner in
crime left behind, and when the plowman comes back the next day, his surprise
at finding the field plowed up - how are these, and so many other damning
circumstances to be accounted for.
But
counsel tell you, this man was a Christian gentleman; he was a trespasser and a
violator of the law from the very commencement of this fearful tragedy; he knew
he was violating law in going to that old man's house, without a warrant,
laying violent hands upon a citizen of the Commonwealth. Lowly and humble
though it be, the poor man's house is as sacred as the palace; the wooden bolt
as secure as the brazen lock. Was he law-abiding on the premises of Mr.
Moss?
Gentleman,
why should not these witnesses be believed? The prisoner had the right to
impeach the testimony; he could have brought witnesses to show their want of
credibility; he did not do it, and why? They have asked why this case has
slept so long? That question is for us, for you to ask. If this
prisoner is the high-toned Christian gentleman counsel declare him to be, if
these shrieks rang through his own home nine years ago, if a foul murder was
committed by somebody, if a human being had mysteriously disappeared, it was
Foster's business to have investigated it. It is for the Commonwealth to
ask why this case has slept so long.
The
defence has brought evidence as to the good character of the
accused.
But who have they brought? Mr. Booker, his commission merchant, who lives
a hundred miles away, who, when he is asked what he may know of the reputation
of Mr. Foster, replies, "he pays his debts;" - what do his neighbors
think of him? "I have always found him correct in his business
transactions."
None of his witnesses know much about him; only some have heard rumors - fatal
rumors! Why are not his friends and neighbors here to-day to aid
him?
Now is the day and now is the hour. Col. Flournoy has spoken of the
action of the friends of a man from Kentucky. Well do I remember the case
of the young man accused of murder when I was at Washington University.
The defence rested upon his general character. The old pastor came and
all who had known him from his youth up came and bore testimony that such had
always been his character that the jury were convinced he could not be guilty
of such an atrocious crime. Old Judge Brockenborough, putting his arms
around the young man's neck, declared he would be almost willing to be accused
of such a crime, to be able to prove such a character! But where are
those who should be here today to testify to this man's good character?
Standing, as he does, in this imminent peril, why do they not fly to his
relief?
And yet
more. Failure to bring competent testimony, when such testimony can be
had, is presumptive evidence of guilt. There is a competent witness - the
brother-in-law of the prisoner - who has been here in Court, indicted with this
very man - why does not Abner Redmond come here, and deny this charge, and say
that this man is innocent? Is it not because the prisoner - counsel know
that he cannot - he dare not?
In
Eastern legends it is told that when a fearful murder has been committed, the
stars watch over the bloody deed and the dead man's grave, by night, and when
the stars are sleeping, the flowers watch. So, me thinks, it has been
with this crime. For nine long years the stars have been watching this
poor old man's grave, and the fatal gum tree has been keeping vigil,
too.
You are asked to give the prisoner the benefit of your doubts.
Doubt? 'Tis the defence of guilty minds. But what reasonable doubt
of guilt can there be in this case? Doubt fled from all minds two days
ago, and justice has taken its place. Take the case, gentlemen, and
render such a verdict as the testimony you have heard, the oath you have taken,
and the demands of justice shall seem to you to require.
The jury
then retired, but after a short time returned to the Court for
instructions. After again retiring, an interval of painful suspense
ensued, broken at length by the re-appearance of the jury. To the
important question, "have you agreed upon a verdict?" answer was
given, "we have." "Is the prisoner at the bar guilty or
not guilty?" "Not guilty." Judge Dickenson then
ordered the prisoner to be released and the jury discharged.
THE ARGUMENTS - We have given but a brief sketch of the arguments in the case
of Commonwealth vs. W.B. Foster. But one opinion can be entertained of
their ability. The prosecution showed good care and industry in the
preparation of the case. The closing argument of P.W. McKinny was a
splendid effort. Without seeming to rely upon the testimony alone, his
masterly use of the circumstances, seemed to invest all with terrible accuracy
and power. The very arguments of the defence were used against
them. At its close doubt indeed seemed to have fled from all minds.
Source:
The Charlotte Gazette, Smithville, VA., Thursday, June 25, 1874.
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
VIRGINIA: -- In the Clerk's Office of Charlotte
Circuit Court. In vacation, June 16th, 1874, Thomas B. Purcell and
others, Plaintiffs,
Against,
John C. Hamlett, jr., late adm'r of Walter Cole,
dec'd; Edwin Cole: Paul V. Adams, late sheriff of Charlotte, and as such adm'r
de bonis non of Walter Cole, Elmira Cole, late wife of Walter Col,e, dec'd.,
D.D. Burke and Viney his wife, formerly Cole and D.W. Cole, who was also
adm're de bonis non of P.W. Cole, dec'[d, and in his own right; A.B. Paris,
Trustee of Mrs. Hatchett; John T. Hatchett and -- Hatchett his wife; Joseph H.
Cutbutson; Josiah Vaughan, assignee in bankrupcy of D.w. Cole, dec'd, Defendants.
IN CHANCERY,
The object of this cross bill is to settle up
the estate of Walter Cole, dec'd, and subject the same, real or personal, or so
much thereof as may be necessary, to the payment of his debts.
And it appearing by affidavit filed, that the
defendants, D.D. Burke and Viney his wife, are non-residents of the state of
Virginia, it is ordered that they appear here within one month after due
publication of this order, and do what is necessary to protect their interests
in this suit.
A copy - Teste,
F.N. CARRINGTON, Dep. Clerk
J.M. BOULDIN, P.Q.
Source:
The Charlotte Gazette, Charlotte Court House, VA., Thursday, May 22, 1873.
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
LUNACY -- Sandy Pettus, colored, of Ronoke township, was examined before justices Moore, Morton and Sublett, on the 5th inst., pronounced lunatic. From the medical testimony, it appeared he was subject to attacks of epilepsy. He is to day carried to the asylum at Richmond.
Source:
The Charlotte Gazette, Charlotte Court House, VA., Thursday, June 5, 1873.
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
ACQUITTED -- Albert Barrett, tried at the County Court, before a colored jury, for felony, was acquitted, the evidence being merely circumstantial. He was ably defended by Messrs. Henry Watkins, and Paris. The Commonwealth's attorney, Wm. W. Woods, was assisted by J.M. Bouldin, Esq.
Source:
The Charlotte Gazette, Charlotte Court House, VA., Thursday, June 5, 1873.
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
LUNACY -- Mr. John M.
Lawson, of Aspenwall, was adjudged a lunatic by a board of magistrates,
consisting of Samuel Baldwin, C.M. Pugh, and R.F. Hutcheson, on Tuesday, and sent
to the asylum at Williamsburg. He was very reluctant to submit to this
judgment. Pecuniary difficulties, in connection with religious excitement
is supposed to be the cause of his derangement. He has been under
treatment before.
The special grand jury
found bills of indictment for felony against Albert Barrett, Walter Jenkins,
and Ben. Williams; for misdemeanor, Newton Wyatt, and William Goulding.
The grand jury also presented the contractor of the road from the
Courthouse to Drake's Branch, for not being the same in good order, as required
by law.
Newspaper: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, December 13, 1945
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
ORDER OF PUBLICATION
Commonwealth
of Virginia,
In the
Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Charlotte on the 11th day
of December, 1945.
County of
Charlotte, Virginia Plaintiff, against
Allen
Burrell, et als Defendant
The
object of this suit is to subject the real estate standing in the name of
Elvira Jeffress in Bacon magisterial District, Charlotte County, Virginia,
containing six acres, more or less, bounded on the south by the estate of
Matthew Hankins, on the west and north by Jim Thompson and on the east by the
lands of Howard Henderson, being the same land conveyed unto the said Elvira
Jeffress by deed from Bessie M. Hutcheson and husband, dated January 4, 1912, and
of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Charlotte County in
Deed Book 63 at page 235, to the lien of unpaid and delinquent taxes, penalties
and interest due the Commonwealth of Virginia, County of Charlotte and Bacon
District for the years 1926 and 1928 through 1945, inclusive, under and by
virtue of section 402 of the Tax Code of Virginia.
And an
affidavit having been made and filed that Jennie Burwell, defendant in said
suit, is not a resident of the State of Virginia and that there are or may be
other persons interested in the subject matter to be disposed of in said suit
whose names, numbers and whereabouts are unknown and cannot be ascertained, and
who are made parties defendant in the bill under the general description of
"Parties Unknown" it is ordered that the said Jennie Burrell and all
such unknown persons do appear within ten days after due publication hereof and
do what may be necessary to protect their interests in this suit.
A
Copy--Teste:
H.B.
CHERMSIDE, CLERK
?. Page
Morton ???
Newspaper: The Charlotte Gazette, Charlotte Court House,
VA., Thursday, December 28, 1893
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
Special
Notices
TO WHOM
IT MAY CONCERN:
The
undersigned having become the purchaser of lots No. 12, 39 and 40, in a plan of
lots in the town of Keysville, standing in the name of R.H. Gilliam, at a sale
of lands delinquent for taxes, February Court, 1892, hereby gives notice that
he will have the same surveyed by the Co. Surveyor on December 14, 1893,
according to law, and shall apply to the Co. Court for a title to the same at
the January term of the Court.
J.H.
INGRAM
Smithville,
Nov. 17, 1893.-dec.7-4t.
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, March 11, 1926
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
COURT NEWS
Commonwealth vs. H.C.
Hutcheson, violation of the State prohibition law. The accused entered a
plea of guilty and was sentenced to one month in jail and a fine of $50.00, but
the jail sentence was suspended upon execution of a bond in the penalty of
$1,000, by the defendant, with security, conditioned not to violate any of the
provisions of the State prohibition law for one year.
Commonwealth vs. Fitz
Mason and Joe Scott, violation of the State prohibition law. The accused
Fitz Mason plead guilty and elected to be tried by a jury; Joe Scott plead not
guilty and was tried by the same jury. Joe Scott was acquitted and Fitz
Mason received six months in jail and a fine of $50.00.
Commonwealth vs. Carson
Hubbard, transporting ardent spirits; the accused plead guilty and was
sentenced to three months in jail and a fine of $5.00.
Commonwealth vs. Floyd
Atkins, the accused plead not guilty; was tried by a jury and a verdict brought
in of one month in jail and a fine of $50.00.
Commonwealth vs. James
Waddill, transporting ardent spirits; the defendant plead not guilty, was tried
by a jury, and a verdict was returned giving the defendant three months in jail
and a fine of $50. Defendant moved to set aside the verdict of the jury
and grant hi ma (him a) new trial,
which motion was continued until the first day of May term, and the defendant
permitted to give bail.
A Nash automobile was
condemned as forfeited to the Commonwealth for being used for transporting
ardent spirits, subject, however, to a first lien in favor of J.T. Colgate for
repairs, etc.
A Chevrolet automobile
was condemned as forfeited ? Commonwealth, the same having been captured by the
officers with whiskey in it.
Several civil cases were
tried by juries; a great many chancery decrees were entered, and on Monday was
adjourned until the 16th inst., when an important civil case will be tried.
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, February 11, 1926
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
VIRGINIA: In the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Charlotte County.
R.S.
Weaver................Plaintiff
Vs. Order of Publication
C.W. Tucker, E.H. Hall
and S.T. Williamson, partners trading as Tucker, Hall and Williamson, and
Samuel C. Spain....Defendants
The object of this
action is to recover of the defendants the sum of TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS
($2,000.00) for the value of property belonging to the plaintiff and by the
defendants converted to their own use, and to attach, and subject to the
payment of said sum of TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS, the property of the defendants,
E.H. Hall and Samuel C. Spain, in the County of Charlotte, Virginia, and
particularly the following property of the said Samuel C. Spain, namely:
That certain real estate
which was conveyed to him by deed dated July 7th, 1921, from W.T. Pollard and
E.M. Pollard, C.W. Tucker, E.H. Hall, and S.T. Williamson, Deed Book 74, page
344, which real estate is described as follows:
All that certain tract
or parcel of land in Madison District of the County of Charlotte, Virginia, and
bounded as follows: Beginning in a hedgerow, at the Northwest corner of Lot 7
in the line of S.C. Spain (formerly Walter H. Pollard) near Wardsfork Creek at
Station A; thence up a branch, which is the north line of Lot 7 of the above
referred to survey, S.86 1-2 E. 13 3-5 poles, N. 74, E. 14 poles, N. 53 E. 12
poles, N. 85 E. 12 poles, N. 72 E 16 poles, to a point in the branch by an elm
at station B; thence a new line off from the branch, S. 4 E (crossing the
division line of Lots 7 and 8) 112 2-5 poles to a heap of stones in the old
line at station C; thence along the old lines (the notes of the above mentioned
survey) S. 60 W. 82 poles to Stones at Station D. N. 4 W. 137 poles (1060' plus
1200') to the beginning.
And affidavit having
been made and filed, according to law, that E.H. Hall and Samuel C. Spain are
not residents of the State of Virginia, and that service cannot be had on them
in this state, it is ordered that they do appear within ten days after due
publication of this order and do what is necessary to protect his interest in
this action.
The court having
prescribed no newspaper in which this and like orders shall be published, the
clerk doth direct that this order be published for four successive weeks in The
Charlotte Gazette, a newspaper published and "circulating" in the County
of Charlotte.
Given under my hand this
1st day of February, 1926.
H.B. CHERMSIDE, Clerk
Allen and Weaver, p.q.
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, February 11, 1926
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
ORDER OF PUBLICATION
In the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of the County of Charlotte on the 21st day of January, 1926.
P.B. Glinn, F.J. Glinn
and Rush M. Glinn, Plaintiffs; against Fannie Allen Glinn, Rochett Van Sicle,
Janie Baltzell and Mrs. Willie Proctor, defendants; In Chancery.
The object of this suit
is to effect a sale of two certain tracts or parcels of land lying in the town
of Keysville, Charlotte County, Virginia, containing 42 and 14 acres
respectively, of which the late G.R. Glinn died seized, and known as his
"Home Place' and to obtain a partition of the proceeds of the said sale in
accordance with the terms of the will of the said G.R. Glinn.
And an affidavit having
been made and filed that the defendants, Rochett Van Sickle, Janie Baltzell and
Mrs. Willie Proctor do appear withing ten days after due publication hereof,
and do what may be necessary to protect their interests in this suit.
A copy -- Teste:
H.B. CHERMSIDE, Clerk.
K.L. Woody, p.q.
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, February 25, 1926
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
TRUSTEE'S SALE
Of Six Room Cottage
House, 23 7-8 Acres of Land, Water Wheel, in Good Condition, and Other Flour
Mill Equipment
At Wren, Charlotte
County, Va., and better known as "Clay's Mill."
Pursuant to the terms of
a certain deed of trust from W.D. Sowell and Grace B. Sowell, to the
undersigned bearing date on the 3rd day of January, 1922, and of record in the
Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of Charlotte County, Virginia, in Deed Book
77, Page 446, default having been made in the payment of the debt thereby
secured, and being requested to do so by the holder of the said, debt, the
undersigned will on SATURDAY, MARCH 6, 1926, AT 11 A.M. upon the premises,
offer for sale at PUBLIC
AUCTION, to the highest bidder, in accordance with the provisions of the said
deed of trust the property thereby conveyed consisting of the following:
All of that certain
tract or parcel of land lying and being in Midway Magisterial District,
Charlotte County, Virginia, on the West side of Turnip Creek, adjoining the
lands of F.A. Mason and others and known as "Clay's Mill Tract",
containing twenty-three and seven eighths (23 7-8) acres, with building
situated thereon and appurtenances thereto belonging, which is the same identical
tract or parcel of land conveyed to the said W.D. Sowell from Fannie A. Rosser
by deed dated January 1, 1920, to which deed reference is here made for a more
complete description of the tract or parcel of land hereby conveyed.
The improvements on this
property consists of a nice 6 room cottage house with basement, in splendid
condition, rock and concrete mill dam, mill race, large steel water wheel, etc.
with adequate water supply for operating an up-to-date flour and grist mill,
and the location has long been considered one of the most desirable mill sites
in Charlotte County.
Responsible parties may
arrange terms with representative of State Bank of Pamplin on day of sale.
S.P. LOVING, Trustee
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, February 11, 1926
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
COMMISSIONER'S SALE
Under and virtue of a
decree of the Circuit Court of Charlotte County, entered at the January term,
1926, in the chancery cause of Andrew Bailey et al vs. Hamlet Bailey et al, the
undersigned will offer for sale at PUBLIC AUCTION on the premises at Rough Cree
(Creek), Va., on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY
16TH, 1926, at 11 o'clock A.M., the following described property, to -wit:
All of those two certain
adjoining tracts or parcels of land lying and being at and near Rough Creek, in
Madison Magisterial District, Charlotte County, Va., and containing 315 acres
in the aggregate, known as Hamiltons Tract and Noels Tract of which the late
Andrew Bailey died seized.
Terms one-third in cash
and the residue in two equal installments due in one and two years after date
of sale with interest from date, title to be retained until all of the purchase
money shall have been paid. Or all cash, at the option of the purchaser.
K.L. WOODY,
Special Commissioner
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, November 5, 1925
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
ORDER OF PUBLICATION
In the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of the County of Charlotte on the 8th day of October, 1925.
Arthur Johnson, who sues
for the benefit of himself and all other creditors of Daniel
Giles.......Plaintiff
???? against
Daniel Giles, Ida Giles,
Alfred Giles, Mattie Giles and Arvis Giles Defendants.
The object of this suit
is to subject the interest of Daniel Giles in a certain tract or parcel of land
containing 79 2-5 acres of which James Giles died seized, lying in Roanoke
Magisterial District, Charlotte County, Va. to the payment of a certain
judgment of record in the Clerk's Office of Charlotte County in favor of Arthur
Johnson against Daniel Giles and Cleophus Gaines in the sum of $100.m with
interest from November 24, 1925 and 10 per cent attorney's fees, as well as all
other liens of record against the said Daniel Giles.
And an affidavit having
been made and filed that the defendants Daniel Giles and Alfred Giles are not
residents of the State of Virginia, it is ordered that they do appear within
ten days after due publication hereof, and do what may be necessary to protect
their interests in this suit. And it is further ordered that a copy
hereof be published once a week for four consecutive weeks in the Charlotte
Gazette, a newspaper published in the County of Charlotte, that a copy hereof
be published in the County of Charlotte, that a copy be posted at the front
door of the Courthouse of this County on or before the ?????? 1925, that being
the next succeeding Rule day after this order was entered, and that the Clerk
mail a copy hereof to each of the said defendants to the postoffice (post office)
address given in the affidavit herein, and file a certificate of the fact in
the papers of this case.
A copy - Teste:
H.B. CHERMSIDE, Clerk
K.L. Woody, p.q.
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, November 5, 1925
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
ORDER OF PUBLICATION
In the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of the County of Charlotte, on the 16th day of October, 1925.
Andrew Bailey et
als..........Plaintiffs
against
Hamlett Bailey et
als..........Defendants
IN CHANCERY
The object of this suit
is to obtain partition in one of the modes prescribed by law among the parties
entitled thereto of those two certain tracts or parcels of land lying and being
in Madison Magisterial District, Charlotte County, Virginia, known as the
"Hamilton Tract" and the "J.A. Noel Tract", containing 315
acres, more or less, and being the same tracts or parcels of land assigned to
the heirs of Andrew Bailey Jr. in the chancery suit of J.H. White et als. vs.
Bailey et als.
And an affidavit having
been made and filed that the defendant, Alice Hall, is not a resident of the
State of Virginia, and that there are or may be parties interested in the
subject to be divided or disposed of in this suit, to-wit, the heirs, devisees
or alienees, made defendants under the general description of Parties Unknown,
do appear within ten days after due publication hereof and do what may be
necessary to protect their interests in this suit.
A Copy--Teste:
H.B. CHERMSIDE, Clerk
K.L. Woody, p.q.
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA., Thursday,
September 24, 1925
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
COMMISSIONER'S SALE OF
"CLIFTON HOUSE" IN DRAKES BRANCH
By virtue of two certain
decrees of the Circuit Court of Charlotte County, entered at the July term,
1923 and the September Term, 1925, in the chancery cause of Edward Arvin and
others vs. Mollie A. Smith's Exor, and others, we will sell on the premises at
Public Auction on
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY-THIRD
DAY OF OCTOBER, 1925, AT THREE (3) O'CLOCK P.M.
The following real
estate:
1st. All that
certain parcel of land situated in Central District, in the town of Drakes
Branch, Charlotte County, Virginia, composed of two lots, one of said lots
designated as Lot No. 21 containing 50 poles and the other of said lots
designated as Lot No. 22, containing one-half acre and on which said lot is
situated what is known as "THE HOTEL PROPERTY," called "THE CLIFTON
HOUSE"
2nd. Also those two
certain other lots of parcels of land in the town of Drakes Branch, containing
respective 3-4 of an acre and 1 6-16 acres, lying between the Southern railroad
right of way and Twitty's Creek.
The foregoing real
estate is the land owned by the late Mollie A. Smith at the time of her death,
and being the identical land devised to the said Mollie A. Smith by Pattie E.
Shaw by her last will and testament.
TERMS: One-third
cash, the balance in two equal installments payable in one and two years respectively
from date of sale, purchaser to execute his bonds for the deferred payments,
payable to said Commissioners with six per cent interest from date, payable
annually, and to carry insurance on the Hotel building in an amount
proportioned to its value, title to be retained until the whole of the purchase
price is paid.
GEO. E. ALLEN
BOYLAN GREEN
J. KENT EARLY
Special Commissioners
Source: The Charlotte Gazette, Charlotte Court House,
VA., Thursday, May 22, 1873
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
LUNACY - Sandy Pettus, colored, of Roanoke township, was examined before justices Moore, Morton, and Sublett, on the 5th inst., pronounced lunatic. From the medical testimony, it appeared he was subject to attacks of epilepsy. He is to day carried to the asylum at Richmond.
Newspaper: The Charlotte Gazette, Drakes Branch, VA.,
Thursday, May 4, 1933
Submitted By: Bea Adams King
Commonwealth vs Bernice Owen, burglary and larceny of
meat of one C.C. Foster. Convicted and sentenced to two years in the
peniteniary (penitentiary).
The case of Alonzo Newcomb who was on trial for
murder was continued until the July term of court, due to the absence of
material witnesses.
Stencil Arrington vs W.H. DeFord a case of
malicious prosecution, Arrington claiming that DeFord unlawfully
charged him with the stealing of some of his corn. At the magistrates
trial, Arrington was acquitted, and this suit was brought by him for
damages for reason of previous prosecution. The case was decided in favor
of the defendant.