A Guide to the Lynchburg (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1805-1945 Lynchburg (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1805-1945 117500-1175605; 1175783, 1175797, 1175999; 1176243-1176249; and 1176256-1176309; 1201596.

A Guide to the Lynchburg (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1805-1945

A Collection in
the Library of Virginia
Barcode numbers 1175000-1175605; 1175783, 1175797, 1175999; 1176243-1176249; 1176256-1176309; and 1201596.


[logo]

Library of Virginia

The Library of Virginia
800 East Broad Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219-8000
USA
Phone: (804) 692-3888 (Archives Reference)
Fax: (804) 692-3556 (Archives Reference)
Email: archdesk@lva.virginia.gov(Archives)
URL: http://www.lva.virginia.gov/

© 2006 By The Library of Virginia. All Rights Reserved.

Processed by: Greg Crawford and Catherine OBrion

Repository
The Library of Virginia
Barcode numbers
1175000-1175605; 1175783, 1175797, 1175999; 1176243-1176249; 1176256-1176309, and 1201596.
Title
Lynchburg (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1805-1945.
Physical Characteristics
301.70 cu. ft. (666 boxes)
Collector
Lynchburg (Va.) Circuit Court.
Location
Library of Virginia
Language
English

Administrative Information

Access Restrictions

There are no restrictions.

Use Restrictions

Patrons are to use digital images of Lynchburg (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1805-1829 found on the Chancery Records Index available electronically at the website of the Library of Virginia. There are no restrictions for post-1829 Lynchburg (Va.) Chancery Causes.

Preferred Citation

Lynchburg (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1805-1945. (Cite style of suit and chancery index no.). Local government records collection, Lynchburg Court Records. The Library of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, 23219.

Acquisition Information

These items came to the Library of Virginia in shipments of court papers from Lynchburg.

Historical Information

Lynchburg in Campbell County, was named for John Lynch, the owner of the original town site. It was established in 1786, was incorporated as a town in 1805, and became a city in 1852.

Scope and Content

Lynchburg (Va.) Chancery Causes, 1805-1945, are indexed into the Chancery Records Index . Cases are identified by style of suit consisting of plaintiff and defendant names. Surnames of others involved in a suit, including secondary plaintiffs and defendants, witnesses, deponents and affiants, and family members with surnames different from the plaintiff or defendant are indexed. Chancery causes often involved the following: divisions of estates or land, disputes over wills, divorces, debt, and business disputes. Predominant documents found in chancery causes include bills (plaintiff complaint), answers (defendant response), decrees (court decision), depositions, affidavits, correspondence, lists of heirs, deeds, wills, slave records, business records or vital statistics, among other items. Plats, if present, are noted, as are wills from localities with an incomplete record of wills or localities other than the one being indexed.

The collection includes chancery causes heard in the Superior Court of Chancery for the Lynchburg District seated in the city of Lynchburg between 1814 and 1831. The district consisted of the following localities: Amherst County, Bedford County, Campbell County, Franklin County, Henry County, Patrick County, Pittsylvania County, and the city of Lynchburg. Suits that originated in these localities are found in this collection.

The Superior Courts of Chancery were created in 1802 to expedite the hearing of chancery suits. Each court heard cases from the localities which constituted its chancery district. The court met at one location in the district and its records were kept in that one location. The Superior Courts of Chancery were abolished in 1831.

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.

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 is as follows: Bill, Answer, and Final Decree (if found.)

Related Material

Additional Lynchburg 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 .

See the Chancery Records Index to search for chancery suits of additional Virginia localities.

Additional Lynchburg chancery found in the Robert Alonzo Brock Collection on microfilm at the Library of Virginia.

Index Terms

    Corporate Names:

  • Lynchburg (Va.). Circuit Court
  • Subjects:

  • African Americans--History
  • Business enterprises--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Debt--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Divorce suits--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Equity--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Estates (Law)--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Free African Americans--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Land subdivision--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Geographical Names:

  • Lynchburg (Va.)--History
  • Lynchburg (Va.)-- Genealogy
  • Genre and Form Terms:

  • Chancery causes--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Deeds--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Judicial records--Virginia-- Lynchburg.
  • Land records--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Local government records--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Plats--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Wills--Virginia--Lynchburg.
  • Added Entry - Corporate Name:

  • Lynchburg (Va.) Superior Court of Chancery

Selected Suits of Interest

1814-001: Petition of Edmund Martin by c vs Lt. Joseph Barnett:

Plaintiff was underage when he enlisted in War of 1812. Parents want to prevent him from being forced back into service. Cause originated in Pittsylvania County

1815-002: Peter Detto vs Heirs of Caleb Tait, etc.:

Includes letter written from Huntsville, AL by Waddy Tate to his uncle Caleb in Lynchburg. References Andrew Jackson and the Battle of Horsehoe Bend.

1815-004: John Street vs Adms. of Champion Marable and 1815-009: Shadrack Corder by c vs Nathaniel Crenshaw, etc.:

Defendants in both causes took advantage of plaintiffs' weaknesses for card playing and alcohol to get them in debt.

1815-011: Widow of John Mitchell, Jr, etc. vs Admr. of John Mitchell, Sr.:

Dispute centered on land and enslaved people owned by Mitchell, Sr., in Culpeper County and Spotsylvania County.

1816-003: Thomas Johnson vs Isaac, an enslaved man:

Freedom suit. Cause originated in Campbell County. Isaac brought to Virginia from Chester County, South Carolina. Owner - Peter Corbell

1816-008: Anselm Clarkson vs Exr. of James Franklin:

Marriage contract dispute. Anselm Clarkson agreed to marry Polly Sullivan, the illegitimate daughter of James Franklin, if Franklin agreed to pay him the same sum of money he paid Benjamin Taliaferro who agreed to marry Franklin's other illegitimate daughter, Mildred (Milly) Taylor. Franklin failed to pay prior to his death the full amount owed Clarkson. The executor of Franklin's estate refused to pay Clarkson the amount owed. See also chancery cause 1817-028.

1816-014: Benjamin Terrell vs Patty Terrell, etc.:

The will of David Terrell used as an exhibit in the cause. Terrell wrote in his will that he sold an enslaved man anamed Billy around 1766 to Henry Stone. Terrell continued to write in his will that he visited Henry Stone's son who informed him Billy was now living in Tennessee in the possession of a stranger. Terrell wrote "(Billy) I desire may be diligently searched for as for hidden treasure and if found to be freed from slavery at the expence on the part of my estate …"

1817-013: Thomas Ward vs Meredith Lambeth, etc.:

Cause involves transportation of a family of enslaved people from Richmond to Lynchburg. One named Dixon attempted to escape. He was captured in Williamsburg.

1817-021: Young Shelton vs. Exrs. of James Callaway, etc. and 1817-022: Dudley Glass vs. Exrs. of James Callaway, etc.:

Both causes involves enslaved people hired out to work for Callaway and Early, an iron works business.

1817-028: Jeremiah Franklin vs. Sally Franklin:

The plaintiff promised to marry the sister of James Franklin. In return Jeremiah, could live on James Franklin's plantation without paying rent. Also, Jeremiah promised that after marriage he would not remove his family (James' sister and James Franklin's illegitimate daughters - Polly Sullivan and Mildred Taylor - whom James' sister was raising) would not move to North Carolina which Jeremiah wanted to do. Twenty years later, James Franklin died. Sally Franklin introduced a suit in Amherst County against Jeremiah for ownership of the property given to him by James Franklin. See also 1816-008.

1818-005: Paulus A.E. Irving vs. Samuel Garland, etc.:

Irving references his service in the War of 1812. A letter written by Irving used as an exhibit describes troop movements in Norfolk.

1818-016: Nathan Greer vs. Daniel Brown, etc.:

Plaintiff was accused by the defendant of beating and killing an enslaved person named Fanny. Affidavit and depositions reference the beating by Greer. Includes accounts related to hiring out of enslaved people and references family relationships of enslaved people.

1818-029: Jeremiah Gray vs. Elizabeth Gray:

Jeremiah was the brother of Elizabeth's husband Adin Gray. Jeremiah accused Elizabeth of selling and lending out of state (Maryland) enslaved people she received as part of her dower from her husband's estate. He claimed she violated an act of assembly passed in 1785. Consequently, Elizabeth forfeited her balance of the enslaved people. Also, the plaintiff argued that Elizabeth at age 80 was too old to manage his brother's estate and allowed it to go to waste. The cause includes depositions defending Elizabeth's ability to manage the estate claiming she regularly came the assistance of females in difficult cases. One deponent said that Elizabeth married Adin because she owed him 100 pounds for building a mill. She could not repay the debt so she agreed to marry him.

1819-007: Josiah P. Moon vs. Richard North, etc.:

The plaintiff served in the militia during the War of 1812. He references the British attack on Washington, D.C., during the War of 1812. He also references the British threat to Richmond and how the governor called out the militia to protect the city.

1819-012: Thomas Philips vs. Sarah Haynes, etc.:

Defendants were free African Americans emancipated by the will of Thomas Haynes of Bedford County: Sarah, Rachel, Harry, Peter, Ned, George, Isbell, Hannah, Milly, Flanders, Daniel, Anna, Washington, Pleasant, Polly, Caleb, Dinah, James, and Braxton. The cause stems from an ejectment suit the defendants won against the plaintiff in the Superior Court of Law of Bedford County in 1815. Philips wants the Superior Court of Chancery in Lynchburg to overturn the Bedford County court's decision. See also Bedford County Chancery Cause 1811-012: Sarah, a slave, etc. vs. Exr. of Thomas Haynes which is a freedom suit.

1819-015: Rev. Alexander Hay vs. John Ragland, Sr., etc. and Richard C. Moore, etc. vs. John Ragland, Sr.:

Evan Ragland devised land and enslaved people to William and Mary College and the Protestant Episcopal Church of Virginia in his will to fund a trust for the support of ministers of the Protestant Episcopal Church. Ragland's family contested the will. They refuse to relinquish the enslaved people and land to Ragland's executor. Richard Moore, a bishop in the Protestant Church, sued to gain control of the property and enslaved people. His complaint includes background information on the Protestant Episcopal Church.

1819-040: Moses Miller vs. Admr. of Thomas Miller:

Thomas Miller was an immigrant from Ireland who never became a citizen of the U.S. Owned considerable real property in Bedford, Franklin, and Montgomery counties. Miller also had considerable personal property. Thomas Miller was partners with his brothers in mercantile businesses. His family members wanted the court to divide his estate equitably.

1820-024: John Tayloe vs. William Willis, etc.:

Plaintiff accused the defendant of selling him two diseased enslaved people, Moses and Rebecka, who he referred to as "man and wife." Plaintiff was unaware of their illness when he purchased them. One of the enslaved people went blind. Depositions focused on his health. He may have suffered from cataracts. One of the deponents was Dr. Howell Davies, a prominent Lynchburg physician, who treated the enslaved people.

1820-058: Lynchburg Toll Bridge Co. vs. William Mitchell, trst., etc.:

Plaintiff wants the court to issue an injuction against the defendants in order to prevent them from building a free bridge across the James River. See also chancery cause 1823-011.

1820-059: Richard Pollard vs. Joseph Mozby:

Defendant is a free African American who owned property next to the plaintiff an built a hog house on it. Plaintiff claimed that fire from the chimney of Mozby's house posed a danger to his property.

1821-016: Anna Byrd vs. Exr. of William Byrd, etc.:

Cause involves descendants of Colonel William Byrd and Charles Carter of Shirey plantation. The will of Colonel William Byrd is an exhibit in the suit.

1821-020: John Stewart vs. Elisha Ryder, etc.:

Dispute over sale of a runaway enslaved person. Stewart gave Ryder a horse and a 150 dollar bond for the enslaved person.

1821-024: Robert C. Scott vs. John Garnier, etc.:

John Garnier failed to pay his share of the cost in purchasing a "stand of colors" for the cavalry troop in Campbell County. Garnier was of French nationality and believed to have returned to France.

1821-033: Charles Evans, etc. vs. Lewis B. Allen:

Freedom suit. Plaintiffs are enslaved to Lewis B. Allen. They claim to be free on the basis that their ancestor Jane Gibson was a Native American. The plaintiffs entered genealogical charts as exhibits. Also includes court documents from freedom suits initiated by Evans family members that were heard in other courts such as the Superior Court of Chancery - Richmond District and District Court of Richmond (City).

1821-070: Exrs. of George Herndon vs. Mary Justice, etc.:

A freedom suit appealed from the Pittsylvania County. The defendants (Mary and two of her children) won their freedom in the county court. The plaintiffs appealed the verdict to Lynchburg Superior Court of Chancery.

1822-018: Edward H. Carter, etc. vs. Hill Carter, etc.:

Cause involves the division of nearly one hundred enslaved people that were part of a trust fund set up by Edward Carter and William Fauntleroy for their descendants. Wills of Edward Carter and William Fauntleroy used as exhibits. Both requested the emancipation of some of the enslaved people. The cause also includes the division of enslaved people that list their names and value and member of the Carter family that received them. One of the defendants Otho Carter was the brother of the plaintiffs. He was identified as having a mental infirmity since infancy.

1823-039: John Alcock, etc. vs. Exrs. of William Cabell, the elder:

Cause involves division of enslaved peopleall who were descendants of an enslaved woman named Daphney. Her original owners were from Caroline County. They lived there in the 1750s. The cause lists the names of Daphney's descendants and to whom they were sold as well as their residences including Tennessee and North Carolina. Cause includes a list of Daphne's descendants and dates when they were born.

1823-042: Nelson Davis vs. Jonathan Brooks Dawson:

Davis and Dawson were the sons of Christopher Dawson with Davis perhaps being an illegitimate child by one of Dawson's enslaved people. Davis claimed their father left a will in which he gave Davis a sixteen year old enslaved person and other property. Jonathan Dawson denied his father ever wrote a will. The cause contains numerous depositions. One of the deponents was a woman named Nancy Davis who lived in the slave quarters and had twelve children by an enslaved person named Cupid.

1823-060: Philip Thurmond, etc. vs. Nelson Crawford, etc.:

Controversy over sell of enslaved people who were removed by purchasers to Tennessee.

1823-068: Joel Estes vs. Thomas Rawling, etc.:

Dispute centers over the sale of lots for a new town called Jackson on the Dan River in Rockingham County, NC. Plaintiff challenged the defendants' claim concerning the navigability of the Dan River south of Danville. Numerous references to the Dan River and comparing navigating it to other rivers in the region.

1824-001: John H. Smith vs. John Labby, etc.:

Cause involves an enslaved man named Squire, also called Squire Lacy, who was a waterman who could navigate the James River. Plaintiff hired Squire from defendants. He accused the defendants of fraud. The defendants claimed the Squire was healthy at time of sale but the plaintiff said he suffered from asthma and died from it a few month later. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff hired out Squire to remove rocks from the James River for the purpose of paving the Main Street of Lynchburg. While working in inclement weather, Squire became sick and died.

1824-012: Peachy Cash vs. George Campbell:

Cause involves beating of enslave person hired from defendant by plaintiff. Plaintiff claimed he had received defendant's permission to punish the enslaved person with twenty-four lashes to his back for killing plaintiff's dog. Defendant said he gave no such permission. Cause includes affidavits from individuals who witnessed beating.

1824-020: Admr. of Francis Miller vs. Exrs. of John Depriest:

Cause contains references to Depriest fleeing Virginia after stabbing the sheriff of Campbell County

1824-040: Joel Thacker vs. Jemima Jenkins, etc. and James Bruce vs. Joel Thacker, etc.:

One of the defendants in the first suit and the plaintiff in the second suit references a coroners' inquisition in which Joel Thacker was accused of willful murder of an enslaved female given to the defendant by Thacker's father. Thacker fled to the western country. Thacker filed his cause from Kentucky. The defendant further claimed that the coroner was cooperating with Thacker in pursuing the cause against the defendant. The coroner would receive half the proceeds Thacker would receive from winning the cause. The plaintiff in the second cause stated that the coroners' inquest disappeared from the clerk's office.

1824-056: Mark Anthony vs. James C. Moorman, etc.:

Plaintiff accused defendants of being in violation of a Campbell County court order forbidding them from building a dam for their grist mill. The defendants built the dam. The resulting high water behind the dam flooded an important road frequently used for seventy years, according to the plaintiff, by the citizens of Bedford, Franklin, Patrick, Pittsylvania, and Henry counties. Numerous depositions concerning roads and creeks in the area and the dam. Cause includes a plat.

1824-059: Alexander M. Clayotn vs. Robert Mitchell, etc.:

Cause involves division of enslaved property. A crude genealogical chart of the descendants of Joseph Woodson of Powhatan County found of back of bill of complaint.

1824-061: Morry Clark vs. Thomas A. Holcombe, etc.:

The plaintiff agreed to purchase enslaved person suffering from venereal disease from defendants on an installment plan. If the enslaved person died before the plaintiff made the final payment, the defendants agreed to accept the loss. According to the plaintiff, one of the defendants agreed to cover the medical expenses for treatment of the enslaved person but failed to do so. The plaintiff had to pay the medical expenses.

1824-062: Sterling Claiborne vs. Jabez Camden, etc. and Jabez Camden vs. Sterling Claiborne:

Cause involves the value of enslaved people. Correspondence written by Thomas Aldridge to Sterling Claiborne used as an exhibit. Aldridge informs Claiborne that he has an enslaved boy who he used as a spy to monitor the movements of other enslaved people.

1824-063: Elizabeth Boush Pollard by etc. vs. William Vaughan:

The will of James Hopkins used as an exhibit. Items he requested in his will include the emancipation of some of his enslaved property; the creation of a hospital on his property for the purpose of finding cures for consumption, the "yaws" or "lues venera", and kidney stones; and that his grandson Arthur Pollard, son of his daughter Elizabeth Pollard, change his surname to "Hopkins." If he does, Arthur would receive the whole of Hopkins' estate in Albemarle, Amherst, and Fluvanna counties. If he does not, he will receive nothing. James Hopkins' enslaved males were to be freed at age 45 and enslaved females at age 40.

1825-001: Joseph Dillard vs. Admr. of Thomas Clasby:

Plaintiff accused defendant of knowingly selling him an unhealthy enslaved person. The defendant wanted to be rid of the enslaved person because he regularly attempted to a run away. Depositions reference the health of the enslaved man and his attempts to escape enslavement.

1825-013: Exrs. of James Callaway vs. Exr. of Andrew Donald, etc.:

Callaway and Donald family were merchants. Callaway shipped deer skins to William Donald of Scotland to sell in England, Scotland, and Ireland in 1775. The Revolutionary War began; therefore, Callaway did not learn of the state of the transaction until years later. Callaway's estate is suing for the money owed to Callaway from the transaction plus interest.

1825-027: Polly Davidson alias Polly Wright, etc. vs. Thomas P. Wright, etc. and Prior Wright, etc. vs. Admr. of Thomas P. Wright alias Thomas Godsey, etc.:

Cause involves a dispute over the estate of Robert Wright, a free mulatto, who died at age 38. He owned a substantial amount of property (including enslaved people) in Campbell County that he inherited from his former owner and father Thomas Wright. His mother Sylvia was enlaved to his father. Polly Davidson was white and lived with Robert Wright as his wife. They had a child named Martha. Robert also had an infant son named Thomas from a previous marriage with a white woman named Mary Godsey. The family of Thomas Wright argued that Robert was never freed by their father; therefore, did not have legal right to the property. The cause includes numerous depositions regarding Robert and Polly's relationship and the will of Thomas Wright and his divorce from Mary Godsey.

1825-044: Mark Anthony, etc. vs. Abner Anthony, etc.:

Dispute centers over the sale of lots for a new town called Monroe in Pittsylvania County.

1825-049: Jonathan E. Cundiff vs. Dennis Kelly:

Plaintiff accused the defendant of fraud. Defendant claimed he could teach the plaintiff the art of distillation. It turned out to be untrue. Plaintiff accused the defendant of performing a "Yankee trick."

1825-055: Widow of Charles S. Johnston, etc. vs. Edward B. Victor, etc.:

Cause involves efforts of plaintiff to recover enslaved people. Plaintiff claimed the enslaved people were improperly sold. One named Peggy was a runaway who fled to Leesburg or Fredericksburg and passed herself off as a free person for about 5 years. She was found and returned to her owner. Cause references local trafficing of enslaved people.

1825-094: Elijah Weeks vs. Samuel Mitchell, etc.:

Plaintiff accused defendant of knowingly selling him an unhealthy enslaved man named Jim or James who was a blacksmith. He was blind in both eyes and suffered from venereal disease. Depositions reference the health of Jim and his skill as a blacksmith.

1826-054: Peregrine Echols vs. Exrs. of Thomas Leftwich:

The dispute centers on a enslaved woman named Betty, also known as Betty Flannigan, and her children. She belonged to Thomas Leftwich who gave her to his overseer James Flannigan. Betty lived with James Flannigan. Leftwich sold Betty and her children. Prior to their being sold, James Flannigan made an attempt to purchase Betty and her children in order to free them.

1826-086: Exr. of Anthony North, Sr. vs. Stephen Perrow, etc.:

Dispute involves an enslaved man named George. The defendant described him as "nothing more than a common plantation hand of the most indifferent sort. That he is roguish and addicted to running away." Cause includes depositions that reference George's habit of running away. One deponent testified that he spent more time in the woods than he did on the plantation. George suffered from frostbite during one of his attempts to runaway.

1827-001: William Robertson and wife vs. Exr. of Robert Burton, etc. and Thomas Bowles and wife, etc. vs. Exr. of Robert Burton, etc.:

Central question in this cause had to do with the status of two enslaved females, Jenetta and Myrtilla, that were part of Burton's estate. Jenetta was the wife of Thomas Bowles, a free African-American. The executor interpreted Burton's will as saying the enslaved women could hire themselves out to whomever they chose in order to support themselves until they married a free person. They would then receive a substantial legacy from Burton's estate. Moreover, they were to be emancipated as soon as the laws of the Commonwealth permitted it. The heirs of Burton did not agree with the executor's interpretation of Burton's will.

1827-023: Patsey Hawkins by c vs. William Hawkins:

Separate maintenance cause. Multiple depositions and affidavits reference infidelity and spousal abuse both verbal and physical.

1827-037: John N. Rose vs. Hill Carter, etc.:

John N. Rose sued the Carter family to recover wages owed to him for building an addition to the Carter home on Walnut Grove plantation in Nelson County in 1795. He built it for John Champe Carter and his wife Apphia. The reason the Carters gave for not paying Rose was that he never finished building the addition. Rose learned that the Carter family planned to auction eighty-eight enslaved people with proceeds from the sale to be divided among Carter family members. Rose wanted the court to have the Carters pay him what he was owed from the proceeds they receive from the sell of the enslaved people. Cause includes an inventory of enslaved people that list their names, age, and value. Unusual reference found in the deposition of Robert S. Rose. He was asked by the plaintiff if he knew Frank Floyd who was once owned by Robert's father and did he know what proportion of colored blood he has. Rose said that Frank was the son of Sarah Floyd who was the daughter of Betsey Dean, a mulatto. Her mother was black and her father was a white Englishman, an indentured servant to the deponent's grandfather. Sarah married a white man named Mitchel Floyd who died during the Revolutionary War.

1827-057: Lewis Wingfield vs. Hardin Hairston, etc.:

Plaintiff and defendants were involved in tobacco trade. Cause details their efforts to sell tobacco in New York City and Charleston, SC.

1827-061: Louisa Cockrane alias Lavisa Cockrane vs. William Graves, etc.:

Plaintiff was a free Afican American. She was suing to protect her property, land and a house, that she inherited from Richard Bennett, Sr.

1827-071: John Ward, Jr., etc. vs. Patsey Barbour, etc.:

Cause involves the toll bridge across Staunton River. It references the destruction of the toll bridge in 1816 due to high water only months after it was completed.

1828-007: James Brownlee and wife vs. William Harlow, etc.:

Cause involved a dispute related to the estate of Nathaniel Harlow. Brownlee was married to Harlow's daughter Susannah. He accused the defendants of denying his wife her fair share of her estate left to her in her father's will. The defendants' response was that Susannah was denied her portion of the estate because of her and Brownlee's bad character. They questioned the legitimacy of Susannah's marriage to Brownlee. At the time of their marriage, she was already married to James West who was still alive and resided in Kentucky. He was the son of an slaved person named Cillar. There are numerous depostions that attack Brownlee's character. Witnesses accused of him of murdering his first wife, being a drunkard, and operating a brothel out of his house in Waynesboro, Virginia. Witnesses describe Susannah as being "a large woman" who could not take care of herself. Brownlee hired people to assist him in taking care of her. Exhibits in the suit include Nathaniel Harlow's will, list of enslaved people owned by Harlow and their value, and James Brownlee and Susannah West's marriage certificate.

1828-015: John Cannaday vs. Cornelius Crow, etc.:

Cause involves dispute over sale of enslaved people. The cause includes depositions and affidavits that detailed the health of an enslaved woman named Sally prior to when she was sold. She lost an infant child prior to being sold.

1828-037: Cornelius Powell vs. David S. Garland and David S. Garland vs. Cornelius Powell, etc.:

Cause involves a disputed transaction of enslaved people. One was accused of attempting to poison her owner. The enslaved woman and her children were sold and taken out of the commonwealth to the "southern country."

1828-057: William Dickinson, Sr., etc. vs. Isaac Skillman, etc.:

Cause involves an enslaved man named Randal or Randolph who was a blacksmith. He was hired out to work at an iron works in Botetourt County where other enslaved people were forced to labor. He was convicted of stealing and hung. The cause includes depositions and affidavits regarding Randal's character.

1828-070: James Veach and wife vs. Exr. of William Brown, etc.:

Plaintiffs are free persons of color residing in the state of Ohio. Veach's wife was formerly Judith Brown. Her father's name was John Brown. The deceased defendant was her uncle who died in the burning of the theater in Richmond in 1811. Judith's grandfather and grandmother lived in Scotland.

1829-002: George Washington Taylor vs. Albon McDaniel, etc.:

The defendants owned a shipping business that operated on the James River. They used enslaved people as boatmen and navigators.

1829-019: James Bullock, etc. vs. Achilles M. Haden:

Plaintiff wanted the court to issue an injunction to prevent the defendant from removing an enslaved person from the Commonwealth. The defendant was a trader in enslaved people.

1829-035: Andrew Moreland vs. Elijah Fletcher, etc.:

The plaintiff accused one of the defendants, Nancy Shields, of fraudulently hiring out an enslaved person to him. She knew the enslaved person suffered from the "King's Evil" or scrofula.

Significant Places Associated With the Collection

  • Lynchburg (Va.)--History
  • Lynchburg (Va.)-- Genealogy