(1) Territory of Missouri
County of Saint Louis A Bill in chancery for an
injuction to stay proceedings
at Law

To the honorable the judges of the superior
court for the Territory aforesaid — sitting as
a Court of chancery —

The complaint of Peter Primm
unto your honors humblycomplainingtherewith —

That in the year one thousandeight hundred and eleven
or about the twenty third day of the month of March
in that year at the Town of Saint Louis your orator
then being on his partaccidentally in company with and
in the presence of and John Boly then of the the district
of Saint Louis now the county of Saint Louis and one John Lane
of the same place. And that then and there sometime in the
presence of your orator and at other times a little as well from
your orator's full hearing there was a certain conversation
and pretendedtreaty of a certain contract as sale of a certain
stud or seedhorse between the said Bolly and Lane
Where upon the said Bolly offered and proposed the said horse
to the said Lane for sale and asked for said horse of said Lane
the sum of two hundred dollars and thereupon the said Lane
agreed to give the said Bolly the said sum of two hundred dollars
for said horse whereas in truth and good conscience the
said horse was not worth more than sixty dollars and there
upon the said Lane and Bolly agreed between themselves that
the said Lane now to have the horse for the aforesaid sum

(2)

of money and that the said Lane then being very poor and
unable to pay the said sum of money the said Lane was to
use his exertions to induce and procure your orator to become
bound with him said Lane in an obligation or note for the
payment of the said sum and also the said Bolly was to use his
exertions with your orator to procure and induce him your orator
to execute to him the said Bolly an obligation or note as security
for said Lane for the payment of the said sum of money and for
the aforesaid before the said Lane and Boly confederating
with many others unknown to your orator did persuade and
endeavor with your orator to become the security of the said -
Lane for this payment of the said sum of money and execute
an obligation on note with said Lane for the said sum of money
to be paid to the said Bolly and thereupon your orator
refused to so to do and could not execute said note or obligation
as security for said Lane But the said Bolly and Lane not
yet content with your orator did use furtherartfraud and
circumvention in this behalf by persuading your orator to drink
strongdrink thereby intending to prevail on your orator to get
drunk and become intoxicated and get him your orator
in that situation to become security for said Lane for
the payment of said sum of money to the said Bolly and
your orator says that the said Lane and Bolly together with
others their confederates did prevail on your orator then and
there afterwards on the day aforesaid to get drunk and become
intoxicated by their urgent and frequentlyrepeatedsolicitations
to drinkwhiskey and other strongdrink under a pretense
of much friendship and extraordinary regard they had for your
orator. Whereby your oratoraftermanyhours of repeated solicitation
and pretendedfriendship of the said Bolly and Lane and
others their confederates was induced to drink much whiskey and
other strongdrink as that heyouroratorbecameextremely
much drunk and intoxicated and entirely incapable to manage his concerns
with any kind of direction judgment or presidence
and your orator thus being in that situation was again solicited and requested by the said Lane Bolly and
others their confederates to become bound with the said
Lane in an obligation or note for the payment of the
aforesaid sum of money to the said Bolly for the price
pretended to have been agreed on for said horse by said
Lane and Bolly . The said Bolly Lane and others

(3)

their confederatesdeclaring and asserting to your orator that
he your orator would never be injured by being security in
that behalf for the said Lane and also most positively assuring your orator that he said Lane was man of honor and
would not let any man who would befriend him suffer
whereupon the said Bolly presented to your orator an instrument
in writing written on paper the said Bolly Lane and others
their confederates then pretensing to your orator that the same was
an instrument in writing commonly called a promissory note and
also pretending to your orator that the same contained a condition therein that if the said Lane remained in the Town
of Saint Louis until the next day after that then present day then
your orator was discharged from the effect of the said obligation
or note Whereupon your orator requested the said Bolly to read the
said within instrument to him your orator or to let your orator read
the same but the said Bolly said he was a man of honor and
would not deceive your orator and thereupon again assured your
orator that the before mentioned was the condition of the pretended obligation or note and that such was its effect in law
Whereupon youroratorrelying on the truth of what the said

Bolly asserted to him and believing that such was the
condition and that the foregoing as asserted by said Bolly was the
effect by law contained in said instrument or pretended promisory note thereupon together with the said Lane and as security for said Land that he would not depart from the town
of Saint Louis til the next day your oratordid sign and execute the said instrument of writing then and there presented
to him by said Bolly and pretended by the said Bolly to be
in effect nothing in more than security for the remaining of the
said Lane in the said Town of Saint Louis till the next day without reading or having the same read to your orator for the reasons aforesaid and your orator says that on the next day after the execution of said instrument on promisory note
for the security of the said Lane as aforesaid as your oratorthat your
orator discovered on seeing a note with his name signed thereto
and also the name of the said Lane being first signed thereto and your orator being told and informed by several person of voracity
as your orator that and believed that your orator had been

(4)

entirely deceived by the false suggestions and the suspicions
of truth made to your orator by the said Bolly Lane and
others their confederates and that your orator had instead of having
entered into an obligation or note to be read if said Lane did not
leave the Town of Saint Louis till the next day after the date
thereof and that on that event your orator was discharged bylaw
from the effect of said note he your oratorhadbeing
to his said State of intoxication signed together with the said Lane
an absolute instrument or promissory note for the payment
of two hundred dollars to the following effect and purport
Twelve months after date we or either of us do promise to pay
John Bolly a order the sum of two hundred dollars in money
good and lawful of the United States for valuereceived of him
this 23rd day of March1811 John Lane Peter Primm
William FugateAdamBrown

and your orator further shows that on or about the
first day of April in the year one thousand eight hundred
and twelve the said John Bolly by his certain
assignment on the back of said notes assigned the same
note to the aforesaid James Mackey which said assignment
is to the following effect to witI assign the within note
to James Mackey forvaluereceivedby the assignment
being without recourseon me John Bolly and your
orator says the said James Mackey took the said assignment
of said note wellknowing of the manner ofobtaining the
said note and afterwardsabout the first day of April in
the year last aforesaid the said James Mackey assigned the
said note to the said Jeduthan Kendal byan
endorsement on the back of said note to the following -
effect I assign this note to Jeduthan Kendal on condition
that the said Kendal nor any other whatever
shall ever have any recourse on me or mine within
law or equity J Mackeyand your oratorshows that
afterwards in the year one thousand eight hundred and
fifteen on or about the twentyfifth day of March the
said Jeduthan Kendal by Edward Hempstead his attorney
filed in the office of the clerk of the circuit court

(5)

for the county of Saint Louis in the territory aforesaid his
declaration against John Lane and your Orator on said
promisory note of assignee of said Mackey asignee of said
Bolly and thereupon a Capias adrespondendum in an action
of trespass on the case issued against the said Lane and your
Orator Commanding the sheriff of said county to have their bodies
before the Circuit Court for the County of Saint Louis for the
Northern Circuit to be holden in the Town of Saint Louis
in the second monday in April in the year last aforesaid
to which said writ the said sheriff made the following
return Executed on Peter Primm and bail bondtaken
John Law not to be found in this County William
SullivanDp. Sheriff and afterwards on Wednesday the twelfth
day of April in the aforesaid year being the third day of
the said April term of the aforesaid Circuit Court Cause
your Orator one of the aforesaid defendants by Mathias
McGirk his attorney and pleads to the aforesaid Declaration
of the said Kendal in said Court and file his demurrer to
the first count of the said Kendal's declaration and assigned
for causes that there was no profit made in said
Count of the promisory note declared on and thereupon
the said Kendal by E Hempstead his attorney gained
in demurrer and thereupon also at the same time your Orator
by his said attorney to the second count of the said
declaration filed his plea of non assumpsit and thereupon
issue was joined and the cause continued till the next
term of the said Court it being the second monday in
July in the year aforesaid and at the said July Term of the
said Court on the seventeenth day of that monthit
being the seventh day of the said term came the said
Kendal by his said attorney and your orator also by his
said attorney and on motion of your orators attorney
to the said Court leave is given to your orator to amend
his plea whereupon your orators said attorney submitted
to the said Court amended pleas and prayed them
to be filed But the said Court were of expression that
the pleas offered are insufficient in law to bar the plaintiff
action and rejected the same one of which pleas offered
to the said Court by your Orators attorneywasinthe
words and figures following to wit and the said
Peter forfurther plea in this behalf says that the
said plaintiff ought to be barred from having his said action
against him because he says that the said Bolly useddisrespectful
and fraudulent means to induce the said
Peter to execute said writing with the said John Lane
wherein said Lane was principle in said meeting for
the payment of the sum of money mentioned in said
writing and the said Boly persuaded said Peter to execute
said writing said Lane as security for said
Lane the said Boly then and thereatthetime of the
execution of said writingstating to thesaidPrimm
that he said Primm should be discharged for
the payment of the said sumofmoneymentioned
in said writing if said Lane didnotdepart
fromthetown of Saint Louis till the
next day of the date of said writing assuring
the said Peter that suchwas its effect
and operation inlawandsuchto condition
in facts and the said Peter then and
there requiredthe said Boly to read said writing
to himor to lethim the said Peter read
the same and the said Boly persuaded the
said Peter that both wereunnecessaryaffirming
to the said Peter that such was the effect thereof
in law and that the aforesaid were the condition
in fact and the said Boly there and then
telling the said Peter that he said Boly was a
man of honor and wouldnotdeceive the said
Peter thereupon the said Peter placing

(7)

confidence in the statements of the said Boly
thereby induced to execute said writingas the security
of said Lane as aforesaid believing the foregoing
statements of the said Boly to be correctbut the
said Peter in fact says the said writing contained
nosuch conditions and operations inlaw
therefore the said Peter says he wasin this behalfdeceived
and defrauded by the said Boly as aforesaid all which the
said Peter is ready to verifywherefore the said Peter prays judgement
if the said plaintiff ought not to be banned from
having and maintaining his said action against him
and signed by your orator aforesaid attorney to which said
plea your oratortook and subscribed the following oath
to wit St. Louis 17th July 1815 Peter Primm the above Defandant
says that at the lasttermof thecourt he didnot
know of any person by whom he could prove the foregoing
faith but that since that time he has discovered there
is a witnessbeing by whom he expects to prove thesame
Peter Primm sworn to and subscribed before me
M. P . Leduc clk St Ls Circuit Court and your
orator further shows that on the
seventeenth day of said month being the ninth day of said Term came the said Kendal by his said attorney
and your orator also by his said attorney before the
said Count upon which are and singular the
premisesbeing seen and heard by the said courtnow here
fully understood said nature deliberation being thereupon
had for that it seems to the court that the said first count
the plaintiff declaration is good and sufficient in law
to enable him the said plaintiff to have and maintain
his said action against the said defendant and nofurther
pleas being offered itis therefore found by the said Court
now here that the said defendants did undertake and
promise in manner and form asalleged in the plaintiffs
declaration and doassess the damagesofthe

Plaintiff sustained by reason of the non-performance
thereof to the sum of two hundred and forty
dollars It is there upon considered by the Court now
here that the plaintiff do have and recover of and from
the said defendant the said sum of two hundred and
forty dollar damage aforesaid in form aforeaid assessed
together with his costs and charges by himabout his
suit in this lacked said cost and expenses and that
he have his writ of execution thereof against to
said defendant and your orator further shows
that on the trial of the above cause there was no
evidence on the second count of the plaintiff
declaration fact that the aforeaid promissory note
only was produced on that trial and nothing else
and your Orator also further shows that on the
twenty fifth day of July in the year last aforesaid
a writ of execution issued on the said
judgment from the office of the clerk of the
aforeaid court and was then and there put into
the hands of the sheriff for the said county of
Saint Louis which said execution is on the usual
at form commanding the said sheriff to make
the aforesaid sum of two hundred and forty dollars
damages and nineteen dollars and twenty three
cents for Corts of that suit to levy on the lands
and tenements goods and chattels of your Orator and for want
of sufficient landstenements goods and chattels to
take the body of your Orator and that his said
sheriff make return of said writ with the
said sum of money and show how he has
executed the same to the next October Term
of said Court to be holden at Saint Louis on the
second monday in October next and that he
have the said sum of money ready then> and there
to render the same to the said Kendal andyour

Orator says that said writ of execution is not
on his your Orators good & C
but that the said executionyetremains in the
hands of the said Sheriff an executed your
Orator now here offer to your Honors a record of
proceeding hadin said court and the judgmentof
saidcourt on said casewhich will more
fully appear reference being had theretoall of
which and doings and pretenses of the
said John Bolly John Lane James Mackey
Jeduthan Kendal and others their confederates
are contrary to all equity and good conscience
and greatly tend to the defrauding of your Orator
of his just rights Intended consideration whereof and for
as much as your Orator is without remedy in the
premises at the common law and as the premises

properly relievable before your honorson this
Court sitting as a courtof Chancery where
contractsfraudulentcontractsfrauds
and impositions are setaside and where
fraudsandimpositionsofthisnatureare
most properly cognizable to the end therefore that
the said Jeduthan Kendal John Bolly James
Mackey and John Lane and others their confederates
where discovered may full true and perfect
consciencemake to all and every the matters and
things herein contained as particularly and as fully
as if the same were here again repeated and disinterrogated
and that not only a to their direct and
positive knowledge and remembrance but also as to
their best information judgment and belief and especially
that the said John Lane and John Bolly
may answer and set for the whether or not your
Orator Peter Primm was not at the time of executing
the said promisory note drunk and intoxicated
to a degree so as to render him in their judgment
and opinion unable to manage his own business
and concerns with any kind of skill
or judgment whether they the two of them oreither
of them the said Lane or Bolly did not endeavor
and use their exertions to get your orator drunk
and intoxicated as stated herein and when your
Orator wassodrunkand intoxicated prevail on
your Orator to execute said promissory note
as security for said Lane and whether your
Orator and not for a long time reprise to execute
said note when sober and free from & intoxication
and whether or not at the time of said notes
execution the said Lane was not considered and
generally regarded to be insolentor nearly so
and whether said horse was in good conscience
worthmore than sixty dollars and if sohow
much more and whether Bolly about that
time where said note was about to be executed
did not state to your Orator that Lane
never would leta manbe in
who would befriend him and whether your
Orator did not expressa wish to have the said
note read to him or to be permitted to read it himself
and whether they said Bolly Lane and others
their confederates did not that that was
unnecessary as Bolly was a man of honor and
would not deceive your Orator and fully and
specially whether the said Bolly did not then &
before the execution of said note pretend to your
Orator that the said note Contained a condition
therein that if the said Lane wouldremain

(11)

In the Town of Saint Louis till the next day after
the date of said note or till the next day after
the said note was executed that there and on that event
your oratorwould be discharged from said note
or the sum of money mentioned to be securedthere in
and whether they the said Lane Bolly & others these
confederatesdid or did not lay ahold of the circumstances
of your orator being drunk and intoxicated to get
of your orator to execute said note and whether
they the said Lane and Bolly did not by the whole of their conduct on that occasion and by the
whole of the transactionintent and contract that
Lane on his part should buy the said horse from
Bolly and not pay for him at all but by the
aforesaid contrievance make your orator
pay for said horse without receiving anything
therefore and that Bolly on his part was to sell the said -
horse to Lane at the aforesaid priceperceiving Lane to
insolvent or nearly so and by the aforesaid means compel your orator to to pay for the same. And also that
the said Bolly may answer and fullystate what consideration he said Bolly receivedfrom the said
James Mackey for said note and why he transferred the
same to Mackey and also why he assigned the same
to Mackey without recourse to him said Bolly and
if part of the reasonwas not that he expected your orator
would not be ultimately liable to pay said note
and also the said James Mackey and Jeduthan Kendal
an particular required to state whether or not at the
time they or either of them took on assignment of said note if they or either of them did not know partially
or know by information of others that the said note

(12)

had been obtained from your orator by fraud and
imposition and at the time the said James Mackey
took an assignment from Bolly of said note why the
said assignment was made so as to be without recourse
our said Bolly and what reason if any Bolly gave
for making such an assignment and what consideration the said James gave Bolly for said note
and also why the said James Mackey on hispart gave
his assignment of said note to the said Kendal
without recourse on him Or his by any
whatever eitherin law or equity and why the said
Kendal took such an assignment and what
consideration said Kendal gave said Mackey
for said note and the said Mackey and Kendal
are specially required to fully and clearly state all
they know of their own knowledge and all that
they know by information respecting the promises
as if the same had been fully set down have
and they had been interrogated thereto

And your orator prays that a writ
of injunction may be granted to stay the proceedings at
law on said judgment and execution directed to the
said Jeduthan Kendal and to the Sheriff of the said
County of Saint Louis and to the clerk of the Circuit
Court for said County of Saint Louis commending them
and each of them to desist from all other and further
proceedings an the said writ of execution and said Judgment
until the next time of this Court and theyto
beholden at the Town of Saint Louis in and for the
county of saint Louis on the first monday in
February next and then and there said injunction may
be made perpetual and that a summons
may issue from the office of this court for the said
county of Saint Louis To the said Jeduthan Kendal

James Mackey John Bolly and John Lane
commending them to be and appear severally at the
next term of this court to be holden for the county of —
Saint Louis in the Town of Saint Louis at the Court
house on the first monday in February next then and
there to fully and particularlyanswer to the premises —
severally on their corporal oath and that your orator
may in the behalf have such other and furtherrelief —
touching the premises as shall be agreeable to equity and good
conscience and your honors may thankful and your
orator as dutyboundwillever pray —

Signed — Peter Primm & M McGirk Solicitor for
complainant —
affidavit of Peter Primm

Territory of Missouri
County of Saint
Louis of

This day came Peter Primm before me
a Justice of the peace for the Township
of Saint Louis in the County of Saint Louis and
being duly sworn the truth to say says as follows
to wit that the facts contained and alleged in the
foregoing bill for an injunctionare he verily believes
true as therein stated and also that he the said
Peter does verilybelieve that he according to equity
and good conscience is not bound to pay any part of
the said judgment or costsaccessoried by said suit
therein mentioned and that he verilybelieves according
to equity and good conscience the whole of said judgment
for two hundred and forty dollars damages and nineteen
dollars and twenty three cents ought to be enjoined

Signed Peter PrimmSworn to and subscribed
before me the 15th day
of august in the year 1815 J V Garnier JP

no134

ChanceryFebruary Term 1876

Peter Primm
vs
Kendal others Bill
No 34

Filed August 16th 1815 J V Garnier

Territory of Missouri
County of Saint Louis August 6th 1815
To Jeduthan Kendal

Sir this is to inform you that on
the ninteenth day of the present month Iwill my
attorney M McGirk at the chamber of Silas Bent
esquire presiding judge of the superior Court for the
Territory of Missouri at his dwelling house apply
for an injunction by a bill to enjoin the proceedings
at law in the suit wherein at last term of the
circuit court for the county of Saint Louis yourself
as plaintiff and assigneeof James Mackey who
was assignee of John Boly recovera judgment
against me as defendant impleaded with one John
Lane in an action of trespass on the base for the
sum of two hundred and forty dollars and costs of
that suit nineteen dollars and twenty three cents

signed Peter Primm

This day came John W Thompson before me a justice of
the peace for the township of Saint Louis Mo. County of Saint
Louis and being duly sworn says that he do on the
twelfth day of August in the year 1815 deliver a
copy of the above otice to the above named
Jeduthan Kendal in the County of Saint Louis
sworn to and subscribed signed
in my presence

JosephCharless
a justice of the peace J W Thompson

Peter Primm

Noticeofapplication
forinjunction

Jeduthan Kendal a copy

Know all men by these presents that I be Peter Primm of the Town &
County of St . Louis territory of Missouri as price and

as surety are held and verily bound to Jeduthan Kendal in the sum of
five hundred and eighteen dollers and forty sixcents to be paid to the said
Jeduthan Kendal hisheirsor assigned to which payment well and truly
to be made, we lived ourselves our heirsexecutors and administrators
firmly by these presents sealed with our seals and dated this twenty third
day of August in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifteen

whereas the above bound as Peter Primm has applied for and
obtained from the Honorable Silas Bent Esquirepresidingjudge of the St. Louis
court of the Territory of the Missouri an order for an injunction of a judgment
obtained by one Jeduthan Kendal against the said Peter Primm at
the July Term of the circuit court for the county of St Louis for two
hundred and forty dollars damages and nineteen dollars and twenty three
courts costs

Now the condition of the above obligation is such that of the injunction
aforesaid, so as aforesaid qranted, shall be the above bounded
Peter Primm Shall pay to the said Jeduthan Kendal the amount of the
judgment aforesaid together with the costs alreadyaccrued or that may
hereafter accuse and moreover shall pay percentum on the whole or
such part as may be released from the injunction and the legal interest
thereon that his obligation to be void otherwise to be and remained
full force and virtue

signedsealed & delivered
in the presence of J GLindell
J V Garnier as to Peter Primm Peter Primm Matthew Kerr

Peter Primm
to
Jeduthan Kendal
Bound on
Injunction

Filed August 25th 1815 J V Garnier
clk

Territory of Missouri
County of St Louis
ChanceryThe United States of America to Jeduthan Kendal , James Mackey , John Bolly and John Lane
greeting.

You are Summoned that you and each of you personally and appear before the judges of our Superior court of our
territoryof Missouri sitting as a court of chancery at our said St. Louis court to be held in and for our said
County of St Louis in the Territory aforesaid at the Town of St . Louis on the first monday in Febuary next
then and there in our said court before our Judges aforesaid to answer the Bill of complaint of
Peter Primm and of this you are not to fail at your peril and our sheriff of our county of St. Louis is hereby
commanded to make return of this writ at the time and place aforesaid, and certify to our said court howhe
executes the same.

Witness the Honorable Silas Bent Esquirepresiding Judge of our said court at St Louis the twenty
eighth day of August in the year of our lord one thousand and eight hundred and fifteen and of
our independence the fortieth

J V Garnier clk

no1

In chanceryFebruary term 1816

Peter Primmcomplainant
vs Jeduthan Kendal &
others defts

McGirk for complainant

Executed by reading to the within named
Defendants and leaving a copy of the
interrogation with Jeduthan Kendal on the
20th day of November 1815

J W Thompson , shff 4 served $ 2.00 travel 70 miles 3.00 5.50

Territory of Missouri
County of St. Louis
In Chancery
SSThe United States of America to Jeduthan Kendal , James
Mackey , John Bolly, John Lane , John W Thompson
Sheriff of the county of St. Louis and Marie P Leduc
Clerk of the Circuit Court for the said county
theircounsellorsattorneyssolicitorsor Agents
Greeting.

Whereas It has been represented to our Judgesof oursuperiorcourt of our
Territory of Missouri for the county of St. Louis , sitting or a court of chancery
on the part of Peter Primm Complainant, against you the said Jeduthan
Kendal , James Mackey , John Bolly, John Lane , John Thompson and
Marie P. Leduc of the county and Territoryaforesaid, , That on
or about the third day of March eighteen hundred and eleven he the said
complainant being on his part accidentally in company with you the said
John Bolly and you the said John Lane a certain conversation was had
between the said John Bolly and John Lane of a certain contract or
sale of a certain horse or seed whereupon the said Bolly offered
and proposed the said horse to said Lane , for sale and offered to take
for said horse, the sum of two hundred dollars, which the said Lane
agreed to give to said Bolly whereas in truthand goodconscience the
said Horse was not worthmore than sixty dollars, that it was agreed
between you the said Bolly & Lane , that you the said Lane should
have the said horse for said sum but that beingvery poor and unable to
pay the said sum, you should use your best endeavors to procure him the
Complainant to becomebound with you in anobligation for the
payment of the said sum and that you also the said Bolly were to use
your endeavor to procure and induce him the complainant to execute to you
the said Bolly , an obligaiton or note as security for said Lane for the
payment of the said sum of money, which your said complainant
having refused to do and not being willing to execute the said Bond said James Mackey and by said Mackey to said Jeduthan Kendal in the
said James and Jeduthan well know the manner in which the said note
had been obtained from the complainant, the said acquaintants being made
with that that no recourse should be had against you the said
two bestwitnesses - and further that some time in the month of March
last a suit was instilled against the complainant & said Lane in the
Circuit Court of the county of St. Louis and a judgment obtained for the
sum of two hundred and forty dollars damages and nineteen dollars and twenty
three cents of said, for which an execution has beenfiled and is now in
the hands of you the said Sheriff to be executed and levied on the complainant
or his property and praying a writ of injunction to stay the proceedings
at law on the said judgment & execution - we therefore in consideration
of the previous do strictly enjoin and command you the said sheriff
to proceed any further on the execution as aforesaid and you the said
Jeduthan Kendal to take out an aliasexecutor on the judgment
aforesaid against me said complainant or you the said circuit
clerk in case of application to that effect, to issue another execution
against him the said complainant to carryinto effect the
judgment aforesaid, as aforesaid rendered against him
until our said court sitting as aforesaid, before our said judgesshall
have heard & decreed thereon - and after fail not at your peril

Witness the Honorable Silas Bent Esquirepresidingjudge
of our said court at St. Louis this 20th day of August in the
year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifteen and
of our independence the fortieth J. V . Garnier clk

2

on note to you the said Bolly on Security as aforesaid and you the said
Bolly and Lane after many fruitless attempts to procure the Said contract
you as a last resortpersuaded the Said complainant to drinkstrong liquors
thereby intending to prevail on him to get drunk and become intoxicated
and in that situation to get him to become security for you the Said Lane
for the payment of Said Sum of money to you the Said Bolly - and that
You the Said Lane and Bolly together with others your confederates did
prevail on the Said complainant to get drunk and become intoxicated by
Your urgent & frequently repeated solicitation to drink whiskey and other
Strong drink under pretense of much friendship and regard whereby the Said
Complainant was induced to drink made whiskey and other Strong liquors to
that he get extremely much intoxicated and utterly incapable to manage
his concern with any kind of discretion and in that situation was again
solicited and requested by you the Said Lane & Bolly to
the Said bond& note for the payment of the aforesaid Sum of money how
the Said Bolly and Lane pretending that the complainant would never
be injured by being Security in that behalf and also most positively
asserting that the Said Lane was a man of honor and would not let
any man Suffer who would befriend him- and thereupon prevailed to
the complainant an instrument of writing written on paper pretending
it was a promissory note and contained a condition or therein that if said
Lane remained in Town until the next day after that day then the
Complainant was discharged from effect at thereof- that the complainant
required of you the Said Bolly to read the Same to him on let him read it
himself, but you received Your assertion that you were a man of honor
and would not deceive him, and that the before mentioned was the
condition of the Said obligation or note and that Such were its effects
in law whereupon the said complainant did sign and execute the
Said instrumentof writing then and there forward to him by You Said
Bolly , that the Said note was afterwards assigned by Said Bolly to You the

No
Territory of Missouri
County of St Louis
In chanceryFeb Term 1816

Peter Primm Complainant
vs
Jeduthan Kendal
&other
defendants

M Mc Girk

No 1- In chanceryFebruary Term 1816

Peter Primm
vs
Jeduthan Kendal &
others
injunction

Executed on
Jeduthan Kendal
James Mackey John Boley and John
Lane Deputy
Jn. W.Thompsonsheriffand
M P . Leduc clk Circuit
Court St Louis County
by reading- the same
forWillSullivancoroner

A.V. Carr DCoroner 4 Service $ 1.60 traveling 4.00 $5.00 Mc Girk for complainant

The United States of America to Jeduthan Kendal , John W. Thompson Sheriff of the County of St Louis and to the
Clerk of the Circuit Court for the said County of St Louis their, counselors, attornies, solicitors and agents, and every of
them greetin

Whereas It has been represented unto our Judge of our Superior Court of our Territory of Missouri , sitting as a court
of chancery our said court, on the part of Peter Primm complainant, against you the said Jeduthan Kendal ,
John W . Thompson and then said clerk of the Circuit court, that the said complainant havingaccidentally met in company
with one John Boly of the then District, now county of St Louis , in the spring of eighteen hundred and eleven, and one
John Lane a certain conversation or pretendedtreatywas had for a certain contract or sale of a certain seed or studhorse
had between the said Boly an Lane , which the said Boly offered to said Lane for the sum and priceof two hundred dollars, which said sum of two hundred dollars the said Lane agreed to give to him the said Boly , whereas in
truth the said horse was not worth more than sixty dollars- That It was agreed between the said Lane and the
said Boly that the said Lane being a poor man, exertion should be made to inducehim the complainant to become
bond with him said lane in an obligation or note for the payment of the said sum of two hundred dollars which he
the said complaintant then and there declined and absolutely refused to do and would notexecute said note as
security for the said Lane . That the said John Boly and the said John Lane notcontent with your orator for
declining and refusing to sign and execute the said Bond or note as aforesaid, the better to get over the scruples of
the said complainant did is a further art fraud and circumvention,withinbehalf by persuading the complainant, under
the color of friendship, to drink strong drink, thereby intending to prevail on your orator to get drunk and became
intoxicated, and in that situation to become security for said Lane as aforesaid, in which said attempt they did actually
succeed in getting him the said complainant drunk and intoxicated, in which situation he did sign the said Bond
or note, offering him at the same time that the said Lane was a man of honor and could not let him After

deceiving and refusing to sign and execute said Bond or note as aforesaid, the better to get over the scruples of
the said complainant did is a further art fraud and circumventionbehalf by persuading the complainant, under
the color of friendship to drink strong drink, thereby intending to prevail on your orator to get drunk and become
intoxicated, and in that situation to becomesecurity for said Lane aforesaid in which said attempt they did actually
succeed in getting him the said complaintant drunk and intoxicated, in which situation he did sign the said bond
or note, assuringhim at the same time that the said Lane was a man of honor and could not let him Alter
that at the time the said instrument in writing or bond or note was persecuted to him forgedsignaturehe regretted that
the said Boly might read it to him or him to read it himself, upon which the said Boly said that he was a
man of honor, that the said note contained a condition or that of thesaid Lane remained in the Town of St Louis -
until the then next day. then the complainant would be discharged from the effect of the said bond or note - and that
such was its effect in law wherefore the said complainant relying on the truth of what the said Boly asserts to him,
and believing that such was the condition and that the foregoing asserted by said Boly was the effect by law contained in
said instrument or pretendedpromissory note. That afterwards the said note was endorsed by said Boly to one James Mackey and by said James Mackey to you the said Jeduthan Kendal on which said note at the last term of the circuit court for the county of
, St. Louis on the nineteenth day of July last & judgment was obtained by you the said Jeduthan
Kendal against him the complainant where the Bond or note as aforesaid for the sum of two hundred and forty dollars
being the amount of the said note and the interest, thereon, together with the further sum of nineteen dollars and twenty
three cents for your costs- upon which said Judgement has already issued, and is now in the hand of
you the said John W Thompson Sheriff or aforesaid, to levy and make the Damages and costs aforesaid, of the
goods and chattelslands and tenaments of him the said complainant the same retainable on the secondmoved again
October next, and praying the previous writ of the United States of injunction to stay all and every the proceedings
on the Judgement aforesaid, and the executionthereupon issued, and that the said injunction may be made perpetual
Therefore the consideration of the premise aforesaid we do strictlyenjoin and command you the said Jeduthan Kendal
absolutely desistfrom taking out, anexecution against him for the Judgment aforesaid, or ifexecution bealready issued out that
then you the said John W Thompson do desistfrom further proceeding on the same against the said Peter Primm
until the hearing of this case by our said court sitting as a of chancery-

within the honorable Silas Bent Esquirepresiding Judge of our said court at St Louis this twenty eighth
day of August in the year of our lord one thousand eight hundred and fifteen and of our Independence the
fortieth. J. V . Garnier clerk

August 21st 1815

An Injuction is granted and is prayed in the foregoing Bill, and
on the Petitioner filing such bond as is required by the 14th
Section of the act regulating Judicial proceedings in certain
cases and extending certain power to the general court
the clerk of the superior court for the county of saint louis
will issue the writ Matthew Kerr and Risdon H . Price
or either of them, are approved of or surety to the above
mentioned Bond

Silas
Bent one of the Judges of the
superior Court

No
In chanceryFeb Term 1812

Peter Primm
vs
complainant
Jeduthan Kendal
James Mackey James
Boly& John
Lane Respondants
Copy
bill

M McGirk for complainant

Between Peter Primm Plaintiff
and John Bolly Defendant

The replication of Peter Primm complainant against
Jeduthan Kendal James Mackey John Bolly and John
Lane to the several answer of John Bolly Defendant

This repliant saving and reserving to himself all and all
manner of advantage of exception to the manifold insufficiencies of
the said answer, for replicationthereunto saith that he will aver
and prove his said bill to be true certain and sufficient in the law
to be answered into, and that the said answer of the defendant is uncertain
untrue, and insufficient to be replied into by this repliant
without that, that any other thing or matter whatsoever in the said
answer contained material or effectual in the law to be replied unto
confessed and avoided, traversed or denied is true; all which
matters and things this repliant is and will be ready to aver
and prove as this honorable court shall direct and humbly
prays as in and by his said bill he hath already prayed

Peter Primm
vsReplicationinchancery
John Bolly

Filed March 22nd 1816 J V Garnier J
P

Between Peter Primm Plaintiff
and Jeduthan Kendal Defendant

The replication of Peter Primmcomplainant against
Jeduthan Kendal , James Mackey , John Bolly and
John Lane to the several answer of Jeduthan Kendal Defendant.

This repliantsaving and reserving to himself all
and all manner of advantage of exception to the manifold
insufficiencies of the said answer, for replication thereunto saith, that he will aver and prove his said Bill to
be true, certain and sufficient in the law to be answered
unto, and that the said answer of the defendant is uncertain,
untrue and insufficient to be replied into by this repliant,
without that, that any other matter or thing whatsoever in the
said answer contained, material or effectual in the law to be
replied unto, confessed and avoided, traversed or denied, is true
all which matters and things this repliant is and will be ready
to aver and prove as this honorable court shall direct,
and humbly prays as in and by his said bill he hath
already prayed.

Peter Primm
vs
Jeduthan Kendal
Replication in Chancery

filed March 22d 1816 J. V . Garnier
Clk

Between Peter Primm Plaintiff and
James Mackey Defendant

The Replication of Peter Primm complaint against
Jeduthan Kendal , James Mackay and John Bolly and
John Lane to the several answer of James Mackay
Defendant

This Repliant saving and reserving to
himself all and all manner of advantage of exception
to the manifold insufficiencies of the said answer, for replication
thereunto saith, that he will aver and prove his
said bill to be true, certain and sufficient in the law to be
answered into, and that the said answer of the defendant
is uncertain, untrue, and insufficient to be replied unto
by this repliant without that, that any other matter or
thing whatsoever in the said answer contained, material
or effectual in the law to be replied unto, confessed avoided,
traversed or denied, is true; all which matters and
things this repliant is and will be ready to aver and prove
as this honorable court shall direct, and humbly prays
as in and by his bill aforesaid he hath already prayed

Peter Primm
vs
James Mackey
Replication in chancery

filed March 22nd 1816 J. V . Garnier
clk

Territory of Missouri SS

The Several answer of James / Mackey to
the Bill of Complaint of Peter Primmcomplainant
against John Bolly this respondant & others.

The Said James Mackey now and at all times
therefore saving to himself all and all manner of advantage
of expection to the many untruthserrors uncertainties and imperfections
in the said Bill of Complaint contained for answer
there to say that he is altogether ignorant of any of the
transactions of the said Peter Lane & Boli as charged in the
said complaint except what the said Boli & Primm have
informed him that on the first day of April on the year
one thousand eight hundred & Twelve the Said Boly came to
purchase of this Defendant a negro woman & two childrenand promised
to give him four hundred Dollars in cash and horse of one
Lane & Peter Primm for two hundred Dollars - that said Boli
proposed to the Defendant to take the same without recourse
and this defendant knowing Peter Primm and believing that
he was as honest man and able to pay the said sum
although he did not know the said John Lane , inquired of
said Boli for what consideration the said horse was given, &
said Boli informed him that it was for a seedhorse
sold to said Lane , & that Primm was security - That this
Defendant did thereupon agree with said Boli , to sell him
the said negro woman & twochildren for the sum of Four
Hundred and twenty Dollars in cash & said horse on Lane &
Primm& then & there delivered said Boli said negro
wench & children and receiving said sum of money and
said horse in payment, and took on assignment on
said note without recourse that he took the land assignment in that may because he knew Primm to
be able to pay that sum : and on the appearance of
said Boli that the consideration of said Note was a
seedhorse that after the said assignment he called
upon Lane , for the money. and Lane told him he had made
Primmsecure and wished to give this defendant twenty or
thirty Dollars to get that security out of the hands of Primm
but this defendant whollydeclined it That this deponent
also called on Primm for the payment, and said Primmhad
several times him told him that he had signed said note that
Lane had put a pocket Book with some papers in his
hands as his security and him suggested any fraud - or
imposition in obtaining said note on his signature
to the same And this defendant did assign the
said note to the said Jeduthan Kendal without recourse in
the same way for value of said Kendal received in a
concessionfor Land bought of said Kendal that this
defendant knows nothing of any fraud in obtaining said
note nor in any of the subsequenttransactions and
this defendant denies all and all manner of unlawful
combination and confidency in the complaints bill charged
against him, without that that there is any other matter
or thing in the said complainants said Bill contained
material or effective for this defendant to answer unto
and nor herein and hereby sufficiently answered unto
confessed or avoided traversed or denied is true to the
knowledge and belief of this defendant - all which
matter and things this defendant is ready to aver
maintain and prove as this Honorable court shall award

and humbly prays to be hencedismissed with his reasonable
costs and charge in this behalf wrong hath sustained

James Mackey

County of Saint Louis

James Mackey being only sworn on his
oath Saith. that the matter of fact contained in the foregoing
answer as stated from his own knowledge are true - and those stated by way of information he believes to be true

Sworn to & subscribed before me
a justice of the peace of the
countyaforesaidJanuary 23. 1816.JosephCharlessJ.P.

James Mackey
vs
Peter Primm
answer

filedMarch 18th 1816 J V Garnier J P

Territory of Missouri

The Several answer of Jeduthan Kendal to the
Bill of Complaint of Peter Primm. Complainant
against John Boly & others.

The said Jeduthan Kendal now and at all
times here after saving to himself all and all manner of advantage of
exception to the many untruths, errors, and uncertainties, and other
imperfections in the said Bill of Complaint contained for answer there unto or
to so much thereof, asismaterial for him domake answer
to answerethsaith that he knows nothing of the matters and
things charged in the said Bill of Complaint except what so herein after
set forth. To wit that sometime in the last part of the
year the thousand eight hundred and fourteen or the beginning of
the year One thousand eight hundred and fifteen. James Mackey
wished to buy of this defendant a concession for four Hundred
acres of Land, and proposed to assignover to him a note of
hand on the John Lane & Peter Primm, for two hundred dollars
which note was dated the twenty third of March One thousand
eight hundred and eleven, payable twelve months afterdate
John Bolly or order, and assigned by said Boli , to said Mackey .
That this deponent did notthen know of the circumstances as by property of the said John Lane but
he knew the said Peter Primm, tohaveproperty, and believedhim
to be able to pay said sum: and that he did agree
to receive the said note, and did receive as assignment
thereof of said James Mackey . without recourse, because
he thought the said Primm an honest man and able
to pay the said sum :- and he allowed the said Mackay, the
full amount of said note & theintentone thereon - that
he neitherknew nor was informed that there was any pretense
orsuspicion of fraud relative to said note . - . that
soonafter receiving said note he called on said Primm
for the money, and Primm told him that he signed said note as security for Lane : That Lane had given him a
pocket Book & some paper, containing a title to a lot of
land on the State of Ohio , as his security and if Lane would
confess a Judgment withhim on the honorhe would join in
said confession - or that if Lane could be induced to pay one
half he would be glad& wouldpay the balancebut
neversuggested any fraud or oppression in obtaining the
saidnote, or his signature: - . - That this defendant was
therein the said pocket Book & paper. by said Primm and
One of said paper was a deed for a Lot of land in Turn
Lancasteror, the state of Ohio , or a part of a debt.

That the said Peter Primmneglecting to pay the said
note, he did give the said noteto Edward Hempstead
his attorney to himandof theprocuring afterwards he
know nothing, butsupposes the record of the case will
show them at large - That said Primmneverpretended
to him that he was intoxicatedwhen he executed the
said notenordoeshebelieve that was the case: nor
the same was obtained by fraud or imposition - and
this defendant would nothave taken any assignmentof said
note had he thought or believed it had been unfairly
a obtained . - and this defendant denies all
and all manner of unlawful combination and conspiracy
in the complainants Bill set forth against him. - without
that that there is any othermatter a thing in the said
complainants Bill of Complaint contained material effectual
for this defendant to make answer unto - and not herein and
hereby sufficiently answered unto, confessed or avoidedtraversed
ordenied is how to the knowledge and belief of this
Defendant - all which matters and things

this Defendant is ready to aver maintain and prove as this
honorable court shall award, and humbly prays to be hence
dismissedwith his reasonable costs and in this behalf most
wrong fully sustained

JKendal

County of Saint Louis

JeduthanKendal being duly sworn or
his oath saith that the matter of fact contained in the foregoing
answer as stated from his own knowledge are true and those by
way of information of others be believed to be true.

Sworn to & Subscribed before me
a justice of the peace for the
County aforesaid Jan. 23rd 1814Jos Charless j. P.J # Kendal

JeduthanKendal
vs
Peter Primm
answer

filedMarch 18th 1816 J V Garnier clk

Territory of Missouri SS.

The Several answer of John Bolly
to the Bill of Complaint of Peter
Primm. complainant against this
respondant James Mackey & Jeduthan
Kendal

The said John Bolly now and at all times hereafter reserving
to himself all and all manner of advantage of
exception to the many untruths was and uncertain his
in the said Bill of Complaint contained so answer there
to says that in the spring of the year one thousand eight
hundred and Eleven he was in the town of Saint Louis , and owned
a certainseed Horse. Which was in the opinion of this respondant
worth Two Hundred dollars : that there he met one John
Lane with whom he had little or no acquaintance, and
knew nothing of his character except that he had
heard he gambled sometimes that Lane asked him how
much he would take for said Horse, and this respondant
told him that the price was two Hundred Dollars that Lane
said he would give him that price and invited him so
go to in Saint Louis , and this respondantsays
proved for the sake of receiving the money for the Horse - and
we went there : and when we came there Lane did not
pay the money but proposed to give a note for that
amount with good securityfor and this respondant told him
that he might have the Horse if he would get good
securityfor that amount but otherwise he should not
That said Lane offered so given one Mark as Security but
he was not taken & Lane then offered Peter Primm the complaintant
and this respondant knowing Primm to be a man settled at Saint Louis , having a trade & with that sum agreed to
take said Primmwith said Lane that William Fuget and
Adam Brown were present with this respondantPrimm Lane
Burke that someone drew a Note for said sum &
when this respondant heard it read he did not like the form
and as far as he recollects the said Fugetdrew another
and the said Lane & Primmsigned the same & delivered it to
your respondant and he delivered the Horse to said Lane , in
the evening - which note is the same set forth in the
complainants Bill - And this respondant denies that he and
Lane agreed to use their exertion to induce the said Primm
to become security although Lane might have done itnor
did he use any fraud or circumvention or persuade the said
Primm to drinkstrong Drink or to make him intoxicated
for that purpose. nor does he know that said Primm was
intoxicated or incapable of managing his affairs with
prudence nor did he pretend to said Primm or to any
other person that said now contained any other clause
or condition than what was written in said note : nor
that if said Lane continued in town until the next day the said Primm was discharged - all which matters
if insisted upon by said Primm he prays may be proven
That this Respondant the next day went home to where he
lives on the Meramec and this deponent further answering
saith that about the first day of April, in the year, one
thousand eight hundred & Twelve this respondant was about
trading with James Mackey for some negroes - and then
promised to assign over said note : and said Mackey
that if he would like an assignment of the same with
outrecourse this would have : and said Mackey

for what the note was given - and he told him that
it was for a seedhorse- and said Mackey then agreed to
take the same in that way & it was so assigned for
the full amount of said note excepting a deduction
of about Twenty dollars. and the reason of his wishing
to assign the same in that way was, that he had
heard that Primm was going to Canada - and he
did not wish to go to law him, or to be liable
tobehold himself by said Mackey if they traded and for no
other reason that of the proceedings after he asigned
over said note he is entirely ignorant - : That in all
the conduct and transaction of your respondantwith said
Primm he does expressly deny all and all manner of
of unlawful combination confederacy fraud or imposition
in the said complainants Bill charged against him
without that, that there is any other matter or thing
in the said Complainants Bill contained material or
effectual for this Defendant to answer unto and not herein
and hereby sufficiently answered unto confessed or
avoidedtraversed or denied is true to the knowledge
and belief of this defendant - all which matter &
things this defendant is ready to aver maintain and
prove this Honorable Courtshall award. and
humbly prays, henceforth to be dismissedwith his
reasonable costs and charges in this behalf most
wrongfully sustained

John Bolly

County of Saint Louis

John Bolly being duly sworn on his
oath saith that the matter of fact contained in the
forgoing answer as stated from his own knowledge are
true and those from the information of others he believers
are true

Sworn to and Subscribed
before me a justice of the peace
for the county aforesaid this
16th - day of February 1806JosCharlessJ P John Bolly Filed march 18th 1816 J V Garnier
clk

Territory of Missouri
Northern Circuit C
In the Superior Court
>September Term 1876.

The following facts are affirmed by the complainant
and denied by the defendants; there, that on the
county third day of March in the year eighteen
hundred and eleven at the town of St. Louis in the
Territory aforesaid, John Lane and John Bolly did
persuade and procure the complainant to be
made and become drunk and intoxicated with
strong liquors;

2nd That when the said Bolly and then and there sell to
the said Lane a certain studhorse for two
hundred dollars.

3rd That The said horse was not then and there
in good conscience worth more than sixty dollars
4th. That the said Lane was then and there very poor
and unable to pay the said sum of two hundred
dollars.

5th That the said Lane and Bolly then and there agreed
between themselves to induce the said complainant
to become boundtogetherwith the said Lane in an
obligationornote to the said Bolly for the payment
of the said sum of two hundred dollars

6th That the said Bolly was to use his exertions to will
the complainant to become bound as security for said
Lane for the payment of said sum of money.

7. That the complainant at firstrefused to be come bound
as security as aforesaid

8th. That they did procure him to become intoxicated
with an exception to induce him to become bound
as the security of the said Lane for the payment
of the said sum to the said Bolly .

9 That when he was thusintoxicated the said
Bolly and Lane and others declared and
operator to the said complainant that the said
complainant would never be injured by being
security in that behalf for the said Lane . and
most particularly assured the complainant
that the said Lane as a man of honor and
would not let any who would befriend him
suffer.

10 That when the said Bolly and Lane presented
the said obligation or note to the complainant
they pretended and assented to him the same
contained a condition therein that if the said
Lane remained in the town of Saint Louis
until the next day after that then present
day, then the complainant was discharged
from the effect of the said obligation a note.

11 That the complainant then requested the
said Bolly to read the same to him or to
let the complainant read the same

but the said Boly said he ( Boly ) was a man of honor
and would not deceive the complainant once the
said Bolly thereupon again assured the complainant
that the before mentioned was the condition of the
tendered obligation or note and that such was
its effect in law.

12 That believing that the said Bolly had stated
the truth to him he was thereby induced to execute the said obligation or note as security for the said
Lane for the payment of the said sum of
money .

13 That when he executed the said note as security
for said Lane he was entirely incapable to manage
his own concerns with any kind of discretion
Judgment or prudence by reason of the intoxication
aforesaid procured as aforesaid

14 That the said complainant was entirely deceived
in executing said note or obligation by the false
suggestions and the suspicions of truth made
to him by the said Bolly, Lane and others their
confederates

All which facts the said complainant still
affirms to be true and prays that the same may
be inquired of by jury

M McGirk attorney
for complainant and the Defendants do the like E Hempstead

submission
of facts
Primmvs Kendal
and other

filed September 24th 1816 J. V . Garnier
clk New Trial granted
as to the first fact

Territory Of Missouri .
Court. In the Northern Circuit
sct.The United States of America , To William Fugate
Greeting.

We command you that all excuses and delays set aide you personally be and appear before the Judges of our superior Court, at our said
Superior Court , at the town of St. Louis on the twentyfirst day of September next, being the
sixth day of the next Term, to testify to the best of your knowledge in a certain suit now pending in our said court sitting in a courtof chancery
between Peter Primm
plaintiff, and Jeduthan Kendal & others
defendantson the part of the complainant and not depart said court without the leave thereof being first had and
obedience of this you are not to fail at your peril. And have you then there this writ.

Witness the honourable Silas Bent Esq.presiding judge of our
said court, at St. Louis this twenty nineth day of July in the
year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixteen and our Independence the fortieth J. V . Garnier clk

In chanceryNorthern Circuit September Term 1876

William Fugate

executed
J VThompson. Shff.

A. C. Carr Service 33 Traveling 90 $ 1.23

129

122

1

50

50

20

565

5' 5'0

11 15'

127

122

5'0

20

5'.50

86 5'

we the Jurors find that the facts 1st. 2nd 3rd
5th. 7th. 13th. & so much of the 10th as goes to
prove that the complnt was discharged from
the note or obligation in the morning
are true

John Bell foreman

Jeduthan Kendal
ads
Peter Primm

on issue in chancery
Reasons for a new trial
to the finding of the Jury was
against the evidence submitted to the Jury

E Hempstead forDefts

filed (De BeneEsse)
October 4th 1816

J. V . Garnier Clk>

Territory Of Missouri , Northern Circuit, in chancery sct.The United States of America to William Fugate
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded
that setting aide all manner of excuse and delay you be and appear in proper
person before the judges of our superior court sitting as a court of chancery on the twentieth day of March next
at the town of St. Louis , then there to testify and the truth to say in a certain matter of
controversy now pending in our said court, wherein Peter Primmis complainant
and Jeduthan Kendal & others
defendant, on the
part of the complainant and have you then there this writ.

Witness Silas Bent Esquire presiding JudgeMary P. Ledue, Clerk of our said circuit court, at the town of
St. Louis , this nineteenth day of February in the year of our
Lord, one thousand eight hundred and seventeen and of the Independence
of the United States , the forty first J. V . Garnier Clerk

In ChanceryNorthern CircuitMarch Term 1817

William Fugate
Executed this
subpoenaby leaving a Copy at the
house of William

Fugate in the township
of march
13th 1817 A. C. Carr for J W Thompson , Shff Service 33 traveling 99 $ 122

Territory Of Missouri , Northern Circuit
Superior Court The United States of America to Adam Brown
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay You be and appear in proper
person before the judge of our superiorcourt sitting as a court of chancery on the twenty first day of Marchinstant
at the town of St. Louis , then there to testify and the truth to say in a certain matter of
controversy now pending in our said court, wherein Peter Primm
is plaintiff and Jeduthan Kendal & others defendants on the
part of the defendants and have you then there this writ.

Witness Alexander Stuart Esquirepresiding Judge of said circuit court, at the town of
St. Louis , this seventeenth day of March in the year of our
Lord, one thousand eight hundred and seventeen and of the Independence
of the United States , the forty first J. V . Garnier Clerk of St. L . C.C.

Superior court
march Term
1817

Jeduthan Kendal
& others
ads
Peter Primm
subpoena

21st march

Adam Brown

The witness Adam
Brown was not
found in time to
be summoned for
the above suit

J W Thompson Shff 50