The deposition of Elijah Jefferies taken agreeable to the notice this 5th day of March, 1830 at the home of Mrs.? L.? C. R???erton in Perryville, to be read as evidence in a certain suit in chancery now pending in the Mercer Circuit Court, wherein Lewis Powell & Robert Burton are complainants and Charles Hart, Adm. of Charles Powell dec'd is defendant.  This deponent of lawful age and on oath deposeth and sayeth that some time pervious to the death of Mrs. Viles late widow of Charles Powell decd. and during the time of her last illness being in company with Chas. Hart Jr. at the deponents house, in conversation with said Hart, he remarked that he had paid money for the estate of Charles Powell decd: but there was no pacific sum named, said Hart farther observed that he would loose the interest on the money, deponent does not state positively that the interest spoken of was with an allusion to the money above named but has no recollection, nor does he believe that any other money was spoken of during the conversation; and deponent farther sayeth that he frequently visited Mrs. Viles during the time of her illness and the last time of visiting her and probably about one month after the above named conversation with Chas. Hart Jr., Mrs. Viles observed that they had one consolation and that was they owed nothing; that what little they had was their own; to which Mrs. Viles replied, yes it is a ?????? know that she owed one dollar in the world, unless one dollar which she considered a gift from Anderson Jefferies or some other person;
Deponent believes that Mr. and Mrs. Viles lived between three and four years, about one mile or a little upwards from him, and continued to live there until a short time previous to her death.  He deposed was frequently at there house during said term, and believes they lived plentifully and also believes they were at any time during his acquaintance with them able to have paid one or two Hundred Dollars.

QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Do you or not know what the estate of Benjamin Viles was worth, at the time or shortly after the death of Mrs. Viles, late widow of Charles Powell Dece.
ANSWER:
I would suppose the estate was worth upwards of Two Hundred Dollars previous to the sale of property made by the complainants Powell and Burton.
QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not suppose that she could possibly have kept house had the amount of money been  collected of her which I obtained judgement for against complainants Powell and Burton.
ANSWER:
I believe she could as her children were (except one or two) large enough to aid her in doing so.
QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not know how many children were living with her at the time or shortly before her death.
ANSWER:
There were Four or five, the youngest of whom was eight or nine years old.

 QUESTION BY SAME:
Did you or not consider her a hard working, poor unfortunate woman.
ANSWER:
I did consider her a hard working woman and unfortunately situated with both her husbands.
QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not know that Viles left his neighborhood considerably in debt and if so for how many different persons.
ANSWER:
He went off in my debt $1.25 and I have understood that he was indebted to several other persons, but had no knowledge of any large sums, and further sayeth not.
        Elijah Jefferies
Elijah Jefferies claim attendance having rode from Washington City a distance of 7 miles.
Mercer County Ct.
The foregoing deposition of Elijah Jefferies was taken subscribed and sworn to before me this 5th day of March 1830.
        Samuel Ewing J. P.
Adjourned until tomorrow the C?? Inst.
 Justice fee $1.00       S. E.
 
 

The deposition of Henry Powell taken agreeably to notice at the House of Samuel Ewing in Perryville this 13th day of May 1830 to be Read as evidence in a suit in Chancery now pending and undetermined in the Mercer Circuit Court, wherein Lewis Powell & Robert Burton are Compt's & Charles Hart Admt. of Charles Powell Dec'd is Defendant.  This despondent of lawful age & on oath desposeth & sayeth.

 QUESTION BY DEFT. HART;
Did you or not tell Lewis Powell or any other person that you saw the Bond now in controversy in the hands of your mother before her death.
 ANSWER:  I never did tell him or any other person .
 QUESTION BY SAME:
Did you or not understand from your mother a few days before her death & at many other times that  said Bond had never been discharged.
 ANSWER:  I have understood from her frequently & shortly before her death the Bond never had been discharged--
 QUESTION BY SAME:
Did you or not hear her find fault with Benjamin Viles (her husband) after he had left her, for not having discharged said Bond.
 ANSWER:  I have at two or three different times heard her exclaim about him for not discharging said Bond.
 QUESTION BY COMPT.
Powell, How long after the death of your mother before you ? of the money coming to Deft. Hart.
 ANSWER:  From what she told me I had knowledge of it before her death.
 QUESTION BY SAME:
Had you or not visited the house of Mrs. Viles for some years before the death of Your mother until her last sickness.
 ANSWER:  I don't believe I was ever six months without being there in the time.
 QUESTION BY SAME:
Was there or not a dispute between Mrs. Viles your mother and yourself concerning the above named Bond.
 ANSWER:  There was a dispute about the division of the Land.
 QUESTION BY SAME:  Did you or your mother pay for the land you speak of.
 ANSWER:  She paid a part.
 QUESTION BY SAME:  Did you or not sell said land.
 ANSWER:  The land was to be hers when paid for and further saith not.
       Henry Powel
NOTE BY EDGE BY SIGNATURE:
(The above dept. objected ? incompetent  Powell is a Legatee of the said note?)

The deposition of David W. Ellis taken the same time and place and to be read as evidence in the same suit.  This dependent of lawful age and on oath deposeth and sayeth-- (note this paper with Henry Powell paper)
 QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:  Have you or not known claimant Powell for a number of years and if so state how long.
 ANSWER:  I have been slightly acquainted with Mr. Powell for a number of years, I suppose as many as twenty.
 QUESTION BY SAME:
Have you or not knowledge of said Powel's proposing to pay you some money as soon as you would write a receipt for it and at the same time (note: this part very unclear with parts crossed out) Ten Dollar bill, and after obtaining the receipt money did he not refuse to pay the money.
 ANSWER:
Complainant Powel's son Charles owed me some money for which I had obtained a judgement, we afterwards agreed to compromise the matter allowing a deduction of Five Dollars by getting the money in hand; ?? said judgement and after doing so and waiting a reasonable time, I  asked for the money as I wished to go home.  The said Charles observed that he had not the money; A second application was made, and a similar answer given.  A proposition was then made to return to the house od claimant Powells (as we had left his house) in order to see if the money was there' and when the matter was named to him he demanded the settlement and receipt, objected to paying the money ?? giving up the receipt and observed that all might go to Hell; Claimant showed me when about to ?? the bill was as I believe a Ten Dollar Commonwealth bank note which amount he agreed to pay in hand and (three lines crossed out here) because responsible for the balance coming to me and I compromised by giving a Due Bill--
 QUESTION BY SAME:  Do you or not believe that complaint Powell was the cause of all the difficulty, so far as respect the money and receipt.
 ANSWER:  I believe he was as much the cause as any other person, if not the most.  My reason for thinking he was the most was, the man who held the receipt proposed? to give the receipt up if he complaint would consent which he refused to do.
 QUESTION BY SAME:
Was not his son above allured to young and under age at that time and would he not have been contracted? By his father.
 ANSWER:  I believe he was underage.  And in that matter think he was contracted by him.
 QUESTION BY SAME:  Did you or not threaten to prosecute said Powell before you could get your money.
 ANSWER:  I think (Researchers note:  This doesn't appear to be the last of this document.  I don't know if I will be able to find the remaining part--There are many many loose papers all tied in a bundle about 4 inches wide-8 inches long and 7 inches deep.
 

The deposition of Tho. J. Crawford taken this  2nd day of July 1830, agreeable to notice to be read as evidence in a certain suit in Chancery now pending in the Mercer Circuit Court wherein Lewis Powell and Robert Burton are complainants and Charles Hart Jr. Adm. of Charles Powell dec'd. is defendant.  This deponent saith, that on the 22nd day of June last he did as a justice of the peace at the house of complainant Powell take the deposition of Miss Nancy Bottom--
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Did you or did you not while taking the aforesaid deposition have to call complainant Powell to order as many as two or three times.
A:
I did as many as three times, I thought he was dictating to the witness and I named it Improper.
     QUESTION BY COMPLAINANT POWELL:
Did or did not deft. Hart ask said witness improper questions.
     ANSWER:
In the course of taking said deposition the Deft. Hart asked a question that I thought improper, however after some conversation the question was somewhat modified and she answered it.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
did you or did you not tell said Hart that he must not ask such questions.
     ANSWER:
I told Hart that such question were irrelevant and further this deponent saith not.
       Tho. J. Crawford

The further taking of deposition is discontinued until tomorrow 10 O'clock, July 2nd 1830
       Nelson Mays J. P.

July 3 rd 1830 met agreeable to adjournment and preceded to take the deposition of Lucy Campbell formerly Lucy Martin to be read as evidence in the same suit as the foregoing deposition.  This deponent of lawful age and duly sworn and being interrogated by the defendant Hart, deposeth and saith,   That she went in company with Miss Nancy Bottom to see Mrs. Voyles while she lay sick at the house of defendant Hart.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Was or was not my two daughters, Easter and Polly, in the same room with Mrs. Voyles at the time you and Miss Nancy Bottom went in.
     ANSWER:
Yes they were.
 
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Did or did not Easter remain in the same roam with Miss Bottom during the time of your being there,
     ANSWER:
I believe she was but can't say positively as I was out of that room a few minutes in an adjoining one through which she must have passed if she had left the room, there being no door out at which she could have went without passing through the room where I left her in the room when I went out and found her there when I returned.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Was you or not generally while at my house in company with Miss Nancy Bottom and Mrs. Voyles.
     ANSWER:
I was.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
did you or did you not hear said Nancy Bottom ask Mr.s Voyles whether she expected to recover from her illness or ask her any question concerning her death or hear her say anything on that subject.
     ANSWER:
I did not.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not know that Nancy Bottom had information that some of her companions? had given depositions in this suit before she had given hers.
     ANSWER:
She was not.
     QUESTION BY COMPLAINANT POWELL:
Did you or not hear defendant Hart say in your mothers house that he was acting for the fatherless and the widow.
     ANSWER:
It was my clear understanding that he said so.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Did you or not understand this since the death of Mrs. Voyles.
     ANSWER:
I did and further this deponent saith not.
                her
        Lucy X Campbell
         mark

The deposition of George Campbell taken this 3rd of July 1830, to be read as evidence in the same suit as the foregoing .  This deponent of lawful age and duly sworn and being interrogated by the Defendant Hart deposeth and saith,  That he has been acquainted with Jacob Powell about seven years.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Is or is not his general character a good one as it respects truth and honesty.
     ANSWER:
I never heard anything else of him in my life.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Has or not said Jacob Powell lived a near neighbor to you for several years.
     ANSWER:
He has three or four years and further this deponent saith not.
      George P. Campbell

The deposition of Henry Powell taken at the same time and place and to be read as evidence in the same suit as the foregoing deposition.  This deponent of lawful age and duly sworn and being interrogated by the defendant Hart deposeth and saith.
 That his mother Leah Voiles in her last illness refused to be moved from her place of residence until her son Jacob could be got to come and stay and take charge of the children properly and that he did come and agree to stay upon which she appeared to be well satisfied to be moved, believing from the confidence she had in Jacob that he would take good care of the family property.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Do you or not know that your mother Leah Voyles shortly before her death gave up to me a parcel of her papers among which was a title bond she held on you for a piece of land then in her possession, and if so state what has transpired between you myself and others relative to those papers and title bond since that time.
     ANSWER:
I understood from you that first time I saw you after her death she had given up her papers to you amongst which there was a title bond on myself for a piece of land which title bond I called on you to let me see shortly after I received the above information.  You got the bond from amongst my mothers old papers and showed it to me and then put it back into the same old bunch of papers, I further recollect that in a conversation with complainant Powell at the widow  Martins I informed him that I had seen dome papers of my mothers in your possession at which time said Powell asked me if I knew what papers they were.  I answered him I did not except the title bond she my mother held on me for a deed to the land above allured to and further this deponent saith not.
Excepted? to Powells as established?   Henry Powel
???? C.
The further taking of depositions is adorned until Monday next, July 3rd, 1830.
        Nelson Mays J. P.

July 5th 1830, Met agreeable to adjournment and proceeded to take the deposition of Jacob Powell to be read as evidence in the same suit as the foregoing deposition.  This deponent of lawful age and duly sworn and being interrogated by the defendant Hart deposeth and saith, That he was called on shortly before the death of his mother Leah Voiles to come and take charge of her property and children, she being very low and it was thought best that she should be removed to where she could be better taken care of, and that he went according to her request.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Did or did not you and your mother have a conversation about her property and the bond now in controversy between myself and complainant Powell, and if so state what that conversation was.
     ANSWER:
WE had a conversation about her property and said bond, and she requested me to take care of the property, that she did not think she was long for this world and that she expected you would make sale of the property to pay off said bond.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Have you or have you not at several other times understood from your mother that said bond was not paid off.
     ANSWER:
Yes I have heard her say so several times.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Have you or not at different times heard your mother say I was the best friend she ever had, and that if I had pushed on said bond for the money it would have broke her up so that she could not have kept house.
     ANSWER:
Yes, I have heard her say so at different times.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not know the reason why I have not taken your deposition before this time, and if so state what it was.
     ANSWER:
I suppose the reason why you have not taken my deposition before was you did not know until lately that I knew anything about the matter in controversy and that you lately found it out from a conversation I had with John Martin.
     QUESTION BY COMPLAINANT POWELL:
Did you or not tell me that you were one of the legatees and that a part of this money was coming to you.
     ANSWER:
No, not that I recollect of and further this deponent saith not.
(This dep. is excepted as Powell is          his
incompetent, he is a legatee???  ??)   Jacob X Powell
              mark

The deposition of John C. Martin taken this 5th day of July 1830 to be read as evidence in the same suit as the foregoing.  This deponent of lawful age and duly sworn deposeth and saith.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Did you or not in a conversation with me on last Saturday two weeks at your house ask me why I had not taken the deposition of Jacob Powell, If so state what that conversation was.
     ANSWER:
I did, and you said you supposed you could not prove anything by him more than was proven by the rest of the boys, I replied and told you I expected he was the best witness you had, you then observed you would take both of our depositions.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not know that at that time Jacob Powell was at the Ironworks.
     ANSWER:
I don't know certainly but understood so from him.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Have you or not been acquainted with Jacob Powell for a number of years, if so state how long and what is his general character as to truth and honesty.
     ANSWER:
I have been acquainted with him about ten years, and his general character I believe stands fare as a man of truth and honesty, and further this deponent saith not.
       John C. Martin
Mercer County Ct. for Defendant
 The foregoing depositions of Thos. J. Crawford, Lucy Campbell, George P. Campbell, Henry Powell, Jacob Powell, and John C. Martin was taken subscribed and sworn to before me at the time and place and for the purpose as mentioned in the several captions herein, given under my hand this 5th day of July 1830.
       Nelson Mays J. P.

Justice fees----------- $3.00
Witness attendance-- $3.78
Constables fees-------     .50
                                    $7.28

   Hart
   and      }Depo.
   Powell
   Filed July 5th 1830
   (Incompted??  ??  ?? ) (A legal term, maybe incompetent)

The deposition of Joseph Jefferies taken this 29th day of June 1832 at the house of James Kenly in the town of Perryville to be read in evidence in a certain suit in Chancery now pending in the Mercer Circuit court wherein Lewis Powell and Robert Burton are complainants and Charles Hart, Jr. Administrator of Charles Powell dec'd. is defendant.  This deponent being of lawful age and duly sworn deposeth and saith.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Do you or not know that Nelson Crane has lately became unfriendly and hostile towards me.
     ANSWER:
I don't know I would judge from some conversation I have had with him lately and from the circumstances of his not speaking to you on a certain occasion when we met you on the road that he was unfriendly towards you.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Have you or not good reasons to believe that Nelson Crane had lately became more friendly than usual with complainant Powell.
     ANSWER:
I believe he has.
On being interrogated by complainant this dependent saith that he has no knowledge of Nelson Crane and said Complainant Powell ever being unfriendly and further saith not.
        Joseph Jefferies

The deposition Garrett W. Ellis taken at the same time and place to be read in the same suit as the foregoing deposition This deponent of lawful age and duly sworn deposeth and saith.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Do you or not know that Nelson Crane has lately became unfriendly and hostile towards me.
     ANSWER:
I don't know, but I have reason to believe he is unfriendly towards you.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Have you or not good reasons to believe that Nelson Crane has lately became more friendly than usual with Complainant Powell.
     ANSWER:
I have.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Have you or not been acquainted personally and been in the same neighborhood that Henry Powell did for a number of years, and if so state whether or not his general character is good or bad when on oath.
     ANSWER:
I have been acquainted with him a number of years and lived in the same neighborhood with him several years and his character as a man of truth has always been good so far as I know and further saith not.
        Garrett W. Ellis

The deposition of John Martin taken at the same time and place to be read as evidence in the same suit.  This deponent of lawful age and duly sworn deposeth and saith.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Have you or not been personally acquainted with and lived in the same neighborhood as Henry Powell did for a number of years.
     ANSWER:
I have.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
What  or not is his general character good or bad as to a man of truth when on oath.
     ANSWER:
I suppose it is good.  I know nothing to the contrary.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Did you or not ever hear his character infractured by any person until Complainant Powell.
     ANSWER:
I have not.  And further saith not.

        John C. Martin

The deposition of John Kimberland taken at the same time and place to be read as evidence in the same suit.  This dependent of lawful age and duly sworn deposeth and saith.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Have you or not been personally acquainted with and lived in the same neighborhood that Henry Powell did for a number of years.
     ANSWER:
I have.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Whether or not is his general character good or bad as a man of truth when on oath.
     ANSWER:
So far as I have any knowledge it was good.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Did you or not ever go the security of Leah Voiles formerly the widow Powell or Benjamin Voiles to me in any way whatever.
     ANSWER:  I never did.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not know of any other John Kimberland but yourself or nay other Benjamin Thomas, but the Benjamin Thomas, That went in security with your or Benjamin Voiles as guardian to some orphan children in the county court.
     ANSWER:
I know of no other of the same name in Washington or Mercer Counties over twenty one years of age, and further saith not.
         John Kimberlin

The deposition of David Henry taken at the same time and place to be read as evidence in the same suit.  This dependent of lawful age and duly sworn deposeth and saith.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Did you or not hold a conversation with Nelson Crane who gave a deposition in this suit on the 23rd day of March last, and if so state if you please what that conversation was.
     ANSWER:
I did hold a conversation with Nelson Crane on the 23 day of March last, I asked him if he was going to his deposition, he said he was, I as a friend advised him not to do it and told him I understood he had given two or three depositions in this suit already and that if he gave another Hart would blow him sky high.  I told him that Hart would prove him a liar.  I also referred him to a circumstance in which Hart would prove him a liar and observed to him that I expected to be called and if I was he knew what I would have to swear.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Have you or not been personally acquainted with Henry Powell for a number of years.
     ANSWER:  I have ever since he was a boy.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Is or is not the general character of Henry Powell good when under oath.
     ANSWER:
His general character is good and he is to be relied on in his neighborhood.
On being interrogated by the Complainant the deponent saith.
     QUESTION BY COMPLAINANT POWELL:
Do you or not know that Henry Powell was charged with swearing falsely in a suit between Pipes and Graves.
     ANSWER:
I heard Isaac Alexander charge him with swearing false wherein Morris Pipes was complainant and James Graves was defendant.
     QUESTION BY DEFENDANT HART:
Do you or not know that Isaac Alexander had a claim of the same nature of the one between Pipes and Graves.
     ANSWER:  I do.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not know that Alexander showed great animosity on the suit between Pipes and Graves.
     ANSWER:  I do.
     QUESTION BY SAME:
Do you or not know that Alexander ??  ???  ???  of the same nature of Pipes and that he was in favor of Pipes.
     ANSWER:  He had a claim of the same nature of Pipes and showed great animosity in favor of Pipes and further saith not.
      D. Henry
The further taking of depositions is discontinued until tomorrow June 29, 1932
       N. Mays J. P.

The deposition of Cyrus Powell taken the same time and place and to be read as evidence in the same suit as the forgoing deposition.  This deponent of lawful age and duly sworn deposeth and saith.
Question by Defendant:
How long did the widow Powell live out of my neighborhood during the time of her widowhood.
Answer:
She lived on the rolling fork about three years during he widowhood, which was a distance of nine or ten miles from your house.
By Same:
What distance was her residence from my house at the time of her death.
Answer:
I should suppose four miles or upwards.
Question by Defendant:
What length of time was she confined to her bed and not able to get out of her house before her death.
Answer:
I suppose about eight or nine months.
Question by Defendant:
Do you or do you not know that I held a bond on the widow Powell, and did you not understand from her a short time before her death that it was not paid off.
Answer:
I understood you held a bond on her and that it was not paid off, but I did not understand it from her and further saith not.

         Cyrus Powel
 

NOTE:  I have no date on this deposition.  It goes with the George Warner and Cyrus Crawford.  I do not have the other deposition taken at the same time and place.  The date and place are only on the first deposition of the day.  Fleta Aday.

The separate answer of David Powell to the bill and amended bills exhibited against him and shown? in the Mercer Circuit Court by Lewis Powell, complainant.

This deponent ?airing? his erring?? ect.?.? for answer to the said bills of complainant saith that he admits his appointment of adm. of Lea Viles formerly Lea Powell estate.  He has no knowledge or belief that the note in complainants bill mentioned was paid off in her life time.  That in her last illness he frequently heard her speak of a bond that Ch. Hart Jr. (his? as deft.) held on her for property she had purchased at the sale of her late husband Char.  That she had frequently wanted Viles her (then husband) to go and see Hart make arrangementsand pay off the bond.  This defendant wishes? this deposition heretofore given in this com.? and wants? this made a part of his answer.  So far as this deft. has not denied? or admitted and conceded the allegations in complainants bill original and amended he ham? the complainant ?support the same by proof.  Having fully answered he prays honor? ?? dismissed with ent.? ?? (This last seems to be a legal term.)
        David Powel
 

Note:  Much of this I couldn't transcribe, but it seems to be David's answer to allegations made by Lewis Powell against him as Administrator of Leah Powell's estate.)

Lewis Powell
  against           } In ??
Powell's Adm.

 It appears from the sheriffs return on the subpoena against Burton and Jones that the same was executed prior to the last term and they failing to appear and answer the bill.  It is decreed that the bill as to them be and the same is hereby taken as confirmed.  And the case came on was heard on the bills of complainant answers depositions and exhibits, and the court having inspected and considered the same, it is decreed and ordered that the injunction heretofore awards the complainant Test??? proceedings on the judgement at law, be and the same is hereby disallowed? and that Goldman Hart the Adm. subonis?? now of Charles Powell Dec'd. recover against the complainant $18.60 being ten per anum damages on the amount enjoined, and that the bill of the complainant be and is hereby amended?? and finally that the defendant recover against the complainant their costs in??ters suit exhibited?

Note:  I transcribed and proof read this as carefully as I possibly could.  The questions marks are total mysteries.  Although the wording sometimes does not make sense, this is as close as I could come to the actual words. Some of the illegible words are legal terms.  Fleta Aday