Court of Pleas & Quarterly Sessions

CHATHAM COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

Pre-1868, the County Court of Pleas in North Carolina, staffed by Justices of the Peace, ruled on or supervised:
1) bonds, apprenticeships, & orphan cases (see Orphan's Indentures & Apprenticeship Bonds & Guardian Accounts)
2) construction and maintenance of public bridge, roads, and buildings
3) distribution of tavern, mill and ferry licensing
4) determining the required number of sheriffs
5) cases involving 40 shillings to 20 pounds
6) minor civil/criminal cases
7) taxes collected by sheriffs
8) settling of estates
9) freedom of slaves
10) illegitimacy

The surviving volumes of country court minutes are indexed and held in the North Carolina State Archives.

1774-1779

Transcribed by Joe George ➚

p 8
"Deed of Trust from Nathan'l Brewer to Richard Kennon & Co. proved by John Auld."

p 11
"Deed of Trust from Henry Brewer to William Johnston, proved by Vachael Clark."

p 18
"Deed from Elnathan Davic to Daniel Brewer Ack'd."

p 24
"In the suit Philip Jones ag't Wm Maccomock the following Jury Sworn Viz. Benja. Watts, William Petty Jun'r, Joseph Brantley, James George, Gilburd Patterson, Henry Brewer, Richard Parker, Nimrod Burk, Vincent Self, William Lasiter, John Nall & John Montgomery."

p 95-96
"Any twelve of the following persons be a Jury to lay out a road the best way from James Williams's Ferry into the road leading from the Island ford to Hillsborough Viz. Charles Morgan, Edward Edwards, James Rigsby, John Herndon, Luke Bynum, William Griffen, Wm. Snipes, Joseph Rosser, Oliver Brewer, Henry Brewer, Isaiah Hogan, James Kirby, Rich'd Parker, Christopher Kirksey, Isaac Kirksy, John Hatley, and Edward Tatum."

p 96 (included for the sake of interest)
"Mr. Isaiah Hogan unanimously appointed Sheriff of this County... Roger Griffith qual'd as Deputy Sheriff of this County."

p 102
"Oliver Brewer appointed overseer of the road from James Williams ferry into the road leading from the Island ford to Hillsborough Viz. Robert Moseley (Moseby?), Henry Brewer, James Powell, Thomas Powell, John Trip, John Hatley, Gideon Kirksey, Isaac Kirksey, Elias Smith, James Smith, James Smith, Carp., Peter Bray, Wm. Ramsey, Crosender Smith, Moses Smith & Richard Smith, work under the said Oliver Brewer."

p 130
"Gideon Goodwin, Gray Barby, Presley George, Jas. Bell, Joshua Rosser, William Snipes, Henry Bray, Josiah Rogers, Thomas Blackston, Thomas Brooks, Isaac Brooks, Benjamin Watts, William Halone, Richard Bohannon, John Brantley, William Daniel, David Mattock, Philemon Lacey, Thomas West(dry Creek), Samuel Stewart, Henry Crutchfield, Francis Dosset, Joseph Kirk, George Kirk, Thomas Beal, Aaron Evans, Hugh Peoples, John Pile Jun’r, John Done, Peter Sinclair, Morgan Mintor, James Ashmore, Samuel Holaday, Reubift Landrum, John Philip Hartso, John Booker, James Petty Sen’r, William Wilkie, Stephen Rigdon, John Moore, Ambrose George, James Massey, John Smith, Oliver Brewer, George Herndon and Robert Petterson, Be summond by the Sheriff Co attend as Jurors at the next Court to be held in May next."

p 201
"Any twelve of the following persons be a Jury to lay out a road from the Oar hill down by the furnace ‑ down to the Iron works on Deep river Viz. John Wilcox, Stephen Powell, John Poe, William Duncan, John Bryant, Absolam Bryant, Christopher Smith, Thomas Taylor, Richard Taylor, Henry Welsh, Richard Gregory, Isaac Brooks, Balaam Thompson, John Brewer, William Brewer, and Daniel Brown."

Orphan's Indentures & Apprenticeship Bonds

Orphan's Indentures were also known as Apprenticeship Bonds, as the master therein named agreed to teach the child a trade. Note that an orphan was, until the early 1900's, considered to be any child whose father had died; whether or not his or her mother was still living was irrelevant in the definition.

Because the indenture was only in effect only until the child reached the age of 21, these records can be useful in pinning down the approximate birth year of an ancestor. They can also tell us roughly when one of the parents died, and in which county the family lived at that time.

Conditions of the contract between the master and the county commissioners:

1) The orphan could chose the master or trade if over 14 years of age. Otherwise it was decided by the court.

2) The master promising to feed and clothe the orphan, and teach him or her a trade.

4) The child was usually unpaid and not allowed to marry during the contract's duration without permission.

5) At the conclusion of the indenture the child would receive material compensation of some sort, such as a suit of clothing or a bit of money.

Reasons for a child to be bound out:

1) Both parents were deceased and the child was under the age of 21

2) One parent had died and the other could not, or would not, support the child.

3) A child's father died and later, when the mother remarried, the step-father did not wish to take on the child.

Reasons for conclusion of an Apprenticeship Bond:

1) A step-father assumed custody

2) The master declared that he could no longer support the child

3) The child could prove that the master was abusive or not fulfilling his contract and a new master was named

4) The child reached the age of 21

Guardian Accounts

Guardianship had more to do with managing the orphan's inherited property than it did the day to day raising of the child. Remember that an orphan was, at that time, considered to be a child whose father had died. Thus, his or her mother might still be living. The orphan's mother or another relative would usually tend to the child's actual care. Orphans and Guardians ➚ is a very informative article outlining the specific details regarding guardianship in the colonial era.

An orphan's legal guardian was often a well-to-do neighbor who was in close enough proximity to effectively oversee operations, or else an impartial relative who did not have personal interest in the property. The child could pick his or her guardian if over 14 years of age, so long as the person chosen was approved by the court.

Requirements of a guardian:
1) Represent the child in legal matters
2) Manage and improve the orphan's property
3) Give an annual accounting of the property's income and expenses
4) Use the property's profits to financially fund the child's education and physical needs
5) Impartial, with no personal interest in the property (for this reason, rarely would a step-father be approved)
6) Able to post a bond equal to the property's value (for a wealthy child, only a wealthy man could afford this)

CHATHAM COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

GEORGE³ BREWER (OLIVER², GEORGE¹)

Court Session of May 1797, p 139 

"John Crow is appointed guardian of George Brewer, having given Bond in the sum of four hundred pounds with John Ferington, security..."
Source - Orphan's Indentures & Guardianship Records in Court Minutes, transcribed by Sue Ashby ➚

Note that George's mother probably initially had custody as well as guardianship of him, as indicated in his father's will 14 Oct 1791, also in Chatham County, North Carolina. "... I give to my beloved wife Rebecah Brewer the plantation whereon I now live during her natural life and widowhood and all the land of this side Ward's Branch joyning the plantation and after her decease to my son George Brewer to his heirs and assigns forever..."  

Such wording was common at that time. It generally meant that the widow would remain on the main estate, that the named son would remain with and/or care for her, and that this portion of the plantation would eventually fall to him. This, and the fact that she was named as one of the executors, suggest that, until her death, she had the legal right to maintain control of the portion of the estate that he would inherit. Perhaps John Crow took guardianship after she died or remarried.

It can also be assumed that George was the youngest son, since no others were appointed guardians. All of his sisters, save Frances, whether younger than him or not, were already married, according to their father's will. Another indication that he was the youngest son is that he was last in the list of sons, in the portion of the will which divides up the remainder of the property. The responsibility of taking care of one's mother, during her widowhood, on the home place also often fell to a younger son since he did not yet have his own land. A transcription of the will can be found at An Arkansas Connection ➚

Court Sessions of Feb 1798, p 176 

"An acc't of monies retn'd by John Crow, guardian of George Brewer from the Exec'trs of Oliver Brewer was returned & ordered to be recorded."

Source - Orphan's Indentures & Guardianship Records in Court Minutes, transcribed by Sue Ashby ➚

Since he was still under the guardianship of John Crow, it can be safely concluded that George Brewer was under the age of 21 in Feb 1798, putting his birth date after Feb 1777.

Court Sessions of Feb 1800, p 251
"An account of John Crow guardian of George Brewer, minor orphan of Oliver Brewer, dec'd returned in court of oath."
Source - Orphan's Indentures & Guardianship Records in Court Minutes, Chatham County Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions- 1774-1800, Vol 1- 1774-1779, North Carolina State Archives film #C.022.30001, transcribed by Sue Ashby ➚

As a minor, he was still under the age of 21 in Feb 1800, putting his birth date even later, namely after Feb 1779.

Aug 1802, p 7
"George Brewer, Orphan of Oliver Brewer - John Crow, Guardian - Aug 1802"

Source - Guardian Accounts- 1800-1830, Chatham County, Volume A, transcribed by Sue Ashby ➚

Again, George was still under the age of 21 by Aug 1802, indicating that he was born after Aug 1781. So you can see how these records can help narrow down an ancestor's birth date. Thus, he could have been 10 years old or younger when his father's will was written in 1791. His father's estate, at that time, included land and also at least one slave. At the time of the 1790 census, Oliver had 3 slaves. Perhaps the other two had been sold or given to other children, or were a part of the main estate which his widow took charge of, and which George later received.

Circuit Courts

BENTON (LATER CALHOUN) COUNTY, ALABAMA

Williams & Smart, Plaintiff (physician's office)
vs.
Henry H Sutton, Defendant (Isaac Brewer’s lawyer & trusted friend)

Basically, it appears that what happened is Williams & Smart sued Henry H Sutton for Isaac Brewer's medical expenses. Why they thought Henry was responsible for those costs, I am not sure. Perhaps, as a friend, he had asked the doctor to visit Isaac and tend to him. Henry said he didn't owe the money. A constable confiscated Henry's bay horse, that it might be sold to cover the medical expenses. Henry fought the proceedings and was able to gain the sympathies of a higher judge who called for a halt in the case until an investigation of the circuit court proceedings could be made. Another man complained that he never signed one of the bonds with Henry Sutton, but the court was expecting him to pay costs even though he wasn't even aware that the document existed. There was evidently another man by the same name. The first also called for a halt to the charges against him and asked for a new hearing. I don't know what came of this case, which dragged on from 1853-1856, except that Henry H Sutton was in jail by 1860 on felony charges, the jail being in the back of Constable Fielding Love's house.

The following is a summary of Henry Sutton's file. My full transcription will be available soon, taken from photocopies of documents which I obtained while visiting the Anniston Public Library in Calhoun County, Alabama. Included in the PDF will be scans of these photocopies. (link coming)

1853

November 16
S C Williams & E S Simmons give bond of $62 to Henry H Sutton because of alleged debt of $31.20 he owes the Williams & Smart physician office, which puts a lien on Henry’s property if he doesn’t pay cost and damages. If the plaintiffs decide the charges are false, and pay Henry for damages, the bond is void.

Stephen C Williams, of Williams & Smart, gives affidavit before E P Gains, JP, that Henry owes $31.20 on account at the firm, and that he has assets with which to pay, but withholds them. They are suing in order to harass him into paying his bill. (Book K, pages 552-553)

E P Gains, JP, commands any constable in Benton County to confiscate enough of Henry’s estate to cover the $31.20 owing, and then to report back to E P Gains in Oxford the 1st Saturday in December (Dec 3rd), which is about 2 weeks later

November 17
Constable Martin Owens receives command (attachment)

November 18
Constable Martin Owens imposes something (order of confiscation?) on Henry’s bay horse (Book K, page 553)

Henry H Sutton and Joseph Jones give bond of $70 to Williams & Smart, to be paid if Henry doesn’t deliver his bay horse to Constable Martin Owens at Oxford the 1st Saturday of December (Dec 3rd) to cover the $31.20 allegedly owing (Book K, page 555)

November 19
J B Starnes, JP, authorizes constables in Talladega County to confiscate the horse (Book K, page 553)

December 3 ?
An account is given of the cost of medicine for, and visits to, Isaac Brewer. The Transcription includes the title of “Henry H Sutton to Williams & Smart Dr”. The dates of the visit were March 31, April 2, 10, 17, 28, and May 3 and 5. The total costs amounted to $29.25 + Interest as of Dec 3 of $2.15 = $31.40

December 12
Constable Fielding Love reports to E P Gains, JP that the horse is worth the $31.20 + $3.75 additional costs accrued. Any constable of Benton County is commanded to advertise the horse for sale and then sell it to the highest bidder, to recover said costs, and then report back to E P Gains, JP, on how the sale went

Williams & Smart produces the account for $31.20 before E P Gains, JP, but Henry will not agree to his demands, so the JP’s verdict is that they have the right to collect the money ($31.20 + $3.75) from Henry

December 13
Henry appears before the Benton County Probate Judge, Alex Woods, and states that the suit filed against him is really for a debt owed by someone else, and that Constable Fielding Love has orders to sell his property. Henry asks for a Writ of Certiorari and a Writ of Supersedeas, demanding that the circuit court stop proceedings so that a higher court can investigate the lower court to ensure that the case is handled properly.

Probate Judge, A Woods, expects the clerk of the circuit court to issue a Writ of Certiorari and to bring a full transcript of all papers and proceedings in the case to the next circuit court session

Henry H Sutton and K C Lively sign a Certiorari Bond to Williams & Smart for $70, basically stating that he has obtained Writs of Certiorari and Supersedias (proceedings will halt and an investigation will be done), and that the bond is void if he pays the costs that he allegedly owes.

The Clerk, G B Couthit, gives written command to E P Gaines, JP, to immediately halt all proceedings and to bring this letter to the circuit court 3rd Monday in March. It is specifically stated that Henry has given bond, as required by the law, so they must stop proceedings.

December 14
E P Gains, JP, agrees to halt proceedings (Book K, page 556)


1854

April 13
Any constable of Talladega County is to summons J B Starnes, JP, to appear in court the 4th Monday in April (24 Apr). He is to speak the truth in behalf of Williams & Smart. Hugh Montgomery J P was the witness to this summons. Montgomery is later said to be the attorney of Williams & Smart.

April 15
J B Starnes, JP, accept the subpoena to appear in court for 3 days

August 3
Henry H Sutton, Philip S. Lively and B. G. Moon give bond for $70 to Stephen C. Williams and John Smart. The documents state that Henry has obtained Writ of Certiorari & Supersedias, and that the bond is void if Henry decides to pay the costs he allegedly owes. The witnesses were Robert Flowd JP and A. B. Jenkins JP.

October 10
The suit is pending in the Benton County Circuit Court by an appeal. Henry requires that Williams & Smart produce the original book showing the original entries of the account for which he supposedly owes. Henry’s attorneys are Martin & Forney.

October 18
Notice given to Williams by A Brown and F Love


1855

April 23
Fall term verdict filed against Henry Sutton, Philip S Lively and Bolar G Moon, stating that Bolar Moon didn’t sign his name to the Certiorari Bond, or authorize his name to be signed. Moon stated that judgement was rendered wrongly against him because of this, and the attorney for Williams & Smart, H Montgomery agrees.


1856

February 20
A statement by Bolar G Moon is addressed to Thomas A Walker, judge of the 5th Judicial Circuit Court stating that judgement was rendered against him 27 Oct 1855 for $39.24 plus costs. The Certiorari Bond of Henry Sutton, Philip Lively and Bolar Moon is introduced as evidence. Moon states that he never signed the document, but that an alias was discovered by Clerk G B Clouthit 21 Nov 1853. Perhaps this is the man who signed it instead of him. A side note states that 21 Nov 1856 the original execution of the case was placed in the hands of Sheriff Alex Brown of Benton County, and Moon thinks that Williams & Smart are trying to alter the court process. Moon says that the bond is fraudulent, as per his signature. He wants proceedings halted and a new hearing to be set.

Bolar G Moon, B C Sparkes, Thomas Mountain, and P J Cherolm give bond to Stephen C Williams and John Smart $151.18, to secure an order from Thomas A Walker, judge of the 5th Judicial Circuit Court, to have a new hearing. Judgement had been ruled against him 27 Oct 1855. If he pays costs at final hearing, the bond is void.

Bolar G Moon appears before G B Clouthit, Circuit Court Clerk and swore that his statement is true, that he didn’t sign the bond, or authorize his name to be signed. The document is signed by B Fellows. Below that, Thomas A Walker, judge of the Circuit Court, tells the clerk of the court to issue a supersedeas (requiring a higher court to suspend the proceedings of the lower court). Moon had given a bond for double the amount owing, to be paid to Williams & Smart in this final trial against him, in order to secure this Writ of Supersedeas.