FAUQUIER CO. VA
MISC. RECORDS
 

Fauquier Co. VA Miscellaneous Records, 1759-1807; bound volume (FHL film 31,160; no index)

   Pg.60-62: Martin Pickett & Co. (a store) complainant vs. Henry Holtzclaw, late of Fauquier Co. who owned 100 acres from the will of his father Jacob Holtzclaw, adj. land Jacob left to his daughter Catherine that Henry offered to sell Picket in exchange for goods; the goods were given Henry Holtzclaw who was to make a deed later, but Henry has left the colony and says that either he did not sell the land or did not receive the price.
      Deposition by Jeremiah Darnall of proper age; Henry Holtzclaw went to Carolina; deed for land in "Culpeper" left by his father was sold to Pickett and deed should go to them. 28 March 1787.
      Deposition by Benjamin Holtzclaw of proper age; that 8 or 9 years ago his brother Henry ... 26 May 1794.
      Judgement was that Pickett should get the land. Court 28 March 1795.

   Pg.67: Deposition of Daniel Bradford on 25 March 1796, aged about 73 years, regarding land of Joseph Morgan decd. heirs vs. Joshua King.

   Pg.108-112, Skinker vs. Fallis (have copy): Let no grant issue to Thomas Fallis for 25, 13 and 128 acres of land situate in Fauquier Co. on the Rappahannock River and Summerduck Run upon three surveys thereof lately made and returned to the Register's Office, William Skinker Jr. claiming the same by a better title and deed formerly granted by the proprietor of the Northern Neck; Entered June 6, 1796.
         Fauquier Co., to wit: William Skinker Junior this day came before me and made oath that the above Caveat against Thomas Fallis is entered with the intention of securing the land to himself and not for the purpose of getting a title in trust for the said Thomas Fallis; 26 April 1796. (p.108)

FIGURE 1 (Pg.109, 113, 127)

      Surveyed [Figure 1] for Mr. Thomas Fallis by virtue of an entry made with Mr. John Mauzy principal surveyor of Fauquier Co. as also by virtue of a Land Office Treasury Warrant No. 537, land in Fauquier Co. on Rappahannock River between the mouth of Rocky Run and Summer Duck run, lying between the said River and the lines of a certain tract or parcel of land formerly granted to Robert Duncan, bounded as follows: Beg. at A the mouth of Rocky Run corner of the said Duncan's patent and running the said Duncans lines by allowing the usual variation N 74.15 deg. W 68 poles to B, thence N 49.15 deg. W 112 poles to C, thence N 76 deg. W 100 poles to the mouth of Summer Duck Run at the River at D, thence down the River the several courses and meanders thereof to the beginning, containing 13 acres. /s/ Mr. Peter Conway, D.S.F.C. [?Deputy Surveyor Fauquier Co.?], Saturday December 13, 1794. Above copy entered in land office 31 Dec. 1795. /s/ Wm. Price, Rec. Off. (p.109)

FIGURE 2 (Pg.109, 126)

      Surveyed [Figure 2] for Mr. Thomas Fallis by virtue of an entry made with Mr. John Mauzy principal surveyor of Fauquier Co. as also by virtue of a Land Office Treasury Warrant No. 537, land on a run called Summer duck and also lying between the lines or corners of a tract of land formerly granted to Robert Duncan and a tract of land formerly granted to Charles Carter which said tract or parcel of land as represented by the above platt is bounded as follows, viz. Beginning at A a corner of Robert Duncans patent at the mouth of Summer duck run on the branch of the Rappahannock River thence running and binding on the said Duncans line allowing the usual variation N 24.15 deg. W 84 poles still binding on Duncan's line N 79.15 deg. W 114 poles to a stake on the south side of Summerduck Run at C where a maple formerly stood a corner tree called for by Duncan and Carters Patents thence with and binding on the said Carters line S 55 deg. E 173 poles to the upper side of the mouth of Summerduck run at D a branch standing on the branch of the said River thence S 62 deg. E 4 poles to the beginning, containing 25 acres. /s/ Peter Conway D.S.F.C., Saturday Dec. 15, 1794. The above copy from a survey which was entered in the Land Office 31 Dec. 1795. /s/ Wm. Price, Rec. Off. (p.109-10)

FIGURE 3 (Pg.110, 114, 119, 125)

      Surveyed [Figure 3] for Mr. Thomas Fallis by virtue of an Entry with Mr. John Mauzy principal surveyor of Fauquier Co. as also by virtue of a Land Office Treasury warrant No. 537 a certain tract or parcel of land situate in Fauquier Co. lying on Rocky Run and also between the lines or courses of the several tracts of land, viz, a tract formerly granted to Robert Duncan, a tract of land granted to John Courtney, a tract granted to John Corbin, a tract granted to John Fargason and a tract granted to Howson Kenner, which land as represented by the above platt is bounded as follows: Beg. at A a white oak stump on the upper side of Rocky run supposed to be one of the original corner of said Duncan's tract, extending down the run agreeable to the courses of an including patent of said Duncan's tract dated 4 July 1741 with the usual variations allowed, S 14.15 deg. E 16 poles to B, then S 57.15 deg. E 122 poles to C, then S 14.15 deg. E 34 poles to D, then S 35.45 deg. W 48 poles to E, then S 14.15 deg. E 196 poles to F, then S 46.15 deg. E 172 poles to G, then S 2.45 deg. W 18 poles to H, then S 34.15 deg. E 80 poles to I, then S 25.45 deg. W 74 poles to K, then S 7.15 deg. E 24 poles to the upper side of the mouth of Rockey Run at Rappahannock river where the said Duncan's patent calls for two beaches, then leaving the said Duncan's line and running N 83 deg. E crossing the mouth of said Rockey Run 6 poles to the said John Corbin's corner at M on the lower side of the mouth of said run, then with the said Corbin's line all allowing the usual variations N 56 deg. E 68 poles crossing said run twice near Thomas Skinker's mill to a bank where it was supposed a large pine formerly stood and was blown up by the roots at N, the said pine being a corner once called for in Corbin's and Farguson's patents, then with said Farguson's line N 15 deg. W 42 poles to the said run at O, then the several courses and meanders of the said run to P, a white oak corner to Farguson and Howsen Kenner's patents, then with Kenner's line N 82.30 deg. W 115 poles to a red oak corner tree to said Howsen Kenner and John Courtney's patents, then with said Courtney's lines allowing the usual variations N 27.15 deg. W 26 poles to R, N 4.15 deg. W 14 poles to S, then N 30.15 deg. W 14 poles, N 17.45 deg. E 36 poles, N 9.15 deg. W 22 poles cornering near the mouth of a branch and also near William Courtney's corner, then crossing the said branch N 48.15 deg. W 32 poles, N 13.15 deg. W 104 poles cornering about 12 poles to the eastward of the said Thomas Fallis' Mill house, then continuing up the said run N 38.45 deg. E 32 poles, N 14.15 deg. W 64 poles, N 12.45 deg. E 20 poles, N 57.15 deg. W 10 poles, crossing a large branch to "(e)" a corner of a parcel of land lately surveyed for Robert Stringfellow on the said run side and on the upper side of the mouth of the said branch, then up the said run agreeable to the said survey N 86 deg. W 18 poles, N 35 deg. W 6 poles, N 80 deg. W 40 poles, S 85 deg. W 21 poles, N 45 deg. W 40 poles to the first station, containing 128 acres. Peter Conway, D.S.F.C., Saturday, Dec. 13, 1794. Exd. by John Mauzy S.F.C. The foregoing copied from a survey entered in the Land Office 31 Dec. 1795. /s/ Wm. Price, Rec. Off. (p.110-11)
      At a Court of Quarter Sessions continued and held for Fauquier Co. 26 Aug. 1796, William Skinker Junior, Plft. vs. Thomas Fallis, Deft.; on a Caveat. This day came the parties by their attornies and the cause was heard on the exhibits and arguments by Counsel on both sides, whereupon the Court are of opinion that the Plft is entitled to all the land contained within his deed from Benson, bounded by the meanders of the River Rappahannock and Rocky Run, it being a part of the land granted to Robert Duncan, and this court orders that the surveyor proceed to lay off and survey the land claimed by the Plft. under his deed from Benson in order for a final Judgment to assertain what part of the land caveatted falls within the deed from the said Benson to the Plft. and the surveyor is directed to report any special matter that either party may require and either party is at liberty to ?procur (preview?) is? part on making the survey upon condition that the other party receive ten days previous notice of the time of making such survey. (p.112)
      At a Court of Quarter Sessions continued and held 29 November 1796, William Skinker Junior, Plft. against Thomas Fallis, Deft.; on a caveat for twenty-five, thirteen, and one hundred and twenty eight acres of land situate in the County of Fauquier on the Rappahannock river, Rocky Run and Summerduck run upon three surveys thereof lately made and returned to the Register's Office. This day came the parties by their attorneys and the said Deft. acknowledged the Plft's claim to the lands in the Caveat mentioned to be just. Therefore it is considered by the Court that no grant issue to the said Deft. for the said land, the Plft. claiming the same by a better title, and the Deft. agrees to pay the costs. (p.112)

      Pg.113-119, Skinker vs. Fallis (have copy). Let no grant issue to Thomas Fallis for two tracts of land lying in Fauquier Co. on the waters of Rappahannock and Rocky Run, one containing 128 acres and the other 13 acres by survey, William Skinker claiming the same or such part thereof as falls within a grant made by the Proprietors of the Northern Neck to Robert Duncan, Beginning on Rappahannock River at a locust marked as a corner tree between Skinker and Benson and running down the River to the mouth of Rocky Run, then up Rocky Run with the meanders to a poplar, spanish oak and black oak tree on the run marked as the dividing corner between the said William Skinker and Prew (Prue?) Benson and from then to the beginning, the said William Skinker claiming the same by virtue of the aforesaid grant made to the said Robert Duncan who sold the same to James Furnett (Furnell?) who devised the same to his son Ned Furnett (Furnell?) who conveyed the same to Prue (Prew?) Benson who conveyed the same to the said William Skinker.
         Fauquier Co., to wit: William Skinker this day came before me and made oath that the above Caveat against Thomas Fallis obtaining a grant for the land therein mentioned is really and bonafied entered with an intention of procuring the lands for himself and not in trust for the benefit of the said Thomas Fallis against whom the Caveat is intended to be entered. 26 Sept. 1796. /s/ John Blackwell Junr. Entered 3 Oct. 1796. A Copy. (p.113)
      [see Figure 1 above] Surveyed for Mr. Thomas Fallis ... (13 acres; same survey description as on page 109 above) (p.113-14)
      [see Figure 3 above] Surveyed for Mr. Thomas Fallis ... (128 acres; same survey description as on page 110 above) (p.114-15)
      This Indenture 2 May 1791, Prew Benson and wife Elizabeth of Fauquier Co. VA to William Skinker Junior of same, for sum of £134 paid by said William Skinker Junior before sealing and delivery of these presents, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, said Prew Benson and his heirs have granted, bargained, sold, aliened and confirmed to the said William Skinker Junior his heirs ... 134 acres of land, being part of the tract of land the said Prew Benson now lives on, and bounded as follows: Beginning at a four prongd locust tree on the River bank in an old field, then running down the several courses and meanders of the River to the mouth of Rocky Run, then up the several courses and meanders of said rocky run to poplar, a spanish oak and beech trees, then leaving the said run and running S 37 deg. W 100? poles to the beginning, to have and hold the said 134 acres ... (normal warranty deed wording) Prew Benson, Elizabeth (X) Benson. Wit. Thos. Kuth? (Keith?), John Blackwell Jun., Original Young, Thomas Falliz, Robert Stringfellow, John Young.
         Commonwealth of VA to Thomas Keith, Samuel Blackwell and John Blackwell Junior, Gentlemen; that Prew Benson and Elizabeth his wife by their indenture of bargain and sale 2 May 1791 have sold and conveyed to William Skinker Junior the fee simple estate of 134 acres in Fauquier Co., and whereas Elizabeth cannot conveniently travel to the Court of said County to acknowledge the same, we empower you or any two of you to examine Elizabeth and take her acknowledgement ... (Elizabeth to relinquish her dower in private examination). 23 June 1791.
         According to the didemus to us, we have examined Elizabeth ... 23 June 1791, Thos. Keith?, John Blackwell Jr.
         Court 27 June 1791, indenture proved on oaths of Thomas Keith? and Thomas Fallis witnesses, and at court 26 Oct. 1795, was further proved by oath of John Blackwell Jun. another witness, and with the ack. and privy examination of the said Elizabeth, documents ordered recorded. (p.116-18)
      At a court of Quarter Sessions continued and held 29 Nov. 1796, William Skinker, Plft., against Thomas Fallis, Deft.; on a Caveat for two tracts of land lying in Fauquier Co. on the waters of Rappahanock and Rocky Run, one containing 128 acres and the other 13 acres. This day came the parties by their attornies and the said Deft. acknowledges the Plft's claim to the lands in the Caveat mentioned to be just. Therefore it is considered by the court that no grant issue to the Deft. for the said land, the Plft. claiming the same by a better title; and the Deft. agrees to pay the costs. (p.118-19)

      Pg.119-124, Stringfellow vs. Fallis (have copy). Let no grant issue to Thomas Fallis for a tract of land lying in Fauquier Co. on the water of Rocky Run containing by survey 128 acres, Robert Stringfellow claiming the same as or such part thereof as falls within a grant made by the proprietor of the Northern Neck to Robert Duncan who sold or conveyed it to William Johnson who conveyed the same to the said Robert Stringfellow, beginning on Rocky run at an old road known by the name of Staunton's road and at the uppermost part of Richard Teakle's land, then running up the meanders of the said run to Duncans corner white oak on the side of the said (blank) and on the side of the said Stringfellow's saw mill pond and then agreeable to the different courses expressed in the conveyance from Johnson to Stringfellow to the beginning.
         Fauquier Co., to wit: Robert Stringfellow this day came before me and made oath that the above Caveatt against Thomas Fallis obtaining a grant for the land therein mentioned is really and bonafide entered with an intention of procuring the lands for himself and not in trust for the benefit of the said Thomas Fallis against whom this Caveat is intended to be entered. 26 Sept. 1796. Thos. Kuth. Entered 3 Oct. 1796. A copy. (p.119)
      [see Figure 3 above] Surveyed for Mr. Thomas Fallis ... (128 acres; same survey description as on page 110 above) (p.119-21)

FIGURE 4 (Pg.121)

      The above [Figure 4] is a true copy of a platt belonging to Certificate of Survey upon which a grant Issued to Robert Duncan on 14 October 1726. Land Office, March 14, 1796. (p.121)
      The Right Honorable Thomas Lord Fairfax ... for diverse good causes and considerations but more especially for and in consideration of the composition for our use paid unto our agent and attorney and for the annual rent hereafter reserved, we have given, granted and confirmed ... to Robert Duncan of King George Co. one certain tract or parcel of land containing 242 acres in the County aforesaid round and adjacent to a parcel of land granted the said Duncan by Patent July 27, 1715 for 258 acres, the whole being 500 acres, bounded as follows: Beginning at A, a Spanish, a red & two white oaks standing three Angular on the east side of Summerduck run, extending N 43 deg. E 64 poles to B a scrubby oak, then N 80 deg. E 76 poles to C a white oak corner to the land of Giles Traverse, then binding therewith N 70 deg. E 76 poles to D a large pine, then S 60 deg. E 36 poles to E a white Oak, then N 85 deg. E 58 poles to F an Ash, a hiccory and a white oak on a run commonly called Rocky Run, then down the said run S 10 deg. E 72 poles, S 75 deg. E 50 poles, S 10 deg. E 46 poles, S 36 deg. W 32 poles, S 19 deg. E 130 poles, S 10 deg. E 120 poles, SE 34 poles to G two beaches standing on the upper side of the mouth of the said run, then up Rappahannock River N 70 deg. W 44 poles, NW 72 poles, N 80 deg. W 30 poles to H, to diverse marked birches on the lower side of the mouth of Summer duck Run being corner to the Honorable Robert Carters Land, then up the said Run N 48 deg. W 174 poles to I a maple corner to said Carter's land, then binding with the said land S 48 deg. W 12 poles, S 62 deg. W 44 poles, W 38 poles, N 88 deg. W 16 poles to K a corner red oak, then S 17 deg. W 18 poles to L a willow oak being the said Carter's upper corner on the aforesaid River, then up the said River S 86 deg. W 64 poles to a live oak at M on the said bank, finally N 19 deg. W 194 poles to A, the first station; together with all rights, members and appurtenances thereunto belonging, Royal mines excepted and a full third part of all lead, copper, tin, coals, iron mines and Iron ore that shall be found thereon; to have and to hold the said 500 acres ... (normal wording of grant, not copied here) 14 October (?teenth year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord George of Great Britain ...) A copy. (pg.121-23)
      At a Court of Quarter Sessions continued and held for Fauquier Co. 29 Nov. 1796, Robert Stringfellow, Plft., against Thomas Fallis, Deft.; on a Caveat for a tract of land lying in Fauquier County on the waters of Rocky Run containing by survey 128 acres. This day came the parties by their attorneys and the said Deft. acknowledged the Plft's claim to the lands in the Caveat mentioned to be just. Therefore it is considered by the court that no grant issue to the Deft. for the said land, the Plft. claiming the same by a better title; and the Deft. agrees to pay the costs. (p.123-24)

      Pg.124-128, Benson vs. Fallis (have copy). Let no grant issue to Thomas Fallis for three tracts of land lying in Fauquier Co. on the waters of Rocky run, Rappahannock river and summer duck run, one containing 128 acres, the second 25 acres, and the third 13 acres, Prew Benson claiming the same or such part thereof as falls within a grant made by the Proprietors of the Northern Neck to Robert Duncan, Beginning on the River at a four prongd locust tree Beginning corner to William Skinker, then up the several courses and meanders of the River to the mouth of summerduck run, thence up the several courses and meanders of the said Summerduck Run to the mouth of a small branch on Mr. Turnell's branch, emteeing (sic) into the said run and calls for two ash and two elm trees from thence agreeable to Duncan's conveyance two poplar, a beech an elm and an ash, marked for corner trees at the mouth of a small branch and on the side of Rocky run, then down the several courses and meanders of the said run to a poplar, spanish oak and black beech tree on the said run and corner to William Skinker, from thence a southerly course with the said Skinker's line to the beginning. The said Prew Benson claiming the same by virtue of the aforementioned grant made to Robert Duncan who conveyed the same to James Turnell who devised the same to his son Ned Furnell (Turnett?) who conveyed the same to the said Prew Benson. A copy. Entered 4 Oct. 1796. (p.124)
      [see Figure 3 above] Surveyed for Mr. Thomas Fallis ... (128 acres; same survey description as on page 110 above) (p.125-26)
      [see Figure 2 above] Surveyed for Mr. Thomas Fallis ... (25 acres; same survey description as on page 109 above) (p.126-27)
      [see Figure 1 above] Surveyed for Mr. Thomas Fallis ... (13 acres; same survey description as on page 109 above) (p.127)
      At a Court of Quarter Sessions continued and held for Fauquier Co. 29 Nov. 1796, Prow (sic) Benson Plft. against Thomas Fallis Deft.; on a Caveat for three tracts of land lying in the Fauquier Co. on Rocky run, Rappahannock River and summerduck run, containing 128, 25 and 13 acres. This day came the parties by their attorneys and the said Deft. acknowledged the Plft's claim to the lands in the Caveat mentioned to be just. Therefore it is considered by the court that no grant issue to the Deft. for the said land, the Plft. claiming the same by a better title; and the Deft. agrees to pay the costs. (p.128)

   Pg.128-141 (have copy): Skinker vs. Mauzy. Fauquier Co. John Skinker complaining of John Mauzy in custody &c of a plea for that whereas the said defendant on the (blank) day of (blank) in the year 1793 at the Parish (blank) and County aforesaid was indebted to the said Plaintiff in the sum of £50 (blank) or so much money before that time (him? and/any?) (writing faint) namely the said defendant for the (amount to pay?) the said plaintiff and being so indebted the said defendant mansutuations? thereof, afterwards to wit on the same day and year aforesaid at the Parish and County aforesaid bound? upon himself and to the said? Pres. then and there faithfully promised that he would pay the said sum of money which he should be (the security?) required, and whereas the said defendant afterwards, to wit, on the same day and year aforesaid at the Parish and County aforesaid was endebted to the said Plaintiff in one other sum of £50 for the use and occupation of a piece or parcell of land situate in the Parish & County aforesaid containing about 79 acres, the property of the said Plaintiff which said use and occupation of the said land the said Defendant has had and enjoy'd from the (blank) day of (blank) 1780 (1700?) until the (blank) day (blank) 1793 next ensuing and being so indebted the said defendant afterwards to wit, on the same day and year aforesaid assum'd upon himself and to the said Plaintiff then and there faithfully promis'd that he would pay to the said Plaintiff the said sum of £50 when he should be thereunto afterwards required, and whereas the said Defendant afterwards, to wit, on the (blank) day, the Parish and County aforesaid, did take possession of one other tract or parcell of land situate in the Parish & county aforesaid, the property of the said Plaintiff and the said land so taken possession of, the said defendant did continue to hold from the said (blank) day of 1700 until the (blank) day of (blank) in the year 1793. In consideration whereof the said Deft. afterwards to wit on the day and year last mentioned at the Parish and County aforesaid in? assume? upon himself and to the said Plaintiff then and there faithfully promise that he would satisfy and pay to the Plaintiff so much money as the occupation and possession of the land was worth during the time it was so held and enjoyed, and the said Plaintiff in fact says that the said lands were reasonably worth the £50 ... (defendant did not pay the sums of money) (p.128-9)
      And at the ?testeship? for the said County 30 May 1795 came the Plaintiff by his attorney and the Deft. failing to appear and answer the Plaintiff's action it was ordered that judgment be entered for the Plaintiff for what shall appear to be due unless the sd. defendant shall then? cause for selling uses? this award? to at the next Rules.
         And at the Ruleskeeper? for the said County 26 March 1795 came the Plaintiff by his attorney and? the Deft.? not appearing it was ordered that the Commonwealth confussion? and a writ of enquiry of damages was decreased? to be entered at the next court.
         At a Court of Quarter Sessions continued and held for Fauquier Co. 25 Aug. 1796, on the motion of the Defendant by his attorney who pleaded not guilty, to which the Plaintiff issued gennully?, it is ordered that the writ of inquiry awarded in this case be set aside. (p.129-30)
      At a Court of Quarter Sessions continued and held for Fauquier Co. 29 March 1797. This day came the parties by their attornies and thereupon came also Jury, to wit, James Lowe, Randolph Spier Junior, Francis Berryman, William Burditt, James Lamkin, John Conyers, William Russell, William Carter, George Maddux, Edward Burgess, John Morehead?, and John Marr who being elected, tried? (cried?) and sworn the oath to speak upon the issue joined, and having partly heard the evidence were adjourned til tomorrow morning ten of the clock.
         At a Court of Quarter Sessions continued and held for Fauquier Co. 30 March 1797, This day came the parties by their attornies and the jury sworn in this cause yesterday appeared according to adjournment and having fully heard the evidence upon this case say that the Deft. is guilty in manner and form as the Pltf against him hath declared and they co-assess the Pltf damages by reason thereof to £20 ... and in the motion of the defendant a non-suit is awarded him, he paying the costs ... (p.130)
      At a Court of Quarter Sessions ... 29 Nov. 1797, this day came the parties by their attornies and thereupon came also a jury, to wit, Philip Matteny, Enoch Jeffrese, Samuel W. Blackwell, Henry Wharter??, Henry Reyes, James? Wilson?, George Hempin?, John Allison?, Richard Farchills?, Joseph Nelson, James Foley, and Thomas B. Maddux, who being called, ? and sworn ... and having fully heard the evidence were adjourned until tomorrow nine of the Clock. At the trial of this cause the following bill of complaint? was filed? and part of of the second. In this issue the Counsel for the Deft. deposed the following questions: "1. Whether or not it is not necessary for the Pltf. to show a title to the lands which he alledges was attained from him by the Deft. 2. And whether the Plft has produced the best evidence of the title that the nature of the case would admit." and the court gave it as their opinion that it was necessary for the plft to prove a title to the said lands and that they had not produced the best evidence the nature of the case would admit, The Plft. not having deduced a regular title by deed to the lands in question. The Counsel for the Plft. then prayed the opinion of the Court whether altho he had not deduced a regular title by deed to the land in question, Twenty years possession of the land was not a sufficient title to sustain this action, and the court gave it as their opinion that it was not for the following reasons, to wit, Because it appears by the deeds produced by the Plft that the lands in question were granted to (blank) Duncan and by Duncan conveyed to Samuel Skinker and it does not appear that the plaintiff is heir at law to Samuel Skinker or has conveyance from him and because it moreover appears that the lands in question were granted by the Commonwealth to Marten Pickett in the year 1792 and because it did not appear to the court in? assume? that any may have been delivered to him ... (several words too faint) for the payment of the rents charged in the declaration. For these reasons the Court gave as its opinion that altho the Plft. should prove 20 years (kincade?) possession of the lands in question and altho the letter of the Deft hereto heard? in these words it ?? was produced by the Plft. yet that the same was not in this case referred? & ran? whereby ... (more proof to be produced?). (p.130-31)
      At a Court of Quarter Sessions ... 30 November 1797, this day came the parties by their attorneys and the jury ... this cause yesterday appearing ... and having fully heard the evidence in this case, ... that the Deft. is not guilty of the trespass in the declaration in evidence with pleading he hath alledged these for consideration by the court that the Plft take nothing by his bill but for his false ?? maybe lakemd? arrested?. The Deft go thereof without delay and recover against the Plft. his costs by him about his defense and ...
         From which Judgment the Plft. by his attorney prayed an appeal to the first day of the next District Court to be holden at Dumfrees which is granted him upon giving bond with security according to law. (pg.131)
      Grant of the Proprietors to Thomas Duncan. The Rt. Honorable Thomas Lord Fairfax ... do give, grant and confirm unto Thomas Dunkin of King George County, one certain tract or parcel of land containing 67 acres in the said county on a branch of the Marsh Run commonly called Marrs Run and is bounded as follows, Beg. at a white oak corner to the lands of James Morgan, extending N 5? deg. W 20? poles to a red oak corner to the lands of Parson Scott, then binding therewith S 10 deg. W 140 poles to a corner white oak, then S 15 deg. E 26 poles to a live oak on the line of the said Run, then down the said run S 65 deg. W 7? poles to a spanish oak, then N? 75? deg. W 31? poles to a pine corner to Dunwiddie's land, finally along a line of the said land N 5? deg. E 24? poles to the first station, together with all rights, ... for rent of one shilling sterling money for every fifty acres of land (usual grant wording, not copied here) 5 October 1726. (p.132-33)
      Duncan lease to Skinker. This Indenture 19 May 1736 from Thomas Dunken of Hamilton Parish, Prince William Co., planter, to Samuel Skinker of Hanover Parish, County of King George, Gent., for five shillings Sterling money paid ..., all that tract or parcel of land containing 67 acres in the said county of Prince William on a branch of the Marsh Run commonly called Marrs Run, and is bounded as follows: Beg. at a white oak corner to the lands of Charles Morgan, extending N 21 deg. W 28 poles to a red oak corner to the lands of Parson Scott, then binding therewith S 10 deg. W 148 poles to a corner white oak, then S 18 deg. E 26 poles to a live oak on the line of the said Run, then down the said run S 65 deg. W 72 poles to a spanish oak, then N 73 deg. W 31 poles to a pine corner to Dinwiddie's land, finally along a line of the said land N 25 deg. E 246 poles to the first station, together with all rights ... for one year, paying the yearly rent ... Thomas (X) Duncan. Wit. Wm. Hackney, Jeffrey (+) Johnson, Thomas (+) Evans. At a Court held for Prince William Co. July 21, 1736, William Hackney, Jeffrey Johnson and Thomas Evans proved this lease to be the act and deed of Thomas Duncan and it was thereupon admitted to record. (p.133-34)
      This indenture 20 May ... 1736, Thomas Dunkin of Hamilton Parish, Prince William Co., planter, to Samuel Skinker of Hamilton Parish, King George Co., Gent., for £10 current VA money paid before the delivery of these presents, ... all that tract of land containing 67 acres in said Prince William Co. on a branch of the Marsh Run commonly called Marrs Run, and is bounded as follows: Beg. at a white oak corner to the land of Charles Morgan, extending N 21 deg. W 38 (sic) poles to a red oak corner to the land of Parson Scott, then binding therewith S 10 deg. W 148 poles to a corner white oak, then S 18 deg. E 26 poles to a live oak on the line of the said Run, then down the said run S 65 deg. W 72 poles to a spanish oak, then N 73 deg. W 31 poles to a pine corner to Dinwiddie's land, finally along a line of the said land N 25 deg. E 246 poles to the first station, together with all rights ... actual possession of said Samuel Skinker by virtue of an indenture of bargain and sale for one year bearing date the day before the date of these presents ... Thomas (T) Duncan. Wit. Wm. Hackney, Jeffrey (+) Johnson, Thomas (+) Evans. Received of Samuel Skinker the sum of £10 ... Thomas (T) Duncan. (same witnesses) At a Court held for Prince William Co. July 21, 1736, William Hackney, Jeffrey Johnson and Thomas Evans proved this lease to be the act and deed of Thomas Duncan and it was thereupon admitted to record. (p.134-37)
      On the motion of the Plaintiff it is ordered that Peter Conway deputy surveyor of this County do go upon the lands in controversy on the (blank) day of (blank) next, if fair, if not, the next fair day, and survey and lay out the same as the party shall require and return five fair plates [plats] and report thereof to the court and that anyone of the Justices of the said County do then and there meet him and examine and take the depositions of such witnesses as may be produced by either of the parties which are to be returned with the said Plat and reports and the sheriff of the said County is to attend the said survey and remove force if any be offered. (p.137)

FIGURE 5 (Pg.137)

       The Black lines [Figure 5] are the lines sd. Ranty Duncan's deed which will more fully appear by the plats and reports I formerly returned to Francis Brook, Clerk of Fauquier Court. Peter Conway. (p.137) [Figure 5 had three lines of comments written sideways under lines G to H: The dotted lines are the lines of? Martin Pickett Dec. which sd.? John Mauzy paid? me to platt and lay down? agreeable to the lines of the said --?-.] [Figure 5 had three words written in lower dark tip of survey which I cannot read] [Figure 6 was at top of next page.]

FIGURE 6 (Pg.138)

      Pursuant to an order of the worshipful court of Fauquier to me directed I survey, and on 3 Aug. 1796 the lands in controversy between John Skinker Plft. and John Mauzy Deft. and at the request of William Skinker who acted for and in behalf of the Plf. I began at A a pine stump corner of Dunwoodies lands now Chilton Runsdell's and also a corner of Duncan's land near John Skinker's being acknowledged by the parties to be a corner to Duncan's line and run thence the first course of Duncans patent by allowing the usual variations 166 poles to William Casey's fence west through his plantation as is represented by the -?- pencil's figure 36 poles then leaving his plantation and continued the same course until I ran the number of poles called for by the patent ??? ... to the ... (too faint and difficult to read) corner formerly Yeats the said (quit trying to read description) Peter Conway, DSFC; William Caisey and Robert King, chain carriers. (p.138)
      Henry Lee, Esqr., Governor of the CommonWealth of VA, ... that by virtue of a Land Office Treasury Warrant No. 22 issued 8 Oct. 1787 and directed to the principle surveyor of Fauquier Co., also a Treasury Warrant No. 12,455 issued 22 June 1782, there is granted to Martin Pickett a certain tract or parcel of land containing 139 acres by survey dated 28 June 1791 in Fauquier Co. on the marsh and Marrs Run and bounded as follows, to wit, Beg. at an old spanish oak stump by the side of Marrs Run being the beg. corner of Capt. John Stuart?s land, near a line of Colo. John Skinker's land and extending along the lines of the said Skinker's land S 7 deg. W 114 poles to a dead spanish oak by the side of Marrs Run, then S 60 deg. W 181 poles, then S 79 deg. W 20 poles to the Marsh Run, then up the meanders of the said run N 10 deg. E 13 poles, N 10 deg. W 16 poles crossing the mouth of Marrs run, to a bench stump corner to Chilten Ransdells lands then along the said line N 37 deg. E 45 poles to two ashes and three maples, then N 69 deg. E 72? poles to sundry water oaks, N 102 deg. E 21 poles to two white oaks and maples, then N 17 deg. E 174 poles to a corner stone, N 162? deg. E 194 poles to sundry red oaks being the dividing corner between the said Ransdells and the said Stewarts upper tract S 6 deg. W 85 poles to a corner of the aforesaid Stewarts lower another tract, then with the said Stewarts line SW? 206 poles to another of the said Stewart's courses, then N 52 deg. 62? poles to the Beginning. (MAD: very faint and difficulty to read) 26 Dec. 1792. (p.139)

FIGURE 7 (Pg.140)

      In adjudged ??? ... surveyor for Mr. John Mauzy ... Martin Pickett as to waste or unappropriated land situate in Fauquier Co. lying on the marsh and Marrs Run, being inclusive? (Indicated?) ... by lines A B C D E F G H I K L M A, but by a subsequent survey it appears that the greatest part of the same tract is taken by an elder patent granted to Thomas Duncan bearing date 5 October 1726, line point P is a white oak shown for a corner of Morgan's land which appears from circumstance to have been the corner called for as the beginning corner of Duncan's patent, but the first course of said patent appears to have been wrong inserted, as it calls for N 21 deg. W when the course appears to have been originally S 21 deg. W 32 poles instead of 20 poles to L the place fad? on for the corner of Stuart's land formerly Parson Scotts Then the said Duncans Patent calls for running with Parson Scotts now Stewarts land and give the course but only calls for 140 poles when the Distance of the Line L, M is 210 Poles, and yet Duncans Patent appears to call for a corner white oak which is the corner tree call (sic) for by Scotts patent at M, and what makes it more probable that Duncan in his survey seen to Scotts white oak corner at M, is by reversing the course of Duncans Patent from the pine corner Dunwiddie's now Chilton Ransdells, al., H which course is being reversed very nearly runs to the place fixed on for Stuarts corner at M. The corner at B is a dead spanish oak by the side of Marrs Run being an ancient corner tree to another parcell of land which the said Duncan formerly owned and as Duncan's Patent calls for a spanish oak corner thereabout, it is very probable that was the spanish oak corner tree call (sic) for but real? courses in distance does not precisely contact? as appears by the separate line from N towards B, but by augmenting the Distance of the line M, N four polls the next course of Duncans Patent went .. to the corner spanish oak at B, the line from H ?? is the last mentioned course of Duncan's Patent which indis? ?commencing along Dunwoodies line from the pine corner W to the post stake in through? the course grass? ?? agrees with the course of the lines that ... place by the Red Dotted line from W and angat? ... Hendry? Stuarts and Ransdalls tracts where it is to be supposed never stood a corner of Hargaris Junr? which is a circumstance not easily accounted for. The line point to Q is a line drawn in the reverse direction, the first mentioned course of Duncans Patent which intersects the line of Stewarts tract 148 poles from the corner at M which is the distance called for on that line by Duncans Patent. The utmost pretentions that could with any degree of propriety be served? under? Duncans Patent would include 79 acres of the aforesaid land and if strictly confirmed to the express courses and distances only 62 acres. James Routt, 8? March 1793. (p.139-40)
      Henry Lee Esquire, Governor of the Commonwealth of VA, ... by Virtue of a Land Office Treasury Warrant No. 22 issued 8 Oct. 1787 and directed to the surveyor of Fauquier Co., also a Treasury Warrant No. 12455 issued 22 June 1782, granted to Martin Pickett certain tract or parcel of land containing 139 acres by survey 28 June 1791 in Fauquier Co. on the Marsh and Marrs Run, bounded as follows: Beg. at an old Spanish Oak stump by the side of Marrs Run, being the beg. corner of Capt. John Stewards land in or near a line or Colo. John Skinker's land and extending along the lines of the said Skinker's land S 7 deg. W 114 poles to a dead spanish oak by the side of Marrs Run, then S 60 deg. W 181 poles, then S 79 deg. W 20 poles to the Marsh Run, then up the meanders of the said run N 10 deg. E 13 poles, N 10 deg. W 16 poles crossing the mouth of Marrs run, to a bench stump corner to Chilten Ransdells lands then along the said line N 37 deg. E 45 poles to two ashes and three maples, then N 69 deg. E 72? poles to sundry water oaks, N 102 deg. E 21 poles to two white oaks and maples, then N 17 deg. E 174 poles to a corner stone, N 262 deg. E 194 poles to sundry red oaks being the dividing corner between the said Ransdells and the said Stewarts upper tract S 6 deg. W 85 poles to a corner of the aforesaid Stewarts lower another tract, then with the said Stewarts line SW 206 poles to another of the said Stewart's courses, then S 65 deg. E 62? poles to the Beginning. (MAD: very faint and difficult to read) 26 Dec. 1792. (p.141)
 

Return to the Fauquier Co. VA Research File

END

Return to Index to Duncan Research Files in Virginia

Return to The Genealogy Bug's Home Page