HAYWOOD COUNTY, NC - WILLS - Will and Estate Records of John H. 
				& Almira C. Jones Turpin
====================================================================
     USGENWEB NOTICE: In keeping with our policy of providing
         free information on the Internet, data may be used by
         non-commercial entities, as long as this message
         remains on all copied material. These electronic
         pages may NOT be reproduced in any format for profit
         or for presentation by other persons or organizations.

         Persons or organizations desiring to use this material
         for purposes other than stated above must obtain the
         written consent of the file contributor.
		
	 The submitter has given permission to the USGenWeb Archives
	 to store the file permanently for free access.

         This file was contributed for use in the USGenWeb
         Archives by: Marshall Styles	marshallstyles@yahoo.com
====================================================================
Last Will and Testament of John H. Turpin, and the Estate Settlement of John
and, later, his wife Almira Turpin.

Transcribed by Marshall Styles, 22 Sep 1997, marshallstyles@yahoo.com

John Turpin and wife Almira Cynthia Jones Turpin, Haywood County Deeds, Wills
and Original Estate Papers. Their estates are so closely intertwined, it
serves a better purpose to present the settlements in chronological order,
rather than individually.

John H. Turpin (Captain, Confederate States of America) - born 1828 Haywood
County, died 1896. Almira Cynthia Jones - daughter of Charles and Elizabeth
Jones of Haywood County, was born 1832 in Haywood County, died 1911.

October 10 1888; John Turpin writes his Last Will and Testament in Haywood
County, N.C. [original spelling maintained]: "I John Turpin of the State and
County afforesaid, Being of sound mine and memory, but considering the
uncertainty of my Earthley existence do make and declare this my Last Will and
Testament in manner and form following, that is to say: That my executor
(hereinafter named) shall provide for my body a decent burial and toomstones
suitable to the wishes of my relatives and friends and all funeral expenses
together with my just debts howsoever and to whomsoever owing out of the
moneys that may first come into his hands as part or paid of my estate.

"I give and devise to my Beloved wife Almira Turpin the following described
tracks or parsuel of land, to wit: Begining at the mouth of a old ditch about
six poles above the mouth of a big branch on the west side of Ritchland Creek
thence running a southwest direction about thirty two poles to a crooked and
forket Locus blazed on the south east side of said branch, thence up said
small branch a southerly direction passing the head of branch to the gap of a
ridg and in the road that leads to Nelson Howells mill and on Howells line,
thence a W. direction with the top of the ridge and Howell line and pasing
verres corners to M.H. Love line, thence with Love line to a post oak down a
corner to Smith old track, now a stone, thence with Loves and Smiths old line
to the Britton [Horatio Nelson Brittain ?] old line, thence with the Britton
and Smith old line to a well known white oak corner, now a corner to Alden
Howell's land, thence with A. Howell's line on top of said ridg to the M.W.
Smith tract, which is a part of the old Smith tract, thence with the said
Kimsey Howell and the Smith's old line and passing various corners to a stone
in center of the wagon rode, about four poles N.E. of what is none [known] as
the Maple Spring, thence with said rode and Howell line, crossing Hyatts Creek
to W.T. Reeves line, thence with Reeves line and the Smith old line to
Richland Creek, thence across said creek and with James R. Longs and Smith old
line to the top of the ridg, and to R.W. Corzines corner, thence west
direction and with Corzines line to Creek, so as to include the P.C. Allen
track, thence up Creek to the beginning. This convaince is intended to cover
all  the land in said boundrey including my dweling house and all other houses
or improvements on said land to have and to hold to her the said Almiry Turpin
for and during the term of her natural life in satisfaction for and in lieu of
her dower thirds of and in all my real estate.

"I give and bequeath to my said wife Almiry Turpin all of the househole and
kitchen furniture that I one at my deth to despose of acording to her one will
and share all of the farming tules and farming impliments and all of the crops
of every kind that may be on the farm at my deth and all of the provision that
may be on hand at my deth. I give and bequeth to my wife three hundred dollars
in pearsheble property acording to her one choise, if there is that amount on
hand at my deth. I also give and bequeth to my wife Almiry Turpin three
hundred dollars in cash and solvent notes if on hand after just debts have bin
paid. My will and desire is that all of my real estate that I may one at my
deth with the exceptions of that potion that I have convaid to my wife Almiry
Turpin in this my Will, bee sold by my administrator as he may think best and
all of the proceeds of said real estate together with all outher assets that I
my one at my deth bee equalley devided with my children and there
rippersentives taken in consideration all advancements made by me pryer to my
deth -- it also my will and desire that my administrator or executor shall
provide at the deth of my wife Almiry Turpin for her body a decent burial
suitable to the wishes of her relatives and friends and pay funeral expenses
together with all of her just debts out of the monney that first come into his
hands as a part or parcel of my estate -- it is my will and desire that at the
deth of my wife that my administrator or executor shall proceed to sell all of
my real estate as he may think best and collect all debts that may due my
estate and devide equelley betwen all of my children and representatives after
paying all exspence of administration and taken in consideration of all
advances maid before the deth of my wife Almiry Turpin with the exception of
John B. Turpin, he or his ripesentives is to have fifty dollars out of the
last devision of my estate. this is my will and in my one handriting, subject
to enney changes I may need to make during my lifetime, given under my hand
and seal this October 10th day 1888. John Turpin {Seal}.

In a handwriting different from John's: "Codicil to the foregoing Will --
State of North Carolina, Haywood Co. I John Turpin of said County and State,
being of sound mind and memory but considering the uncertainty of my earthly
existence, make this Codicil to my last Will and Testament, which I made
October the 10th 1888, which I ratify and confirm, except as the same shall be
changed thereby. Whereas by my will above mentioned I gave and devised to my
son John B. Turpin, or his representatives, an equal share in my estate, with
the exception of the proceeds of the estate willed to my wife during her
lifetime, of which John B. Turpin was to receive after her death only fifty
dollars. Now, therefore, I hereby revoke the said devise of fifty dollars to
my said son, and will him or his representatives an equal share with the
balance of my children, of all of my estate. I also will that my executor buy
and should have placed the grave of my wife Almira Turpin, suitable toomstones
and charge the same to my estate. This September the 4th A.D. 1895. John
Turpin {Seal}. Signed by the said John Turpin as a Codicil to his last Will
and Testament, in our presence and we in his presence, and with the presence
of each other have, at his request hereto subscribed our names as witnesses.
{Signed} R.A.L. Hyatt, W.H. Frazier." Endorsed, "Recorded in Book Record of
Wills for Haywood Co. N.C., pages 363-369. This 28 day of March 1896. {Signed}
J.K. Boone, CSC of Haywood Co."

March 21 1896, John Turpin dies in Haywood County.

March 28 1896:
"Haywood County -- In the Superior Court} In the matter of the Administration
of the Estate of John Turpin, Almiry Turpin being sworn doth say: That John
Turpin, late of said County is dead, leaving a last Will and Testament; and
that there is no Executor therein named. The said Almiry Turpin therefore
applies for Letters of Administration with the Will annexed... Further, that
the value of said estate, so far as can be ascertained at the date of this
application, is about $7,000 outside of the devises made to Almiry Turpin, and
that Almiry Turpin the widow, J.B. Turpin, James E. Turpin, Almedia Liner wife
of Thomas Liner, Robert L. Turpin, William M. Turpin, Victor A. Turpin, Wiley
Turpin, Dock H. Turpin, Maggie D. Moody wife of Frank Moody, Charles C. Turpin
are entitled as heirs and distributees thereof. {Signed} Almiry Turpin."

"In the Superior Court before J.K. Boone, Clerk: A paper writing without
subscribing witnesses purporting to be the last Will and Testament of John
Turpin, deceased, is exhibited before me, the undersigned, Clerk of the
Superior Court... by Almiry Turpin, the widow of John Turpin, deceased, and a
devise in said will, and it is therefore proved by the oath and examination of
Almiry Turpin who being duly sworn, doth depose and say, that the said will
was found among the valuable papers of John Turpin after his death, and had
been among his papers from the time it was written, having been placed there
by John Turpin in his lifetime; and it is further proved by the oath and
examination of three credible witnesses, to wit: J.M. Tate, B.W. Corzine and
R.Q. McCracken, who being duly sworn doth depose and say, and each for himself
deposeth, that they and each of them, are acquainted with the handwriting of
the said John Turpin having often seen him write, and verily believe that the
name of John Turpin, subscribed to the Will and the Will itself, and every
part thereof, are in the proper handwriting of John Turpin, and that the
handwriting is generally known to the acquaintances of John Turpin. And
further these deponents say not. {Signed} Almiry Turpin {Seal} J.M. Tate
{Seal} B.W. Corzine {Seal} R.Q. McCracken {Seal}. Severally sworn and
subscribed before me this the 28th day of March A.D. 1896, J.K. Boone, Clerk
Superior Court of Haywood County."

Another document, similarly worded, is in the estate file for the proving of
John's Codicil, witnessed by R.A.L. Hyatt and W.H. Frazier. The proving of the
Will and its Codicil occurred on March 28 1896. Also on that date, the Clerk
issued an order for the probate of the Will. Excerpts, "It is further shown to
the satisfaction of the court... that John Turpin was, at the time of making
said codicil to said will, of sound mind and memory, of full age to execute a
will and under no restraint to their knowledge, information or belief. It is
further considered, adjudged and decreed, that said proof of will and of the
codicil thereto is sufficient and according to law and that paper writing and
the codicil thereto and every part thereof is and contains the last Will and
Testament of John Turpin. And on motion it is ordered... to be admitted to
probate and recorded in the Book of Wills... It is further ordered that Almiry
Turpin, when she gives the proper bond, be allowed to qualify as
administratrix with the will annexed as provided by law and enter upon the
discharge of the duties..."

April 7 1896:
"In Superior Court, Before the Clerk. It appearing to the satisfaction of the 
undersigned [J.K Boone], Clerk of the Superior Court of Haywood County, that 
John Turpin late of said County is dead leaving first made and published his 
last Will and Testament with no Executor named therein, which said will has 
been admitted to probate and recorded in this office, and it further appearing 
that Almiry Turpin is the proper person entitled to Letters of Administration 
with the will annexed on the estate of the said John Turpin, and the said 
Almiry Turpin having filed bond and having duly qualified as such 
administratrix with the will annexed as required by law. Letters of 
Administration... are issued to the said Almiry Turpin."

April 17 1896:
The following notice appeared in the Waynesville Courier newspaper: 
"Administratrix Notice: Almiry Turpin has duly qualified as administratrix 
with the will annexed of  John Turpin, deceased, and hereby gives notice that 
she requires all persons having claims against the estate or the said John 
Turpin to present them to the said Almiry Turpin duly authenticated, for 
payment, on or before the 18th day of April 1897, or else this notice will be 
pleaded in bar of recovery. Persons indebted to the estate must pay without 
delay.... Almiry Turpin, Administratrix..."

May 12 1896:
"In the matter of Elmira Turpin, Widow of John Turpin, deceased. The 
undersigned R.L. Owens, J.P. Owens, D.V. Owens and D.J.M. Owens, 
Commissioners, duly summonsed & sworn, do hereby assign and allot to Elmira 
Turpin... the following articles of personal property of the value assessed 
which the said Elmira Turpin is entitled to by virtue of the last Will made by 
the said John Turpin deceased, to wit: Eight head of hogs $27.00, Four head of 
cattle $60.00, Three head of young mules $135.00, One young mare $45.00, One 
horse $33.00, Total $300.00"

May 18 1896:
Land description of various tracts of lands as the homestead:
"One tract of land supposed to be about one hundred acres which is known as 
Jack Smith & P.C. Allen land joining the lands of Nelson Howell, W.H. 
Leatherwood and R.W. Corzine, also three other tracts of land, one of which is 
known as the C.F. Moody tract, & one known as the V.A. Turpin tract, and the 
remaining tract is known as the Isaiah Davis land lying and being in the Ivy 
Hill township, also two lots in the Nero Oak Forest, addition of the town of 
Waynesville and being lots No. 7 & 8 in block "F" of said addition. The home 
lands were devised to Almiry Turpin during life."

"There is no other personal property belonging to the estate, except the 
farming tools, household goods & which was willed to Almiry Turpin the widow. 
If there should be any other notes, accounts or property found, the same will 
be returned hereafter in an additional inventory. Respectfully submitted, 
Almiry Turpin, Administratrix with will annexed..." Endorsed, "Recorded and 
filed, recorded in book "Record of Accounts No. 2" For Haywood County N.C., 
page(s) 170-177, May 18th 1896."

July 2 1896:
The following notice appeared in the Waynesville Courier newspaper: "Notice of 
Land Sale by Administratrix:

September 22 1896:
Haywood County Deed Book 8, pp. 231-233, Grantors John and Almira Jones 
Turpin, Grantee Thomas Mitchell:

"North Carolina, Haywood County} Know all men by these that whereas John
Turpin and his wife Almira Turpin on he 7th day of March 1887, for and in
consideration of the sum of $550.00 bargained and sold to Thomas Mitchell the
tract of land hereinafter described, and on said 7th day of March 1887,
executed to said Thomas Mitchell their bond for title for the same, and
whereas said bond for title was recorded in the office of Register of Deeds
for Haywood County on the 31st day of April 1888 in Book X, page 288, and
whereas John Turpin died on the 21st day of March 1896, and Almira Turpin on
the 7th day of April 1896 was duly appointed & qualified as Administratrix
with the Will annexed of John Turpin, deceased, and whereas said Thomas
Mitchell has paid all of said purchase money with interest thereon.

"Now therefore this indenture made and entered into this the 21st day of
September 1896 by and between Almiry Turpin, Admr., with the Will annexed of
John Turpin, deceased, party of the first part and Thomas Mitchell party of
the second part, both of the County of Haywood, State of North Carolina,
Witnesseth: That the party of the first part for and in consideration of the
promises and in consideration of the sum of five hundred and fifty dollars to
her in hand paid by the party of the second part, the receipt whereof is
hereby acknowledged, the said Almiry Turpin, admin. as aforesaid, have given,
granted, bargained, sold & by these presents does give, grant, bargain, sell,
convey & confirm unto the said Thomas Mitchell, his heirs and assigns forever,
all interest in a parcel of land lying & being in the County of Haywood, N.C.
adjoining the lands of Robert Plott, John H. Boyd & others, the same being in
Ivy Hill Township on the waters of Jonathans Creek.

"Beginning at a black oak and running South 34 poles to a stake on the North
bank of Jonathans Creek, thence beginning on said line North about 4 poles
from said creek, and moving North West direction up a ridge with the water
shed to a chestnut, calculated to be 140 poles; thence North 77 degrees W 46
poles to a Spanish Oak in small cove; thence W. 12 degrees W. 56 poles to a
chestnut; thence East 111 poles to a spruce pine near a branch thence S. 29
degrees e. 128 poles to the beginning, containing 61-3/4 acres ore or less,
also the right of a reservation made by John Turpin in Deed to John H. Boyd of
March 22nd 1896.

"To have and to hold the above described land and premises with all the
appurtenances thereunto belonging or in any wise appertaining unto the said
party of the second part & his said heirs & assigns to the only use & behoof
of said Thomas Mitchell & his said heirs & assigns forever. And the said party
of the first part does hereby covenant to and with said party of the second
part that she Almiry Turpin is lawfully seized in fee simple of said land and
premises and hath full right and power to convey the same in fee simple to
said party of the second part and that said land and premises are free from
any and all encumbrances and that she Almiry Turpin as Administratrix with the
Will annexed of John Turpin, deceased, will warrant and defend the title to
the same so far as she can by virtue of said administratrixship and no
further.

"In witness whereof the said party of the first part has hereunto set her hand
and seal the day and year above written. {Signed} Almiry "x" Turpin {Seal},
Administratrix of John Turpin, deceased.

"State of North Carolina, Haywood County} The execution of the foregoing deed
was this day duly acknowledged before me by Almiry Turpin, Administratrix with
the will annexed of John Turpin, deceased, the grantor for the purposes and
consideration therein contained. Therefore let the same with this certificate
be registered. This the 22nd day of September, A.D. 1896. Registered this the
30th day of November 1896."

June 1 1897:
"Annual account of Almiry Turpin, administratrix with the will of John Turpin,
deceased, made on this the 1st day of June 1897." Receipts summarized as
follows: March 1896 cash on hand from inventory $32.27; April, cash received
$82.83 various persons; June cash received $248.42 various persons; July
$24.00; August $20.00; September cash received $361.57 various persons, also
$49.00 from James Turpin; September, judgment against Thomas W. Mitchell
$300.00  [further records provide the following information: "One note on T.W.
Mitchell dated the 7th day of March 1887 for one hundred & eighty three
dollars with interest from date at 8 percent, received on the above note the
following credits $85.00 December the 7th 1891, $50.00 February the 13th 1893,
$65.00 January the 6th 1894."]; October $262.51; November & December $185.75
cash from various persons, also $680.00 for lands of Victor A. Turpin and C.F.
Moody sold to Wiley M. Turpin, also $150.00 for land of Gus Sorrells sold to
James B. Turpin; January through June 1897 cash received $249.61 various
persons; April & May $624.93, judgment against W.A. Campbell. Total receipts
$3,294.63. Disbursements summarized as follows: $407.15 to various
individuals. Net $2887.48.

"The following amounts have been advanced to the children and heirs at law of
John Turpin, deceased, in his life time and receipts for the same are produced
as evidence, to wit: June 13 1891, Almeda J. Liner $100.00; January 7 & March
5 1896, J.B. Turpin $574.00; January 6 1896, V.A. Turpin $645.00; June 1 1894,
James E. Turpin $528.00; December 12 1895 & March 1 1896, Robert E. Turpin
$297.00; February 4 1896, W.M. Turpin $500.00; January 6 1896, Wiley J. Turpin
$150.68; March 3 1896, Maggie D. Moody, in land, $800.00; total of
advancements $3,594.68, which being added to balance due by administratrix to
the estate $2,887.48, total of estate for distribution $6,482.16, which will
give to each one of ten children the sum of $648.21-3/5, to wit: (1) Elmedia
J. Liner (2) J.B. Turpin (3) V.A. Turpin (4) James E. Turpin (5) Robert E.
Turpin (6) W.M. Turpin (7) Wiley J. Turpin (8) Maggie D. Moody (9) D.H. Turpin
(10) Charles F. Turpin. To amount of above due Elmeda J. Liner $648.21, cash
paid to Elmedia J. Liner by Testator $100, by cash paid to Elmedia J. Liner by
Administratrix [various dates] $700.00; overpaid $151.79."

November 20 1901:
Almira writes her Last Will and Testament (taken from the transcribed copy in 
the court records):
"North Carolina, Haywood County} I, Almira Turpin, of the aforesaid County and
State, being of sound mind but considering the uncertainty of my earthly
existence, do make and declare this my last Will and Testament.

"FIRST: My executors hereinafter named shall give my body a decent burial,
suitable to the wishes of my friends and relatives and pay all my funeral
expenses, together with all my just debts, out of the first moneys which may
come into their hands, belonging to my estate. SECOND: I give and bequeath to
my grand-daughter, Mellie Liner, all the stock, all the household and kitchen
furniture, and all the crops and provisions, and all the domestic, fowl and
poultry that I may have on hand at my death, and also give and bequeath unto
my grand-daughter, Mellie Liner, all the money, notes, debts and accounts that
may be due me at my death, and all my other personal property of every kind
and description, except such amount of money or money value as may be
necessary for the payment of my burial expenses and just debts, as hereinafter
provided. THIRD: I hereby constitute and appoint my trusty sons, William M.
Turpin and D.H. Turpin, my lawful executors to all intents and purposes to
execute this my last Will and Testament, according to the true intent and
meaning of the same, and every part and clause thereof, hereby revoking and
declaring utterly void all other wills and testaments by me heretofore made.
In witness whereof, I, the said Almira Turpin, do hereunto set my hand and
seal this the 20th day of November 1901. Almira Turpin {Seal} Signed, sealed,
published and declared by the said Almira Turpin, to be her last Will and
Testament in the presence of us, who at her request and in her presence, and
in the presence of each other, do subscribe our names as witnesses thereto.
Witnesses, Hugh A. Love, S.C. Welch."

September 22 1906:
"In the Superior Court} L.M. Welch vs. Elmira Turpin Executrix... Complaint.
The Plaintiff complaining of the defendant alleges: I. That the defendant is
the lawfully appointed administratrix... of John Turpin, deceased, who died on
or about the months of March of April 1896. II. That after the death of the
said John Turpin the defendant was appointed by the Superior Court of Haywood
County on April 7 1896, the administratrix... and entered upon her duties as
such... III. That at Spring Term 1894, which convened on the 9th day of April
1894, there was a judgment rendered for costs in the case of W.M. Turpin vs.
James L. Queen, rendered adversely to W.M. Turpin and John Turpin as surety on
the said W.M. Turpin's bond for the cost of the action which judgment was
rendered before the Honorable James G. McIver, Judge presiding and holding
said term of court which judgment is docketed in Book L, page 265, of judgment
docket of Haywood County to which reference is hereby made... is referred to
and made a part of this complaint.

"IV. That subsequent to the rendition of said judgment the plaintiff bought
various and sundry items of cost in said case from the various parties who
owned the same for a valuable consideration and that now the plaintiff is the
owner of various and sundry items  cost as indicated on said judgment docket
to which reference is made for a full and perfect knowledge. And that the
amounts now owned by the plaintiff of said judgment is $33.92, with interest
on the same from the 9th day of April 1894.... VI. That the defendant had
notice as administratrix aforesaid of the judgment referred to in this
complain which was against her decedent and notwithstanding that knowledge and
notice the defendant has failed and refused to pay the same. [advancing
forward in the records] VIII. That the said John Turpin died seized of various
and sundry tracts of land lying and being in Haywood County among which tracts
the said John Turpin died seized is 208 acres of valuable land lying and being
in Waynesville Township and known as the lands the said John Turpin bought
from D.L. Boyd and M.I. Boyd his wife, said deed is dated October 30 1872 and
registered on December 6th 1872, in book L, page 79, record of deeds of
Haywood County, and for a full description of said land reference is hereby
made to said record... the above described lands is known as the home place on
which John Turpin lived and died. IX. That said land.. the title of which is
still in the widow and heirs at law of John Turpin... wherefore plaintiff
demands judgment against the defendant. 1st, That the defendant as
administratrix... be compelled by a decree of this court to sell a sufficient
amount of the above described lands for the purpose of creating asset... to
pay the plaintiffs debts together with the cost of this action. 2nd, That the
plaintiff have and recover judgment for the sum of $33.92, and interest on the
same from April 9th 1894, and for the cost of the action to be taxed by the
clerk...  {Signed} Crawford & Hannah, Attorneys for the Plaintiff." A year and
a half would follow before the estate answered the complaint.

January 28 1908:
"Superior Court, January Term, 1908} L.M. Welch vs. Elmira Turpin,
Administratrix... Answer. Almira Turpin, administratrix of John Turpin,
answering the complaint in the above entitled cause, alleges:

"I. That the defendant, said Almira Turpin, is the person upon whom the
summons in this action was served but that her name is Almira and not Elmira,
and that she is administratrix, and not executrix. She therefore suggests that
the record in this case be amended, so that a final determination of this
matter may be had, without leaving any uncertainty in the record, and having
made this suggestion, she answers as follows: II. That the defendant has no
information sufficient to enable her to form a belief as to the matters
contained in the fourth allegation of the complaint, and therefore she denies
the same and demands strict proof thereof. III. That as regards the fifth
allegation of the complain made no demand on defendant for the amounts herein
claimed until after defendant had made a final settlement of the estate of
John Turpin, deceased. IV. That defendant had notice as alleged in paragraph
six of the complaint, of plaintiffs said claims set up in this complaint,
until after defendant had made a full and final settlement, as administratrix
of John Turpin. V. That the judgment sued on was rendered, for costs only
[underlined in the record], at the Spring Term, 1894, on April 9th, and
plaintiff's action was commenced on the  18th day of March 1904, more than
three years after said judgment was rendered, and defendant pleads that
plaintiff is barred of recovery by the statute, Revisal of 11905, Sec. 395,
Sub. Sec. S. VI. That defendant made a final settlement of the estate... on
the 31st day of October, A.D. 1900, and this action was commenced after said
settlement... Wherefore the defendant demands judgment, that the plaintiff
take nothing by his suit, and that defendant go hereof without day, and
recover of the plaintiff, her costs of action. {Signed} Norwood & Norwood,
Attorneys for Defendant." [The foregoing record was two typewritten pages.
Following that record was written by hand at the bottom of page two:]

"W.M. Turpin, being duly sworn, deposes and says, that he is the agent of the
defendant in this action, and has personal knowledge of the matters set forth
in this answer, and that the said defendant is absent and is relying on
affiant to attend to this lawsuit, therefore affiant makes this affidavit. And
affiant further saith, that this answer is true of his own knowledge, except
those things stated to be on information and belief, and these he believes to
be true. {Signed} W.M. Turpin."

September 24 1911:
Almira Cynthia Jones Turpin dies in Haywood County.

October 19 1911:
"In the Superior Court Before Jerry R. Leatherwood, Clerk. Re Estate of Elmira
Turpin, Deceased} Order for Probate of Will. A paper writing purporting to be
the last Will and Testament of Almira Turpin, deceased, is exhibited in open
Court for probate by W.M. Turpin, Executor therein named and the due execution
thereof by Almira Turpin, deceased, is duly proven by the oath and examination
of Hugh A. Love and S.C. Welch, subscribing witnesses thereto and it is
further shown to the satisfaction of the Court by said witnesses that Almira
Turpin was at the time of making said Will, of sound mind and memory of full
age. It is thereupon considered, adjudged and decreed that said proof is
sufficient and according to law and that said paper writing is and contains
the last Will and Testament of Almira Turpin and on motion is ordered that
Will be admitted to probate and recorded in the Book of Wills of Haywood
County and as such filed as provided by law in the office of the Clerk... It
is further adjudged that W.M. Turpin is a suitable person to act as executor
and that he be allowed to qualify as executor as provided by law and enter
upon the discharge of the duties imposed by said trust." Further, "that Almira
Turpin in the presents of these deponents subscribed her name at the end of
paper writing now shown as aforesaid... And the deponent further saith that
Almira Turpin, the testator, died at the time of subscribing her name, declare
the paper writing so subscribed by her and exhibited to be her Last Will and
Testament, and this deponent did thereupon subscribe his name at the end of
said Will as an attesting witness thereto and at the request and in the
presence of the testator... Hugh A. Love {Seal} S.C. Welch {Seal}"

October 24 1911:
"Executor's Bond, State of North Carolina, Haywood County, In the Superior
Court} Know all men by these presents, that we, W.M. Turpin, F.T. Hyatt and
D.L. Boyd, are held and firmly bound unto the State of North Carolina, in the
sum of Two Thousand Dollars, to the payment whereof we bind ourselves, and
each of us, our heirs, executors and administrators, jointly and severally,
firmly by these presents. Signed and sealed this 24 day of October 1911. The
condition of this obligation is such, that if the above bounden W.M. Turpin,
executor of Almira Turpin, do make a true and perfect inventory and account of
sales of all the real estate, and all the goods and chattels, rights and
credits of the deceased, which have or shall come to his possession of any
other person for him, and the same do exhibit into the office of the Clerk...
within ninety days after the date of these presents, and do well and truly
administer, according to law, all the goods and chattels, rights and credits
of the deceased, and the proceeds of her real estate that may be sold for the
payment of her debts, which shall at any time, come into his possession or to
the possession of any other person for him; and further, do make a true and
just account of his administration within two years after date... and all the
rest and residue of proceeds of real estate, goods, chattels and credits which
shall be found remaining upon his account (the same being first examined and
allowed by the Clerk of the Superior Court), shall deliver and pay to such a
person as the same shall be due unto, pursuant to law... W.M. Turpin above
bound, being thereunto required, do render and deliver the Letters of
Administration (probate of Testament being first had and made) in the Superior
Court, and faithfully execute the trust reposed in him... and obey all lawful
orders... then this obligation to be void and of no effect. W.M. Turpin {Seal}
F.T. Hyatt {Seal} D.L. Boyd {Seal}. F.T. Hyatt makes affidavit that he is
worth $1,000.00 over and above exemptions by law and his indebtedness. D.L.
Boyd makes affidavit that he is worth $1,000.00 over and above exemptions by
law and his indebtedness."

January 16 1913:
Maggie D. Turpin Moody who, along with husband C.F. Moody, played a major part
in the estate settlement of her father, John Turpin, was also active in the
settlement of her mother's estate.

"In the Superior Court Before the Clerk. In the matter of W.M. Turpin,
Executor of the estate of Elmira Turpin, deceased} Affidavit. Maggie D. Moody
being duly sworn in the above entitled matter deposes and says that she is one
of the children and heirs-at-law and legatees of the estate of Elmira Turpin,
deceased who died testate in Haywood County North Carolina on or about the
24th day September 1911, and in the last Will and Testament of Elmira Turpin,
she appointed W.M. Turpin her executor who qualified as such executor... and
was duly commissioned by the Clerk of the Superior Court of Haywood County,
the court in which the last Will and Testament of Elmira Turpin was duly
probated, and W.M. Turpin was authorized by court with the will annexed of
Elmira Turpin to act as such executor and did take it upon himself the duties
and responsibilities of the administration of the estate. That it has been
more than three months since the qualification of W.M. Turpin as such executor
and that the executor has failed and refused to file an inventory... of the
real and personal property belonging to said estate and has failed to file an
annual account and exhibit the same before the Clerk of the Superior Court of
Haywood County as the law requires, notwithstanding it has been more than one
year since the appointment and qualification of said executor. That W.M.
Turpin has neglected to look after the duties of said estate. That Elmira
Turpin left at her death considerable property belonging to her estate and
that W.M. Turpin has failed as affiant is informed and believes to take into
his possession any of the personal property belonging to said estate and has
allowed the same to be made way with in manner that perhaps that it cannot be
recovered. That affiant is informed and believes that W.M. Turpin has left the
State of North Carolina and has been out of the State... for several months
and that he is now a non resident of the State... and that the court to issue
an order allowing the said notice and order to be served by publication as
required by law. Affiant further avers that if the said executor is allowed to
remain that the estate will be greatly damaged and that the estate is heavily
in debt and needs the assets that it has to pay off the indebtedness of Elmira
Turpin. Wherefore affiant prays the court, to remove W.M. Turpin as executor
and appoint some suitable person to administer on said estate with the will
annexed and for such other and further relief as the affiant is entitled to.
{Signed} Maggie D. Moody, Affiant. {Signed} Jerry R. Leatherwood, Clerk
Superior Court."

Almira Cynthia Jones Turpin - Estate Records -- Haywood County Original 
Estates and Superior Court Minutes:

March 21 1913:
"State of North Carolina, County of Haywood} In The Superior Court, Before the
Clerk} In the Matter of W.M. Turpin, Executor of the Estate of Elmira Turpin,
Deceased} Order Removing Him As Such Executor}

"This cause coming on to be heard on this 21 day of Mar 1913, before Jrmy R.
Leatherwood, Clerk of the Superior Court of Haywood County in his office in
Waynesville N.C. upon motion of Maggie D. Moody one of the heirs of said
estate, to remove said W.M. Turpin from the office of such executor and it
appearing to the court that said W.M. Turpin, executor of Elmira Turpin
deceased has been appointed as such executor in the year 1911, and that he
qualified and took upon himself the duties required by law of said
executorship and that the Court finds as a fact that said W.M. Turpin executor
as aforesaid failed to file an inventory or annual account as the law
required, and that notice was duly issued to the said W.M. Turpin... to come
in and file with this court an inventory and annual account of said estate and
that the said notice was and has been legally served and that it has been more
than twenty days since the completed service of notice and order on said
respondent and said W.M. Turpin... failed to appear and file an inventory or
annual account and that on the 27th day of March 1913, the undersigned clerk
issued an order of arrest against the person of said W.M. Turpin and delivered
to the Sheriff of Haywood County to arrest... W.M. Turpin... and commit him to
the common jail of Haywood County until he make said inventory and file said
annual account and be discharged or otherwise dealt with according to law, and
whereas the Sheriff of Haywood County has returned the said order of arrest
and attachment, with the following endorsement and return thereon, to wit: Due
search, and the respondent W.M Turpin executor of Elmira Turpin deceased
cannot be found in Haywood County, and that after due diligence cannot be
found in the State.

"Now therefore, it is ordered, considered, decreed and adjudged by the Court
that the letters testamentary heretofore issued to said W.M. Turpin, executor
of the estate of Elmira Turpin deceased, be and the same are hereby revoked
and declared null and void from this date and the said W.M. Turpin is hereby
removed from his said office as such executor and is not authorized to act and
is hereby forbidden to act further as executor of said estate. {Signed} Jrmy
R. Leatherwood, Clerk Superior Court."

July 16 1913:
North Carolina, Haywood County} In Superior Court Before the Clerk. In the
matter of the estate of Almira Turpin, Deceased. To the Clerk of the Superior
Court of Haywood County North Carolina. And now comes W.M. Turpin, Executor
under the terms of the will of Almira Turpin, deceased, and for answer to the
rule or order to show cause issued in the above entitled matter, on the 13th
day of January 1913, this respondent says, that the reason why this respondent
failed to file and inventory or an annual account, was that no real or
personal property belonging to the estate of said testatrix has come into his
hands or into the hands of any other person or persons for him, and therefore
he had nothing to inventory or account for. That if Almira Turpin at her death
left considerable property, he was unable to find any, on the contrary
respondent says, that Almira Turpin some months prior to her death gave away
all the personalty she was possessed of to various persons as he is informed
and believes. Respondent further says that while it is true that he has been
away and out of the State of North Carolina, he still retains his citizenship
and is a resident of said State. And respondent further saith not. {Signed}
W.M. Turpin."

September 1914 (regarding both the estate of John Turpin and Almira Jones
Turpin, both deceased, and Almira's handling of the estate's properties): "In
the Superior Court} F.T. Hyatt vs. Maggie D. Moody, Administratrix, with the
Will annexed of John Turpin, deceased, R.G.A. Campbell, Administrator of
Elmira Turpin, deceased, C.F. Moody, Alden Howell, Jr., T. Woolsey Howell, and
W.T. Lee} The plaintiff above named of the defendant above named and for cause
of action alleges:

"I. That on or about the 9th day of November, 1910, one M.J. McCracken,
recovered two judgments in the Justice Court for Waynesville Township, Haywood
County, North Carolina, against W.M. Turpin, Elmira Turpin, and W.T. Lee, each
for the sum of $209.67, with interest and costs of suit in each of said
judgments, and which said two judgments as aforesaid, were duly docketed in
the Superior Court of Haywood County on the 14th day of November 1910, in
Judgment Docket, S. pages 257 and 258, and then and thereby became Judgments
of the said Superior Court. II. That on or about the 14th day of March 1911,
the said W.J. McCracken for value, and without recourse to him, transferred,
assigned and set over the said two judgments to one, R.L. Lee, who then and
there became the assignee of the said W.J. McCracken and the owner and holder
of said judgment, that thereafter to wit, on or about the 12th day of
February, 1912, the said R.L. Lee for value transferred, assigned and set over
the said judgments to W.M. Turpin, J.M. Noland, and F.T. Hyatt. By entering on
the Docket of the Superior Court a written assignment wherein and whereby W.M.
Turpin, J.M. Noland, and F.T. Hyatt became the assignees of the said R.L. Lee,
and the owners of said judgments.

"III. That on or about the 10th day of October 1888, and long before the date
of this judgment hereinbefore set out, one John Turpin, the husband of Elmira
Turpin in his lifetime made and executed his last Will and Testament, whereby
he devised to Elmira Turpin, his said wife, for and during her natural life
the following described land, to wit:

"Lying and being in the county of Haywood, and State of North Carolina,
beginning at the mouth of an old ditch about 6 poles above the mouth of a big
branch on the west side of Richland Creek, thence running S.W. direction,
about 32 poles to a crooked and forked locust, blazed on the S.E. side of said
branch, thence up said small branch a southerly direction passing the head of
branch to the gap of a ridge and in the road that leads to Nelson Howell's
mill and on Howell's line, thence a W. direction with the top of the ridge and
Howell line and passing various corners to M.H. Love's line, thence with Love
line to a post oak down a corner to Smith old tract, now a stone, thence with
Love and Smith's old line to the Britton [Horatio Nelson Brittain ?] old line,
thence with the Britton and Smith's  old line to a well known white oak
corner, now a corner to Alden Howell's land, thence with A. Howell's line on
top of said ridge to the M.W. Smith tract, which is a part of the old Smith
tract, thence with the said Kimsey Howell and the Smith's old line passing
various corners to a stone in center of the wagon road, about four poles N.E.
of what is known as the Maple Spring, thence with said road and Howell line,
crossing Hyatt's Creek to W.T. Reeves line, thence with Reeves line and the
Smith old line to Richland Creek, thence across said creek and with James R.
Long's and Smith old line to the top of the ridge, and to R.W. Corzine's
corner, thence west direction and with Corzine's line to Creek, so as to
include the P.C. Allen tract, thence up Creek to the beginning. This
conveyance is intended to cover all  the land in said boundary including my
dwelling house and all other houses or improvements on said land.

"That in said last Will and Testament John Turpin provided and directed his
executor, after the death of his wife, Elmira Turpin, to sell and dispose of
all of his real property, that he died seized and possessed of, and out of the
proceeds arising from such sale the executor was directed to  apply the same
to the payment and discharge of any and all debts due and owing by Elmira
Turpin; that... John Turpin died in the county of Haywood and his last Will
and Testament was duly probated in the office of the Clerk of the Superior
Court... as will more fully appear by reference to said Will with the probates
thereon, recorded in Book No. 2 of Wills at page 363 et seq. That
thereafter... Maggie D. Moody was duly appointed and qualified as
administratrix... of the estate of John Turpin... having failed to nominate
any person as executor under the terms of the Will. IV. That... Elmira Turpin,
the wife of said John Turpin, died in the county of Haywood and that prior to
her death, on the 20th day of November 1907, she made, executed and published
her last Will and Testament whereby she bequeathed to her granddaughter,
Mellie Liner, all of her personal estate, that under the terms of said Will,
C.M. Turpin and John Turpin were named as executors therein; that C.M. Turpin
qualified as executor and was subsequently removed and thereupon T.F. Moody
was appointed in his place and stead, and upon his resignation as executor,
the defendant R.G.A. Campbell was appointed in his place and stead; plaintiff
is informed and verily believes that the said Elmira Turpin, prior to her
death, had disposed of all of her personal estate by gifts to various and
sundry persons, and that no assets came into the hands of any of the executors
of the estate of Elmira Turpin, sufficient to pay the debts of the deceased.

"V. That upon the death of John Turpin and Elmira Turpin there were left
surviving them a large number of heirs at law, to wit: J.B. Turpin, V.A.
Turpin, J.E. Turpin, R.E. Turpin, W.M. Turpin, W.J. Turpin, D.H. Turpin, C.C.
Turpin, Almedia Liner, wife of Thomas C. Liner, and Maggie D. Moody, wife of
C.F. Moody; that after the death of Elmira Turpin, when the life estate
devised to her by the terms of the Will of her husband... had been
extinguished, the defendant, C.F. Moody, the husband of defendant Maggie D.
Moody, and one of the heirs at law, and also the administratrix of John
Turpin, immediately began to purchase and have conveyed to him the various
interests of the heirs at law in the estate of John Turpin, in order thereby
to acquire the title to the real property of John Turpin, which he had devised
to his wife for and during her natural life, and which at her death was to be
sold by the executor of the estate, and with the proceeds thereof to pay the
debts of Elmira Turpin. And this plaintiff charges that the purchase was made
by C.F. Moody with the intent to defraud the creditors of Elmira Turpin,
deceased.

"VI. Plaintiff alleges that by the terms of the last Will and Testament of
John Turpin, it was the express intention of the testator that the lands
hereinbefore described should, upon his death, and upon the death of Elmira
Turpin, be sold to satisfy any claims or debts or other indebtedness created
by Elmira Turpin during her lifetime, and of such intention Maggie D. Moody,
the administratrix... of John Turpin, and her husband C.F. Moody were fully
informed and had notice of the conditions and of the intentions as set out in
the Will, but notwithstanding the express terms of said Will and wholly
disregarding the same, Maggie D. Moody knowing that there were indebtednesses
created by Elmira Turpin during her lifetime failed to sell the lands... as
expressed in said last Will and Testament of paying the debts due by Elmira
Turpin...

"VII. That the estate of Elmira Turpin is wholly insolvent and has been wholly
insolvent without sufficient funds coming into the hands of her executors to
pay any debts that might be due... or which were created by her during her
lifetime, and that the plaintiff has no means by which he can have the
judgments he now holds against Elmira Turpin unless the same can be reached
and paid out of the property hereinbefore described and designated by testator
as property with which to pay the debts of Elmira Turpin. VIII. That no part
of said judgments has been paid by Maggie D. Moody, administratrix... and that
unless the plaintiff can have the judgments paid out of the property... his
debt will be entirely lost to him and he suffer great and irreparable damage.
Wherefore plaintiff prays judgment as follows: 1st. That the said lands... be
decreed to be sold for the purpose of paying and satisfying any and all debts
due and owing by Elmira Turpin, to any and all persons and especially to the
satisfaction of the judgment hereinbefore particularly set out an due and
owing this plaintiff. 2nd. That it be decreed and ordered that the title of
the said defendant other than Maggie D. Moody be held by the defendant in
trust for the purpose of paying and satisfying any and all debts... For such
other and further relief as to the Court shall seem meet and equitable in the
premises..."  The reply follows.

September 1914:
"In the Superior Court, Fall Term 1914. F.T. Hyatt vs. Maggie D. Moody,
administratrix, R.G.A. Campbell, administrator of Elmira Turpin, C.F. Moody,
Alden Howell, Jr., T. Woolsey Howell and W.T. Lee} Answer:  The defendants
answering the complaint of the plaintiff and interpleader, for their answer,
say:

"I. That in answer to Paragraph I of the plaintiff's complaint, the defendants
admit that the two judgments as referred to... were rendered before R.Q.
McCracken, a Justice of the Peace for Waynesville Township, against W.M.
Turpin, Almira Turpin (instead of Elmira Turpin), and W.T. Lee for the sum of
$209.67 with interest and cost each, and that judgments or purported judgments
were docketed... on November 14 1910, but the defendants aver that each of
said judgments were void and of no effect, and not binding on the defendants
mentioned therein, in that the Justice of the Peace who rendered each of them,
had no jurisdiction on the subject mater, the same being for more than
$200.00, and as a defense, these defendants especially plead the want of
jurisdiction on the Justice of the Peace who rendered said judgments, or
attempted to render them as a bar to the plaintiff having any right to base
this action on the judgments, or collect them from the defendants.

II. That in answer to Paragraph II of the complaint, these defendants are not
informed as to the truth of the allegations set out... and therefore denied,
and demand strict proof of the same. III. That in answer to Paragraph III...
it is not true as therein alleged, and is therefore denied; except that John
Turpin, husband of Almira Turpin, executed a last Will and Testament in which
he devised the lands described in paragraph III, to Almira Turpin during her
natural life; and that the Will was duly probated in Haywood County, N.C., and
that Almira Turpin qualified as executrix and died before winding up the
estate, and that the defendant, Maggie D. Moody, was duly appointed and
qualified as his administrator... IV. That in answer to Paragraph IV... it is
not true, as therein alleged, and is therefore denied; except Almira Turpin...
died testate in Haywood County, and that R.G.A. Campbell was appointed
administrator 'de bonis non'."

"V. In answer to Paragraph V... it is not true as therein alleged, and is
therefore denied; except that John Turpin and Almira Turpin left surviving
them, as heirs and legatees, the parties mentioned... and that the defendants
C.F. Moody and Maggie D. Moody purchased some of the shares in the lands of
which John Turpin died seized, ... but that they paid a valuable consideration
for each interest they bought, and expressly deny that they bought any part
thereof for the purpose of defrauding the creditors of Almira Turpin or John
Turpin. VI. That Paragraph VI... is not true as therein alleged, and is
therefore denied; except that said Will provides that the honest debts of
Almira Turpin incurred for her own personal comfort and support should be paid
out of the assets of the estate of John Turpin; and the defendants aver that
the debts, if any there were created by Almira... on which the two judgments
were rendered as set out in Paragraph I hereof, which the defendants do not
admit, were not the debts of Almira... but that she was only surety for W.M.
Turpin, if anything, and that it was not the intention of John Turpin in his
Will to make his estate liable for any of the security debts that Almira might
incur, but only for the necessary expenses for her support and living; and the
defendants aver that the debts incurred as sued on in the two judgments, were
not for the benefit of Almira... and that she got no consideration whatever on
account of the same, but they were the debts of W.M. Turpin and therefore the
estate of John Turpin is not in any way liable, or the lands he owned at his
death are in no way liable to pay said judgments.



"VII. In answer to Paragraph VII... the defendants aver that the same is not
true as therein alleged, and is therefore denied. VIII. That in answer to
Paragraph VIII... it is not true as therein alleged, and is therefore denied;
except that Maggie D. Moody, administratrix of John Turpin has not paid any
part of said judgments, but the defendants aver that W.M. Turpin, who was the
principal debtor in the notes sued upon on which the said judgments were
rendered, has paid the same and that the plaintiff in fact owns no interest
whatever in them, as they were settled long before any assignments or
purported assignments to the plaintiff were made.

"For a further defense and answer to the plaintiff's complaint, and to the
inter-pleader, D.R. Noland, these defendants say:

"I. That the judgments or purported judgments described in Paragraph I of
plaintiff's complaint, have been paid in full by W.M. Turpin, who was the
principal debtor in said judgments, the said Almira Turpin and W.T. Lee only
being sureties and therefore have no force or effect, the same having been
paid long before the assignment to R.L. Lee and long before the assignment...
to the plaintiff, F.T. Hyatt and W.M. Turpin, J.M. Noland and W.T. Lee.  II.
That as a further answer to the complaint... and the inter-pleader in this
cause, to paragraph II of complaint, the defendants aver that R.L. Lee did not
pay anything for the judgments, that the same had been paid by W.M. Turpin,
the principal debtor... and were not in force, and were settled long before
the assignment to R.L. Lee and long before the assignment to W.M. Turpin, J.M.
Noland, and F.T. Hyatt by R.L. Lee, and the defendants further aver that the
plaintiff, F.T. Hyatt, has paid nothing whatever for the judgments, and that
the purported assignment to him of the same, was without consideration and
void. And for a further defense the defendants aver that the estates of John
Turpin and Almira Turpin had no contractual relations with the plaintiff, or
J.M. Noland, deceased, the decedent of the said D.R. Noland, the interpleader,
and therefore said estates have no obligations to the plaintiff, F.T. Hyatt,
and interpleader, D.R. Noland, administrator of J.M. Noland, deceased.

"III. That the plaintiff, F.T. Hyatt and J.M. Noland, long after the two
judgments referred to... were rendered, to wit, more than a year, endorsed the
note of one W.M. Turpin, who was named as a defendant in the two judgments...
of plaintiff's complaint, as accommodation endorser, as defendants are
informed and believe, and that W.M. Turpin, and J.M. Noland the interpleader's
decedent, and F.T. Hyatt allowed themselves to be sued on the said note
endorsed for W.M. Turpin and judgment was rendered in the Superior Court of
Haywood County on January 29, 1912 for the sum of $450.00, with interest from
June 6, 1911, the date said note was executed and so endorsed. That the
$450.00 as represented by note and the judgment rendered thereon, was for a
greater amount than the two judgments referred to in Paragraph I of
plaintiff's complaint, and was solely and independent matter, but after the
rendition of judgment for $450.00... W.T. Lee assigned the judgment to G.C.
Palmer, Trustee for W.A. Palmer, and there is no evidence whatever, and the
defendants aver that F.T. Hyatt has not paid anything on the said judgment so
taken against him, and therefore has no right to recover in this action,
because he is out nothing; and the defendants are not sufficiently informed
that the interpleader, D.R. Noland, administrator for J.M. Noland, has paid
anything, and if he has paid anything, the judgment for $450.00 was not
rendered against any of these defendants, and these defendants would not be
liable in any way for the debts of W.M. Turpin. Wherefore the defendants
demand judgment that the plaintiff, and the interpleader take nothing by their
writ, and that the defendants go hence without day, and recover their cost in
this behalf incurred. {Signed} Hannah & Leatherwood, Jno. M. Queen, Attorneys
for Defendants"

November 23 1914:
The State of North Carolina files suit against Almira's Administrator, W.M. 
Turpin and his bond sureties:
"In the Superior Court, Fall Term 1914. State on Relation of R.G.A. Campbell,
Administrator de bonis non with the will annexed of Almira Turpin, deceased,
vs. W.M. Turpin, D.L. Boyd and F.T. Hyatt} Complaint. The plaintiff
complaining of the defendants for his complaint, alleges: I. That Almira
Turpin died testate in Haywood County, N.C., on or about the 24th day of
September 1911, and in her will Almira Turpin appointed W.M. Turpin and D.H.
Turpin as her executors, and D.H. Turpin refused to qualify as such executor,
and is now a non resident of this State, and on the 24th day of October 1911,
the defendant, W.M. Turpin, executed a bond in the sum of Two Thousand
($2,000.00) Dollars, with D.L. Boyd and FT. Hyatt as his sureties on bond,
which bond was payable to the State of North Carolina, conditioned on the
faithful performance of his duties as such executor of the estate of Almira
Turpin, deceased, to wit, on the 28th day of October 1911, W.M. Turpin was
duly qualified as such executor by the Clerk of the Superior Court of Haywood
County, and took upon himself and fully assumed the obligations required by
law of him as executor of the estate of Almira Turpin, deceased, having at
that date, to wit, on the 28th day of October 1911, received letters
testamentary with the will annexed of the estate of Almira Turpin, from Clerk
of Court, a copy of the will of Almira Turpin, and a copy of the bond herein
referred to of W.M. Turpin... are hereto attached and marked respectively
Exhibits "A" and "B".

"II. That Almira Turpin at the date of her death, owned considerable personal
property, consisting of live stock, notes and choses in action, growing crops,
rent, corn and other grain, and grain that had already been gathered, scales,
farming utensils, buggy, poultry, produce and forage and household and kitchen
furniture on hand as plaintiff is informed and believes. All of which, as
plaintiff is informed and believes, amounted to at least $1,800.00. III. That
at the date of the death of Almira Turpin she was indebted in large amounts to
different parties as plaintiff is informed and believes, and at the date of
the qualification as executor of W.M. Turpin, as aforesaid, the estate of
Almira Turpin was indebted to various and sundry persons, and that the estate
of Almira Turpin is still indebted to various and sundry persons.

"IV. That W.M. Turpin... as plaintiff, is informed and believes, did not
qualify as such executor in good faith to administer estate, and that, as
plaintiff is informed and believes, W.M. Turpin, executor as aforesaid, either
negligently failed to take charge of the personal property of the estate... or
if he did take charge of estate or any part thereto, that he sold various and
sundry articles and property belonging to the estate, and converted it to his
own use, while other articles of property he took into possession and
converted to his own use,. and other articles of personal property belonging
to estate, plaintiff is informed and believes that the executor gave it away,
without compensation, until he has either used and converted to his own use,
squandered, wasted and given away the entire personal property belonging to
the estate of Almira Turpin, deceased, without accounting to said estate for
any of the personal property that executor took or should have taken into his
possession, and administered it properly and according to law in the amount of
$1,800.00"

"V. That W.M. Turpin failed to file an inventory of estate, as the law
required, and failed to make annual settlements, as the law required, and
thereby no only committed a breach of the bond but committed a breach of the
bond in addition thereto, by failing to properly administer said estate, when
he converted it to his own use and allowed a great deal of it to be wasted, as
herein alleged; that by reason of the breaches... and the failure on the part
of W.M. Turpin... to file an inventory and annual account... after notice duly
served on W.M. Turpin... to do so, the Clerk of the Superior Court... after
W.M. Turpin failed to appear and file inventory and make annual account,
removed W.M. Turpin as the executor of Almira Turpin, deceased, on the 27th
day of March 1913; and to wit, on the 27th day of March 1913 after W.M. Turpin
had been so removed by the order of the Clerk... the Clerk duly appointed C.F.
Moody as administrator de bonis non... in the place of W.M. Turpin, executor
removed, and C.F. Moody duly qualified as such administrator of the estate of
Almira Turpin, and acted as such until... he resigned as administrator de
bonis non... to the Clerk of the Superior Court of Haywood County without
fully administering, and after the resignation of C.F. Moody as such
administrator, the Clerk of the Superior Court... duly appointed R.G.A.
Campbell, the plaintiff in this action as administrator de bonis non... who
filed his bond and duly qualified as such administrator and entered upon his
duties as such, and is now the duly qualified and acting administrator of the
estate of Almira Turpin, and brings this suit for the purpose of winding up
the estate..."

"VI. That shortly after the appointment and qualification of W.M. Turpin,
executor as aforesaid, the plaintiff is informed and believes that he left the
State of North Carolina, and kept himself, as plaintiff is informed and
believes, beyond the borders of this State and out of the jurisdiction of this
Court, for the purpose of evading jurisdiction and process of this Court, W.M.
Turpin, plaintiff avers, being insolvent at the time he qualified as executor
and has been insolvent ever since, and that the bond filed by W.M. Turpin...
with His co-defendants as surety is solvent. VII. That the plaintiff bring
this action for the purpose of collecting the personal property belonging to
the estate... in order that he may be able to pay the indebtedness of said
estate, which is due and still unpaid and plaintiff avers that if he is able
to collect the amount that is justly due the estate of Almira Turpin, from the
defendants for the reason herein set forth, that he verily believes that he
will be able to pay the entire indebtedness due by the estate of Almira
Turpin. VIII. That the plaintiff, R.G.A. Campbell, administrator as aforesaid,
has made due search and that he is unable to find the property belonging to
the estate of his decedent, or get into the possession of the property
belonging to estate that was so wasted and squandered by the defendant, W.M.
Turpin, as herein alleged.

"IX. That on account of the failure of W.M. Turpin, executor... to do his duty
and by carelessly wasting and squandering and converting to his own use the
property belonging to the estate of plaintiff's decedent, the estate is
damaged in the sum of at least $1,800.00, which property so wasted and
squandered was reasonably worth $1,800.00 with interest from the 27th day of
March 1913. Wherefore the plaintiff prays judgment against the defendants for
the sum of $2,000.00 on the bond filed by W.M. Turpin, as executor, as alleged
in this complaint, as damages in lieu of property wasted and squandered
belonging to the estate of Almira Turpin, deceased, to be discharged on the
payment of $1,800.00 with interest from the 27th day of March 1913, until paid
and the cost of this action. {Signed} W.J. Hannah, Jno. M. Queen, Felix E.
Alley, Attorneys for Plaintiff."

"R.G.A. Campbell being duly sworn deposes and says: That he is the plaintiff
in this action, and that he had read the foregoing complaint and knows the
contents thereof; that the same is true of his own personal knowledge except
such matters as are stated on information and belief, and as to those matters
he believes it to be true. {Signed} R.G.A. Campbell, Admr., Affiant."

December  13 1914:
Mr. William M. Turpin files his answer to the suit brought against him by the
State of North Carolina:

"And now comes the defendant W.M. Turpin and files this his separate answer to
the complaint of plaintiff. 1. That paragraph 1. of said complaint is admitted
to be true except that Exhibits "A" and "B" referred to therein are not made
part of said complaint. 2. Answering the 2d paragraph of complaint, this
defendant, that if Almira Turpin at the date of her death owned considerable
personal property, (which this defendant denies), this defendant was unable to
find the same, and no such personal property came into his hands, or into the
hands of any other person for him. 3. That as to the 3d paragraph of
plaintiff's complaint, this defendant has no information sufficient to form a
belief as to the truth of said allegation and therefore denies the same, but
that if Almira Turpin was indebted as alleged, then this defendant alleges,
that under and by the terms of the will of John Turpin, deceased, the husband
of Almira that provision was made in and by the terms of said Will for the
payment of any debts of Almira out of the real and personal estate of John
Turpin, and his executor was empowered to sell his property for the payment of
such debts. 4. That the 4th paragraph of complaint is not true.

"5. Answering the 5th paragraph... this defendant admits that he failed to
file and inventory of estate, but alleges that his failure so to do, was that
no property of said testatrix came into his hands or into the hands of any
other person for him and he was unable to find any personal property belonging
to said estate. Defendant denies that he committed a breach of his bond by
failing to properly administer estate, or that he converted to his own use any
property belonging to said estate, or that he converted to his own use any
property belonging to estate, and denies that he allowed a great deal of
property to be wasted, and defendant denies that there were any breaches of
the bond by reason of the failure to file an inventory or annual account when
there was no property to inventory or any account to be made. Defendant admits
on information and belief that the Clerk of the Superior Court issued a
notice, service of which was pretended to have been had on this defendant by
publication, but otherwise this defendant has no information or belief upon
the subject. 6. That the 6th paragraph of complaint is not true.  7. That as
to the 7th paragraph of complaint this defendant has no knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief and therefore denies the same.

"8. That as to the 8th paragraph of complaint, this defendant verily believes
that the plaintiff has been unable to find any property belonging to the
estate of decedent as the decedent left no property to be administered upon.
And this defendant expressly denies that any property of decedent came into
his hands or into the hands of any other person for him, or that he has wasted
and squandered any property belonging to the estate. 9. That the ninth
paragraph of complaint is not true. Further answering said complaint and by
way of demurrer, this defendant says: 1. That said complaint does not state
facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this defendant or
either of them, for that (a) the said complaint fails to set out the Exhibits
"A" and "B" alleged in the first paragraph of said complaint. (b) the
description of the personal property alleged to have been maladministered upon
is not specific and definite; (c) for that said complaint fails to show to
whom the testatrix was indebted to and in what amount if any. Wherefore the
defendant W.M. Turpin prays to be hence dismissed with his costs in this
behalf expended. {Signed} M. Silver, Attorney for Defendant, W.M. Turpin"

"W.M. Turpin being duly sworn deposes and says, that he is one of the
defendants in the above entitled action, that he has heard read the foregoing
answer and knows the contents thereof and that the same is true of his own
knowledge except as to those matters therein stated on information and belief
and that as to those matters he believes it to be true. {Signed} W.M. Turpin"

"Separate Answer of Defendants, Boyd and Hyatt. And now come the defendants
D.L. Boyd and F.T. Hyatt and for answer to the complaint of the plaintiff
[State of North Carolina], answering say: 1. That paragraph 1 of said
complaint is admitted to be true. 2. That as to paragraphs 2 [thru] 9 of said
complaint, these defendants have no information sufficient to form a belief as
to the truth of said allegations and therefore deny each and every of said
allegations.  Further answering said complaint and by way of demurrer these
defendants say: 1. That said complaint does not state facts sufficient to
constitute a cause of against these defendants or either of them, for that (a)
the said complaint fails to set out the Exhibits "A" and "B" alleged in the
first paragraph of said complaint; (b) the description of the personal
property alleged to have been maladministered upon is not specific and
definite; (c) for that said complaint fails to show to whom the testatrix was
indebted to and in what amount if any. Wherefore the defendants D.L. Boyd and
F.T. Hyatt pray to be hence dismissed with their costs in this behalf
expended. {Signed} M. Silver, Attorney for Defendants"

January 1915, The petition of F.T. Hyatt against the John Turpin estates 
continues:
"In the Superior Court, January Term 1915} In this case by consent parties and
counsel waive a jury trial and certain facts are agreed upon as being the
facts pertinent to this case, and as to the other remaining facts necessary to
be found, it is agreed that the court shall find thence and thereto shall
apply the law and award judgment thereon, a jury trial being expressly waived
by both sides. The agreed facts are as follows:

"That on or about the 9th day of November 1910, W.M. Turpin, Elmira Turpin and
W.T. Lee executed to M.J. McCracken a certain promissory note for the sum of
$200.00; that on the 4th day of November 1910, the said M.J. McCracken got a
judgment in the Justice's court of Haywood County, Waynesville Township,
against W.M. Turpin, Elmira Turpin and W.T. Lee for the sum of $209.67, with
interest on $200.00 from November 9, 1910. That on the 14th day of November,
1910, the judgment was received and docketed in the office of the Clerk of the
Superior Court and docketed in Judgment Docket "S", page 257; that on the 14th
day of March, 19111, M.J. McCracken, for value received assigned the judgment
to R.L. Lee, principal, interest and cost without recourse. That on the 12th
day of February, 1912, in the Judgment Docket... the following assignment
appears: "I hereby assign this judgment to W.M. Turpin, J.M. Noland and F.T.
Hyatt, in consideration of a judgment this day obtained by W.T. Lee against
the said parties for the amount of this judgment, being obtained upon a note
executed to cover the amount of this judgment and paid $258.00. {Signed} R.L.
Lee"

"Also the following appears on said record: "No homestead found and nothing
collected on this execution. Received on this execution $2.50 -- retained on
my fees, $2.50, paid into the court nothing. {Signed} W.J. Palmer, Sheriff, by
R.G.A. Love, Deputy Sheriff."

"It is agreed that there was a second note for $200.00, from the same makers
and same parties, sued upon at the same time, judgment rendered at the same
time, docketed in the office of the Clerk of the Superior Court at the same
time, the same assignment and the same note -- so the same statement of fact
as to the one note is applicable to the other. The assignment on the second
judgment reads as follows: February 12, 1912. I hereby assign this judgment to
W.M. Turpin, J.M. Noland, and F.T. Hyatt, or anyone of them who may pay this
judgment this day obtained by W.T. Lee against persons upon a note executed to
said Lee for the amount of this judgment. {Signed} R.L. Lee.  On or about the
10th day of October, 1888, John Turpin executed his last Will and Testament,
and said John Turpin died about the 21st day of March, 1896, and his will was
duly proven and admitted to probate, it is to be found in Book of Wills #2,
page 363, reference to which is hereby made and the same is made a part
hereof. Elmira Turpin, wife of John Turpin mentioned in said Will survived him
and lived until about September 24, 1911, when she died leaving a last Will
and Testament, which is to be found in Book of Wills #3, page 319, and W.M.
Turpin duly qualified as her executor, and he was subsequently removed and
C.F. Moody was appointed and qualified as her administrator; said Moody
resigned and R.G.A. Campbell was appointed in his stead, and is now the acting
administrator.

"That on the [blank] day of February, 1911, W.M. Turpin and F.T. Hyatt and
J.M. Noland made, executed and delivered to W.T. Lee a note for $450.00, due
in June 1911, this being to secure to Lee the amount he was about to pay
McCracken in satisfaction of his two judgments. That Elmira Turpin took no
part in this new arrangement, did not sign the new note and the McCracken
judgments were not assigned to W.M. Turpin, Noland and Hyatt until about a
year after they gave Lee their note.... A judgment by default was rendered
against all three of the defendants upon $450.00 note... in Judgment Docket
'T', page 122. That this assignment appears upon the docket: "I hereby assign
this judgment to G.C. Palmer, trustee for W.A. Palmer, for value received, in
full, of interest and cost, May 15, 1914. {Signed} W.T. Lee." Also, an
assignment dated December 28, 1914, as follows: "I hereby assign this judgment
to R.A.L. Hyatt, trustee for the use and benefit of F.T. Hyatt and D.R.
Noland, administrators of J.M. Noland, for value received, in full of
interest, principal and cost for recourse on him. {Signed} G.C. Palmer,
Trustee..." The present action was begun by issuing of the summons, 29th of
June, 1914."

"The Court finds the following facts from the evidence of W.T. Lee: That he
paid off the McCracken judgment against W.M. Turpin, Elmira Turpin and
himself; that before doing so the note for $450.00 was given him by W.M.
Turpin, Noland and Hyatt; that it was to reimburse him the money he was about
to pay McCracken in satisfaction of is judgments; that nothing was said then
about assigning to them the McCracken judgments or for a year after that; that
when Lee sued them and took judgment in February 1912, Honorable W.T.
Crawford, his attorney prepared the so-called assignments to Turpin, Noland &
Hyatt which was signed by R.L. Lee; that W.T. Lee knew nothing of this matter
but was satisfied with whatever his attorneys did; that the present plaintiffs
did not pay the Lee judgment until about December 28th 1914, although they
brought the present suit June 29th 1914.

"From the evidence of R.L. Lee: That he did not pay anything for the judgments
assigned to him and did not receive anything when he assigned them to Turpin
and others. From the testimony of a member of other witnesses not necessary to
be enumerated here, I find as a fact that Elmira Turpin was not possessed of
any property of her own at the time of her death in 1911. (This was the only
really disputed question to be passed upon and the fact found by the Court.)
Elmira Turpin, however, as Executrix of the estate of her husband John Turpin
back in 1897 and 1898 received, paid out and disbursed away his heirs several
thousand dollars of personal property assets, the record thereof being as
follows: The records in the Clerk's office show that the total receipts from
the first day of June 1897 were $3,294.63, and after paying the debts due by
him, she had a balance of $2,887.48. She makes another report on the 11th day
of February 1898; the report shows that she had sold real estate to the amount
of $1,870.00, and had $3,526.89. Her report of the 9th day of January 1898
here shows a balance due the estate of $3,266.50, which was divided among the
heirs according to this report.

"It is agreed that Maggie D. Moody and her husband, C.F. Moody, and Alden
Howell, Jr., and wife Thomasine Howell, purchased the John Turpin land, as
described in the John Turpin Will, from the children of John and Elmira
Turpin, and paid valuable consideration thereof. It is shown in the record
that the Will has been probated. The deeds of conveyance, being several in
number, mad on the 28th of December 1910, and registered January 10 1911, in
Book 31 of Deeds, pages 18 et seq. About 1900 E.H. Turpin, one of the heirs at
law, and C.F. Moody, bought the entire farm from the heirs at law. About 1909
C.F. Moody bought E.H. Turpin's interest in the farm, and in 1910, Mr. Moody
sells one-half interest in the farm to Alden Howell and wife. (Here M.J.
McCracken states that the original McCracken notes were given him two or three
years before they were sued on in 1910. And the court, upon the foregoing
findings in fact, is of the opinion as a matter of law, and so holds and
adjudges, that the plaintiffs are not entitled to have the land in question,
or any part thereof decreed, to be sold and sold for the satisfaction of the
judgments sued on in this action, and it being admitted that this is the issue
in the case awards judgment in favor of the defendants -- that the plaintiffs
take nothing by their action but the defendants go here without day and
recover their cost. To this judgment the plaintiffs except and from which they
appeal to the Supreme Court. Notice waived and appeal bond fixed at $50.00. By
consent the plaintiffs are allowed 40 days from the rising of this court to
make and serve their statement of case on appeal and the defendant 30 days
after receipt of case on appeal to file exceptions or serve counter-case.
{Signed} E.B. Cline, Judge Presiding."

During the course of the case being heard, Superior Court minutes contain a
transcript of examination and cross-examination of several parties to the
suit, parts of which are contained below, and are valuable as to the economic
state of affairs of the Turpin family in the early 1900's, as well as to their
pertinence to the case of the handling of the estate by Almira. The first
witness, for the defense, by plaintiff's attorney, "Captain Hannah", is J.B.
Campbell:

(Q) Do you know when Elmira Turpin died? (A) Yes sir... 1910, I think, will
not be positive. (Q) Were you around her home about the time she died or
before? (A) Yes, sir, for a year or two past before she died was there
frequently. (Q) Did you observe what property she had? (A) Wheat and corn
principally... I saw the wheat in different years - three or four years I was
there before she died. (Q) The last year? (A) Some two or three hundred
bushels... about $1.00 [per bushel]. (Q) How many bushels of corn? (A) Five or
six hundred bushels... about 90 cents a bushel. (Q) What else did she have?
(A) Really I don't know except a horse and buggy. (Q) How about hay and oats?
(A) She had hay and oats... I cannot tell you how much? (Q) Give us an
estimate? (A) Three or hundred dollars worth of hay and oats on a farm like
that. (Q) How about hogs and cattle? (A) As for that part, I don't know. (Q)
Is there anything else you know that she had there? There were hogs on the
place, wasn't there? (A) Yes, sir, and cattle too. (Q) Didn't you try to buy
some of the hogs? (A) Yes, sir... Said Millie Liner claimed the hogs."

Cross examination of J.B. Campbell by defendants' attorney, Mr. Ferguson: "(Q)
Can you swear that Millie Liner had a single grain of wheat of her own there?
(A) She said it was hers... (Q) When did you hear her say it? (A) About two
months before she died... She said she got half the wheat, and that she would
make five or six hundred bushels that year... Probably had two or three
hundred bushels. (Q) Don't you know Millie Liner lived there at the time? (A)
Yes, sir. (Q) Don't you know Millie Liner claimed everything on the place? (A)
She claimed the chickens, and sheep and some two or three cattle. (Q) Haven't
you heard Mrs. Turpin say on several different occasions that she had given
Millie everything she had to stay there and take care of her? (A) No, sir, she
said when her debts were paid that everything that was left was Millie's. (Q)
She talked to you about that? (A) Yes, sir... Several times in the last three
or four years up to right before she died. (Q) She did say everything was
Millie's? (A) No, sir... After she was done with it and her debts were paid,
it belonged to Millie."

Testimony by W.M. Turpin, by Attorney Ferguson: "(Q) You are the son of Elmira
Turpin?.. the W.M. Turpin that was her executor? (A) Yes, sir. (Q) State what
property your mother had at her death. (A) She didn't have anything - she had
given it to Millie Liner - said for Millie to take care of her and take care
of her for the rest of her days and she would give it to her - she didn't have
anything at her death. (Q) How long had you been living at her house before
her death? (A) Three or four years, something like that. (Q) And you knew she
had already given it to Millie Liner? (A) Yes, sir, said she wasn't able to
look after anything herself and for her to look after her and she give it to
her to take care of hr the rest of her days. (Q) Millie Liner said everything
was hers? (A) Said her grandmother had nothing."  Cross examination by
Attorney Hannah: "(Q) When did your mother die? (A) September 1911. (Q) There
were good crops on the place? (A) Tolerably good; me and Pink Leatherwood
thought there eleven hundred bushels of corn -- guessed it off in the field.
(Q) You have read your mother's will?.. It states in there that after her
debts are paid, Miss Liner is to have the rest? (A) I don't remember
particular how it reads."  Cross examination by the Judge: "(Q) Did your
mother maintain her mental faculties up to the time she died? (A) Up to a few
days before she died. (Q) Who was in charge of the farm? (A) Millie Liner -
she took charge of everything there... For the last four or five years. (Q)
She lived there on the farm? (A) Yes (Q) What relation was she? granddaughter?
(A) Yes, sir, and my niece. Lived with us for 25 years. Mother gave her full
charge, mother got down in health and told her to take charge of everything
and said, "All I want you to do in the world is to take care of me as long as
I live." And I said, "You have done the wrong thing; you and Millie might fall
out and you have given her all you have got." (Q) Did she direct the farm work
the last two years? (A) Everything  mother couldn't do anything... Millie
looked after everything - I helped her sometimes."

Examination of Mrs. Millie Liner Ball, by Attorney Ferguson: (Q) Your name was
Millie Liner until you married? (A) Yes (Q) State whether your grandmother,
Elmira Turpin, had any property of any description at the time of her death.
(A) She didn't have anything at all... Gave it to me for waiting on her. (Q)
How long did you wait on her? (A) 25 years except a few months. (Q) And she
gave you all she had to wait on her? (A) Yes, sir. (Q) Did she claim any wheat
and corn or any other property of any kind before her death? (A) Nothing (Q)
Did she have charge of the farm? (A) No... Pink Leatherwood [a renter] had
charge (Q) Who run it? (A) I did, myself. (Q) And you got the proceeds for
staying there and waiting on her? (A) Yes, sir. (Q) Your grandmother left a
will?... and you had it probated? (A) Yes, sir. (Q) Did your grandmother leave
any notes? (A) She gave me some notes. (Q) And whose were they? (A) Will
Turpin's." The judge cross-examines: (Q) You had the will probated? (A) Yes,
sir. (Q) You brought the will to the court house? (A) Will Turpin - I gave it
to him and he had it probated." By Attorney Ferguson: (Q) What did she say
about the notes? (A) She gave them to me. The notes on Will Turpin before her
death. (Q) Is Will Turpin solvent? (A) No, sir."

End of the estate files.