BLOUNT CO. TN
COURT RECORDS
 

Blount Co. TN Court Minutes 1795-1817 (County Court or Court Pleas & Quarter Sessions) by WPA, incl. index (FHL film 24,596)
   County Court Record Book 1, 1795-1804 (item 1 on film)
      Index: Duncan, John, 45, 56, 67, 76, 206, 207, 258, 277, 283, 284, 306, 315, 316, 317, 320, 327, 335, 360, 363, 395, 451, 461
   County Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions Minutes, Vol.2, 1804-1807 (item 2 and 3)
      Index: Duncan, Elias, 245 (MAD: actually Elias DEBUSK, not Elias Duncan); Duncan, John, 1, 3, 5, 8, 11, 12, 16, 18, 93, 179, 206, 212, 237, 243, 245, 246, 269, 275, 282, 284, 290, 292, 296, 289 (MAD: sic), 298, 309, 318, 320, 322, 327, 328
   County Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions Minutes, Vol.2, 1808-1811 (item 4)
      Index: Duncan, James, 137; Duncan, John, 337, 339; Duncan, Joseph, 172
   County Court 1811-1814 - not on this film
   County Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions Minutes, Vol.2, 1814-1817 (item 5)
      Index: Duncan (Dunkin), George, 33, 50, 66, 232, 370, 452, 470 (not found), 452 (MAD: sic), 483; Duncan, Gideon, 414; Duncan, John, 38, 44, 55, 109, 387, 407, 495; Duncan, Joseph, 11, 52, 96, 148, 189, 190, 225, 274, 292, 297, 298, 369, 377, 391, 407 (not found), 450, 470, 498 (not found), 500, 512; Duncan, Wm., 41, 79, 297
   County Court Record Book, Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions, Vol.1, Sept. 1795 to May 1804.
      Pg.45: Tuesday after 2nd Monday Dec. 1796, John Duncan on jury.
      Pg.56: 2nd Monday, March 1797, Per Arbitrators, between Alex Kelly and John Duncan, as soon as Duncan makes a conveyance to Kelly, then the said Kelly obligation shall be good and valid.
      Pg.67: Thursday after 2nd Monday, March 1797, John Duncan on jury.
      Pg.76: Thursday after 2nd Monday, Sept. 1797, John Duncan on jury.
      Pg.206-7: 4th Monday Aug. 1800, John Duncan to be a juror.
      Pg.258: Wednesday, 27 May 1801, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.277: Friday, 28 Aug. 1801, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.283-4: 4th Monday Nov. 1801, John Duncan to be a juror.
      Pg.306: Thursday, 25 Feb. 1802, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.315-7: Monday, May 24, 1802, John Duncan summoned as juror, not chosen as grand juror, to be traverse juror; on jury.
      Pg.320, 327: Tuesday, 25 May 1802, and Friday, 28 May 1802, John Duncan on juries.
      Pg.335: Tuesday, 24 Aug. 1802, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.360: Thursday, 25 Nov. 1802, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.363: Friday, 26 Nov. 1802, John Duncan listed as signing a bond, but not listed in the body of the bond; MAD: perhaps an error.
      Pg.395: Monday, May 23, 1803, John Duncan summoned as a juror.
      Pg.451: Thursday, 1 Dec. 1803, John Duncan and others arbitrators.
      Pg.461: Monday, 27 Feb. 1804, John Duncan a juror.

   County Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions Minutes, Vol.2, 1804-1807:
      Pg.1, 3, 5, 8, 11, 12, 16, 18: Aug. 27, 1804, John Duncan summoned as a juror; to be traverse juror; Tuesday, 28 Aug. 1804, to Friday, 31 Aug. 1804, John Duncan on juries.
      Pg.93: Friday, 31 May 1805, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.179: Thursday, 27 July? 1806, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.206, 212, 237, 243, 245, 246: Tuesday, 29 May 1806, John Duncan on juries.
      Pg.269: Friday, 28 Nov. 1806, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.275, 282, 284, 290, 292, 296, 298: Monday, 24 Feb. 1807, to Thursday, 27 Feb. 1807, John Duncan on juries.
      Pg.309, 318, 320, 322, 327, 328: 24 May 1807 through Thursday, 28 May 1807, John or Jno. Duncan on juries.

   County Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions Minutes, Vol.2, 1808-1811:
      Pg.137: Saturday, 4 March 1809, on petition of James Benham, ordered that the road that was opened through his field be closed and that the road go round the same, and that James Irwin, Wm. Irwin, James Duncan, David Richey, Robert Richey view and mark the same.
      Pg.172: Wednesday, 30 Aug. 1809, bill of sale from Ebinezer Jones to Joseph Duncan for a tract of land on McCulleys Creek of 217 acres was acknowledged in court by Jones the subscriber and admitted to registration.
      Pg.337, 339: Tuesday, 25 Dec. 1810, and Wednesday, 26 Dec. 1810, John Duncan on several juries.

   County Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions Minutes, Vol.2, 1814-1817:
      Pg.11: Tuesday, Sept. 27, 1814, Joseph Duncan, one of justices, present.
      Pg.33: Friday, Sept. 30, 1814, George Duncan and others failed to pay tax but had good reason, 200 acres, 1 white pole, in 1st Thornburgs Dist.
      Pg.38: Saturday, Oct. 1, 1814, John Duncan to be grand juror.
      Pg.41: Saturday, Oct. 1, 1814, ordered by court that William Hugh Junr. be overseer of the road leading from Maryville to Tuckaleechee from the ford of Little River above Isaac Tates to the branch above Wm. Duncans.
      Pg.50: Tuesday, Dec. 27, 1814, Alexander Edington be overseer of the road from the upper end of John McClures field to Maryville and have hands on the following plantations to work under him: John McClure, Grinsfield Taylor, Robert Maxwell, James McCullock, L. Hicks, George Duncan, Joseph Hart, David Edington, Hugh Weir, Houstins Mill place and David Oins.
      Pg.52: Tuesday, Dec. 27, 1814, Joseph Duncan be appointed to take the taxable poles and property in Dist. #7, Capt. Duncan's Co.
      Pg.55: Wednesday, Dec. 28, 1814, John Duncan a juror.
      Pg.66: Monday, March 27, 1815, Alexander Eagleton be overseer of road from upper end of John McClure's field to Maryville and that hands on following plantations work under him: James McCullock, S. Hicks, George Duncan, Joseph Hart, David Edington, Hugh Weir, Hountons Mill place, and David Owens.
      Pg.79: Tuesday, March 25, 1815, jury of view appointed at last court to view the nearest and best way from the road to pass leading from Morganton at Lowe's ferry, report and say the best way will be from Morgantons by Valentine Mayos then to Moses Hughes then by Jesse Cartwright's plantation then by Martins leaving his plantation all on the left then thro William Dunkins land then by the widow Williams leaving her plantation on the left hand then thro David Walkers land then by Johnston Jones field then across Gallaghers Creek at Davis house then by Peter Bowerman then by Bains Cabin then to intersect the road now leading to Low's ferry on the Hendersons land between John Gaults and James Gillespies.
      Pg.96: Wednesday, March 29, 1815, list of taxable polls and property in the bounds of Capt. Davidsons Company was returned to court by Joseph Duncan Esq. and filed.
      Pg.148: Tuesday, Sept. 26, 1815, present at Court ... Joseph Duncan, Esq.
      Pg.189: Tuesday, Dec. 26, 1815, list of justices appointed to take in lists of taxable poles and property for 1816 ... Capt. Greenway's Company, Joseph Duncan Esq.
      Pg.190: Wednesday, Dec. 27, 1815, present at Court ... Joseph Duncan, Esq.
      Pg.225: Friday, March 26, 1816, present at Court ... Joseph Duncan, Esq.
      Pg.232: Friday, March 26, 1816, ordered by court that Grincefield Taylor be overseer of road from upper end of John McClures field to Maryville and the hands on the following plantations work under him, to wit, James McCulluck, S. Hicks Jr., George Duncan, Joseph Hart, David Edington, Hugh Weir, Houstons Mill place and David Owens.
      Pg.274: Tuesday, June 25, 1816, ordered by court that Robert McCally, Wm. Gault and Joseph Duncan be appointed commissioners to settle with Umphry Montgomery and James Walker, administrators of the estate of Samuel Reed decd.
      Pg.292: Monday, Sept. 23, 1816, present at Court ... Joseph Duncan, Esq.
      Pg.297: Monday, Sept. 23, 1816, ordered by court that Samuel Harris, William (MAD: no second name, indexed as William Duncan) and Joseph Duncan be appointed commissioners to settle with John Eddington, administrator of John Duff decd.
      Pg.299: Tuesday, Sept. 24, 1816, present at Court ... Joseph Duncan, Esq.
      Pg.369: Monday, March 24, 1817, deed of conveyance from Ebenezer Jones to Alexander Wilson for 217-1/4 acres proven in court by Joseph Duncan, one of subscribing witnesses who also swore he saw Jacob Johnston and Reuben Cassida sign the same as witnesses and that they are not in the county, was admitted to record, let it be registered.
      Pg.370: Monday, March 24, 1817, ordered by court that William Wier be appointed overseer of the road from the upper end of John McClures field to Maryville and that hands on following plantations work under him, to wit, David Eagleton, Hugh Wier, Houstons Mill Place, David Owens, George Duncan and Joseph Hart.
      Pg.377: Monday, March 24, 1817, ordered by court that William Gault, Joseph Duncan and David McKamey, Esquires, be appointed to settle with the administrators of the estate of Francis Orr decd. and return the same to the next court.
      Pg.387: Tuesday, March 25, 1817, ordered by court that Josiah Tedford, Jonathan Trippit, Samuel Houston, John Thornbary, John Duncan, Samuel Wier, Joseph Hart, William Kindrick, John Cox, Thomas Coldwell and William Wier be appointed a jury to enquire of damages that Richard Chandler does or will sustain by clearing out the road leading from Maryville to Wrights ferry, is reported by jury of view heretofore appointed by this court to alter the same from the point where it enters the land of the said Chandlers to the point where the said road leaves the said land, keeping in view the public good and injury to the said Chandler, and that a writ issue accordingly.
      Pg.391: Wednesday, March 26, 1817, ordered by court that Joseph Duncan, Robert McCulley and Henry Bowerman be appointed commissioners to settle with Aron Hackney, administrator of the estate of John Hackney decd, and report same to next term of court.
      Pg.407: Saturday, March 29, 1817, John Dunkin (and others) summoned to county court as jurors.
      Pg.414: Monday, June 23, 1817, ordered that Thomas Hart be appointed overseer to open and keep in repair a road from William Wiers bridge to the old road leading from Wm. Gillespies to Dearmonds and have Edward Hart, Gideon C. Dunkin, Greenfield Taylor, Daniel Reagan, Eleven Hitch, the hands at the burnt station, James and John McCullock and Jasper Miser.
      Pg.450: Monday, Sept. 22, 1817, ordered by court that William Lowry, Joseph Duncan and Holbert McClure, Esquires, be appointed commissioners to settle with the executors of the estate of William Hammontree decd. and return the same to the present term of court.
      Pg.452: Monday, Sept. 22, 1817, ordered by court that George Duncan be fined one dollar for not attending as a juror, Andrew Thompson released from attending as a juror at this term.
      Pg.470: Wednesday, Sept. 24, 1817, ordered by court that William Lowry, Holbert McClure and Joseph Duncan, Esquires, be appointed commissioners to settle with the administrator of the estate of Adam Duff decd. and return same to the next term of this court.
      Pg.483: Wednesday, Sept. 24, 1817, the fine heretofore imposed on George Duncan is released.
      Pg.495: Tuesday, Dec. 23, 1817, John B. Burnett vs. Moses Hanna, in this cause an attachment having been issued by a Justice of the Peace, no goods and chattles to be found, levied on one tract of land adjoining John Duncan and James Donahoo's land, said defendant failed to appear and replevy his property, ... ordered land be sold ...
      Pg.500: Wednesday, Dec. 24, 1817, Joseph Duncan, Esq., present at court.
      Pg.512: Thursday, Dec. 25, 1817, justices to take in the taxable properties in the different Captains Companies for 1818 ... Capt. Duncan's Company, Joseph Duncan, Esq.

Blount Co. TN County Court Minutes, 1795-1818; 1834-1908; most volumns individually indexed
      Minutes v.A-C 1795-1812 (on FHL film 888,867, but cataloged 3/1999 as on FHL film 888,874)
            Vol.A, 1795-
            Vol.B, 1804-1807
            Vol.C, 1808-1811
      Minutes v.1 1795-1818, abstract copies of v.A-E (cataloged as FHL film 888,867, but not on film)
      Minutes v.D-E, 1813-1818; v.5 1834-1843 (FHL film 888,868)
      Minutes v.6-7, 1843-1853 (FHL film 888,869)
      Minutes v.8-9 1854-1866 (FHL film 888,870)
      Misc. Court Records v.1, 1796-1834 (FHL film 888,874)
            Short film, does not contain County Court of P&Q 1795-1818 as indexed by Lochner in book 976.8885 P2L
      Minutes 1795-1817 (County Court or Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions) by WPA, incl. index (FHL film 24,596; not those indexed by Lochner in book 976.8885 P2L)

Blount Co. TN County Court Minutes, v.5, 1834-1843 (FHL film 888,868 item 2)
      Pg.197: Court 1st Monday Oct. 1838. James Duncan. Settlement with Andrew Duncan and John McConnel, execs of will of James Duncan decd; they obtained receipts from the following legatees: (1) John C. Richey and Elizabeth N. Richey formerly Elizabeth N. Duncan for their share in full of the personal property bequeathed in the will, (2) Matthew Edmonson and Martha A. Edmonson formerly Martha A. Duncan for their share in full of the personal property bequeathed in the will, (3) George McCroy and Jane S. McCroy formerly Jane S. Duncan for their share in full of the personal property bequeathed in the will, (4) James K. Duncan for his share in full of the personal property bequeathed in the will, (5) Samuel Duncan one horse, saddle and bridle in part of the personal property bequeathed to him in the will. There are two legatees yet under age 21, John Duncan and George W. Duncan. Sept. 11, 1838. (MAD: McCroy is as written, should be McCoy)

Blount Co. TN County Court Minutes
   Vol.10, 1857-1866 (FHL film 888,871)
      Pg.136: 3 Jan. 1859, George Duncan heirs; Mary Duncan guardian for said heirs renewed her bond; security David Chandler.
      Pg.272, 275, 363 (not copied)
      Pg.294: 1 April 1861, John Duncan's Heirs. County Court of Blount Co., April term 1861, present and presiding James Henry Chairman and the other Justices, viz, Saml. Tullock, D.D. Foute, Saml. Price, E.S. Wilkinson, A.J. Wilson, Savater Wear, Dan H. Emmett, John Gamble, Richard Nichols, Henry Lincumfelter, Geo. Caldwell. It is ordered to be certified that it has this day been proven to the satisfaction of the Court that John Duncan who it is stated and proven was a private soldier in the Virginia line in the war of the Revolution and that he died having first made a will on the 29th day of April 1836 and that the will was after his death proven but he has no personal representative and that he left the following children and grand children who are his only heirs at law: James Duncan, Andrew Duncan, Alexander R. Duncan, John Duncan, Margaret Duncan & Mary Duncan, and that said Mary Duncan married Samuel N?. Rankin and Mary is now dead and left only one child who is now the wife of Joseph Rogers and that Margaret Duncan married William Alexander and died intestate leaving her only child Mary Jane Alexander, that John Duncan died intestate and left as his heirs at law Robert and Mary Jane Duncan ---- (MAD: long dash) who are minors under the age of twenty one years and the above named are the only heirs at law of the said John Duncan deceased that all the balance except the heirs of him the said John Duncan Jr. are over the age of twenty one years. It was further proven to the satisfaction of the Court that John Duncan Senr. when he died left a widow and that she departed this life on the 29th April 1847.

   Vol.11, 1866-1873 (FHL film 888,871)
      Pg.16, 407, 412, 428, 458, 467, 503, 716 (B.F. Duncan)
      Pg.29 (W.R?, J.B. etc.)
      Pg.68, 205 (George Duncan)
      Pg.78, 97, 110, 489
      Pg.241, 334, 367 (not found), 378
      11-16: Dec. 1866, C.H. Henry security for James B. Duncan, executor of B.F. Duncan, in place of C. Cowan released; bondsman A. Kennedy and Henry Brakebill.
      11-29: 8 Jan. 1867, W.A. Walker appointed guardian of William H., Jno. B. and Harriet A. Duncan, minors; bondsmen R.F. Walker and John White. (Walker also appointed guardian of John James and Catherine Houser; John White appointed gdn. of Calvin Coulter; apparently these men are guardian of many minors.)
      11-97: July 1867, Jas. B. Duncan vs. heirs of B.F. Duncan; land to be sold to pay debts.
      11-78: June 1867, Jas. B. Duncan vs. heirs of B.F. Duncan decd; petition to sell land; answer by W.A. Walker, guardian of three heirs of George R. Duncan decd, William, John B. and Harriet Duncan, all minors under age 14; court finds it necessary to sell land to pay debts; court to act for non-resident respondants James Duncan son and heir of Frank Duncan decd. who was heir at law of Benjm. F. Duncan; and as James is under 14 years of age, court asks evidence of value of personal estate and its disposition, etc.
      11-412: Jan. 1870, James B. Duncan removed as executor, R.C. Tucker appointed administrator de bonus non of B.F. Duncan decd.

   Vol.12, 1873-1877 (FHL film 888,872)
      12-87: Oct. 1873, James B. Duncan, a non-resident distributee; newspaper notice published; accepted by B.H. Morton & W.A. Watkin, guardians of minor distributees; administrator de bonas non R.H. Hood.
      12-90: Settlement Oct. 1873, B.F. Duncan, decd., & inventory
      12-120: January 1874, W.H. Duncan, J.B. Duncan and H.A. Duncan, minor children of G.R. Duncan decd; application to remove estate of said minors to Texas; minors have moved to Tarrant Co. TX with their mother; that Mrs. M.A. Duncan their mother was appointed guardian; bond filed in Tarrant Co. TX 20 Nov. 1873, filed in TN, security W.R. Hensley and W.C. Hollands; court now appoints W.A. Walker their guardian in TN.
      12-300: Duncan indexed, Not copied, road work.
      12-477: Duncan indexed, Not copied

Blount Co. TN Circuit Court Minutes, Civil and Criminal, 1852-1865, 1881-1907 (FHL film 888,842)
   Vol.A, 1852-1865 (FHL film 888,842 item 1)
      A-166: Bond of H.J. Roach and John F. Garner to Joseph Duncan, 12 Oct. 1852, for $250; Harrison Roach this day appealed from judgement in Circuit Court in favor of Joseph Duncan against him for possession of tract of land. Summons to Sheriff, complaint by Joseph Duncan of forceable and unlawful entry and detainure by Harrison Roach into a house or tract of land bounded by John Moor, Robert Bogle and others on waters of Fourmile Creek, 150 acres, 28 Sept. 1852. Trial on 6 Oct. 1852, judgement for Plaintiff, he be restored to possession. Appeal granted. Jan. 28, 1854, jury found deft. guilty, assess damages at $10. Deft. requests new trial. Feb. 3, 1855, jury found for deft., not guilty, Deft. recover all costs from Pltf. and Andrew Duncan and R.J. Wilson his securities. Duncan requested new trial; request be discharged.
   Vol. 1881-1907 - not looked at

Blount Co. TN Chancery Court Minutes (FHL film 888,840)
   Vol.I, 1859-1869 - no index
   Vol.II, 1870-1879
      2-288, 345, 427, 658: J.B. Duncan et al vs. Walker & Morton
      2-25: J.B. Duncan (not found)
      2-22, 705 (14 Dec. 1878), J.B. Duncan v. A. Kennedy Sr., dismissed
      2-22: 14 June 1870, Alex. Kennedy Sr. et als vs. James B. Duncan et als; James Duncan a minor heir of Frank Duncan (needs guardian for a suit in court), B.A. Morton appointed guardian ad litum.
      2-288: 8 Dec. 1873, Walker J. Marton vs. James B. Duncan et als; defendants George W. Henry, A. Kennedy Sr. and Henry Brakebill have three months to answer the bill.
      2-345: 11 June 1874, W.A. Walker and B.A. Morten, guardians, vs. James B. Duncan et als; suit should have been brought in the names of the infants of whom they are guardians.
      2-427: 14 June 1875, defendants have three months to answer (similar to 2-288)
      2-658: 11 June 1878, W.A. Walker & B.A. Morton, Gdns &c et al, vs. James B. Duncan et al; be it remembered that on this 11 June 1878, this cause came on to be heard before the Hon. O.P. Temple, Chancellor etc, upon all the proceedings heretofore had in this cause but more especially upon the instanter report of the Master this day made, which report being unexcepted to, is in all things confirmed. And it appearing from said report that sixty (60) dollars would be a reasonable fee to McGinley & Hood for their services as solicitors in this cause, it is decreed that the Clerk & Master pay said McGinley & Hood said sum of sixty (60) dollars out of the first money that may come into his hands. And it further appearing from said report that the total amount of the estate of B.F. Duncan decd, with interest to date received by H.A. Walker, guardian of Rufus Duncan's heirs, amounts to the sum of $1271 and ?/100 Dollars, and that the amount received by B.A. Horton, guardian of Frank Duncan's heirs, with interest to this date amounts to the sum of $687 and 64/100 Dollars, and that the recovery in this cause, after deducting expenses, amounts to the sum of $617.92, which would make the whole estate due to the heirs of said Rufus and Frank Duncan, the sum of $2575.97, and it appears that the 1/2 of said sum would be the sum of $1287.98, which amount would be due to the heirs of said Frank and Rufus Duncan respectively. And it further appearing that W.A. Walker, guardian of the heirs of Rufus Duncan, has already received of said sum, the sum of $1271.41, and that B.A. Horton, guardian of Frank Duncan's heirs, has received of said sum, the sum of $687.64, and it appearing that the balance of the recovery in this cause due to W.A. Walker, guardian of Rufus Duncan's heirs amounts to $16.58, and that the balance of the recovery in this cause due to B.A. Horton, guardian of the heirs of Frank Duncan, amounts to $600.34. It is ordered by the Court that the Clerk & Master shall pay out of the recover and fund in this cause, the said sum of $16.58 to W.A. Walker guardian etc. and $600.34 to B.A. Horton guardian etc. It is further decreed that this is a final settlement of the estate of B.F. Duncan.
 

"Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of Tennessee during the years 1866-67" by Thomas H. Coldwell, Vol.III (spine title: Coldwell's Reports"); Tennessee Reports, Vol.43, pgs.102 to 110 (California State Law Library, Sacramento, 2/2004)
      ALLEN VAUGHN vs. THE STATE; Supreme Court of Tennessee, Knoxville; 43 Tenn. 102; 3 Cold. 102; September, 1866, Decided.
      From Blount.
      The plaintiff in error was indicted for feeding "armed prowlers, robbers and guerrillas." The defendant demurred to the indictment, which was disallowed. At the September Term, 1866, the defendant was convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for seven years. Defendant appealed. Judge E. T. HALL, presiding.
      HAWKINS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.
      The plaintiff, in error, was indicted in the Circuit Court of Blount County, at its June Term, 1866. The indictment charges, that "Allen Vaughn, late of said county, on the 25th day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, in the county aforesaid, feloniously, knowingly, willfully and voluntarily, did feed certain armed prowlers, robbers and guerrillas, to-wit: Heart, Duncan, and others whose names are to the grand jurors aforesaid unknown, contrary to the form of the Statute, in such cases made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the State."
      The defendant demurred to the indictment, and among other grounds of demurrer, assigned the following: "The indictment does not allege that 'the feeding of the persons charged to have been guerrillas, robbers and prowlers, was for the purpose of aiding and assisting them in their unlawful and illegal objects.'"
      The demurrer was disallowed. The defendant plead "not guilty;" and at the September Term, 1866, of said Court, a trial was had, which resulted in the conviction of the defendant, and he was sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary of the State for the period of seven years. A motion for a new trial was made and overruled, and an appeal prosecuted to this Court.
      The question for our determination now, is: Does the indictment, with sufficient certainty, charge the defendant with a violation of the criminal laws of the State?
      The Attorney General insists, upon the part of the State, that, under the provisions of the 4th section of the Act of May the 17th, 1865, entitled "An Act to punish all armed prowlers, guerrillas, brigands and highway robbers, and for other purposes," if any person shall knowingly, willingly and voluntarily, feed any such person, or persons, as described in the previous sections of said Act, he is guilty of an offense against the criminal laws of the State, and upon conviction, is subject to the penalty imposed by that section.
      The indictment is predicated upon that section. Its provisions are as follows: "That all persons who shall knowingly, willingly, and voluntarily feed any such person, or persons, as described in the previous sections of this Act; or furnish them information, for the purpose of aiding and assisting them in their unlawful and illegal objects, shall be deemed guilty of a felony; and on conviction thereof, shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary, for a period of not less than five years, nor more than twenty-one years."
      By reference to the previous sections of the Act, it will be seen the persons referred to in the 4th section are guerrillas, highway robbers, brigands, scouts, soldiers, and armed prowlers, to feed, or to furnish whom, with information, knowingly, willingly and voluntarily, for the purpose of aiding and assisting them in their unlawful and illegal objects, is, by said 4th section, declared to be a felony. The 1st section of the Act, in express terms declares, what shall be necessary, within the meaning of the Act, to constitute a guerrilla, highway robber and brigand. Its provisions are as follows: "That every man, or squad of men, who may hereafter make inroads for plunder, upon the peaceable inhabitants of this State, and by force deprive them of their property, or endeavor so to deprive them by the alarm caused by their being armed, when in fact, he or they were not at the time part of any organized army, and sharing continuously in its duties, but who sometimes return to their homes, with the assumption of the semblances of peaceful pursuits, divesting him or themselves of the appearance or character of soldiers, are hereby declared guerrillas, highway robbers, and brigands."
      Other persons, who may not fall within the description of guerrillas, highway robbers and brigands, as given in section one of said Act, are mentioned in the second section; the provisions of which are as follows: "That scouts, or single soldiers, if disguised in the dress of the country, or clothed in the uniform of either army, who shall willfully, maliciously and forcibly take from the possession or person of the peaceful citizens of the State, their property, by threats of violence, or the actual use of force and violence, and under the terror of arms, shall, upon conviction, suffer death by hanging."
      And still by the 3d section of said Act, another class of persons is mentioned, not described or mentioned in either of the preceding sections. Its provisions are as follows: "That all armed prowlers, by whatever name they may be called, who shall willfully, maliciously and forcibly make an attack upon any one of the peaceable citizens of this State, for the purpose of robbing him or her, or of stealing his or her property, or of killing him or her, shall, on conviction, suffer death by hanging."
      Now, it will be observed that this Act, in terms, by the provisions of the 1st section, declares who are guerrillas, highway robbers and brigands, and such only as are hown to fall within the description given in the Act itself, can be taken and held to be guerrillas, highway robbers, or brigands, within the sense and meaning of the Act.
      But the Act does not undertake to declare who are or shall be held to be, within the meaning of the Act, scouts, soldiers, or armed prowlers -- the several classes of persons mentioned in the second and third sections. It merely declares that the persons mentioned in these sections, shall, upon conviction of certain specified acts mentioned therein, suffer death by hanging.
      The Act under consideration, was passed during the existence in this country of a terrible civil war, when large hostile armies were in the field, at a time when the country was filled with straggling soldiers, marauders, and armed men, who were going about, singly and in squads, plundering the country, robbing and murdering the peaceable and defenseless citizens of the State. And the language of the Act must be construed with reference to the surrounding circumstances -- the evils existing at the time of its enactment, and the remedy intended to be provided. Aided by these rules, we construe the word "scouts," as used in the second section of said Act, to mean, persons who, in times of war, are sent out to gain information and bring in tidings of the movements and condition of the enemy. The word "soldier," as used in the same section, means one who belongs to a regularly organized body of combatants, and as such is engaged in the military service, either as an officer or private.
      That the words "armed prowlers," as used in the third section of said Act, means armed persons, (though called by some other name,) who are wandering or roving about over the country, for the purpose of plundering or robbing the people, or for the purpose of plunder.
      A man falling within the description of a "guerrilla, highway robber, and brigand," given in the Act, shall, according to the provisions of the first section, upon conviction, suffer death by hanging; but a man may be a scout or a soldier, "disguised in the dress of the country, or clothed in the uniform of either army," or may even be an "armed prowler," without, in any manner, violating the provisions of this Act, or subjecting himself to the punishment therein provided.
      The office, duties and objects of a scout, or soldier, may be, nay, often are, not only lawful, but eminently honorable, patriotic, praiseworthy, and even necessary, however perilous; yet they are persons mentioned and described in one of the previous sections of this Act. Now, can it for one moment be believed, that the Legislature intended, by the fourth section of the Act, to declare, that whosoever should, knowingly, willingly, and voluntarily, feed a scout or soldier, should be guilty of a felony, and, upon conviction, be imprisoned in the penitentiary. We think not. Yet, such must be the operation and effect of the Statute, if we give it the construction contended for. And we could not stop even at this point; but every peaceable and order-loving citizen, who might feed any of the persons mentioned in the first, second, or third sections of the Act, for the purpose of procuring or aiding in their arrest, in order that they might be brought to punishment; and every person, whether a private citizen or a public officer, who, from motives of humanity, or the promptings of duty, should feed such persons after their arrest, would, also, be held and punished as felons. Surely, the Legislature intended no such thing. We, therefore, think the fourth section of said Act, must be construed as though it read, "that all persons who shall, knowingly, willingly, and voluntarily, feed any such persons, as described in the previous sections of this Act, for the purpose of aiding and assisting them in their unlawful and illegal objects, or who shall, knowingly, willingly, and voluntarily, furnish them information, for the purpose of aiding and assisting them in their unlawful and illegal objects, shall be deemed guilty," etc.
      Then, to constitute an offense, under said section, it is not enough that a person shall, knowingly, willingly and voluntarily, feed such persons as are mentioned in the previous sections of the Act; for, as we have already shown that may be done, not only innocently, but in the discharge of duty; but, to subject the party to the pains and penalties of the Act, it must also be done in the language of the Act, "for the purpose of aiding and assisting them in their unlawful and illegal objects."
      It is insisted, by counsel for the plaintiff in error, that an indictment, under the fourth section of the Act under consideration, must state, specifically, the acts of which the persons mentioned in the previous section have been guilty, and with all the particularity which would be necessary in an indictment against such persons, for such acts. We do not think so.
      All that is necessary, is, that the indictment state such facts as are necessary to constitute the offense, and where the offense is one created by Statute, it is generally sufficient, and is, perhaps, the safer rule, to charge the offense in the language of the Statute. And, by reference again to the 4th section of the Act, it will be seen that all that is necessary to constitute the offense, is, that the party charged shall have, knowingly, &c., fed any such person or persons, as are described in the previous sections of the Act, for the purpose of aiding and assisting them in their unlawful and illegal objects, or shall have given them information for such purpose.
      The guilt of the accused, under the fourth section of the Act, does not depend upon the fact that any of the persons described in the previous sections, have been guilty of any of the offenses specially mentioned in the Act, and for which such persons shall suffer death, except so far as the same may be necessary to constitute them, such persons as are described in the Act. Neither does it depend upon the fact that he knowingly and voluntarily feed such persons, or gave them information, for the purpose of aiding them in the commission of any of the particular offenses mentioned in the Statute.
      The offense is complete, if he, knowingly, willingly, and voluntarily, fed such persons, or gave them information, for the purpose of aiding them in any unlawful purpose, or object whatever. Now, a man may be an "armed prowler," within the meaning of the Statute, without having committed any of the offenses enumerated in the third section of the Act, for which, upon conviction, he shall suffer death. And, by the fourth section, it is, in substance, declared, that if any person shall willingly and voluntarily feed an "armed prowler," or give him information, for the purpose of aiding him in his unlawful purposes, such person shall be guilty of a felony.
      Other errors have been assigned in argument; but, as those arising upon the demurrer are decisive of the case, we do not deem it necessary to notice others.
      The judgment of the Circuit Court will be reversed; the demurrer to the indictment allowed; and the prisoner will be remanded to Blount County, to be proceeded against, or to be discharged.
 

Return to the Blount Co. TN Research File
 

END

Return to Index to Duncan Research Files in Tennessee

Return to The Genealogy Bug's Home Page