COURT MINUTE BOOK, St. Landry Parish, Louisiana Submitted by Mike Miller ********************************************** Copyright. All rights reserved. http://usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm http://usgwarchives.net/la/lafiles.htm ********************************************** page 98 Monday 2d July 1821 The Court met, present, George King Esqre Judge, #929 Crummelin vs Arden #953 Haffeley vs Tribble #1016 Davis vs Stevens all Continued generally #1024 Todd vs Coe: And now by consent, Judgment is rendered against the defendant James Coe, for the sum of forty six dollars with interest at 10 per cent, from the first day of March 1819 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. #1033 Hull [sp?] vs Bowie & Duggins: Judgment for default. #1034 Long vs Winchester: Judgment for default. #1039 Marc & Smith vs Jany [double dots on 'y']: Final judgment against defendant for the sum of One hundred and five dollars fifty cents, with five per cent interest from 5th June 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. #1040 Louvillier vs Devillier; Judgment for default #1041 Veda [Neda?] vs Sallier & Clany: Judgment for default. #1043 Johnson vs Sallier: Judgment for default. #1048 Miramond vs Johnson: Judgment confessed, now final against defendant for the sum of Two hundred and five dollars with 5 per cent interest from 19th June 1821. & costs of suit to be taxed. #1044 Hrs [Heirs] of Sorrel vs Bossier: Judgment by consent against defendant, for Two hundred and thirty six dollars, with five per cent interest from 19th June 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. #1045 Johnston vs Campbell: Judgment for default #1047 Swet vs Singleton: id #1049 W & J. Moore vs Singleton: id #1050 Hatton vs Edwards: id The Court then adjourned until tomorrow 10 O'clock page 99 Tuesday July 3d 1821 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present Geo. King Esqre Judge #1019 W. & J. Moore vs Thompson: Final judgment against defendant, William Thompson for the sum of One hundred and thirty one dollars, Eighty one and a fourth cents, with ten per cent interest from the first of March 1820, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. #1038 Hatton [use of Hill] vs Coe: Final judgment against defendant for the sum of fifty dollars, with five percent interest from 5th June 1821, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. #1033 Poisseau vs Devillier: This cause was argued and laid over for consideration... A. Duggins, A. Marc, D. L. Todd, sworn #1035 Hatton vs Todd: This cause was argued, and laid over for consideration.... G. H. Bell, L. Lesassier, B.S. Haco [sp?], sworn for pltff S. Hamilton, A. Duggins sworn for defdt. The court then adjourned until Thursday 5th July 1821 Thursday 5th July 1821 The court met, present, as before #1023 Widow Poisseau vs Widow Devillier: Judgment against defendant for the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars, damages & costs of suit. #1036 Foreman vs Sommervell: Final Judgment against defendant for the sum of one hundred and sixty nine dollars eight cents with interest on the sum of One hundred and sixteen dollars seventy cents at ten percent, from 1 April 1821, and on the sum of fifty two dollars thirty eight cents at five per cent from 5th June 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. #1042 Heirs of Clack vs Prather & Barrow: Final judgment against defendants for the sum of one hundred and twelve dollars fifty cents, with interest at five per cent from 19th June 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed & ordered that the property of William Prather the principal be first seized and sold to satisfy this Judgment. page 100 #1045 Heirs of Bourg--- vs West & Hollier: Final judgment against defendants for the sum of one hundred and fifty two dollars and fifty cents with interest at five per cent, from 19th June 1821, and costs of suit. Jail Bounds established The Court then proceeded to fix the Jail bounds in conjunction with Celestin Lavergne and Guy H. Bell Justices of the peace--as follows-- Commencing at the north boundary of the land of John Jenkins, on bayou Tesson on South Street, and running up the left bank of said bayou to north street thence along said street to Union Street, thence down said street to South Street thence along said street to the place of beginning including the full width of said North, Union, and South streets. The court then adjourned to Tomorrow morning 10 OClk Friday 6th July 1821 The court met pursuant to adjournment, present as before, #1032 Haw vs Bowie & Duggins: The judgment for deault [sic] now made final against defendants for the sum of one hundred and two dollars Eighty seven and a half cents, with ten per cent interest from 1 March last past and costs of suit to be taxed. #1034 Long vs Winchester: The judgment for default now made final against the defendant for the sum of One hundred and fifty Dollars with ten per cent interest from 8 March 1821 until paid & costs of suit to be taxed. #1040 Louvillier vs Devillier & Courtableau: The judgment for default now made final against the defendants, for the sum of Two hundred and ninety dollars with five per cent interest from 16 June 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. page 101 #1041 Neda assignee vs Claret: The judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of seventy dollars with five percent interest from 19th June, and costs of suit to be taxed. #1043 Johnson vs Chachére: The judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of Eighty three dollars, with five per cent interest from 19th June 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. #1046 Johnson vs Campbell & Dalton: The judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of thirty four dollars with five percent interest from 19th June 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. #1047 Swett vs Singleton: The judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of seventy nine dollars, nineteen cents with five percent interest from 19th June 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. #1049 W. & J. Moore vs Singleton: The judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of Twenty five dollars with ten per cent interest from 1 March 1819, and costs of suit to be taxed. #1050 Hatton ass. vs Edwards: The judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of fifty dollars with five per cent interest from 19th June 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. The court then adjourned to Saturday the 14th Instant. Saturday 14 July 1821 The Court met pursuant to adjournment present as before Judgments signed The judgments were signed in the following cases: to Wit: 1019 Moores vs Thompson 1024 Todd vs Coe 1032 Haw vs Bowie & Duggins 1033 Poisseau vs Fontenette & Devillier 1034 Long vs Winchester 1036 Foreman vs Sommervell 1035 Hatton use Hill vs Coe 1039 Marc & Smith vs Jany [double dots over 'y'] 1040 Louviller vs Courtableau & Devillier 1041 Neda assignee vs Claret 1042 Hrs [heirs] of Clark vs Prather & Barrow 1043 Johnson vs Chachére 1044 Hrs Sorrell vs Bossier 1045 Hrs Bourque vs West & Hollier 1046 Johnson vs Campbell & Dalton 1047 Swett vs Singleton 1048 Miramond vs Johnson 1049 Moore vs Singleton 1050 Hatton assignee vs Edwards The court then adjourned Test. Guy H. Bell clerk page 102 Monday 6th August 1821 The Court met, present, George King Parish Judge Meeting of the Magistrates--to take Sheriffs Securities This day, being appointed for a meeting of the magistrates of this parish, to receive the securities to be offered by Benjamin S. Haw as Sheriff and Collector of the taxes for the present year vice Theophilus Collins- late sheriff- resigned--The following Magistrates appeared --to wit-- Francois Coulon Devillier Jean Marie DeBaillon Celestin Lavergne Augustin Gradinego Etienne V. Fusilier Cesar Hanchett William Glenn Guy H. Bell When Benjamin S. Haw offered as his securities--as Sheriff and for the collection of the State and parish tax for the Year 1821--the following persons to wit-- Joseph Andrus William Haslett Luke Lesassier and Eloy [double dots over the 'y', as an umlaut] Whereupon the Court and magistrates aforesaid were unanimously of opinion, that the said person were good and sufficient securities--for the said Benjamin S. Haw and Sheriff and collector of the State tax for the present year. Whereupon the usual bonds were signed and are in the words and figures following to wit-- Benjamin S. Haw Sheriff to Governor Know all men by these presents, that We, Benjamin S. Haw, Joseph Andrus--William Haslett--Luke Lesassier--and Eloy Landry--are held and firmly bound unto Thomas B. Robertson, Governor of the State of Louisiana & to his successors in Office--in the sum of six thousand Dollars, which said sum we and each of us, do hereby jointly and severally bind ourselves our heirs, executors and administrators to pay to the said Governor or to his successors in office as aforesaid. In page 103 Witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands and affixed our Seals at Opelousas this sixth day of August in the Year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred & twenty one. Whereas the above bound Benjamin S. Haw--hath been appointed sheriff of the Parish of St. Landry now if the said Benjamin S. Haw shall well & faithfully execute and make true returns according to law of all such writs orders & process as shall come into his hands as Sheriff as aforesaid and well and truly pay over all sums of money that shall come into his hands as Sheriff as aforesaid to the persons entitled by Law to the same and shall faithfully do and perform all such other duties as may be required of him by law then the above obligation to be void otherwise to remain in full force-- and Virtue-- signed & sealed in presence of James Ray H. Taylor Wm Haslett L. Lesassier Eloy Landry Benjm S. Haw Joseph Andrus ==== Benjamin S. Haw Sheriff to Governor State Tax Bond Recorded 6th August 1821 Know all men by these presents that we Benjamin S. Haw Joseph Andrus William Haslett Luke Lesassier & Eloy Landry are held and firmly bound unto Thomas B. Robertson governor of the State of Louisiana and to his successors in office in the sum of nine thousand one hundred and ninety eight Dollarsa which said sum We and each of us do hereby jointly and severally bind ourselves our page 104 heirs executors & administrators to pay to the said Governor or to his successors as aforesaid. In Witness Whereof We have hereunto set our hands and affixed our Seals at Opelousas this Sixth day of August in the year one thousand eight hundred and twenty one. The Condition of the above obligation is such that Whereas the above bound Benjamin S. Haws hath been appointed Sheriff of the Parish of St. Landry. Now if the said Benjamin S. Haw shall by himself or deputies faithfully collect and account for all taxes of the State within this Parish for the present year agreeably to law together with all fins & amercements then the above obligation to be void otherwise to remain in full force and Virtue-- Signed Sealed & delivered in presence of James Ray H. Taylor Benjamin S. Haw (seal) Joseph Andrus (seal) Wm Haslett (seal) L. Lesassier (seal) Eloy Landry (seal) === Benjamin S. Haw Sheriff to Governor Know all men by these presents that We Benjamin S. Haw Joseph Andrus William Haslett Luke Lesassier & Eloy Landry all of the State of Louisiana and Parish of St. Landry--are held & firmly bound unto Thomas B. Robertson Governor of said State & to his successors in Office in the sum of nine thousand one hundred and ninety eight Dollars which said sum We and each of us do hereby jointly and severally bind ourselves our heirs executors and administrators to pay to the Page 105 Governor or to his Successors in Office as aforesaid--In Witness Whereof we have hereunto set our hands and affixed our Seals at Opelousas this sixth day of August in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty one. The Condition of the above obligation is such that if the above bound Benjamin S. Haw Sheriff of the aforesaid Parish of St. Landry shall by himself or deputies faithfully collect and account for all Parish taxes levied within said Parish by the Police Jury for the present year one thousand eight hundred and twenty one together will all fines & amercements then the above obligation to be void otherwise to remain in full force--and virtue-- Signed Sealed and delivered in presence of James Ray H. Taylor Benjmn S. Haw (seal) Joseph Andrus (seal) Wm Haslett (seal) L. Lesassier (seal) Eloy Landry (seal) === Sheriff Installed Benjamin S. Haw, Esqre presented to the court his commission as Sheriff of this parish of St. Landry (Theo. Collins Esqre resigned) and as such took the oath of office required by Law The Court now proceeded to business #929 Crummelin vs Arden: Non-suit and Judgment against plaintiff for costs. #983 Haffeley vs Tribble: Continued #1016 Davis vs Stephens: Continued #1037 Foreman vs Coe: Final judgment, by consent, against defendant for ninety two Dollars sixty two & a half cents with 5 PCt interest from 5th June 1821, & costs of suit to be taxed. 11th Rule of Court see page 43 & 121 Answers must be filed on the first day of the term, and on culling over the Trial Docket, judgment for default shall be entered in all cases where no answer is filed or intimation from an attorney that an answer is to be filed page 106 1051 Treasurer vs Judsin: Judgment for default 1052 Treasurer vs Doucett & al: Judgment for default 1053 Neda vs Henry: Judgment for default 1054 Moore vs Coe: Judgment for default 1055 Moore vs Johnson: Confession of Judgment, now made final against defendant for Two hundred and fifty six dollars, thirty seven and a half cents, with 10PCent interest from 1st March 1820 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1056 W. Moore vs Johnson: Confession of Judgment now made final against Defendant for one hundred and forty three dollars eighteen & three fourth cents with 10 PCent interest from 1 March 1820, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1057 Moore indorsee [sic] vs Bossier & wife: Final judgment against defendants, for One hundred and sixty seven dollars, forty six & a half cents, with 10 PCent interest on one hundred and fifteen dollars Sixty two and a half cents from the 10 July 1821, until paid & costs of suit to be taxed. This judgment in no way to effect the Dowry of Susannah Colins Bossier one of the defendants. 1058 Bonner vs Fisher: Ordered that the horse in the hands of B. S. Haw, be delivered to the plaintiff and that there be final judgment against the defendant for the costs of suit to be taxed-- (Justice sworn) 1059 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Singleton: Judgment for default 1060 Sutton vs Devillier; Judgment for default 1061 Moore vs Rawls: Judgment for default 1062 Moore vs OConnor: Judgment against defendant for One hundred and twenty one dollars, seventy five cents, with 10 PCent interest from 1st March 1821, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed, and by consent--stay of execution until first September defendant waiving the right of appeal (Cesar Hanchett sworn) 1063 Winchester vs Carver: Final Judgment against defendant for fifty seven dollars and fifty cents, with 5 per cent interest from 21 July 1821, and the costs of suit to be taxed. (Waggeman sworn) page 107 Thursday -- 9th August 1821 The Court met, pursuant to adjournment present as before 1051 Treasurer vs Judsin: Judgment for default now made final against defendant, for Thirty dollars with five per cent interest, from 28th June 1821 & costs of suit to be taxed. 1052 Treasurer vs Dufour & Lejeune: Judgment for default now made final against defendants for Thirty dollars with five per cent interest from 28th June 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1053 Neda vs Henry: Judgment for default, now made final against defendant for two hundred and fifty dollars with five per cent interest from 11 July 1821, & costs of suit to be taxed. 1054 W. & J. Moore vs Coe: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for Eighty six dollars fifty three & 3/4 cents, with 10 PCent interest on $49.87-1/2 from 1st October 1820, and 10 pCent interest on #37.75 from 1 March 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1059 Garrigue & Debaillon vs H. Singleton: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for, Two hundred and sixty nine dollars with ten per cent, interest from 1 April 1821, & costs of suit to be taxed. 1061 Moore vs Rawls: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for fifty nine dollars 93-3/4 cents, 10 per cent interest from 1 March 1818, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1060 Sutton vs Deviller: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of one hundred and forty five dollars 86 cents, with 10 per cent interest from 10 Nov. 1816, on one hundred dollars & costs of suit to be taxed. The court then adjourned until the 13th Instant. Monday 13th August 1821 The court met pursuant to adjournment present as before Judgments signed--The judgments were signed in the following cases to wit-- 929 Crummelin vs Arden 1051 Parish Treasurer vs Judsin 1053 Neda vs Henry 1055 Moore vs Johnson 1057 Moore vs Bossier's 1059 Garrigues & Debaillon vs Singleton 1061 Moore vs Rawls 1063 Winchester vs Carver 1037 Foreman vs Coe 1052 Parish Treasurer vs Dufaux & Lejeune 1054 Moores vs Coe 1056 Bonner vs Fisher 1060 Sutton vs Devillier 1062 Moores vs OConnor The court then adjourned Teste Guy H. Bell clk page 108 Tuesday 28th August 1821 The Court met present George King Esqr Judge Deputy Sheriff received Comes Benjamin S. Haw Esqr Sheriff of the Parish of St. Landry, and gives the court here to understand that he wished to appoint Sylvestre Bossier Senr as his deputy, in his said office of Sheriff to Keep the public Prison of said Parish--Whereupon the court here approves of the said appointment, and the said Sylvestre Bossier signifying his willingness to accept the same is appointed accordingly and took the oath required by law The court then adjourned Test Guy H. Bell clerk Monday 3d September 1821 The Court met, present, George King Esqre Judge, Judgment for default was rendered in the following cases to wit-- 1073 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Thomas Insall 1074 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Simon Burney 1076 David L. Todd vs William Glenn 1077 Garrigue & Debaillon vs John Bass 1078 Garrigue & Debaillon vs John Philips 1080 Garrigue & Debaillon vs William Campbell 1084 Garrigue & Debaillon vs James Younger 1083 Louvillier freres vs William Thompson 1081 Louis peres & Renaud vs William Thompson 1082 Peter Sylvestre vs Dennis M. Stevens 1065 Doucet vs Lafleur: Final judgment against defendant for the sum of Two hundred and twenty dollars with five per cent form 31st July 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. (Meunier sworn) 1066 Bossier vs Nice: Final judgment against defendant &wife Clarisse Carraby for the sum of seventy one dollars with interest & costs with stay of execution for two months page 109 1070 Davis vs McDaniel: Final judgment against Defendant for the sum of Twelve Dollars fifty cents with five per cent interest from judicial demand and costs of suit to be taxed. 1071 Barnett vs Daigle: Amicably arranged--and judgment against the Defendant for the costs of suit to be taxed. 1072 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Willis Senr: Amicably arranged and judgment against Defendant for the costs of suit to be taxed. 1075 Garrigue & DeBaillon vs -. Campbell: Amicably arranged and judgment against the plaintiffs for the costs of suit to be taxed. 1079 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Thompson Jr.: Amicably arranged and judgment against defendant for the costs of suit to be taxed with stay of execution to 1 Novr next. 1086 Louviller freres & Renaud vs McDaniel: The parties consenting thereto, final judgment is rendered against Defendant for the sum of two hundred and seventy three dollars sixty two and a half cents with ten per cent interest from 12st of April 1821, and costs of suit conditioned for a stay of execution until 1st March 1822 waiving & renouncing the right of appeal. 1087 Louvillier freres indorces [sic] vs McDaniel: amicably arranged and judgment against Defendant for the costs of suit to be taxed. 1088 Louviller freres vs Renaud: Final judgment against defendant for the sum of One hundred and seventy two Dollars, seventy five cents with interest at 10 PCent from 1 March 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1090 Treasurer vs Dubardiner [sp?]: Final judgment against defendant for costs of suit to be taxed--the debt having been paid-- 953 Haffeley vs Tribble: Final judgment against plaintiff (Appelant) for the sum of twenty eight dollars, sixty two and a half cents with 5 per cent interest from judicial demand--and also the sum of six dollars the costs of suit before the Justice of the Peace and the costs of this appeal to be taxed. 1068 Long vs Somervell: Final judgment against defendant for the sum of One hundred and five dollars, with 10 per cent interest from 1st April 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. page 110 1069 Long vs Somervill & Robb: Final judgment against defendants, for the sum of One hundred and sixty dollars, with five per cent from 1st August 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. W. T. Hatton received as Deputy Sheriff-- Comes Benjamin S. Haw Esqre Sheriff of this Parish and gives the Court here to understand that he wished to appoint William T. Hatton as his deputy in his said office of Sheriff--Whereupon the court here approves of the said appointment and the said William T. Hatton signifying his willingness to accept, the same is appointed according and took the oath required by law. The court then adjourned until Friday the 7th Inst. Test. Guy H. Bell clerk Friday 7th September 1821 The court met pursuant to adjournment present as before 1073 Garrigue & DeBaillon vs Insal: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of One hundred and seventeen dollars 32-1/2/100 with interest & costs of suit 1074 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Barney [sp?]: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of one hundred and twenty seven dollars eighty seven & a half cents with 10 per cent interest [illegible] and costs of suit to be taxed. 1076 Todd vs Glenn: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of forty six dollars fifty cents--with interest--& costs of suit-- 1077 Garrigue & Debaillon vs John Bass: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of seventy one Dollars fifty cents with interest and costs of suit 1080 Garrigue & Debaillon vs W. Campbell: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of two hundred and twenty one dollars 43-3/4 cents with interest and costs of suit 1081 Louviller frere & Renaud vs W. Thompson: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of two hundred and fifty four dollars ten cents with Interest and costs of suit- page 111 1082 Sylvestre vs Stephens: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of One hundred Dollars, with interest & costs of suit 1083 Louvillier freres vs W. Thompson: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of one hundred and twelve dollars--eighty seven & a half cents, with interest and costs of suit. 1084 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Younger: Judgment for default now made final against defendant for the sum of fifty seven dollars with interest and costs of suit. Whereupon the said judgments were signed as also those rendered on the third instant and there being no further business for the court-- The Court adjourned Test. Guy H. Bell Clerk Monday 3d December 1821 The court met present George King Esqr Judge 1033 Poisseau vs Fontenette; 1036 Foreman vs Somervell; 1039 Marc & Smith vs Jany; 1042 Heirs of Clark vs Barrow; 1044 Heirs of Sorrel vs Bossier; 1045 Bourque vs West & ---; 1065 Doucet vs Lafleur: On motion, and it appearing to the Court by the certificate of the clerk of the district Court of this Parish that the appellants in these cases towit the defendants herein, have not prosecuted their appeals within the delay prescribed by law. It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law, Ordered thatr the judgments in these case be afirmed, and that execution may therein issue-- The court then adjourned Test Guy H. Bell clerk page 112 Monday 4th March 1822 The Court met, Present, George King Esqre Judge 1064 Porter & als vs Chiason: Judgment buy Default 1067 Prather vs Dunks: Judgment by Default, continued. 1085 Isabell vs Lewis: Judgment by Default 1089 Miramond vs Lejeune: Judgment by Default 1091 Simien vs Bello: Continued 1092 Taylor vs Ney: Settled & dismissed at Plaintiffs Costs 1093 Andrus & als vs Devillier; Judgment by Default 1094 Taylor vs Davis: Judgment by Default 1095 Andrus & als vs Mat: Judgment by Default 1096 Andrus & als vs Darwin: Dismissed at defendants costs. 1097 Andrus & als vs Simpson: Judgment by Default 1101 Andrus & als vs Gardner: Judgment by Default 1098 Winchester vs Washington: Judgment by Default 1099 Garrigues & Co. vs Willis: Judgmet by Default 1100 Jackson vs Hillebunt: Judgment by Default 1102 Guillory vs Octalon: Judgment by Default 1104 Miramond vs Moreau: Judgment by Default 1105 Prather vs Richard: Continued 1108 Garrigue & Co. vs Waking: Judgment by Default 1109 Garrigue & Co. vs Provost: Judgment by Default 1110 Louvillier vs Octalon: Judgment by Default 1112 King vs Alston: Judgment by Default 1113 Louvillier vs Owen: Judgment by Default 1116 Davis vs Stevens: Continued 1107 Louvillier vs Belard: Judgment by Default 1109 Garrigue & Co. vs Dunman: Judgment by Default 1114 Louvilleri vs Lejeune; Judgment by Default The court then adjourned until Friday next at 10 Oclock A. M. Test Guy H. Bell clerk page 113 Friday 8th March 1822 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before 1064 Porter & als vs Chiasson: Judgment by default now made final against defendant for the sum of fifty six Dollars with 5 PCent interest from 4th July 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1085 Isabelle vs Lewis: Judgment by default now made final against defendant for the sum of One hundred & twenty two Dollars, with 5 percent interest from 10th August 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1089 Miramond vs Lejeune: Judgment by default now made final against defendant for the sum of seventy three Dollars & fifty cents, with 10 percent interest from 14th June 1820, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1093 Andrus & als vs Devillier: Judgment by default made final against Defendant for the sum of Eighty seven Dollars Eighty seven & a half cents with 10 PCetn interest from 1 March 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1094 Taylor vs Davis: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and ninety Dollars, with 10 PCetn interest from 31 March 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1095 Andrus & als vs Matt: Judgment by default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and eight Dollars--with 10 percent interest, from 1 March 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed-- 1097 Andrus vs Simpson: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Seventy five Dollars and six & a fourth cents with 10 percent interest from 1 March 18921, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1101 Andrus & als vs Gardner: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Eighty five Dollars, and seventy five cents, with 10 per [sic] interest from 1 March 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1098 Winchester vs Washington: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of fifty seven Dollars and fifty cents with 5 percent interest from 6 November 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. page 114 1099 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Willis Junr: Judgment by default now made final against defendant for the sum of fifty four Dollars, and thirty one and a fourth cents, with 5 per cent from 9 November 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1100 Jacksdon vs Hillabrent: Judgment by default now made final against defendant for the sum of sixty eight Dollars and forty one cents, with 5 per cent from 9 November 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1102 Guillory vs Ortholon: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and seventy Dollars with ten per cent interest from 3 June 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1103 Guillory vs Ortholon: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of thirty six Dollars and twenty five cents with 10 percent interest from 21st July 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1104 Miramond vs Moreau: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Thirty seven Dollars and sixty two and a half cents with 10 PCent interest from 23d July 1820, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1107 Louvillier freres vs Belard: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Seventy four Dollars and eighteen and three fourth cents, with 5 per cent interest from 21 November 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1108 Garrigues & Debaillon vs Waking: Judgement by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Sixty three Dollars & fifty cents, with 10 pcent interest from 24th May 1819, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1109 Garrigues & Debaillon vs Dunman: judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Forty six Dollars and fifty six and a half cents with 5 per cent interest from 21 November 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1110 Garrigues & Debaillon vs Provost: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Eighty two Dollars, & sixty eight & three fourth cents with 10 pCent from 1st March 1820 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1111 Louvilliere freres vs Ortalon: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Sixty two Dollars and seventy five cents, with 10 per cent interest from 1st March 1820 and costs of suit to be taxed. page 115 1112 King vs Alston: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Sixty Dollars, with 5 per cent interest from 23d November 1821 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1113 Louvillier freres vs Owen: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of two hundred and twelve Dollars, twelve and a half cents with 10 percent interest from 19th March 1820 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1114 Louvillier freres vs Lejeune: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Fifty eight Dollars and sixty eight and three fourth cents with 10 per cent interest from 1st March 1819, and costs of suit to be taxed. Whereupon the said Judgments were signed and the court then adjourned Test Guy H. Bell clerk Saturday 23d March 1822 Th Court Met, Present, George King Esqre Judge Meeting of the Magistrates to take sheriffs securities This being the day appointed for the meeting of the magistrates of this Parish to receive the securities to be offered by Benjamin S. Haw, as Sheriff of the Parish and collector of the taxes therein, on calling over the names of the magistrates it appeared that of those summoned there was present-- Ceasar Hanchett Francois Coulon Devillier Domingue Richard John G. Dorman Joseph Andrus Eloy Landry and Guy H. Bell Whereupon Benjamin S. Haw presented his receipts for the State treasurer, in full for the taxes of the year 1821, and offered as his securities--for the faithfully performance of his duties as Sheriff and for the collection of the State and parish taxes for the present year 1822 the following persons to wit' Joseph Andrus, William Haslett, William Moore, Eloy Landry and Luke Lesassier Whereupon the court and magistrates aforesaid were unanimously of opinion that the said persons were good and sufficient security for the said Benjamin S. Haw, as Sheriff of the Parish of St. page 116 Landry, and as collector of the state and Parish taxes of this parish for the year 1822-- Whereupon the usual Bond [sic] were signed, which bonds are in the words and figures following towit-- Benj. S. Haw Sheriff to Governor Sheriffs Bond Know all men by these presents that we Benjamin S. Haw, William Haslett, Joseph Andrus, William Moore, Eloi Landry, and Luke Lesassier, are held and firmly bound unto Thomas Bolling Robertson Governor of the State of Louisiana & to his successors in office in the sum of Six Thousand dollars, which said sum we and each of us do hereby Jointly & Severally bind ourselves our heirs executors & administrators to pay to the said Governor or to his successors in office as aforesaid--In witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands & affixed our seals at Opelousas this twenty third day of March one thousand eight hundred and twenty two-- Whereas the above bound Benjamin S. Haw hath been appointed Sheriff of the Parish of St. Landry as appears by his Commission bearing date the 15th day of February 1822--Now if the said Benjamin S. Haw shall well & faithfully execute & make true returns according to Law of all such writs, orders and process as shall come into his hands as Sheriff as aforesaid, and will & truly pay over all sums of money that shall come into his hands as Sheriff as aforesaid to the persons entitled by Law to the same, and shall faithfully do & perform all such other duties as may be required of him by Law, then the above obligation to be void, otherwise to remain in full force & virtue-- Signed and sealed in presence of Guy H. Bell and Sam. Hamilton Benjmn S. Haw (seal) Wm Haslett (seal) Joseph Andrus (seal) Eloy Landry (seal) W. Moore (seal) L. Lesassier (seal) page 117 page 123 Monday 20th May 1822 The court met present George King Judge Lile Chachéré appointed Deputy Sheriff Comes Benjamin S. Haw, Esqre Sheriff of this Parish and give the Court here to understand that he wished to appoint Lile Chachéré as his deputy in his said Office of Sheriff. Whereupon the Court here approves of the said appointment, and the said Lile Chacheré, signifying his willingness to accept the said appointment he is appointed accordingly, and took the oath required by Law. The Court then adjourned Test. Guy H. Bell Clerk Monday 8th July 1822 The court me, present, George King Judge 1016 Davis vs Stevens: Continued 1134 Bowen vs Duggins: Continued, on affidavit & order, to answer interrogatories 1135 Matt vs Chiasson: Continued 1137 Carrier vs Hebert: Continued, on affidavit & order to answer interrogatories 1140 Guillory vs Heath: Continued, on affidavit & order to answer interrogatories 1091 Simien vs Bello: Judgment below confirmed 1105 Prather vs Richard: Continued with leave to amend-- 1115 Burnet vs Choate: Judgment against Defendant, for #106.87, with interest & --- (Jn Dyson sworn) 1117 Duggins vs Pitre: Leave granted Plaintiff to amend and judgment against him for the costs of suit that has accrued 1118 Louvillier frere vs Lejeune; Judgment against Defendant for $103.00 with interest & Costs (F. [T?] Cassagne sworn) 1120 Darwin vs Barnes: Judgment against Defendant for $107.50, with interest & costs ((Geo. Laughlin sworn) 1136 Miramond vs Richard: Judgment against Defendant for $120.75 with interest & costs ( C. Lavergne sworn) 1138 Larazo vs Reed & Campbell: Judgment by Default 1141 Landry vs Charlot: Judgment by Default The court then adjourned until Saturday next. Test. Guy H. Bell clerk page 124 Saturday 13th July 1822 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before 1138 Laroze vs Reed & Campbell: Judgment by Default made final against defendants, for the sum of $224.--, with 5 per cent interest from 8 May 1822 & costs 1142 Landry vs Charlot: Judgment by Default made final against defendant for the sum of $160. with 10 per cent interest from 8th August 1820 & costs No motions having been made for new trials in any of the causes adjudged at this term, the same were signed The Court then adjourned Test Guy H. Bell clerk Monday 26th August 1822, The Court met, Present George King Esqre Judge Alexander Duggins appoints Deputy Sheriff Comes Benjamin S. Haw, Esqre. Sheriff of this Parish, and gives the Court here to understand, that he wishes to appoint Alexander Duggins his Deputy in his said office of Sheriff and the said Alexander Duggins signifying his willingness to accept said appointment. The Court [illegible] approves the same and the said Alexander Duggins is appointed accordingly and took the oath of Office required by law The court then adjourned Test Guy H. Bell clerk Monday 2d September 1822 The Court met, present George King Esqre Judge, and then adjourned until Monday the 9th September 1822, at 10 Oclock A. M. Test Guy H. Bell clerk page 125 Monday 9th September 1822 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present, as before, 1016 Davis vs Stevens: Continued by consent 1134 Bowen vs Duggins: Continued by Consent, 1140 Guillory vs Heath: Continued by consent 1144 Louvillier vs Kimball: Continued by consent 1148 Bowen vs Elmer: Continued by consent 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: Continued by consent 1151 Simien vs Barriere: Continued 1152 Marc vs Derousse: Continued by consent 1153 Winchester vs Kimball: Continued by consent 1156 Carraby vs Boudreau: Continued by consent 1158 Schoff vs Davis: Continued by consent 1163 Lesassier vs Glenn: Continued by consent 1164 Brownson vs Glenn: Continued by consent 1167 Oakley vs Kimball: Continued by consent 1105 Prather vs Richard: Continued by consent, DuBreaux, Arkson & Duggins, sworn for Pltff 1117 Duggins vs Pitre: Nonsuit and Judgment against Plaintiff for the costs of suit to be taxed. 1135 Matt vs Chiasson: The debt in this case having been amicably arranged at defendants costs, As appears from the record on file herein this suit is dismissed and Judgment rendered against defendant for the costs of suit. 1137 Louvillier vs Andrus: The debt herein having been amicably arranged between the parties, each to pay half the costs-It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law considered--that this suit be dismissed--and that there be judgment against teach party for one half the costs-- 1143 Louvillier freres vs A. Hebert: The execution of the note on which this suit is brought being satisfactorily proven. It is considered, by reason thereof and of the law that the plaintiffs have final Judgment and do recover of defendant the sum of ninety eight Dollars, and eighteen & three fourth cents, with interest at five per cent from 1 March 1820, until paid & costs of suit to be taxed. Lesassier for Pltiffs Todd for Dfdt C. Derbigny sworn page 126 1145 Louvilier frere vs Raper: The Defendant having failed to file her answer agreeably to the statute and the rules of this Court, It is considered by reason thereof and on motion of the Plaintiffs by their attorney that there be Judgment by default against the defendant 1146 Louvillier frere vs B. Andrus: The plaintiffs by their attorney suggesting an amicable arrangement herein, for the debt, at defendants costs, It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law considered that there be final Judgment against defendant for the costs of suit. 1147 Simien fmc [free man of color] vs Nicholas fmc: After hearing the allegations of the Parties and the evidence adduced in support thereof and the evidence being in favor of the Defendant It is considered by reason thereof and of the law--that the defendant have final Judgment and do recover from the plaintiff the sum of thirty one Dollars and costs of this suit-- Lesassier for Pltff King for Dft Sworn: Trudeau, Terrance for Pltff Martin for Dft. 1149 Louvillier freres vs Prather: The execution of the note on which this suit is brought being satisfactorily proven--It is considered by reason thereof and of the Law, that the plaintiffs have final Judgment and od recover of the defendant the sum of Sixty one Dollars and forty seven and a half cents, with interest at ten per cent from 1 Mars 1822 until paid and costs of suit-- Lesassier for Pltrff King for Defdt Cassagne sworn 1153 Garrigue & Debaillon vs McDaniel: It satisfactorily appearing from the record on file in this case that on the 2 September instant in the office of the Clerk of this court, the defendant John McDaniel and John T. Heath, as his security had acknowledged and confessed a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs as prayed for in their petition for the sum of One hundred and six Dollars and seventy five cents--with interest at ten per cent from 1 March 1822, until paid and costs of suit--Conditioned for a stay of execution until the first day of December, next waiving and renouncing their right of appeal and all formalities of law, to all which the plaintiff by their attorney and consented--It is, therefore, by reason thereof, and of the law and on motion of plaintiffs by there [sic] Attorney, considered by the court here that the said confession of Judgment be now made final and that the plaintiffs Garrigue & Debaillon do recover of the defendants John McDaniel and John T. Heath the sum of One hundred and six Dollars and seventy five cents, with interest and costs f suit in manner and form aforesaid-- page 127 1154 Andrus vs Rawls: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of his Court... It is therefore considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiffs by their attorney that their [sic] be Judgment by default against defendant-- 1157 Louvillier freres vs Bossier & wife: The defendants having failed to filed [sic] their answer agreably [sic] to the Statute, and the rules of this Court, It is therefore considered by reason therefore and on motion of plaintiffs by their attorney that there by Judgment by default against the defendants 1159 Dixon vs Glenn: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute & the rules of this Court. It is therefore considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his attorney that there be Judgment by default against the Defendant-- 1160 Winchester vs Davis: The material facts and allegations in the plaintiffs petition contained being satisfactorily proven It is considered by reason thereof and of the law that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of Seventy five Dollars and twenty five cents--with interest and costs of suit-- King Atty for Pltff Lessasier " for Dft Witnesses: Thompson --Boatright, Duggin---Hutchins, sworn for Pltff 1161 Miramond vs Stouts: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this court, It is considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his attorney, that there be final Judgment by Default against the defendant-- 1162 Kirkby vs Estilette: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this court. It is considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his attorney, that there be Judgment by Default against the defendant-- 1166 Marc vs Ramard: The pleadings in this case having taken the jurisdiction herein from this court, it is therefore ordered that this cause be transfered [sic] to the District Court in and for this Parish-- 1169 Sutton vs Reeves: The defendant plea in Bar sustained and Ordered that this suit be Quashed and that there be judgment against the Plaintiff for the costs of suit-- The court then adjourned until to-morrow morning- at 10 O'clock Test Guy H. Bell Clerk page 128 Tuesday 10th September 1822 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before 1171 Davis vs Thompson: Leave granted plaintiff so to amend his petition and account as to make the dates therein read 1821, instead of 1820--Whereupon after hearing the allegations of the parties and the evidence advanced in support thereof and it appearing therefrom that there was a ballance [sic] due to the plaintiff of thirty four Dollars and sixty five cents.. It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law considered by the court here, that the plaintiff have final Judgment and od recover of the defendant the sum of thirty four Dollars and sixty five cents with costs of suit-- 1172 Taylor vs Duggins & Winchester: Leave granted plaintiff to amend his petition and cause continued 1173 Richard vs Carrier: Amicably arranged and appeal Dismissed 1174 Chaule vs Lesassier: The defendant having failed and neglected to answer the interrogatories propounded to him by the plaintiff the same are taken as confessed, whereupon it is considered by reason thereof and of the law, that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of one hundred and twenty two Dollars with interest and costs of suit-- 1182 Bossier vs Pecourd & Labiche: Leave granted Plaintiffs to amend their petition and cause continued 1175 Chaule vs Keathley: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Citation and the rules of this Court. It is considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his attorney that Judgment by default be rendered against the defendant The court then adjourned until Saturday next 10 O'clock Test Guy H. Bell Clerk page 129 Saturday, 14th September 1822 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present, as before 1145 Louvillier freres vs Widow Raper: Judgment by default made final against defendant for the sum of two hundred and thirty six Dollars and twenty five cents, with 10 per cent interest from 1 March 1822 until paid & costs of suit to be taxed. 1154 Andrus vs Rawls: Judgment by default made final against Defendant for one hundred and seventy nine Dollars & fifty cents, with interest on $68.50, from 13th June 1818, at 10 per cent, and at 5 per cent on $110. from 15 July 1822, and costs of suit to be taxed-- 1157 Louvillier freres vs Bossier & wife: Judgment by default, made final against Defendants for the sum of one hundred and ninety seven Dollars & ninety five cents, with 5 PCent from 15 July 1822, & costs of suit to be taxed-- 1159 James Dixson vs David Glenn: Judgment by default, made final against Defendant for the sum of Seventy dollars with 5 per cent from 20th July 1822 & costs of suit to be taxed-- 1161 Miramond vs Stouts: Judgment by default made final against Defendant for the sum of twenty four Dollars and twelve and one half cents with Interest and Costs of suit to be taxed. (Celestin Lavergne, sworn & examined) 1175 Chaule vs Keathly: Judgment by default, made final against Defendant for the sum of Seventy one Dollars with interest and Costs of suit to be taxed-- (John Wilslare [sp?] sworn & examined) 1162 Kirkby vs Estilete: Judgment by default, made final against Defendant for the sum of one hundred and twenty three Dollars and seventy five cents with 10 per cent from 1st March 1821, and costs of suit to be taxed-- and no motions having been made for new trials in any of the causes tried and adjudged at this term the same were signed by the judge The court then adjourned until court in course Test Guy H. Bell clerk page 130 Monday 7th October 1822 The court met, present, George King Esquire Judge Comes Thomas Lewis Esqre Clerk of the supreme Court of the Western District at Opelousas and give the court here to understand that he wishes to appoint David L. Todd as his deputy in his said Office of Clerk, and the said David L. Todd, here present, signifying his willingness to accept of said appointment the court here approves the same and the said David L. Todd is appointed accordingly and took the oath of Office required by law-- Monday 4th November 1822 The Court met, present George King Esqre Judge 1016 Davis vs Stevens: The Plaintiff being solemnly called to come into Court and prosecute this his suit came not but made default Whereupon It is considered, by the court here by reason thereof and of the law, that the plaintiff be nonsuited and that there be judgment against him for the costs of suit to be taxed-- 1105 Prather vs Richard: After argument and examination of witnesses, cause continued by consent and the plaintiff paying all costs up to this term. I. Ray, D. Arkson, & A. Duggins sworn for plaintiff- 1134 Bown vs Duggins: Continued 1141 Guillory vs Heath: Final Judgment against the defendant for the sum of one hundred and seventy five Dollars, with interest thereon at five per cent from 22d May 1822 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. Defendants motion for a continuance on affidavit overrulled [sic]. 1144 Louvillier vs Kimball: Continued on application and by consent of both parties-- 1148 Bowen vs Elmer: Continued, on application and by consent of both parties 1149 Louvillier vs Prather: amicable arranged debt and costs paid-- page 131 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: Continued by an application and by consent of both parties 1151 Simien vs Barriere: Judgment of the Justices court affirmed and final Judgment against the plaintiff appellant for the sum of nineteen Dollars, debt also the sum of three dollars the costs below and the costs of this appeal-- 1152 Marc vs Derousso: Continued by defendant-- 1156 Carrely [sp?] vs Boudreau: Continued on application and by consent of both parties 1153 Schoff vs Davis: amicably arranged by the parties, and Judgment against the plaintiff for the costs of suit to be taxed-- 1163 Lesassier vs Glenn: Continued by consent and application of both parties 1164 Brownson vs Glenn: Continued on application and by consent of both parties 1165 Lamilleon [sp?] vs Deville: Continued on application and by consent of both parties 1167 Oakely vs Kimball: Continued by consent and on application of the plaintiff 1172 Taylor vs Duggin: Continued 1176 Heirs of Pitre vs Kimball & Heath: Final Judgment by consent against the codefendant John T. Heath for the sum of One hundred and ninety five Dollars with interest on ninety seven Dollars & fifty cents from 1st April 1821, at ten per cent, and on the sum of ninety seven Dollars and fifty cents from 20 August 1822 at 5 per cent and the costs of suit--with stay of execution to the 1st of March next. 1177 Dalton vs Darwin: Continued as upon affidavit of defendant 1179 Harman vs N[V?]ey: Continued by consent. 1181 Garrigue vs Berjeat: Amicably arranged and Judgment against defendant for the costs 1182 Badger vs Pecoud: Continued by consent. page 132 1183 Bossier vs Gardner: After hearing the parties by their attorneys as well as the evidence adduced by each in support of his allegations It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the law that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of thirty Dollars and the costs of suit-- P. OConnor, A. Simien, N.[V?] Stewart, sworn for pltff w. Moore sworn for Dft. 1191 Hill vs Hilebrent: The execution of the note on which this suit is brought having been satisfactorily proven It is considered by reason thereof and of the law. That the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of Defendant the sum of One hundred Dollars and forty seven and an half cents--with 10 per cent interest on ninety five Dollars until paid and costs of suit to be taxed... S. Laughlin sworn for pltff. The Court then adjourned until tomorrow--11 Oclock A. M. Tuesday 5th November 1822 The Court met, pursuant to adjournment, present as before 1168 Miramond vs Roza: Judgment by Default against defendant 1176 Hrs of Pitre vs Kimball & Heath: Judgment by default against Defendant, Thomas H Kimball 1178 Garrigue vs Baurent & Dames [sp?]: Judgment by Default against Defendant 1180 Vexiere vs Cormier: Judgment by Default against Defendant. 1185 Louvillier vs Charlot: Judgment by Default against Defendant. 1188 Carrier vs Darro & als: Judgment by Default against the defendants 1192 Treasurer vs Davis & als: Judgment by Default against the defendants 1186 Carrier vs Hebert: Defendants plea in abatement ---culled, & cause continued 1189 Bohanon vs Duggins: Continued on affidavit of Defendant. 1190 Taylor vs Manon: Continued page 133 1187 Will indorsee vs Andrus: The facts and allegations in the plaintiffs petition contained being satisfactorily proven it is considered by reason thereof and of the law, that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of Seventy Dollars with interest thereon at five per Cent from 16 October 1822 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1170 Miramond vs Jany: Amicably arranged and Judgement against defendant for the costs of suit-- 1155 Winchester use of Miramond vs Kimball: In this case, after hearing the parties by their attornies [sic] and the evidence adduced, in support thereof It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the law, that the plaintiff have final Judgment and Do recover of the defendant the sum of One hundred and thirty three Dollars and fifty cents with interest from Judicial demand and costs of suit to be taxed. The court then adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10, O'clock Wednesday 6th November 1822 The court met pursuant to adjournment, Present as before and there being no business it was Adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 Oclock. Thursday 7th November 1822 The court met pursuant to adjournment, Present as before and there being no business it was Adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10, o'Clock Friday 8th November 1822 The court met pursuant to adjournment, Present as before. The court adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'Clock page 134 Saturday 9th November 1822 The Court met pursuant to adjourment [sic]. Present as before, 1168 Miramond vs Roya [Roza?]: Judgment by default made final against Defendant, for the sum of $72.75 with interest and costs of suit to be taxed. 1176 Heirs of Pitre vs Kimball & Heath: Judgment by Default made final against the defendant--Thomas H. Kimball, for the sum of $195.00, with interest on the one half $97.50, at 10 PCent from 1st April 1821, and on the other half $97.50 at 65 Pcent from 20th August 1822 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1178 Garrigue vs Laurent & wife: Judgment by default made final against defendants for the sum of $62.50--with interest and Costs of suit to be taxed. 1180 Vexire vs Cormier: Judgment by default made final against defendant for the sum of $90. with interest and costs of suit to be taxed. 1185 Louvillier freres vs Charlot: Judgment by default made final against defendant for the sum of $6703, with interest at 10 per cent from 1st March 1822, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1188 Carrier vs Darros & Gradenigo: Judgment by default made final against Defendants for the sum of $100... with interest and costs of suit to be taxed. 1192 Parish Treasurer vs Davis & als: Judgment by default made final against Defendants for the sum of $125... with interest and costs of Suit No motions for new trials having been made in any of the causes heard and adjudged at this term, the final Judgments in such cases were signed by the Court. The court then adjourned to the first Monday of January 1823. Test Guy H. Bell clerk page 135 Monday 6th January 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment, Present as before 1105 Prather vs Richard: Continued by consent 1144 Louvillier vs Kimball: Continued by consent 1148 Bowen vs Elmer: Continued by consent 1150 Guilbert vs Smith : Continued by consent 1156 Carraby vs Boudreau: Continued by consent 1152 Marc vs Derousse: Cause argued--curia advisure vult. [illegible - 2 words] 1172 E. M. Taylor vs Duggins & Winchester: After hearing the allegations of the Parties, and the evidence adduced in support thereof and the same being in favor of the Plaintiff it is by reason thereof and of the law, considered by the court here that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of Ninety dollars with interest thereon at five per cent from Judicial demand ) towit 14th August 1822 / until paid and costs of suit to be taxed--(ten days allowed Defendant to prove his ------) 1163 Lesassier vs Glenn's: Final Judgment against the defendants for the sum of fifty Dollars, with five percent interest thereon from Judicial demand until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1164 Brownson vs Glenns: Final Judgment against the defendants for the sum of fifty Dollars with interest from Judicial demand until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1172 Taylor vs Duggins: totally scratched out 1179 Harman vs Ney: Final Judgment against Defendant for the sum of ninety Dollars and eight cents, with interest and costs of suit, to be taxed subject to the deduction which plaintiffs answer to interrogatories may prove. 1182 Badger vs Pecoud & Labiche: The plaintiff being solemnly called to come into court and prosecute--this their suit came not but made Default. Whereupon Nonsuit is entered and Judgment against Plaintiffs for the costs of suit to be taxed. page 136 1190 Taylor vs Manon: Final Judgment against defendant for the sum of Ninety Dollars with Judicial interest, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1193 Fontenot vs Guidry: Judgment by default, against the defendant, 1194 Estilette vs Bourque: Judgment by default, against the Defendant, 1195 Miramond vs Southerland & als: Final Judgment against defendants for the sum of one hundred and thirty eight Dollars and fifty six and a fourth cents with Judicial Interest and costs of suit, to be taxed. 1196 Simons vs Duggins: Final Judgment against defendants for the sum of thirty eight Dollars, with interest at ten per Cent, from 1st April 1822, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1197 Simons & Reynier vs Duggins: Final Judgment against Defendant for the sum of twenty one Dollars and Seventy five cents with interest at ten per cent, from 18 Septr 1822, and costs of suit to be taxed. 1207 Hrs of Fontenot vs Garrard & Andrus: Judgment by Default-- 1165 Miramond vs Devillier: Continued 1167 Oakely vs Kimball: Continued 1176 Dalton vs Darwin: Continued 1186 Carrier vs Hebert: Continued 1189 Bohannan vs Duggins: Continued 1206 Moore vs Simien: Ordered that the Plaintiff, John Moore answer the interrogatories propounded to him by the defendant by Francois Simien. The court then adjourned until tommorrow [sic] morning at 10 Oclk A.M. Tuesday 7th January 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before The court adjourned until tomorrow at 10 O clock A M. Wednesday 8th January 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before The Court adjourned until tomorrow at 10 Oclk A. M. Thursday 9th January 1823 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Presen tas before The court adjourned until tomorrow at 10 Oclk A. M. page 137 Friday 10th January 1823 The court met pursuant adjournment, Present, as before, The court adjourned until tomorrow at 10 o'clk A. M. Saturday 11th January 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment present, as before 1193 Fontenot vs Guidry: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Default heretofore rendered in this case, the same by reason thereof and of the law is now made final against the defendant for the sum of one hundred and eighty Dollars, with Judicial interest and the costs of suit to be taxed-- 1194 Estillette vs Bourques: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Default heretofore rendered in this case--the same by reason thereof and of the law is now made final against the Defendants, for the sum of Seventy one Dollars and seventy five cents--with Judicial interest and costs of suit to be taxed-- 1207 Hrs of Fontenot vs Guidry: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Default heretofore rendered in this case--the same by reason thereof and of the law is now made final against the Defendants, for the sum of Eighty three Dollars, and fifty cents, with 10 per cent interest from [no date entered] until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed-- The final Judgments rendered this term were signed. The court then adjourned until the first Monday of March next. Test Guy H. Bell clerk Page 138 Monday 3d March 1823 The court met, pursuant to adjournment. Present George Esqre Judge 1105 Prather vs Richard: It appearing to the court from the record on file herein that on the 7th January 1823, the parties herein had agreed to leave the decision of this cause to William Moore and Guy H. Bell, and that the same should be the Judgment of the court, waiving and renouncing all formalities of law, and it further appearing that the said personas had found that the plaintiff was indebted to the defendant in the sum of tow Dollars, It is therefore considered by reason thereof and of the law, that there be Judgment in favor of the defendant and that he do recover of the plaintiff the sum of two dollars and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit to be taxed-- 1134 Brown vs Duggins: The interrogatories propounded to the Defendant having been answered in the affirmative. It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law considered by the court here that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the Defendant the sum of Two hundred and fifty dollars and fifty cents with interest thereon at ten per cent from 7th October 1822 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed-- 1144 Louvillier vs Kimball: Continued by Plaintiff 1148 Bowen indorsee of Cumings vs Elmer: The execution of the note on which this suit is brought now on the trial of this cause not being denied It is considered by reason thereof and of the law that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of One hundred and fifty dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 30th May 1821, until paid, and costs of suit to be taxed-- 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: Continued by consent page 139 1179 Harman vs Ney: The execution of the note on which this suit is brought not being denied by the Defendant and it appearing from the indorsements [sic] thereon that the sum of fifty seven dollars ninety two cents has been paid leaving a ballance [sic] due of ninety two dollars and eight cents--It is therefore considered by the court here by reason thereof that the plaintiff Thomas Harman have final Judgment and do and do recover of the defendant Benedict Ney the said sum of Ninety two dollars and Eight cents with interest thereon at five per cent from the 20th April 1822, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed-- 1156 Carraby vs Boudreau: Continued by consent 1165 Lamerlere [sp?] vs Devillier: Continued by consent 1167 Oakley vs Kimball: Continued by Plaintiff 1177 Dalton vs Darwin: Continued by consent 1186 Carriere vs Hebert: The defendant, having failed to prove the allegations set forth in his answer and not denying the justness of the Plaintiff's demand. It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the law, that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of One hundred and twenty one dollars with interest thereon at five per cent from the 11th October 1822 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed-- 1189 Bohannon vs Duggins: Continued by Consent The court then adjourned until tomorrow morning 10 O'clock page 140 Tuesday 4th March 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before 1198 Moore's vs Sloan: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this court It is therefore by reason thereof and on motion of Plaintiff's by their attorney that there be judgment against the defendant by default-- 1199 Brent ass. of Martin vs Carrier & Link: The Execution of the note on which this suit is brought being Satisfactorily proven It is considered by reason thereof and of the law that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the Defendant the sum of Two hundred and forty dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 9th October 1822 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed-- 1201 Hrs of Fontenot & wife vs Davis & Haslett: The defendants having failed to file their answer agreeably to the Statutes and the rules of this Court It is therefore by reason thereof and on motion of Plaintiff's by their Attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendants by default-- 1202 Fullerton vs Hicks: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statutes and the rules of this court. It is therefore by reason thereof and on motion of Plaintiff by his attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default-- 1204 Moore's vs Hebert: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statutes and the rules of this court. It is therefore by reason thereof and on motion of Plaintiff's by their attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default 1205 Fontenot [widow of Lamirande deceased] vs Heath: The defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statutes and the rules of this court. It is therefore by reason thereof and on motion of Plaintiff by her attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default-- page 141 [illegible] 1209 Vivant vs Pain: The Execution of the note on which this suit is brought not being denied, and the Plaintiff having admitted the amount claimed as sett [sic] off in defendants answer It is considered by reason thereof and of the law that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of Thirty five dollars and six and a fourth cents with interest thereon at five per cent from Judicial demand and costs of suit to be taxed-- 1210 Miramond vs Devillier: The defendant having failed to file her answer agreeably to the Statute, and rules of the court. It is therefore by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default. 1211 Gayoso indorsee of Galv[b?]an vs Carriere: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statutes and rules of this court. It is therefore by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default-- 1212 David vs Darros: The defendant having failed to prove the allegations set forth in his answer and having admitted the Justness of the Plaintiff's demand. It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the court here that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of Ninety one Dollars with interest, thereon at five per cent from 27th January 1823, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed.-- 1214 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Campbell and West: The Defendants having failed to file their answer agreeably to the statues and rules of this court. It is therefore by reason thereof and on motion of Plaintiff by his attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default.-- page 142 1152 Marc vs Derousse: Cause again argued Whereupon Curia & D. Velt [sp?]-- The court then adjourned until tomorrow 10 Oclock Wednesday 5th March 1823 The court met pursuant to ajourment [sic] Present as before 1215 Davis vs Harris: An amicable arrangement having taken place between the parties herein, the defendant to pay the costs. It is considered by the court here, by reason thereof and of the law and on motion that this suit be dismissed and that there be final Judgment against the defendant for the costs of Suit to be taxed-- Thursday 6th March 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before The Court adjourned until tomorrow at 10 Oclk A. M. Friday 7th March 1823 The Court met pursuant to adjournment present as before The court then adjourned until tomorrow at 10 Oclock A. M. page 143 Saturday 8th March 1823 The Court met pursuant to adjournment present as before 1198: Moore's vs Sloan: Saturday 8th March 1823, No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case. It is considered by the court here, by reason thereof and of the Statute in such case made and provided that the said Judgment by Default be now made final and that the plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of fifty five Dollars Eighteen and three fourth cents with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 12th January 1823, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1201 Hrs of Fontenot & wife vs Davis and Haslett: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case--It is considered by the court here, by reason thereof and of the statute in such case made and provided that the said Judgment by default be now made final and that the plaintiffs do recover of the Defendants the sum of Ninety One Dollars, Seventy five cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 1st April 1822, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1202 Fullerton vs Hicks: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case. It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the statute in such case made and provided that the said Judgment by Default be now made final and that the plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of One hundred and Sixty Dollars fifty cents, with interest thereon at five per cent from the 21st December 1822, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. page 144 1204 Moore;s vs Hebert: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case--It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the statute in such case made and provided that the said Judgment by Default be now made final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of Eighty two Dollars thirty seven and a half cents with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 1st March 1820 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1205 Fontenot widow of Lamirande deceased vs Heath: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case. It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the statute in such case made and provided that the said Judgment by Default be now made final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of Eighty one Dollars and fifty cents with interest thereon at five per cent from the 23rd December 1822, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1210 Miramond vs Devellier: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case. It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the statute in such case made and provided that the said Judgment by Default be now made final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of One hundred and ninety nine Dollars and thirty four cents with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 1st April 1822, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1214 Garrigue & Debaillon vs Campbell & West: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case. It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the statute in such case made and provided that the said Judgment by Default be now made page 145 final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of One hundred & fifty five Dollars three and three fourth cents with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 23d August 1821, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1211 Gayoso indorsee of Galban [sp?] vs Carriere: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case. It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the statute in such case made and provided that the said Judgment by Default be now made final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of Fifty Dollars with interest thereon at five per cent from the 27th January 1823--until paid and costs of suit to be taxed-- The court then adjourned until Monday morning at 10 O'clock Monday 10th March 1823 The court met, pursuant to adjournment. Present, as before, The court adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'clock Tuesday 11th March 1823 The court met, pursuant to adjournment. Present, as before, The court adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'clock Wednesday 12th March 1823 The Court met pursunt [sic] to adjournment. Present as before 1206 Moore vs Simien's: Continued 1217 Moore vs Glenn's: Continued The Court having singed the final Judgments rendered at this term. Adjourned to the first Monday of May next-- Test. Guy H. Bell Clerk page 146 Monday 5th May 1823 The Court met ;pursuant to adjournment Present, George King Esqre Judge 1144 Louvillier vs Kimball: Continued by the Plaintiffs 1167 Oakely vs Kimball: Continued by the Plaintiff 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: Continued by consent 1156 Carraby vs Boudreau: Continued by Plaintiffs 1165 Lamerlere vs Devillier: Continued by Plaintiffs 1189 Bohannan vs Duggins: Comes the defendant, Alexander Duggins, in proper person and here in open court, acknowledges and confesses--Judgement in favor of the Plaintiff as prayed for in his petition, for the sum of One hundred and sixty Dollars--with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 21st of July 1821 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed--conditioned for a stay of execution to the 1st November next to which stay the plaintiffs by their attorney consent Whereupon, It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the court here, that the said confession of Judgment be made final and the Plaintiff do recover of the defendant the sum of One hundred and sixty Dollars, in manner and form as aforesaid. 1203 Litell use of Simons vs Dorman: Comes the Plaintifs by their attorney and prays--the court for leave to dismiss this their suit at their costs Whereupon it is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the law, that this suit be dismissed and that there be Judgment against the Plaintiffs for the costs of suit to be taxed. 1206 W. & I. Moore vs Simiens: The execution of the note on which this suit is brought not being denied and the interrogatories propounded by defendant to the Plaintiff having answered in the negative--It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the law-that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendants the sum of One hundred and seventy two Dollars and sixty eight & three fourth cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from 15th April; 1822, until paid and costs of suit to be taxed-- page 146 1208 Miramond vs Provost: The execution of the note on which this suit is brought being satisfactorily proven. It is considered by reason thereof and of the law, that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendants the sum of One hundred and thirty one Dollars and forty cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 15th October 1822 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1222 Garrigues vs Simiens: The execution of the note on which this suit is brought being satisfactorily proven. It is considered by reason thereof and of the law, that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendants the sum of One hundred and thirty four Dollars and thirty seven & an half cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 30th July 1822 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1216 Garrigue vs Simien: The facts and allegations in the plaintiffs petition contained now not being denied on the trial of this cause bgy the Defendants and the same being founded on an authentic act. It by reason thereof and of the law considered by the court here, that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of One hundred and ninety Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from the first of November 1822 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1217 Moore vs Glenn's: After hearing the alligations [sic] of the parties and the evidence adduced in support thereof and the same being in favor of the plaintiff It is considered by the court here by reason thereof and of the law, that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the Defendants the sum of fifty one Dollars and seventy five cents with interest at ten per cent from 27th June 1822 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed-- 1220 Lyons vs Dunks: Cause argued. J- Darwin, Foreman, Thos Hayes, Benjm McCleland, Lyons: sworn & examined 1219 Chaperon [sp?] vs Nelson: Continued by consent. page 148 1228 Lesassier & Brownson vs Carrier: The defendant having in the Office of the clerk of this court on the 25th April 1823, acknowledged and confessed a Judgement in favor of the Plaintiffs as prayed for in their petition for the sum of two hundred and ninety eight Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from said 25 April 1823 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed, waiving and renouncing his right of appeal and all formalities of law. Conditioned for a stay of execution as appears from the record on file herein. It is therefore, by reason thereof and of the law and on motion considered by the court here, that the said confession of Judgment be now made final and that the Plaintiffs do recover of the defendant the said sum of Two hundred and ninety eight Dollars--with interest and costs of suit--in manner and form as aforesaid-- The court then adjourned until tomorrow morning 10 O'clock Tuesday 6th May 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment present as before 1221 Guillory vs Carriere: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statutes and the rules of this Court. It is considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his Attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default. 1224 Provost vs Auxinfans [sp?]: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statutes and the rules of this Court. It is considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his Attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default. 1226 W. & I. Moore vs Lavergne: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statutes and the rules of this Court. It is considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his Attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default. 1227 Thompson vs Davis: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statutes and the rules of this Court. It is considered by reason thereof and on motion of plaintiff by his Attorney that there be Judgment against the Defendant by Default. 1223 Lyons indorsee vs Dunks: After hearing the alligations [sic] of the parties and the evidence adduced in support thereof and the Plaintiffs demand, and the breach of covenant by the defendant being satisfactorily proven. It is considered by reason thereof and of the law, that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the sum of One hundred Dollars with interest from Judicial demand (17th April 1823) until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1177 Dalton vs Darwin: Continued by consent 1213 Green vs Lynch: on motion ordered that the second and third interrogatory propounded by defendant to plaintiff be stricken out, cause thereupon continued. 1225 More vs Carrier: Continued-- The Court then adjourned until tomorrow morning 10 O'Clock. Wednesday 7th May 1823 The Court met, pursuant to adjournment Present as before 1152 Marc Vs Derousse: After hearing the alligations [sic] of the parties and the evidence adduced in support thereof and the same being in favor of the defendant. It is by the court here considered by reason thereof and of the law, that the defendant have final Judgment and that there be judgment against the Plaintiff for the costs of suit to be taxed. Robert Taylor Jr. appointment as Deputy Clerk Guy H. Bell clerk of this court and of the District Court gives deputy Robert Taylor Jr. and the said Robert Taylor Jr. signifying his willingness to accept of said appointment he the said Robert Taylor Jr. is appointed--Clerk of the Parish and District Courts St. Landry and took the oath of office required by law-- The Court then adjourned, until tomorrow 10 Oclock-- page 150 Thursday 8th May 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment present as before The court then adjourned until to morrow at 9 Oclock A. M. Friday 9th May 1823 The court met pursuant to adjournment Present as Before The court then adjourned until to morrow at 9 Oclock A.M. Saturday 10th May 1823 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present as Before. 1221 Guillory vs Carriere: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Default heretofore rendered in this case--It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof and of the law that the said Judgment by Default be now made final and that the plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of Sixty five Dollars, with interest thereon at five per Cent from 15th April 1823, until paid--and costs of Suit to be taxed. Signed in Open Court the [no day written] day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand, Eight hundred and twenty Three-- 1224 Provost vs Auxinfars [sp?]: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Default heretofore rendered in this case--It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof and of the law that the said Judgment by Default be now made final and that the plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of Seventy Dollars forty three and three fourth cents, with interest thereon at five per Cent from 19th April 1823, until paid, and costs of Suit to be taxed. Signed in Open Court the [no day written] day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand, Eight hundred and twenty Three-- page 151 1226 Moore's vs Lavergne: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Default heretofore rendered in this case. It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof and of the law that the said Judgment by Default be now made final, and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of Two hundred and Twenty three Dollars fifty Eight and a half cents, with interest thereon at ten per Cent from 1st March 1823, until paid, and costs of Suit to be taxed. Signed in Open Court the [no day written] day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand, Eight hundred and twenty Three-- 1227 Thompson vs Davis: No motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Default heretofore rendered in this case. It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof and of the Law that the said Judgment by Default be now made final, and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the Sum of one hundred and nine Dollars, with interest thereon at ten Pr Cent from 14th May 1822, until paid, and costs of Suit to be taxed. Signed in Open Court the [no day written] day of May in the Year of our Lord one thousand, Eight hundred and twenty Three-- page 152 Monday 16th June 1823 Meeting of Magistrates to take Sheriffs securities for the collection of the taxes for the year 1823 This being the day appointed for the meeting of the Magistrates of this parish to receive the securities to be offered by Benjamin S. Haw, Sheriff--for the collection of the State and Parish Taxes to be levied in said Parish for the present year 1823.-- Present-- George King Edqre Parish Judge. Esquires, Justices of the Peace: John G. Dorman Alexander Somerwell Malachi Stanton Eloy Landry Louis Chachere' John C. Lesassier & Guy H. Bell who being a quorum of all the magistrates in the Parish the court proceeded to business--and Benjamin S. Haws having offered-- Joseph Andrus William Haslett Luke Lesassier Eloy Landry & Alexander Robb as his securities for the collection of the State & Parish taxes--within said Parish--for the present year 1823, and the said court being o f opinion--unanimously --that the said persons so offered, are good and sufficient securities for the purpose aforesaid, they were accepted accordingly and Signed together with the said Sheriff--the usual bonds--which bonds are in the words and figures following towit-- Know all men by these presents that We Benjamin S. Haw, Joseph Andrus, William Haslett, Luke Lesassier, Eloy Landry & Alexander Robb are held and firmly bound unto Thomas Bolling Robertson Governor of the State of Louisiana & to his successors in Office in the sum of Eight thousand nine hundred and Eleven dollars & ninety one Cents which said sum we and Each of us do hereby jointly & severally bind ourselves, our heirs Executors, & Administrators to pay to the Said Governor or to his Successors in Office as aforesaid--In Witness whereof We have hereunto Signed & Affixed Our Seals at Opelousas this page 153 Sixteenth day of June, One thousand Eight hundred & twenty Three--The condition of the above obligation is such that Whereas the above bound Benjamin S. Haw hath been appointed Sheriff of the Parish of St. Landry. Now if the said Benjamin S. Haw Shall by himself or deputies faithfully collect and account for all taxes of the State Within the said Parish of St. Landry, for the Present Year agreeably to Law, together with all fines & amercements, then the above obligation to be void. Otherwise to remain in full force and virtue in Law. Signed & Sealed in presence of Guy H. Bell Robert Taylor Jr. Benjm S. Haw (seal) Joseph Andrus (seal)_ Wm Haslett (seal) L. Lesassier (seal) Eloy Landry (seal)_ Alexander Robb (seal) Know all men by these presents that We Benjamin S. Haw,. Joseph Andrus, William Haslett, Luke Lesassier, Eloy Landry & Alexander Robb, of the State of Louisiana & Parish of St. Landry are held and firmly bound unto Thomas Bolling Robertson, Governor of said State & to his Successors in Office in the sum of Eight Thousand nine hundred & Eleven Dollars, Which Said Sum we and Each of us, do hereby jointly & severally bind ourselves, our heirs, Executors, & administrators, to pay to the said Governor or to his Successors in Office, as aforesaid--In witness Whereof we have hereunto Set our hands & Seals, at Opelousas, this Sixteenth day of June One page 154 thousand, Eight hundred and Twenty Three-- The condition of t he above obligation is such that if the above bound Benjamin S. Haw Sheriff of the aforesaid Parish of St. Landry, Shall by himself or deputies, faithfully collect and account for all the Parish Taxes levied within said Parish, by the Police Jury, for the Present Year One thousand Eight hundred & twenty three together with all fines and amercements, then the above obligation to be void otherwise to remain in full force & Virtue in Law-- Signed & Sealed in presence of Guy H. Bell, Robert Taylor Jr. Benjm S. Haw (seal) Joseph Andrus (seal) Wm Haslett (seal) L. Lesassier (seal) Ely Landry (seal) Alexander Robb (seal) Monday 7th July 1823 The Court met, pursuant to adjournment. Presest [sic] George King Esqre Judge The causes set for trial for this day were severally continued to the 28th Instant. The court then adjourned Monday 28th July 18923 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present, as before The causes set for trial at this term were severally continued The Court then adjourned to the first Monday of September next. Test Guy H. Bell Clerk page 155 Monday 1st September 1823 The Court was adjourned the Honorable the Judge being sic, to the 29th Instant. Monday 2th September 1823 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present George King Esqre Judge 1144 Louvillier freres vs Kimball: Thomas Quirk, sworn in behalf of plaintiffs says, that he recognizes the signature as witness to the note on which this suit is brought to be his signature. 1156 Carraby vs Boudreau: Continued on application of plaintiff 1167 Oakley vs Kimball: Continued by consent of both parties. 1218 Miramond vs Curvellos: Comes the Plaintiff by his attorney, and prays the court for leave to dismiss this his suit--the same having been amicably arranged--Leave thereupon granted, and ordered that this suit be dismissed and that there be judgment against the Plaintiff for the costs of suit to be taxed. 1230 Brownson vs McCleland: Comes the Plaintiff by his attorney, and prays the court for leave to dismiss this his suit--the same having been amicably arranged--Leave thereupon granted, and Ordered that this suit be dismissed and that there be judgment against the Plaintiff for the costs of suit to be taxed. 1240 Kirkby vs Estilette & Thibido: The Defendants having failed to answer the interrogatories propounded to them by the plaintiff the same is taken as confessed. Whereupon It is considered by reason thereof and of the law, that the plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendants the sum of One hundred and fifty nine Dollars and seventy three cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from the 1st day of March 1823 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 12046 Bijos vs Gibbs: Comes the plaintiff and prays by his Attorney for leave to dismiss this his suit--Leave granted accordingly and Ordered that this suit be dismissed and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit to bet axed. page 158 [appears either intervening pages missing, or mis-numbered] 1268 Widow & heirs of Jean Meche vs Ozemee Guilbau: Judgment by Default 1269 William T. Day vs James H. Skinner: Judgment by Default 1270 John Brownson vs Louis Guidry: Judgment by Default 1272 James Burton vs Joseph Lejeune: Judgment by Default 1165 Lamerlece use of Miramond vs Courtableau & Devillier: Final Judgment against the Defendants for the sum of two hundred and ninety Dollars with interest from Judicial demand and costs of suit to be taxed-- 1213 Green vs Lynch: Final Judgment against the Defendant for the sum of Ninety five Dollars, with interest at five per cent from the 27th January 1823 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1220 Richard vs Thibedeau: Judgment of Magistrate confirmed and final Judgment against the appellant and plaintiff for the sum of thirty two Dollars with interest and costs on both courts 1225 Waible use of Moore vs Carriere: Final Judgment against the Defendant for the sum of one hundred and six Dollars with interest and costs. 1260 Bousses vs Arnaud: Plea in Demurrer sustained and final Judgment against the Defendant for the sum of Sixty nine Dollars and seventy one cents, with interest and costs of suit. page 159 1229 Morrow vs McCleland: Injunction dissolved & Judgment against Plaintiff for Costs of Suit 1237 Miramond vs Dorman: Judgment against Defendant for $106.67, with interest at 10 PCt from 1st April 1823, & Costs. 1243 Miramond vs Rogeau: Judgment against Defendant for $83 with 10 PCt interest from 1st April 1822 & Costs. 1254 Pickens vs Guidry: Judgment against Defendant for $250 with interest & Costs [illegible initials] 1264 Widow & heirs of Jeremie Risler decd. vs Mamé Jany: Judgment against Defendant for $55.06 with interest & Costs. 1265 Widow & heirs of Jeremie Risler decd. vs Cyrille Richard: Judgment against Defendant for $58.18-3/4 cent Int. from judicial demand, & Costs. 1267 Widow & heirs of Jeremie Risler decd vs Manuel Amadon: Judgment against Defendant for $128.50 with interest from judicial demand & Costs of Suit to be taxed. 1144 Louvillier vs Kimball: Continued 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: Continued 1169 Oakley vs Kimball: Continued 1187 [hard to read] Dalton vs Darwin: Continued 1299 [hard to read] Chaperon vs Nelson: Continued 1236 Nagel vs Lazzereth [or Lazzeretti]: Continued 1239 Arnaud vs Gayoso: Continued 1249 Hrs of Harman vs Arnaud: Continued 1250 Hrs of Harman vs Chachére: Continued 1252 Odle vs Cady: Continued 1256 Carraby vs Boudreau: Continued 1260 Cormier vs Snoddy: Continued 1253 Stephens vs Hatton: Continued 1262 Reed vs Quirk: Continued The Court then adjourned until tomorrow at 10 Oclock A.M. page 160 Wednesday 31st [sic] September [October written first then scratched out] 1824 The court met, pursuant to adjournment Present as before and there being ok business the Court adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'Clock Thursday 2d October 1823 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present as before and there being no business, the Court adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'clock Friday 3d October 1823 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present as before and there being no business the Court adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'clk Saturday 4th October 1823 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before 1231 Marchand vs Heath: Judgment by Default, now made final against the defendant for the sum of Sixty Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from 1st March 1822 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed. 1232 Hrs of Fontenot & wife vs Garrard & Andrus: Judgment by Default, now made final against defendant for the sum of Eighty three Dollars and fifty cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from 1st April 1823 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1233 Hrs of Fontenot & wife vs Davis & Haslett: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendants for the sum of Ninety one Dollars and seventy five cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from 1st April 1823 until paid & costs of suit to be taxed. 1234 Fontenot fils vs Heath: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of two hundred and sixty nine Dollars, with interest thereon at ten per cent from 6th June 1823 until paid & costs of suit to be taxed. page 161 1235 Miramond vs Davis: Judgment by Default now made final against defendant for the sum of two hundred and fifty Dollars, and sixteen cents, with Interest thereon at ten per cent from 6th September 1823 until paid & costs of suit to be taxed. 1238 Miramond vs Smith: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and twenty four Dollars, and forty nine and an half cents, with Interest from 9th June 1822 until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1241 Todd vs Davis: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of Two hundred and forty Dollars and thirty eight cents with interest from 1st March 1823 until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1242 Littell & Collins vs Marc: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and sixty five Dollars, with interest thereon at five per cent from 17th June 1823 until paid & the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1244 Littel vs Davis: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and thirty two Dollars and sixty two and an half cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from 19th August [scratched out] October 1821 until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1245 Miramond vs Figurant: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and eighty eight Dollars and sixty eight and an half cents--with interest at ten per cent from 12 June 1823, until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1247 Miramond vs Figurant: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and eighty eight Dollars and sixty eight and an half cents--with interest at the rate of ten per cent from 12 June 1823, until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1248 Hrs of Hebert vs Lejeune & Bourque: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and four Dollars and seventy eight and a fourth cents, with interest at the rate of five per cent, from 25 June 1823 until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1257 Guilbeau vs Smith: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and twenty Dollars with interest at five per cent, from 14 August 1823, until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. page 162 1258 Smith vs Mudd & als: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendants for the sum of Eighty five Dollars with interest at ten per cent, from 23 Octbr. 1822, until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1259 Bowen vs Green: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendants for the sum of Fifty two Dollars and fifty cents, with interest thereon at ten per cent from 30th April 1821, until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1266 Heirs of Risler vs Hardy: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendants for the sum of One hundred and seventy Dollars, with interest at five per cent from 15th September 1823--until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1268 Heirs of Meche vs Guilbeau & Cormier: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendants for the sum of Two hundred and eighty two Dollars and sixty six and two third cents with interest at five per cent from 15th September 1823 until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1269 Day vs Skinner: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendant for the sum of One hundred and eighteen Dollars and thirty seven and an half cents, with interest at ten per cent from 27th January 1823--until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1270 Brownson vs Guidry: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendant for the sum of two hundred and seventy six Dollars, with interest on $251 at 10 per cent from 28 March 1823, and five pCent on the ballance [sic] from 15 Septr. 1823 until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1272 Burton vs Lejeune: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendant for the sum of sixty five Dollars with interest at the rate of five pCent from 17 September 1823 until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1231 Marchand vs Heath: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendant for the sum of sixty Dollars with interest at the rate of ten per cent from 1st March 1822 until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. 1232 Heirs of Fontenot & wife vs William Garrard & Joseph Andrus: Judgment by Default now made final against the Defendant for the sum of Eighty three Dollars and fifty cents with interest thereon at ten per cent from 1st April 1823, until paid and the Costs of suit to be taxed. There being no motions made for new trials in any of the causes adjudged at this term--the same were signed by the Judge And The Court adjourned until the second Monday of January next Test Guy H. Bell Clerk page 163 Monday 12th January 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present George King Esqre Judge The several causes set for trial at this term were severally continued The Court then adjourned to the second Monday of March next. Monday 8th March 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present George King Esquire Judge 1144 Louvillier vs Kimball: Continued 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: Continued 1156 Carraby vs Boudreau: Continued 1167 Oakley vs Kimball: Final Judgement against Defendant for the sum of Seventy five Dollars with interest at ten per cent, from 8th May 1822 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1239 Arnaud vs Gayoso: By consent, final Judgement against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and fourteen Dollars and seventy two cents, with interest from Judicial demand (towit 17th June 1823) at five per cent, and the Costs of suit to be taxed with a stay of execution to 1st May next--subject to such deduction as may be proved by defendant to the satisfaction of the Clerk of this court, on or before the said 1st day of May next. 1249 Heirs of Harman vs Arnaud & Chachére: Final Judgement against Defendants for the sum of Two hundred and ninety five Dollars, twenty eight and one third cents, with interest from Judicial demand and costs of suit to be taxed. 1250 Heirs of Harman vs Chachere & Arnaud: Final Judgement against Defendants for the sum of Two hundred and ninety five Dollars, twenty eight and one third cents, with interest from Judicial demand and costs of suit to be taxed. 1252 Odle [sp?] vs Cady: suit dismissed & final Judgment against Plaintiff for costs. 1253 Stephens vs Hatton: Continued 1283 Hrs of Langly vs Foreman: Amicably arranged and suit dismissed at defendants costs 1284 Bideman vs Toucheque: Final Judgement against Defendant for the sum of Two hundred and twenty five Dollars with interest and costs of suit. 1287 Foreman vs Toucheque: Amicably arranged and suit dismissed at the Plaintiffs costs. page 164 1290 Ashworth use of Moore vs Toucheque: On motion, and after argument, Ordered that a fourth time of thirty days be allowed the defendant to file his answer. 1291 Ashworth use of Moore vs Toucheque: On motion, and after argument, Ordered that a fourth time of thirty days be allowed the defendant to file his answer. 1289 Ashworth use of Moore vs Toucheque: On motion, and after argument, Ordered that a fourth time of thirty days be allowed the defendant to file his answer. The Court then adjourned until tomorrow morning at 9 A. M. Tuesday 8th March 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present, as before 1177 Dalton vs Darwin: Continued 1219 Chaperon vs Nelson: Continued 1236 Nagel vs Lazzeretti: Continued 1256 Widow & Heirs of Burleigh vs Davis: Final Judgement against defendant for the sum of One hundred and twenty nine Dollars, with interest at ten per cent from 30th April 1823 until paid & the costs of suit to be taxed. 1262 Reed vs Quirk: Continued 1275 Galban vs Carrier: Continued 1277 Lopez vs Montpellier: Continued 1280 Roys - case: On motion Ordered that this case be transfered [sic] to the District Court. 1285 Johnson vs Carrier: Continued 1278 Miramond vs Glenn: Final Judgment, by consent, against Defendant for the sum of Ninety Dolars and sixty cents, with interest at ten per cent from 11th September 1822 and costs of suit to be taxed with a stay of execution to the 1st of June 1824. 1279 Ponsony vs Rawls: Final Judgment against Defendant for the sum of Two hundred and ninety two Dollars and thirty seven and an half cents, with interest and costs of suit. 1290 Simien vs Simon: Judgment of Magistrate confirmed and final Judgment against the plaintiff and appellant for the sum of Thirty Dollars with interest and costs of suit and also the sum of [nothing written] Dollars and [blank] cents costs before magistrate-- 1295 Jackson vs Darby: on motion Ordered that John C. Mitchell Esqre be appointed to represent the interest of the defendant. 1273 Heirs of Fontenot & wife vs Humber & Andrus: Judgment by Default against Defendants 1274 Louvillier & Renaud vs Cockran: Judgment by Default against Defendant. 1276 Lyons vs Garrard: Judgment by Default against Defendant 1281 Widow & heirs of Langley vs McCleland & Andrus: Judgment by Default against Defendants. 1282 Widow & heirs of Langley vs Frugé & Ouachine: Judgment by Default against Defendants. 1286 Lesassier vs Fisher: Judgment by Default against Defendant. 1288 P. Treasurer vs Bundick: Judgment by Default against Defendant. 1292 Finch & Thompson vs Elmer & wife: Judgment by Default against Defendant. The Court then adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 Oclock A. M. Wednesday 9th March 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment, Present as before The court adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'clock Thursday 10th March 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present as before The Court then adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'clock Friday 11th March 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before, The Court then adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 O'clock Page 166 Saturday 13th March 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment. Present, as before. 1261 Cormier vs Snoddy: Final Judgment against Defendant for the sum of Two hundred Dollars with interest and costs of suit. 1273 Heirs of Fontenot & wife vs Humble & Andrus: Judgment by Default made final against Defendants for the sum of Ninety seven Dollars with interest and costs of suit. 1274 Louvillier's & Renaud vs Cockran: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred Dollars and sixty eight & three fourth cents with interest at ten per cent on $25.25 from 1 April 1821, and on $75.43-3/4 from 1st April 1822, until paid & costs of suit to be taxed. 1276 Lyons vs Garrard: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and eleven Dollars twenty cents, with interest at ten per cent from 23 August 1820 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1281 Widow & heirs of Langly vs McCleland & Andrus: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendant for the sum of One hundred and fifty two Dollars & fifty cents with interest and costs of suit. 1282 Widow & heirs of Langly vs [appears smudged out?] & Ouachine: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendants for the sum of sixty five Dollars and fifty cents with interest and costs of suit to be taxed. 1286 Lesassier vs Fisher: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendants for the sum of One hundred Dollars with ten percent interest thereon from 7th of April 1823 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1288 Parish Treasurer vs Bundicks: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendants for the sum of Forty Dollars with interest costs of suit. [no number] Finch & Thompson vs Elmer & wife: Judgment by Default now made final against Defendants for the sum of Fifty nine Dollars sixty two and an half cents with Interest thereon at ten per cent from 16th June 1823 until paid and costs of suit to be taxed and five Dollars cost of protest. The Court then adjourned until Thursday the 18th Instant at 10 A. M. page 167 Thursday 18th March 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment, Present as before 1261 Cormier vs Snoddy: Judgment signed-- page 168 Monday 7th June 1824 Meeting of Magistrates Sheriff's securities This being the day appointed for a meeting of the Magistrates of this Parish to approve the securities offered by Benjamin S. Haw Esqre Sheriff of said Parish for the collection of the State and Parish taxes for the year 1824-there appeared-- George King Parish Judge Justices of the Peace: Garrigue Flaujac Louis Chachere père Eloy Landry Eliakem Littell Joseph Andrus Cesar Hanchett and Guy H. Bell And there being a majority of all the magistrates in commission present, they proceed to business and the said Benjamin S. Haw-Sheriff having offered as his securities for the collection of the State and parish taxes levied on this parish for the present year 1824--Joseph Andrus, William Haslett, Luke Lesassier, Eloy Landry, and Alexander Robb in solidum--they are deemed sufficient and are accepted as such by this meeting. Monday 12th July 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present George King Esqre Judsge 1144 Louvillier vs Kimball: Continued by consent. 1150 Gilbert bs Smith: Continued by consent. 1156 Carraby vs Boudreau: Continued by consent. 1177 Dalton vs Darwin: Judgment of Nonsuit against the Plaintiff 1219 Chaperon vs Nelson: Dismissed at the Pliantiffs Costs. 1253 Stephens vs Hatton: Judgment, against defendant, to deliver the horse and pay the sum of twenty five Dollars Damayes and the costs of suit. S. Bossier and L. Schnidler, sworn. 1236 Nagel vs Lazzeretti: Continued by consent. 1262 Reed vs Quirk: Continued by consent. 1275 Galban vs Carrier: Judgment against the defendant for the sum of Sixty nine Dollars, with interest and costs of suit to be taxed. F. Gertsema [sic], sworn. 1277 Lopez use of Gil vs Montpellier: Judgment against the defendant for the sum of Eighty five Dollars, with interest and costs of suit to be taxed. 1285 Johnson vs Carrier: Leave granted the [blank] to amend, cause thereupon continued--- 1295 Jackson vs Darby: On motion ordered that this cause be transferred to the probate Court of this Parish. The Court then adjourned until tomorrow morning at 8 O'clock Tuesday 13th july 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjourment [sic]. Present as before. 1289 Ashworth use of Moore vs Touchecke: Judgment by Default against the Defendant. 1290 Ashoworth use of Moore vs Touchecke: Judgment by Default against the Defendant. 1291 Ashworth use of Moore vbs Touchecke: Judgment by Default against the Defendant. 1296 McBride vs Frilot: Judgment by Default against the Defendant. 1294 Foreman vs Isles [Estes?]: Judgment by Default against the Defendant. 1303 Jany vs Lacaze: Judgment by Default against the Defendant. 1305 Ignogoso [sic] vs Savoy: Judgment by Default against the Defendant. 1307 Glaze vs Girard: Judgment by Default against the Defendant. 1293 Fogleman vs Duggins & Cullom: Defendants offsett [sic] allowed and Judgment against the Defendants for the sum of Twenty nine Dollars, and fifty cents with interest and costs of suit. 1306 Cropper, tutr vs Duggins: Continued 1297 Knox vs Ferguson: Continued 1298 Gradinego use of Carrier vs Gardner: Continued 1299 Esclavon vs Richardson: Continued 1300 Robb vs Edwards: Continued 1301 Thompson vs Duggins & Gardner: Continued 1304 Bijos use of Wade vs Carriere: Continued page 170 1302 Allen f.m.c. vs Richard & Landry: The defendant & Richard by his attorney, moved the court for an order that the plaintiff answer the interrogatories propounded to him in the answer, after argument. The Court adjourned until Monday the 19th Instant, at 10 Oclock A. M. Monday 19th July 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjourment [sic]. Present as before. 1289 Ashworth use of Moore vs Touchecke: Judgment by Default made final against defendant for the sum of Two hundred and fifteen Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from 5th December 1823 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1290 Ashworth use of Moore vs Touchecke: Judgment by Default now made final against defendant for the sum of Two hundred and fifteen Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from 5th December 1823 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1291 Ashworth use of Moore vs Touchecke: Judgment by Default now made final against defendant for the sum of One hundred and thirty Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from 5th December 1823 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1294 Foreman vs Isles Senr.: Judgment by Default now made final against defendant for the sum of One hundred and ninety Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent, on two hundred Dollars from the first day of July 1823, to the 12th of February 1824 and on the sum of one hundred and ninety Dollars from the 12th of February 1824 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1296 McBride vs Frilot: Judgment by Default, now made final against defendant for the sum of One hundred and thirty Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from 5th December 1823 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1303 Jany vs Lacaze: Judgment by Default now made final against defendant for the sum of One hundred and thirty One Dollars and twenty five cents with interest thereon at five per cent from 1st of May 1824 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. And Ordered that the tract of land mentioned in the petition and accompanying Documents as Mortgaged to secure the payment of the sum for which this suit is brought be first seized and sold to satisfy this Judgment. Page 171 1307 Glaze vs Girard: Judgment by Default now made final against defendant for the sum of One hundred and forty Dollars with interest thereon at ten per cent from 1st November 1822 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1305 Ignogoso vs Savoy: Judgment by Default now made final against defendant for the sum of Two hundred and forty Dollars with interest thereon from the Judicial demand towit the 29th June 1824 until paid and the costs of suit to be taxed. 1303 Allin f.m.c. vs Richard & Landry: In this Case, It is ordered that plaintiff answer the interrogatories propounded to him by the defendant Dominique Richard. No motions for new trials in any of the causes decided at this term having been made--the same were signed in open court by the Judge The Court then adjourned until the first Monday of September next. Test. Guy H. Bell Clerk Monday 6th September 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment Present as before- The Court then adjourned until Thirsday [sic] morning at 9 Oclock-- Thirsday [sic] 9th September 1824 The Court met pursuant to adjournment present as before. 1144 Louvillier freres vs Kimball: Continued 1263 Reed vs Quirk: Continued Page 170 [evidently a mis-numbering] 1285 Johnson vs Carriere fils: Continued 1300 Robb vs Edwards: Continued 1301 Thompson vs Duggins and Gardner: Continued 1304 Bijos use of Wade vs Carrier: Continued 1306 Cropper tutor vs Duggins: Continued 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: On motion. (The death of the Defendant being proved) ordered that this Suit be revised against the curator of John D. Smith cause thereupon continued-- 1299 Esclavon vs Richard père: The Defendant by his Counsel D. L. Todd Esq. moved to dissolve the injunction. After argument the motion was overruled and the cause was thereupon Continued-- 1313 Smith vs Blount: On motion and by consent of Defendant by his Counsel--Ordered that the Interrogatories in Defendants answer be Stricken out and that the Plaintiffs have leave to amend their petition cause thereupon continued-- 1309 Hebert & Cormier vs Smith: On motion ordered that this cause be transferred to the Probate Court of this Parish-- 1308 Rougeau use of Ledoux vs Hergemoider [sp?]: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this court. It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof, and the Law--and on motin of Plaintiff by his Attorney that there be judgment by Default against the Defendant-- Page 171 [evidently a mis-numbering] 1310 Brown us of King vs Andrus: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this court. It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof, and the Law--and on motion of Plaintiff by his Attorney that there be judgment by Default against the Defendant-- 1156 [maybe 1150?] Carraby's vs Boudreau: Comes the Parties by their Attornies [sic] and the execution of the note on which this Suit is brought being Satisfactorily proven. It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof, and of the Law, that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the Defendant the sum of one hundred and Ninety four Dollars with interest thereon at five per cent from judicial demand to wit 15th July 1822 and costs of suit to be taxed. 1297 Knox vs Ferguson: Comes the Parties by their Attornies and the execution of the note on which this Suit is brought now not being denied. It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof, and of the Law, that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the Defendant the sum of one hundred and eleven Dollars and twelve and a half cents with interest at ten per cent on fifty one Dollars twelve and a half cents from 1st March 1823 and on Sixty Dollars from 8th March 1823, until paid and Costs of suit to be taxed. 1298 Darross & Gradenigo use of Carrier vs Gardner: Comes the Parties by their Attornies and the execution of the note on which this Suit is brought now not being denied. It is considered by the Court here by reason thereof, and of the Law, that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the Defendant the sum of Seventy two Dollars and thirty seven and a half cents, with interest at five per cent from judicial demand to wit 14th June 1824 until paid and Costs of suit to be taxed. Page 172 Tuesday 21st Septr 1824 George Jackson received as deputy Sheriff Comes Benjamin S. Haw Esqre Sheriff of the Parish and gives the Court here to understand that he wished to appoint George Jackson as his Deputy in his said Office of Sheriff Whereupon the Court here approves of the said appointment and the said George Jackson signifying his willingness to accept the same is appointed accordingly, and took the oath required by law. Wednesday 22d September 1824 Benjm S. Haw to Governor State Tax Bond Recorded 22d Septemr 1824 Know all men by these presents that We Benjamin S. Haw, Joseph Andrus, William Haslett, Luke Lesassier, Eloy Landry & Alexander Robb are held and firmly bound unto Thomas Bolling Robertson Governor of the State of Louisiana & to his successors in Office in the sum of Eight thousand nine hundred and seventy three dollars & fifty cents which said sum we and Each of us do hereby jointly & severally bind ourselves, our heirs Executors, & Administrators to pay to the Said Governor or to his Successors in Office as aforesaid. In Witness whereof We have hereunto Signed & Affixed Our Seals at Opelousas this [blank] day of June, One thousand Eight hundred and twenty four. The condition of the above obligation is such, that whereas the above bound Benjamin S. Haw hath been appointed Sheriff of the Parish of St. Landry. Now if the said Benjamin S. Haw Shall by himself or deputies faithfully collect & account for all taxes of the State Within the said Parish of St. Landry, for the present year agreeably to Law, together with Page 173 all fines & amercements, then the above obligation to be void, otherwise to remain in full force and virtue in Law. Signed & Sealed in presence of Guy H. Bell Benjamin S. Haw (seal) Joseph Andrus (seal) Wm. Haslett (seal) L. Lesassier (seal) Eloy Landry (seal) Alex Robb (seal) Benjm S. Haw to Governor Parish Tax Bond Recorded 22 September 1824 Know all men by these presents that We Benjamin S. Haw, Joseph Andrus, William Haslett, Luke Lesassier, Eloy Landry & Alexander Robb of the State of Louisiana and Parish of St. Landry are held and firmly bound unto Thomas Bolling Robertson Governor of the aforesaid State and to his successors in Office in the sum of three thousand nine hundred and twenty two Dollars & fifty cents, which said sum we and Each of us do hereby jointly & severally bind ourselves, our heirs executors & Administrators to pay to the Said Governor or to his Successors in Office as aforesaid. In witness whereof we have hereunto Signed & Affixed Our Seals at Opelousas this [blank] day of June, One thousand Eight hundred and twenty four. The condition of the above obligation is such that whereas the above bound Benjamin S. Haw Sheriff of the above said Parish of St. Landry shall by himself or deputies faithfully collect and account for all taxes of the State within said Page 174 Parish by the Police Jury for the present year one thousand eight hundred and twenty four together with all fines & amercements, then the above obligation to be void, otherwise to remain in full force and virtue in Law. Signed & Sealed in presence of Guy H. Bell Benjamin S. Haw (seal) Joseph Andrus (seal) Wm. Haslett (seal) L. Lesassier (seal) Eloy Landry (seal) Alex Robb (seal) The Court then adjourned to Monday the 13th December 1824. Monday 13th December 1824 This day being the day fixed on for the holding Court, and the Honorable the Parish Judge, not attending, the Court was thereupon adjourned, Sini die [du?] Monday 7th March 1825 This being the day assigned for holding court The Court met, present, Geo. King Esqr PJudge 849 Collins vs W Lucky: Continued [no number] Risler vs Downing: continued & further ordered that this Suit be revived in the Heirs - of Jeremie Risler- 1149 Louvilliers f. vs Kimball: Continued 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: Continued & ordered that this Suit be revived agt the Curator of the estate of J. D. [sp?] Smith 1200 Moore vs Ashworth: Continued 1262 Reed vs Quirk: Continued 1285 Johnson vs Carriere fils: Continued Page 175 1299 Esclavon vs Richard pere: Continued 1300 Robb vs Edwards: Continued 1301 Thompson vs Duggins & Garner: Continued 1302 Allen f.m.c. vs Richard & Landry: Continued 1304 Bijos use of Wade vs Carriere: Continued 1306 Carpentier tutor to children vs Duggins: Continued 1309 Hebert & Cormier vs Smith: Contd. and further ordered that this Suit be revd against the curator of the Estate of Smith 1311 Bordelon vs Hargroider: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law, and on motion considered by the Court here, that there be judgment by deft. against the deft. 1312 Neda vs Sallier: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore, by by [sic] reason thereof and of the law, and on motion by the Plaintiff by his attorney, ordered, that there be judgment by Default, against the Defendant. 1313 Smith vs Blount: Continued 1314 Landrum use of Blount vs Perkins: Continued 1315 Porter vs Garrard: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore, by reason thereof and of the law, considered by the Court here, and on motion, that there be judgment by Default, against the Deft. Page 176 1316 Simmons vs Duggins: Continued 1317 Collins vs Fontenot: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore, by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, & on motion of Plaintiff by his attorney ordered that there be judgment against the Deft. by default-- 1318 Louaillier f. et Renaud vs Fontenot: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore, by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, & on motion of Plaintiff by his attorney ordered that there be judgment against the Deft. by default 1319 Louailler frere et Renaud vs Fontenot: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore, by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, & on motion of Plaintiff by his attorney ordered that there be judgment agt. the Deft. by default 1320 Louailler frere et Renaud vs Fontenot: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore, by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, & on motion of Plaintiff by his attorney ordered that there be judgment agt. the Deft. by default 1321 Louailler frere et Renaud vs Fontenot: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore, by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, & on motion of Plaintiff by his attorney ordered that there be judgment against the Deft. 12[?]22: Rosalie fwc vs Mallet ---: continued Page 177 1323 Somervell vs Duggins: The Defendant having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law, considered by the Court here, & on motion ordered that there be judgment against the Deft. 1324 Andrus Lessasier and Collins vs Dorman: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, and on motion of Plaintiff by his Attorney, that there be judgment against the Defendant by default-- 1325 Louier freres Toledans & Co. vs Richard: Continued 1327 King vs Gilchrist: The Deft. having failed to file his answer agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is therefore considered by the court here, by reason thereof and of the law, and on motion of Plaintiff by his attorney, that there be judgment by deft. against the Deft. 1328 Moore vs Cormier: Continued 1329 Neda vs Jany: In this case on motion ordered that this Suit be dismissed and that the Deft. pay the costs of this Suit to be taxed-- 1330 Munroe vs Foullaide & Estorge: Continued 1331 Martin vs Quibedeau: Continued 1332 Barnett vs Duggins: Continued [no number] Finch & Thompson vs Duggins: Continued Page 178 Bond to Keep the Ferry at the Bayou Boeuf and Crocodile Know ye that we James McDaniel as principal and William Link as security are held and firmly bound unto Andrew Moore Treasurer of the Parish of St. Landry in the sum of five hundred Dollars which sum well and truly to be paid to the said Treasurer and to his Successors in Office we do by these presents, bind ourselves, our Heirs executors and Administrators, firmly by these presents, Signed with our hands and sealed at Opelousas the twenty first day of February in the Year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and twenty five--Whereas the above bound James McDaniel has this day at Public auction by the Parish Judge of the Parish of St. Landry, [paid - not very legible] the Keeping and maintaining of the Ferry at the junction of the Bayou Boeuf and Crocodile for one year from and after this date. Now the Condition of this obligation is such that if the said bound James McDaniel shall well and truly and faithfully Keep and maintain the said Ferry at all times during one year, counting from the oath of these presents, according to the laws of this State and the ordinances of the Police Jury of this parish, and Shall pay all such damages or injuries that may happen to any person or persons through the negligence or malconduct of him the said James McDaniel or of any person in his employ, then this obligation to be null, and void, otherwise to remain in full force and virtue according to the ordinances of the Police Jury of this Parish of St. Landry-- Signed & acknowledged in presence of us: B. S. Haw Guy H. Bell James McDaniel (seal) William Link (seal) Page 179 [no number] State vs Western: The Deft. having been brought up by Habeas corpus, ordered that the Deft. Jean Simon Simon Western enter into recognizance himself in the sum of Two thousand dollars, and two -- more sufficient sureties in the like sum, conditioned for his the Defts personal appearance, at a District Court to be holden in and for the Parish of St. Landry on the Second Monday of May next, to be taken before any Magistrate, acting in and for the Parish of St. Landry-- The court then adjourned to the 28th March 1825 Monday 28th March 1825 The Court present the Hon. Geo. King Judge 849 Collins vs McLusky: Continued and ordered that this Suit be revived against the Heirs of McLusky, Defendants-- 1149 Louaillier freres vs Kimball: The facts and allegations in the Plaintiff's Petition contained, being satisfactorily proven to this Court. It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the court here, that the Plaintiffs have final Judgment and do recover of the Defendant the sum of ninety one Dollars and forty Cents, with 5 per ct. from the 27th June 1822, and the costs of Suit to be taxed-- 1150 Guilbert vs Lavergne cur.: Continued 1262 Reed vs Quirk: Continued 1285 Johnson vs Carriere fils: Continued 1300 Robb vs Edwards: Continued 1304 Bijos use Wade vs Carriere: Continued Page 180 1306 Cropper vs Duggins: Continued 1313 Heirs of Smith vs Blount: Continued and leave granted to amend Pltff Petition 1316 Simmons vs Duggins: The facts and allegations contained in the Plaintiff's demand, being satisfactorily proven to this Court. It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here that the Plaintiff have final judgment and do recover of the Defendant the sum of fifty Dollars with five per cent interest thereon from the 15th September 1824. Conditioned for a stay of execution to first May 1825, and it is further ordered that the deft. pay the costs of this Suit to be taxed. 1322 Rosalie fwc vs Mallet fmm: Continued 1326 Laua Toldeano. freres vs Richard: Continued 1330 Munroe vs Foullaide & Estorge: Continued, and leave granted Deft. to amend their answer in this case filed in 30 days-- 1330 Martin vs Quebedeau: The facts and allegations set forth by Plaintiff in his demand being satisfactorily substantiated, to this Court It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court, that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the Sum of Sixty Dollars with 5 PCt from 20th January 1825--and the costs of this Suit to be taxed--with a stay to 1st August 1825- 1332 Barnett vs Duggins: Continued 1333 Finch & Thompson vs Duggins: The Deft. having failed to file his answer Page 181 agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, and on motion of Plaintiff by his Attorney, that there be judgment by default against the Defendant. 1314 Landrum use of Blount vs Perkins: The facts and allegations in the Plaintiff's petition contained, being satisfactorily established. It is by reason thereof and of the law, considered by the Court here, that the Plaintiff have final Judgment and do recover of the defendant the Sum of ninety six Dollars with 5 per cent interest from the 25th August 1824 and the costs of this Suit to be taxed-- 1301 Thompson vs Duggins & Garner: The execution of the note on which this Suit is brought substantially proven. It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, that the Pltff have final judgment and do recover of the Defendants the Sum of Seventy Dollars with 5 per cent interest from the 22d June 1822 and the costs of this Suit to be taxed-- 1334 Fribble [sp?] vs Embert: In this case it appearing satisfactorily to the court that the Defendant had failed to prosecute his appeal herein. It is by the Court here considered by reason thereof and of the law that there be judgment against the Deft. and that he do pay to the Plff the sum of forty Seven Dollars, and Seventy five cents with five per cent interest thereon from the 28th day of March 1825. And it is further ordered, that the Deft. do pay the costs of this Suit to be taxed. [no number] Allen fmc vs Richard & Landry: IN this cause after argument of counsel ordered that the Bill of exceptions filed by Deft.s to Plffs answer be overrulled-- The Court then adjourned to 29 March Page 182 Tuesday 29th March 1825 The court met present as before- 1302 Allen fmc vs Richard & Landry: The facts and allegations i n the Plaintiff's Petition, now on the trial of this cause being satisfactorily proven to this Court. It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, by reason thereof & of the law that the Plaintiff have final judgement against one of the Defendants Namely Dominique Richard for the sum of Ninety two Dollars, with 10 per Cent from 21st March 1824, and the costs of this suit to be taxed--- 1313 Heirs of Smith vs Blount: In this case it appearing from the document on file that the Plffs by their Atty had dismissed this Suit, at Plff's costs, whereupon on motion, ordered, that this Suit be dismissed and that the Plaintiffs pay the costs of this Suit to be taxed--- 1324 Cullom vs Heath [sp?]: In this cause. It appearing from satisfactory evidence, to the Court thereon, that the parties herein had come to an amicable arrangement. It is by reason thereof and of the law, ordered by the Court here, that this Suit be dismissed, and that the Deft. do pay the costs of this suit to be taxed-- 1328 W. & I. Moore vs Cormier: The facts and allegations set forth in Plaintiffs demand, being clearly proven to this Court It is by reason thereof and of the law, ordered by the Court here, that the Plffs have final Judgment and do recover of the Deft. the sum of Eighty dollars eighty six & 1/4 cents with 10 PCt from 1st March 1824 & the costs of this Suit to be taxed-- Page 183 1327 King vs Gilchrist: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by default heretofore rendered in this case. It is on motion ordered that the said Judgment by default be now made final and that the Plff do recover of the Defendant the sum of Two hundred Dollars with five per cent interest thereon from the 28 October 1824 and the costs oof this suit to be taxed. 1311 Bordelon vs Hargroider: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the judgment by default, heretofore rendered in this case. It is on motion ordered that the said judgment by default be now made final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Deft. the sum of Sixty three Dollars with 5 per cent from the 18th August 1824 until paid, and the costs of this suit to be taxed. 1315 And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the judgt by default, heretofore rendered in this case. It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, and on motion ordered that the Said Judgment by default be now made final and that the Plff do recover of the Deft. the sum of one hundred and two Dollars fifty cents with 5 Pcent from 4th September 1824 until paid, and the costs of this suit to be taxed. Page 184 1317 Collins vs Fontenot: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Deft, heretofore rendered in this cause. It is by reason thereof and of the law, considered by the Court here, and on motion ordered that the Said judgment by default be now made final and that the Plff have judgment and do recover of the Defendt. the sum of Two hundred and forty three Dollars fifty cents with 5 Pcent interest from 17th September 1824--and the costs of this suit to be taxed. 1318 Louaillier freres et Red. vs Fontenot C. B. père: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by Default heretofore rendered in this cause. It is by reason thereof and of the law considered by the Court here, and on motion ordered that the Said judgment by Deft. be now made final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Deft. the sum of Eighty eight Dollars and thirty one cents with 10 Pcent interest from 17th Augt. 1824--and the costs of this suit to be taxed. 1319 Louaillier freres et Red. vs Fontenot Augt.: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by deft. heretofore rendd. in this cause. It is by reason thereof and of the law, and on motion ordered that the Said judgment by Deft. be now made final and that the Plffs do recover of the Deft. the sum of Sixty one Dollars and forty three fourth [sic] one cents with 5 Pcent interest from 20 Sept. 1824 and the costs of this suit to be taxed. Page 185 [no number] Louaillier freres et Renaud vs Fontenot Luffroy: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by deft. heretofore rendered in this cause. It is by reason thereof and of the law, and on motion of Plaintiffs by their Attorney, ordered by the Court here, that the Said judgt. by default be now made final and that the Plffs. do recover of the Deft. the sum of Thirty seven Dollars and thirty one and one fourth cents--with 10 Pcent from the 1st day of April 1822, until paid and the costs of this suit to be taxed. [no number] Louaillier freres et R. vs Fontenot C. B. fils: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by deft. heretofore rendered in this cause. It is by reason thereof and of the law, and on motion of Plaintiffs by their Attorney, ordered by the Court here, that the Said judgt. by default be now made final and that the Plffs. do recover of the Deft. the sum of Thirty seven Dollars and thirty one and one fourth cents--with 10 Pcent from the 1st day of April 1822, until paid and the costs of this suit to be taxed. 1323 Somervell vs Duggins: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the judgt. by default heretofore rendered in this cause. It is by reason thereof and on motion of Plaintiffs by their Attorney, considered by the Court here that the Said judgment by default be now made final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of one hundred & fifty five Dollars eighty two & half cents with 10 Pcent on $200 from the 10th June 1823, to the 18th Jany. 1826 & 10 PCt on $150 from 18th Jany 1824 & costs of Suit to be taxed. Page 186 1325 Andrus & als vs Dorman: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the Judgment by deft. heretofore rendered in this Case. It is by reason thereof and on motion of Plaintiff by his Attorney ordered by the Court here, that the Said Judgment by default be now made final and that the Plaintiff do recover of the Defendant the sum of Seventy nine Dollars with 10 per cent from the 1st March 1821, until paid, and the costs of Suit to be taxed. 1312 Neda vs Sallier: In this Case, on Suggestion that the Deft. had died, Since the institution of this Suit, and on motion, ordered, that this Suit be revived against the widow & heirs of Charles Sallier decd.--in the Probate Court. The Court then adjourned to Wednesday the 30th 1825. Wednesday 30th 1825 By order of Court, the Court adjourned to Thursday the 31st 1825 Thursday 31st March 1825 By order, The Court, adjourned to Friday 1st April 1825. Friday 1st April 1825 The Court met, present as before. 1149 Louaillier freres vs Kimball: Judgment signed 1301 Thompson vs Duggins & Garner: Judgment signed 1302 Allen fmc vs Richard & wife: Judgment signed Page 187 1313 Heirs of Smith vs Blount: Judgment Signed 1314 Landrum use of R. Blount vs Perkins: Judgment Signed 1316 Simmons vs Duggins: Judgment Signed 1324 Cullom vs Scott: Judgment Signed 1328 Moores vs Cormier: Judgment Signed 1329 Neda vs Jany: Judgment Signed 1330 Martin fils vs Quebedeau: Judgment Signed 1327 King vs Gilchrist: Judgment Signed 1311 Bordelon vs Hargroider: Judgment Signed 1315 Porter vs Garrard: Judgment Signed 1317 Collins vs Fontenot: Judgment Signed 1318 Louailiere f.et R. vs Fontenot: Judgment Signed 1319 Louaillier f. et R. vs Fontenot: Judgment Signed 1310 Louaillier f. et R. vs Fontenot: Judgment Signed 1321 Louaillier f. et R. vs Fontenot: Judgment Signed 1320 Somervall vs Duggins: Judgment Signed 1325 Andrus & als vs Dorman: Judgment Signed 1334 Trebble vs Embert: Judgment Signed Page 188 [no number] Finch & Thompson vs Duggins: And now to day no motion having been made to set aside the judgment by default heretofore rendered in this Cause. It is by reason thereof and of the law, and on motion of Plaintiff by his Attorney, ordered by the Court here, that the Said judgment by default be now made final and that the Plffs do recover of the Defendant the sum of forty eight Dollars and Seventy five cents with ten per cent interest thereon from the 19th of July 1822, until paid, and the Costs of Suit to be taxed. Judgment Signed Ruler [sp?] vs Downing: Ordered that this Suit be dismissed and that the Plaintiff pay the Costs of this Suit to be taxed-- And there being no further business adjourned to the 4th Monday June 1825. And the Court further orders that the regular Sessions of this Court, be fixed hereafter, for the 4th Monday in June 1825--the 4th Monday in August the 2d Monday in Decr and the 4th Monday in March Successively--- Teste Henderson Taylor Clerk Page 189 Monday 27th June 1825 Pursuant to adjournment Present as before 1150 Guilbert vs Smith: In this case on motion: Ordered that Luke Lesassier's name be Striken off this Suit, it appearing to teh Court, that he has been appointed Attorney to the absent heirs of the Defendant decd. and it is further ordered, on motion, that John C. Mitchel, be appointed to represent the interests of the Plaintiff herein--cause therefrom contind on former order of this Court-- 1262 Reed vs Quirk: In this case, the Court having heard the allegations of the Parties as well as the evidence adduced in support thereof and being of opinion that the law and evidence are in favor of the Defendant in the appeal Edwd Quirk, order adjudge and decree, that the judgment below be affirmed, and that the Defendant do recover of the Plaintiff the Sum of forty one Dollars, and Seventy five cents with interest at five per cent from judicial demand until paid and costs of Suit to be taxed-- 1300 Robb vs Edwards: In this case the execution of the note on which this Suit is brought, being satisfactorily proven to the Court. It is therefore by reason thereof and of the law, being in favor of the Plaintiff by the Court here, ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the Plaintiff have final judgment and do recover of the Defendant the Sum of ninety six Dollars and seventy five cents with five per cent from 22d day of June 1824 until paid and the costs of Suit to be taxed-- Page 190 1304 Bijos use Wade vs Carriere: Continued by consent 1306 Crapper Tutor vs Duggins: Continued 1322 Rosalie fnw [sp?] vs Mallet fnm [sp?]: Continued 1326 Lauve freres Toledano & Co. vs Richard: In this case on motion of Plaintiffs by their Attornies [sic], ordered, that this Suit be dismissed and that there be judgment against the Plaintiffs for the Costs of this Suit to be taxed. The Court then adjourned to Tuesday the 28 Inst., 10 oclock Tuesday 29th June 1825 The Court Pursuant to adjournment Present as before 1332 Barnett vs Dugins: contd. upon affidavit--the plaintiff paying costs of continuance-- 1335 Castillon widow of Simon decd. vs Hargroider: The Defendant having failed to file his answer herein agreeably to the Statute and the rules of this Court. It is by reason thereof and on motion, ordered that there be judgment again [sic] the Defendant by default-- 1337 Assignees Andrus vs Harman & Welsh: Continued 1338 Assignees of Andrus vs Harman & McLeland: Continued 1339 Heirs dup: of Andrus vs Harmans: Continued Source: Family History Library Microfilm #1412749, Item 2, Court Minute Book, St. Landry , Pages 98-190.