Plff
vs

Action of
in the circuit Court
of the County of
Saint Louis ,
November Term
A.D. 1835

Action of Trespass on the case upon promises
County of Saint Louis , to wit ss.

James Adams Plaintiff complains of Benja
min L.E. Berneville of a plea of tres
pass on the case upon promises for that
whereas the said defendant heretofore
to wit an on the third day of septem-
ber in the year of our Lord one thou-
sand eight hundred and thirty five
at the county of Saint Louis was
in debted to the defendant in the sum
of five hundred Dollars of lawful
money of the United States for work
labor and services before that time
done and performed by the said
plaintiff for the said Defendant
and at his special instance and
request and being so indebted he the said
defendant in consideration thereof after
wards so wit on the day and year
last aforesaid at the county aforesaid
undertook and then and there faithfully
promised the said plaintiff to pay him
the said last mentioned sum of money
when he the said Defendant should be
thereunto afterwards requested.

For that whereas also the said defendant
Heretofore to wit on the twenty second day of February
in the year of Our Lord one Thou
sand eight hundred and thiry two
to wit at the county of Saint Louis
aforesaid,
made his certain agreement
in writing (to wit by & through Rene
Powell his agent, to wit the Defendants,
agent thereunto by him lawfully au
thorised) bearing date the
day and your aforesaid and thereby
then and there agreed to hire the
aforesaid plaintiff as a hand
to serve to wit to do certain work labour and
services for him the said
Defendant about his business
to wit the business of the said
Defendant for the space of
eighteen months to begin from the first
day of March in the year of Our Lord
one thousand eight hundred thirty two
and the said plaintiff did do
and perform all in his part
to be done and performed by the
said contract untill such
time

to with at the county of
Saint Louis when he was against his own will and
duly discharged from
his said work labour and services
which he had untill then per
formed and which he still
held himself ready to and desired
to and offered to perform and
do in accordance with writ the contract

aforesaid by
a person by the defendant afore
said duly authorized to discharge
him the said plaintiff as aforesaid
and the said plaintiff being so
discharged as aforesaid was
sent home so wit

at to wit the
county aforesaid and from the
time of plaintiffs discharge as
aforesaid he hath held himself
ready to do & perform every thing on
his part to be done and performed
in accordance with said contract
and hath desired and offered to
do the same to wit at the county
of Saint Louis aforesaid,
And the said Defendant by the
said contract promised to pay the
defendant certain moneys to the
said plaintiff to wit wages for the
said eighteen months aforesaid at the
sale of two hundred a year, the
said plaintiff having faithfully re
ramined in the service of the defen-
dant during the eighteen month aforesaid
to wit at the court of aforesaid
such time as he was duly discharged as aforesaid
which
money & the de
fendant applied
at the counting
room of Rune Paul
the defendants agent
in St. Louis on
the 2nd day of september
in the year of our
Lord one thousand eight & thirty five at the county of Saint Louis
there issued same
By means whereof and force of
the statute in such case made and
provided the said defendant then & there became liable to pay to the said plaintiff the
said sums of money in the said
contract specified according to
the tenor and effect of the said
contract and being so liable be the
said Defendant in con
sideration thereof afterwards to wit
as the third day of september and year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred & thirty five aforesaid at
the county aforesaid undertook and
then and there faith fully promised
the said plaintiff to pay him the
said sum of money in the said
in writing specified
to wit the sum of three hundred Dollars
according to the tenor and effect
thereof

And whereas also the said defendant
afterwards to wit on the third
day of september in the year of
our Lord one thousand eight hun
dred and thirty five at the county
aforesaid accounted with the
said plaintiff of and concering
divers other sums of money from
the said Defendant to the plaintiff
before that time due and owing
and then in arrear and unpaid
and upon that account the said
defendant was then and there found
so be in arrear and indebted
to the said plaintiff in the farther
sum of three hundred
Dollars
of the lawful money, and being
so found in arrear and indebted
as last aforesaid he the said defendant
in consideration thereof afterwards
to wit on the same day and year

last aforesaid at the county aforesaid
undertook and then and there faith
fully promised the said plaintiff
to pay him the said sum of money
last mentioned, whenever after
wards he the said defendant
should be thereunto requested
Nevertheless the said defendant not
regarding his said several promises
and under takings but
and fraudulently intending
and to deceive and defraud
the said plaintiff in this behalf
hath not as yet paid the said
serveral sums of money or any
or either of them or any part
thereof, to the siad plaintiff
although often requested so to
do and athough he the said
defendant afterwards to wit on
the third day of September
in the year of Our Lord one thou
sand eight hundred and thirty
five at the county aforesaid
was requested by the plaintiff so
to do, but the said defendant
to pay him the same hath hitherto
neglected and refused and
still doth neglect and refuse to
wit to the damage of the said
plaintiff of two thousand Dollars
and therefore he brings his suit

Primm & Mullanphy
atty for Plaintiff-

County Of St. Louis , Sct.
State Of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St. Louis CountyGreeting.

We command you to Attach Benjamin L. E. Bonneville
by all and singular his lands and tenements,
goods, chattels, moneys, credits, and effects, or so much thereof as shall be
sufficient to secure the sum of Three Hundred dollars
with interest and costs of suit, in whose
hands or possession soever the same be found, in your bailiwick, that the said
Benjamin L. E. Bonneville
be and appear at the next term of the Circuit Court , before the Judge thereof,
on the first day of said term, to be holden at the city of St Louis , within
and for the county of St. Louis , on the second Monday of November next
then and there to answer unto James Adams
of a plea of trespass on the case upon promises
to the damage of said plaintiff of Two thousand
dollars: And also that you might summon all and every person, in whose
hands or possession soever, any such lands, tenements, goods, chattels, moneys,
credits or effects may be found, and particularly Peter Powell and
Joseph Powell that they be and appear
before the judge of our said court, on the first day of the term aforesaid,
then and there to answer unto what may be objected against them; and have
you then there this writ.

Witness, Archibald Gamble , Clerk of our
said Circuit Court , at the City of St. Louis , this Tenth
day of September in the year of our Lord
one thousand eight hundred and thirty five Archibald Gamble Clerk C.C.

Executed this writ by reading it and the declaration
to Peter Powell and Joseph Powell on the 10th Sept
1835 in the County of St Louis and Summoned them
as Garnishee by declaring to them in the presence
of David Lamont who is a creditable person of the
neighbor head that by virtue of this said writ
I did attach in their hands all the lands
tenements goods Chattets Monies Credits and
Effects of Benjamin of L E . Bonneville the depts.
herein

J Brotherton Shff
by G Hammond Depty Service 2.00

No 35 Saint Louis Circuit Court
November Term 1835 James Adams
vs Attachment
Benjamin L. E. Bonnevilee
Peter & Joseph Powell Garnishees

No 35
Saint Louis Circuit Court
November Term 1835

James Adams
vs
Bonneville

3 Counts
Damage $ 2000
attachment
to be
Peter & Joseph Powell
to be garnisheed
Primm & Mullanphy
for plaintiffs

Filed 10th September 1835 A Gamble Clk

The plaintiff is within action of assumpset
deposeth and sayeth that the defendant in
within action is justly indebted to the said
plaintiff in a sum exceeding the sum of fifty
Dollars to wit in the sum of three hundred
dollars that such deponent verity be
lieves that said defendant is not a resident
of or residing within this state and that he
has so absented himself from this state that
the ordinaty process of law cannot be arved
on him.

Sworn to and subscribed before
me this >10th day of September 1835 Wilson Primm J.P. James Adams

vs

action of assumpsit
in the Saint Louis
Circuit Court
Nov. Term A.D. 1835

The plaintiff aforesaid
comes and files according to the
such & provided following
Allegations and interrogatorries Against Peter
Powell and Joseph Powell who have been sum
moned as granishees in this case, namely

1. said plaintiff alleges that at the time
the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell
were summoned as garnishees in this suit they were
indebted to said defendant in the sum
of two thousand Dollars for goods, wares
and merchandize, beaver, beaver traps fur
purchased by them of said
defendant before that time

2 Also that at the time said garnishees aforesaid were
summoned as such, they were indebted
to the aforesaid Defendant Benjamin
L.E.Bonneville in the sum of two thousand
Dollars for land sold and conveyed goods
wares and merchandize sold and delivered
& for notes, bonds, account & other
in action assigned by said defendant
aforesaid to the said garnishees.

3. Also that when said garnishees were sum
moned as such as aforesaid they had in
their possession, custody or charge lands,
tenements, money goods, wares & merchandize
fur , notes, Bonds, bills and accounts belonging
to said Benjanin L.E.Bonneville
to a large amount and of great value
to wit of the value of two thousand Dollars

4. Also that there has come to the hand
of said granishee, since they were so
summoned as aforesaid money goods, chattles,
moneys, credits, & effects of said defen
dant aforesaid of great value to wit of
the value of two thousand Dollars
And the plaintiff aforesaid prays
that said granishess aforesaid may
be compelled on their oaths fully
to answer the above allegations and
particularly & specially the following
Interrogatories

1.When summoned as garnishees in this
suit were you or either of you or you or either of your with others indebted
to said Defendant done as to said
Defendant with others for goods wares
and merchandize, fur, beaverbeaver
traps & other matters in the purchased by
as either of you or you or either of you with others
you from above named defendant
alone or with others
in the sum of Two thousand Dollars
if not in the sum stated how much
did you or either of you or you or either of you with others owe him alone or him with others

2.when summoned as granishes as aforesaid
were not you or either of you or you or either of your with others indebted
to the said defendant or to the said
defendant with others as stated in
the second allegation if not so indebted
how were you indebted and in what sum?

3. When summoned as such garnishes
is aforsaid were or either indebted
to the above defendant or to the above
defendant with others or had not you
or either of you or you or either of you
with others in the possession custody or charge of
you or either of you or you or either of

you with others the land property & effects
of said defendant or of said defendant
with other as mentioned in the fourth
allegation?

Please State particularly what property
you or of you or you
or either of you with others then
had in the possession, coustody or charge
of you or either or of you or either
of you with others belonging to
the said defendant or to the said
defendant with others,
specifying to whom said property
& effects belonged & the value thereof

4. Has there not come into the possession
custody or charge of you or either of you
or you or either of you with others since
you were summoned as such garnishees
goods, chattels, moneys, credits & effects
of said Defendant or of said defendant
with others as stated in the fourth
allegation aforesaid- ?

please state particularly specify &describe what pro
perty or effects of the above defendant
or of the above Defendant with others
have come into the possession custody or charge of you
or either of you or you or either of
you with others, adding the name of
the person to whom the same belongs
and the value thereof, to wit of each
item, ?

The plaintiff above named prays that the said
garnishees may be ordered fully to
answer the foregoing allegations. &
interrogatories on or before the third day
of the next term of this court

Primm & Mullanphy attys for plaintiff

No 35
Nov Term 1835

In the Circuit Court of the
County of Saint Louis
Nov. Term A.D. 1835
action of assumpsit

James Adams
vs
Benjamin L.E.Bonneville
Garnishees

Peter Powell
Joseph Powell
Allegations & interrogatories

filed Nov 11th 1835A G Clk

order of pub Book 7-- 457

clerk Gamble fee $ 1-38 3/4
on 226

March Term 1836

James Adams
vs
B. L.E.Bonneville

plff
Francis Corella
David Solomon &
Gilbert Solomon 9th march 1836.

Executed this writ by Reading it to
Francis Corella on the 26th day of March
1836 in the county of st Louis David
Solomon & Gilbert Solomon not found
in my county

Service502 nonest2575

James Brotherton Shff
By M Brotherton D Shff

County of St. Louis , sct.
State of missouri,To the Sheriff of St. Louis County-Greeting.

You are hereby commanded to summon
Francis Corella & David Solomon & Gilbert
Solomon
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the Fifth day of april next
at the city of St. Louis , then and there to TESTIFY
and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
wherein James Adams is plaintiff and B. L.E.Bonneville
is defendant on the part of the
plaintiff and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court , at the
City of St. Louis , this ninth day of March
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty six Jn. Ruland Clerk C.C.

vs

Saint Louis Circuit Court
March Term A D 1836State of Missouri
County of St Louis
ss

Joseph Powell summoned as Garni
shee with Peter Powell to answer allegations and Interrogations filed
and exhibited in the above entitled cause according to and by virtue
of the Statute in such case made and provided first being duly
Sworn makes the following Statements on oath for answer :

For answer to the
first allegation: he says that, at the time the siad Peter Powell and
Joseph Powell were summoned as garnishees in this suit they were
not in debted to said Defendant Benjamin L E Bonneville in the
sum of two thousand dollars for goodswaresand merchandize
beaver, beavertraps, fur and other matters purchased by them of
said defendant before that time.

For answer to the second allegation; he says, that at the time
said Garnishees aforesaid were summoned as such, they were not
indebted to the aforesaid defendant Benjamin L E Bonneville
in the sum of two thousand dollars for land sold and conveyed, goods
wares and merchandise so to and delivered & for notes bonds
accounts and other in action assigned by said defendant
aforesiad to the said garnishees.

For answer to the third allegation;- he says, that when
said Garnishees were summoned as such as aforesaid they had
not in their possession custody or charge lands tenements,
money, goods, wares & merchandise, fur & beaver notes bonds
bills and accounts belonging to said Benjamin L.E. Bonneville
to a large amount & of great value, to wit, of the value of two
thousand dollars.

For answer to the Fourth Allegation;- he says, that there
had not come to the hands of said Garnishees since they were
so summoned as aforesaid moneys, goods, chattels credits and
effects of the said defendant aforesaid of great value, to wit of the
value of two thousand dollars. And the above named Joseph
Powell according to the tenour of the said plaintiff's prayer makes
the above statements under Oath in answer to the allegations
filed & exhibited in the above entitled suit.- And for answer to the
several Interrogatories which the siad plaintiff prays the said
Garnishees aforesaid may be on their oaths fully to an
swer, the said Joseph Powell makes the following further statements
under oath.

For answer to the first interrogatory; he says when sum
moned as Garnishees in this suit neither was he the said Jospeh
Powell , nor were the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell , nor was either
of them as far as he knows alone or with others indebted to the said
Defendant alone or to the said defendant with others. for goods wares
and merchandise fur, beaverbeaver traps and others matters pur
chased by him the said Joseph Powell or by them the said Peter
Powell and Joseph Powell , or as far he knows either of them alone
or with others from the above named Defendant alone or said defendant with
others in the sum of two thousand dollars, nor did he or they or as far
as he knows either of them alone or with others owe the said defendant
alone or the said Defendant with others any sum or account whatsoever.

For answer to the second Interrogatory he says thatwhensum
moned as Garnishees as aforesaid neitherwas he the said Joseph Powell .
nor were they the said Peter Powell & Joseph Powell nor as far as he knows
was either of them alone or with others indebted to the said Defendant
or to the said Defendant with others as stated in the second allegation
of the said plaintiff; nor in any other manner or way, nor by any
other means was he, or they, or as far as he knows, either of them
indebted alone or with others to the said defendant alone or with
others in any sum or amount whatsoever.

For answer to the Third Interrogatory; he says that when
summoned as such garnishees as aforesaid neither was he the said
Joseph Powell nor were they the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell ,
nor, as far as he knows was either of them alone or with others indebtedto the above de
fendant or to the above defendant with others; that neither had
he the said Joseph Powell nor they the said Peter Powell and Joseph
Powell nor, as far as he knows either of then alone or with others
in the possession custody or charge of him the said Joseph Powell
or them the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell or as far as he
knows either of them alone or with others the land property or effects
of said Defendant or of said defendant with others as mentioned in the
fourth alligation said plaintiff... And the said Joseph Powell also
sataes; that neither had be nor the siad Peter Powell & Joseph Powell
nor as far he knows either of them alone or with others any
property or effects whatsoever in the possession custody or charge of
him, them, or as far as he knows either of them alone or with others
belonging to the said defendant or to the said Defendant with others at
the time mentioned in the said Interrogatory.

For answer to the Fourth Interrogatory; he says that there has
not come into the possession custody or charge of him the said Joseph
Powell , nor them the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell nor as far as

he knows either of them alone or with others since they were summoned
as such Garnishees goods chattels moneys credits and effects of said
Defendant or of said defendant with others as stated in the Plaintiffs
fourth allegation aforesaid. And the said Joseph Powell says; that
no property or effects of the above defendant or of the above defendant
with others have come into the passession, custody or charge of the
said Joseph Powell or the said Peter Powell & Joseph Powell or as far as
he knows either of them alone or with others and therefore he is unable,
as he is frequently requested in the said plaintiffs Interrogations "Par
ticularly to specify & describe" any property or effects or "to add the
name of the person to whom the same belong" or "the value thereof,
to with in value of each item"

The above an the answers under Oath which the said Joseph
Powell summoned as one of the Garnishees in the above entitled cause,
begsleave to be permitted to put in to the said plaintiffs several alle
gations & Intrrogations according to the tenour of the said plaintiff's
prayer and of the Staute in that behalf made & provided which said
answers & statements are as position full & satisfactory with the
nature of the case & circumstances may be possible.

Sworn to and subscribed before
me this 16th day of March A D 1836 Justice Jos Powell

John Adams
vs
Benjamin L.E Bonneville

Answer of Joseph Powell , Garnishees

Filed 16th March 1835 John Ruland Clerk

State of Missouri
County of St Louis Saint Louis Circuit Court
March Term AD 1836

vs

ss

Peter Powell summoned
as garnishee with Joseph Powell to answer allegations and
interrogatories filed & exhibited in the above entitled cause according
to & by virtue of the statute in such case made & provided first
being duly sworn for answer makes the following statements
on oath:

For answer to the First allegation; he says that at
the time the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell were summoned
as garnishees in this suit they were not indebted to said Defend
ant Benjamin L E Bonneville in the sum of two thousand
dollars for goods wares, merchendise, beaver beaver traps, fur &
other matters purchased by then of said defendant before that
time

For answer to the second allegation, he says that at the
time said garnishees aforesaid were summoned as such they were
not indebted to the aforesaid defendant Benjamin L E Bonneville
in the sum of two thousand dollars for land sold and
goods wares & merchandise sold and for notes,
bonds accounts & other in action assigned by said De
fendant aforesaid to the said garnishees.

For answer to the Third allegation, he says that when
said garnishees were summoned as such as aforesaid they had
not in their possession custody or charge lands tentaments
money, goods, wares and merchandise fur and beaver, notes, bonds
bills and accounts belonging to said Benjamin L . E . Bonneville ,
to a large amount and of great value, to wit of the value of two
thousand dollars.

For answer to the Fourth allegation; he says that there have
not come to the hands of said garnishees since they were so summoned
as aforesaid moneys goods chattles, credits and effects of
of the said Defendant aforesaid of great value; to wit of the value of
two thousand dollars And the above named Peter Powell accord
ing to the tenour of the said plaintiff's prayer makes the above state
ments under oath in answer to the allegations filed & exhibited in the
above entitled suit And for answer to the several Interragatories
which the said plaintiff prays the said garnishees aforesaid may be
compelled on their oaths fully to answer the said Peter Powell makes
the following further statements under oath

For answer to the first Interrogatory he says that when sum
moned as garnishees in this suit neither was he the said Peter Powell
nor were the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell nor was either of them
as for as he knows alone or with others indebted to the said defendant
alone or to the said defendant with others for goods wares andmerchan
dise, fur beaver and beaver traps and other matters purchased by him the
said Peter Powell or by them the said Peter , Powel and Joseph Powel
or as far as he knows either of them alone or with others from the
above named defendant alone, or said defendant with others, in the
sum of two thousand dollars; nor did he or they or as far as he knows
either of them alone or with others, owe the said defendant alone, or
the said defendant with others any sum or amount whatosever

For answer to the second Interrogatory; he says that when
summoned as garnishees as afresaid neither was he the said
Peter Powell nor were they the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell
nor as far as he knows was either of them alone or with others in
debted to the said Defendant or to the said Defendent with others
as stated in the second allegation of the said plaintiff; nor in any
other manner or way nor by any other means was he or they or as far
as he knows either of them alone or with others indebted to the said
Defendant alone or with others in any sum or amount whatsover

For answer to the Third Interrogatory: he says that when
summoned as such garnishees as aforesaid neither was he the
said Peter Powell , nor were they the said Peter Powell and Joseph
Powell nor as for as he knows was either of them alone or with
others indebted to the above defendant or to the above defendant
with others; that neither had he the said Peter Powel nor they
the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell nor as far as he knows either of
them alone or with others in the possessioncustody or charge of him
the said Peter Powell or them the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell , or,
as far as he knows either of them, alone or with others, the land, property
or effects of said Defendant, or of said Defendant with others as mentioned
in the Fourth allegaiton of said plaintiff: and the said Peter Powell
also states that neither had he nor the said Peter Powell and Joseph
Powell , nor, as far as he knows either of them, alone or with others any
property or effects whatsoever in the possession custody or charge of
him them or as for as he knows either of them, alone or with others, be
longing to the said Defendnat, or to the said defendant with others at the
time mentioned in the said Third Interrogatory.

For answer to the fourth Interrogatory; he says, that there have
not come into the possession, custody or charge of him the said
Peter Powell , nor them the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell , nor, as
far us he knows either of them alone or with others since they were sum
moned as such garnishees goods, chattels, moneys, executed and effects
of said Defendant or of said Defendant with others as stated in th4e plain
tiffs fourth allegation aforesaid. And the said Peter Powell says; that
no property or effects of the above Defendant, or of the above defendant
with others have come into the possession, custody or charge of the said
Peter Powell or the said Peter Powell and Joseph Powell or, as far as he
knows either of them, alone or with others, and therefore he is unable as
he is frequently requested in the said plaintiff's interragatories, "particu
larly to specify and describe" any property or effects, or "to add the name
of the person to whom the same belong," or, "the value thereof to wit
the value of each item."

The above are the matters and answers under oath which the said
Peter Powell summoned as one of the garnishees in the above entitled
cause by leave to be permitted to put in to the said plaintiff's several
allegations and Interrogatories according to the tenour of the said plain
tiff's prayer and of the statute in that behalf made and provided
which said answers, statements & matters are as full positive and
satisfactory as in the nature of the case and circumstatnces may be
possible.

Sworn & Subscribed before
me this 26th day of Feby 1836 William Peter Powell

Philadelphia County SS

I Richard
of the court of Common Pleas for the City & County of Philadelphia
Do Herebycertify that William Milnor Esquire
is an Alderman for the City of Philadelphia
Ex officer a Justice of the Peace duly Commissioned
and Justified and that full faith
is Justly due to all her acts as

In Witness Whereof I have
hereunto Set my hand and
affixed the seal of said Court
the 26 day of Feby A D 1836

No 35 November Term 1835

James Adams
vs
Benj . L. E. Bonneville

Answer of Peter Powell Garnishee

Filed 10th March 1836 John Ruland Clerk

St. Louis Cir. Court Nov Term 1836
attachment
Adams
vs
Benjamin L.E.Bonneville
publication of notice to Deft signed by Clerk A
Gamble Esqre. published in Mo.Repub 4 weeks
publication comd23d Jany 1836 end 13th Feby. 1836

costs of publication$ 3 25/100 Recd same of Bryan
Mullanphy

Charles
By

in which these
would probably involve the commit- Pre
yet, if the Senate thought the the nic
oper direction, he was ready tounder-aw
ke it, and they shall be subjected to the whi
ctest scrutiny. They cannot be passed Co
thout legislative action, and none of the

Filed in open Court March
17. 1836

Jn. Ruland Clk

,
vs.
.

St. Louis Circuit Court
>November Term, 1835

On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney , It is ordered
that the said Benjamin L.E.Bonneville be notified
that an action of assumpsit, damages two thousand dollars,
has been commenced against him by the said Jas. Adams -
that a write of attachment has issued against his estate, and
that unless he be and appear at the next March Term of
this court, and plead to the action aforesaid, according to
law, a judgment will be entered Against him, and his estate
sold so satisfy the same; and it is further ordered, that
a copy of this order be inserted for four weeks succes
sively, in some newspaper published in the city of St .
Louis , and at least twenty days before the nest March term
of this court. - A true copy of the order,

Jan 16

Archibald Gamble , Clerk.

State Of Missouri ,
County Of St. Louis .

Personally appeared before the undersigned, a Justice of the Peace, within and for the county afore
said, Edward Charles , who being duly sworn, deposeth and saith, that the annex
ed advertisement was published in the Missouri Republican, the newspaper of which he is printer, for
four weeks, successively, the first insertion being on the twenty three day
of January, 1836, and the last insertion on the thirteenth (13th) day of
february, 1836,-- as follows, To Wit: In No. 21 ,January 23d ; in No. 30,January 30 ; in No. 31, February 6th ; in No. 32 , February 13; in No , ; in No , ; in No , ' in No , ; in No. , ;

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
>16th day of March 1836 J.P. Edwd Charles

Adams
vs
Bonneville
attachment
Replication to answer of garnishee Peter Powell

filed april 27th 1836 John Ruland Clerk

Circuit Court of the County of Saint Louis
March Term A. D. 1836

Between James Adams plaintiff
vs Peter Powell Garnishee in an attachment
suit of of assumpsit wherein above James Adams is plaintiff
& Benjamin L.E. Bonneville is Defendant

The replication Between of James Adams Pltff to the
Answer (to the Allegations & inter
rogatories in this suit ) of Peter Powell , garnishee

This reppliant, saving & reserving to him
self all and all manner of advantage
of exception to the manifold insufficiencies
of the said answer, for replication there
unto sayeth that he will aver & prove
his said Bill &allegationsinterrogatories to be true certain and
sufficient in the law to be answered unto
and that the said answer of the garnishee
is uncertain untrue and unsufficient
to be replied unto by this repliant, without
that, that any other matter or thing whtat
soever in the said answer contained
material or effecient in the law to be
replied unto, confefred and avoided
traversed on denied is true; all which
matters & things this repliant is & will
be ready to aver & prove as this honoura
ble Court shall direct and humbly prays

James Adams by his atty
Bryan Mullanphy

Adams
vs
Bonneville
attachments

Replication to answer
of garnishe Joseph
Powell

filed april 27th 1836 John Ruland

Circuit Court of the County of Saint Louis
March Term A D. 1836

Between James Adams Pltff vs Joseph Powell garnishee
in an attachment suit of aforesaid wherein
above James Adams is plaintiff & Benjamin
L. E. Bonneville is defendant

The replication of James Adams Pltff to
the answer (to the allegations & interogations
in this Suit) of Joseph Powell Garnishee

This repliant saving & reserving to himself all & all
manner of advantage of to the manifold
insufficiencies of the said answer for replication
thereuntosayeth that he will aver & prove
his said Bill or Allegations & interrogatories to be true cer
tain & sufficient in the Court to be answered
unto and that the said answer of the
said garnishee is uncertain untrue & in
sufficient to the replied unto by this repliant
without that , that any other matter or
thing whatsoever in the said answer con
tained material or effectual in the law to
be replied unto, confessed & avoided traversed
or denied is true; all which matters & things
this repliant is & will be ready to aver
& prove as this honourable Court shall
& humbly prays &c

James Adams by his
atty Bryan Mullanphy

Executed this writ by reading to Francis Corella
& David Solomon on the 1st day of July 1836 in the
county of St Louis & Gilbert Solomon not found in
my county of

Service$1.0012 1/21.12 1/2

James Brotherton Sheriff
by Louis
Deputy

July Term 1836,

James Adams
vs
B. L. E. Bonneville

Plff
Francis Corella
David Solomon
Gilbert Solomon 21 July.

County of St. Louis , sct.
State of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St. Louis County-Greeting.

You are hereby commanded to summon
Francis Corella , David Solomon & Gilbert Solomon that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 21st July next.
at the city of St. Louis , then and there to Testify
and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
wherein James Adams
is plaintiff and B. L. E. Bonneville
is defendant on the part of the
plaintiff and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court , at the
City of St. Louis , this 29th day of June
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty six. Jn Ruland Clerk C.C.