A Guide to the Alleghany County (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1831-1913 Alleghany County (Va.) Chancery Causes

A Guide to the Alleghany County (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1831-1913

A Collection in
the Library of Virginia
Accession number 53639


[logo]

Library of Virginia

The Library of Virginia
800 East Broad Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219-8000
USA
Email: archdesk@lva.virginia.gov(Archives)
URL: http://www.lva.virginia.gov/

© 2023 By The Library of Virginia. All Rights Reserved.

Processed by: V. Brooks; J. Taylor

Repository
Library of Virginia
Title
Alleghany County (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1831-1913
Physical Characteristics
Digital images .
Collector
Alleghany County (Va.) Circuit Court.
Location
Library of Virginia
Language
English

Administrative Information

Access Restrictions

Alleghany County (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1831-1913, use digital images found on the Chancery Records Index available electronically at the website of the Library of Virginia.

Use Restrictions

There are no restrictions.

Preferred Citation

Alleghany County (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1831-1913. (Cite style of suit and chancery index no.). Local government records collection, Alleghany County Court Records. The Library of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, 23219.

Acquisition Information

Chancery Causes, 1831-1880 came to the Library of Virginia in transfer of court papers from Alleghany County in 2022 under accession number 53639.

Chancery Causes, 1881-1913 came to the Library of Virginia in transfer of court papers from Alleghany County in 2023 under accession number 53986.

Custodial History

Chancery Causes, 1831-1880 transferred to the Library of Virginia from the Circuit Court of Alleghany County in 2022 for processing and reformatting. Original Records returned to the locality in 2023 by request of the clerk of the Circuit Court.

Chancery Causes, 1881-1913 transferred to the Library of Virginia from the Circuit Court of Alleghany County in 2023 for processing and reformatting. Original Records returned to the locality in 2025 by request of the clerk of the Circuit Court.

Processing Information

Digital images for Chancery Causes, 1831-1880 were generated by Backstage Library Works through the Library of Virginia's Circuit Court Records Preservation Program in 2023.

Digital images for Chancery Causes, 1881-1913 were generated by Backstage Library Works through the Library of Virginia's Circuit Court Records Preservation Program in 2025.

Chancery Causes, 1831-1880 were processed by V. Brooks 2022-2023 and Chancery Causes, 1881-1913 were processed by J. Taylor 2023-2024

Chancery Causes, 1881-1913 underwent significant conservation due to large amounts of adhesive tape needing to be removed from the records.

When transferred to the Library of Virginia, the Alleghany County chancery causes were housed in Mylar sleeves and organized in 3-ring binders. Field processing staff in the courthouse ca. 1990 implemented this organization. An index was created for the binders using a File and Packet number as a reference. The File and Packet numbers have been retained after reprocessing at the Library of Virginia. They are indicated in the Local Case File Number (LCFN) field of the Chancery Records Index. Ex: File # 61, Packet # 1 recorded in LCFN as File 61-1.

Encoded by V. Brooks: August 2023; updated by M. Mason, August 2025

Historical Information

Context for Record Type: Chancery Causes are cases of equity. According to Black's Law Dictionary they are "administered according to fairness as contrasted with the strictly formulated rules of common law." A judge, not a jury, determines the outcome of the case; however, the judge is basing the decision on findings compiled and documented by Commissioners. Chancery causes are useful when researching local history, genealogical information, and land or estate divisions. They are a valuable source of local, state, social, and legal history and serve as a primary source for understanding a locality's history. Chancery causes document the lived experiences of free and enslaved individuals; women; children; people living with physical disabilities or mental health struggles; people living in poverty; defunct institutions and corporate entities; or those that may not have otherwise left traditional written histories.

Locality History: Alleghany County bears a variant spelling derived from the name of the Allegheny Mountains that pass along the county's western boundary. It was formed in 1822 from Bath, Botetourt, and Monroe (now in West Virginia) Counties. Subsequent additions were made from Monroe County in 1843 and Bath County in 1847. On 20 March 1991, the General Assembly authorized the consolidation of Alleghany County and the independent city of Clifton Forge into a new independent city of Alleghany. The citizens of both locales voted against the proposal on 5 May 1992, however, and the change did not take effect. In March 2001 Clifton Forge's citizens voted to relinquish city status, and Alleghany County regained the city (now town) of Clifton Forge on 1 July 2001.

Scope and Content

Alleghany County (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1831-1880, consists of cases concerning issues of equity brought largely by residents of the county and filed in the circuit court. These cases often involve the following actions: divisions of estates or land, disputes over wills, disputes regarding contracts, debt, divorce, and business disputes. Other less prevalent issues include freedom suits, permissions to sell property, and disputes concerning trespass. Predominant documents found in these chancery causes include bills (documents the plaintiff's complaint), answers (defendant's response to the plaintiff's complaint), decrees (court's decision), depositions, affidavits, correspondence, lists of heirs, deeds, plats, wills, records involving enslaved individuals, business records or vital statistics.

Development of the upper Valley of Virginia, both pre- and post-Civil War, is reflected in these records. Suits involving hotel, turnpike, and railroad companies are noteworthy. Additionally, some land disputes reference colonial patents and early land grants.

Nearly all suits heard before the court in the 1890s were debt related. This was likely due to a economic depression which began in 1893 and lasted for nearly four years. A conflict over the U.S. currency led to lenders calling in their loans on both a national and local level; the cases in Alleghany were mostly attempts to recover loaned funds.

As the iron industry developed, Alleghany Co. many mines and mining companies were created. The iron industry was the primary source of revenue for the county until the end of the iron era in the early 1900s. Many suits involve mining companies such as the Alleghany Iron Company or the Low Moor Iron Company as parties to the suit or provide information about mining and miners in nineteenth-century Alleghany.

Clifton Forge was a major railway depot due to its location as the dividing point for the Eastern and Western divisions of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad. Many suits relate to the effects of the railroad on the area, either involving railroad companies as parties to the suit or providing information on the businesses which developed as an effect of the railroad, such as the hotel industry.

Additionally, there is a box of Orphan Chancery material.

Arrangement

Organized by case, of which each is assigned a unique index number comprised of the latest year found in case and a sequentially increasing 3-digit number assigned by the processor as cases for that year are found. Arranged chronologically.

Arrangement of documents within each folder are as follows: Bill, Answer, and Final Decree (if found).

Related Material

Additional Alleghany County Court Records can be found on microfilm at The Library of Virginia web site. Consult A Guide to Virginia County and City Records on Microfilm.

Adjunct Descriptive Data

Location of Originals

Alleghany County (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1831-1913, are retained in the locality. Contact the clerk of the Circuit Court for access.

Selected Causes of Interest

Causes of Interest are identified by local records archivists during processing and indexing. These causes are generally selected based upon guiding principles of having historical, genealogical or sensational significance; however, determining what is "of interest" is subjective, and the individual perspective and experience of the describing archivist will affect the material identified.

1831-002: Abel Jackson etc. vs. George Mayse etc.

Contract suit. This case involves division of a large land patent originally granted by Governor Dunmore in 1773. Land was in Barbour County, then Bath County, and then Allegheny County.

1835-006: Exrs. Of Michael Mallow vs. Peter Pence etc.

Debt suit. This suit references contracts for constructing a number of miles of the Lexington and Covington Turnpike.

1835-014: William Robinson and wife vs. Adms. Of George Sively

Estate suit. Her father bequeathed Robinson's wife money, but the administrators say that Robinson refused to accept any notes except bank notes from The Bank of the United States.

1839-002: Robert Page vs. Mary Ker etc.

Debt suit. The chancery cause concerns land containing the Rumsey Iron Works.

1844-007: Gray and Parkey] vs. Henry Anderson and wife, etc.
Henry Anderson vs. Gray and Parkey

Debt suit. Suit is a simple debt suit, but contains information on the so-called "Saxon Colonization Project." Over one million acres in western Virginia and Kentucky were acquired from James Swann (Boston), alleged agent of Lewis Eisenmenger. Various members of French and German royalty were involved in the speculation scheme designed to settle poor people from Saxony on the Virginia frontier. In addition to Alleghany County [see also 1836-006, George Seivley vs. Charles T. Taylor, etc], several other localities have chancery causes related to land allegedly owned by Eisenmenger and sold by Swann [Bath County, Tazewell County, and Wythe County].

1874-008: Admr. Of John Larquey vs. John Kelly

Contract suit. The chancery cause concerns the construction of the Blue Ridge Tunnel.

1881-005: Hezekiah W. Massie vs. Rebecca G. Sturgess etc.

An estate case determining the correct partition of land. Included is a deposition which go in-depth into the efforts of providing care to a child who either died shortly after birth or was stillborn. It was legally relevant whether the child lived a short time, as the mother, who also passed shortly after the birth, was one of the inheritors of the estate and if the child had lived briefly, the father could inherit the land.

1884-013: Mary B. Hall vs. Ledford A. Hall

A debt suit which began after Ledford A. Hall proposed marriage to Mary B. Hall in order to coerce her into sexual intercourse. He abandoned her and married someone else, while Mary gave birth to an illegitimate child. She sued for damages and received a judgement in her favor. She filed this suit in a chancery court in order to force him to pay the judgement.

1887-011: Thomas H. Smith etc. vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad Co etc.

The plaintiffs built a hotel along the railroad and ran it for many years, until a second hotel was built nearby. The plaintiffs asked the court to shut down the second hotel, as there weren't enough travelers to support two hotels in the area.

1889-004: Roxanna Holland by etc. vs. B.F. Holland

A decree in this divorce suit includes custody information and what would today be called a "no-contact" order against B.F. Holland, restraining him from contacting both Roxanna and their children.

1892-001: Turner K. Hackman vs. Carrie M. Hackman

Turner Hackman sued for divorce from his wife Carrie M. Hackman because she had abandoned him and married another man. Further details reveal that they were married secretly in DC because both had jobs in the federal government (Turner was a page in congress and Carrie worked for the Department of Agriculture) and if they were found out to be married, Carrie would have lost her job. At some point, Turner chose to leave his job as a page in DC and move to Iron Gate, VA and Carrie chose to remain in DC. Soon after, Carrie left her job as a clerk in the DoA and married another man, before leaving DC for Philadelphia and Chicago. Carrie never responded to the suit and it was alleged she and her new husband were in Europe. Included in the suit is correspondence from Carrie to one of her coworkers about her choice to marry and leave her job.

1893-008: Adaline Hall by etc. vs. Austin Hall

Adaline Hall sued for divorce from her husband Austin after he contracted a venereal disease and infected her with it. Austin and Adaline were Black and one of the women Austin had an adulterous affair with was white.

1894-012: Admr. of E.T. Beard vs. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.

A suit filed to recover damages from the death of E.T. Beard which occurred while he was working on a Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Co. train.

1896-003: Lizzie Benton vs. Thomas Benton

Lizzie Benton sued for divorce on the grounds of adultery. Thomas Benton worked in the Low Moor Mines and had an affair with a woman there. Depositions provide information about gender expectations in mine towns.

1896-005: RL Parrish vs. The County of Alleghany etc.

In 1831, land was conveyed to acting justices of the peace and their successors of Alleghany County by Samuel Merry and Robert Kelso. The deed specified the land was to be used for purposes related to the law only. The Alleghany courthouse and jail were built on the lots and in 1853, Andrew Damron, a practicing lawyer, was allowed to build a law office on one of the lots with an annual rent of $1. The building was only to be used as a law office. RL Parrish, another practicing lawyer, purchased the office from Damron in 1874 and built an addition onto the office. The Board of Supervisors, in 1893, ordered the county to eject Parrish from the office because of the county's plans to use the land the office was on for other purposes.

1895-010: Clifton Forge Mining & Development Co. vs. Alleghany Iron Co.

Contract suit which contains extensive information on mining operations and geological formations in and around Alleghany County circa 1890s. Included are ore charts and land surveys done at the time.

1896-013: Clifton Forge Co. by etc. vs. S.M. Yost etc.

Debt suit which contains information on the final years of the "Valley Virginian" newspaper upon its removal from Staunton to Clifton Forge.

1897-007: L.A. Brizindine vs. Octavia Brizindine

L.A. Brizindine sued for divorce on the grounds of marriage under false pretenses. L.A. was threatened by Octavia's father because Octavia was pregnant with a child and alleged the child was L.A.'s. Her father threatened to have him charged with the crime of seduction, which could lead either a fine or prison time and as LA was too poor to afford a lawyer for court, chose to marry Octavia. He sued for divorce after Octavia continued to see other men.

1903-011: Mary M. Bowmen vs. John Kuhn

Contract suit. Bowmen owned a plot of land in Alleghany. After becoming engaged to Kuhn, she deeded the land over to him, at which point he left the state. She filed suit, alleging he had promised to marry her under false pretenses and with the intention of stealing her land.

1904-020: The Interment Co. vs. W.C. Hundley and wife

Business suit which focused on the Intermont Hotel in Alleghany and determining whether the new managers have allowed the hotel to fall into disrepair and moral decay.

1905-009: A.E. Harnsberger etc. vs. Walter K. Martin Jr etc.

A debt suit which contains extensive information about the effect of the 1890s economic collapse on land in Alleghany.

1906-007: G.H. Noble vs. Elizabeth E. Noble

G.H. Noble sued for divorce on the grounds of being married under false premises. Noble was forced to marry Elizabeth under threat of being murdered by her brother's in law. Elizabeth was pregnant at the time and Noble admitted to having intercourse with her, however after the baby was born months too early for him to be the father, he sued for divorce.

1908-009: John T. Delaney, Gdn vs. Bessie W. Patterson

This suit was filed by Delaney, the legal guardian of Bessie Patterson, a widowed woman under the age of 21. Delaney sought to use the remainder of Patterson's deceased husband's life insurance to invest in property on behalf of his ward. As Patterson was still a minor under the law, she had been appointed a guardian to handle her financial affairs despite having already been married and widowed. Depositions in the suit also provide information on Patterson's husband's death in a railway accident.

1910-001: J.R. McMunn vs. William M. England

McMunn made a noise complaint against England's bowling alley. Included is descriptions of who visited the bowling alley, how bowling was played in 1910, and how its location was detrimental to residents of the area.

1910-006: Petition of Emma James, admx.

Lawrence James, Emma James' husband, was killed after a boiler exploded at the West Virginia Pulp & Paper Company. Emma believed she had "no valid claim" to sue her husband's employer for negligence, but the company had agreed to give her money. The contract specified that by taking the money given to her by the company, she removed any present or future claims as to the company's liability in Lawrence's death.

1913-012: M.D. Miller etc. vs. John L. Murphy etc.

This debt suit is concerned with the sale of a property which was used as a "moving picture outfit" or a movie theater in Covington, Virginia.

1913-013: Commonwealth of Virginia vs. R.J. Barger etc.

A debt suit filed by the Commonwealth of Virginia for the costs of the prosecution against him for feloniously shooting at with the intent to kill two different men. The suit contains jury instructions which provide more information on the nature of Barger's felony assault charge.