To the Honorable Abner S. Lipscome
Judge of the Circuit Court in the county aforesaid in chancery sitting.
Humbling complaining showith unto your honor your orator John
B. Lorez of the county of St. Clair and the state aforesaid,
that Nathaniel Broton of the
county of Monroe and the state aforesaid on or about the twenty-eight day
of December in the Year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixteen
applied to your orator who was engaged in the business trade and occupation
of a merchant to advance to him the said Nathaniel
Broton and to one Christopher
Coullett on credit a certain parcel or quantity of goods,
wares and merchandies. There upon your orator stated to the said Nathaniel
Broton that he had no confidence in Christopher
Coullett and that he would not advance any goods on credit
but that if the said Nathaniel Broton
would become responsible and bound to your orator for the payment of the
whole amount of the purchase money, he would advance to him the said Nathaniel
Broton on a credit a certain quantity of goods. Having thus
replied to the application of the said Nathaniel
Broton for goods, he observed that he wished to befriend
the said Christopher Coulliet
and then and there agreed and undertook to receive from your orator the
said goods and to become responsible for the payment of the amount of the
purchase money. Your orator further showith that in consequense of the
said request and undertaking of the said Nathaniel
Broton, he did advance, sell and deliver to the said Nathaniel
Broton goods,wares and merchandies to the amount of Nine
hundred and twenty-four Dollars and forty two cents. And that he Nathaniel
Broton and Christopher Coulliet
carried the goods away as will be more fully appear by an account or schedule
of said goods aknowledged by the receipt of Nathaniel
Broton and Christopher Coulliet
their own proper hand writing being thereto subscribed, which is herewith
filed and exhibited and marked "A", which your orator
prays may be taken as a part of this bill and references thereto had as
often as the nature of the case may require. Your orator further showith
unto your honor that he is a foreigner by birth and unskilled in the correct
use and application of the english language and that the receipt which
is set forth in the above named exhibit does not name your orator as (?)
express in clear unequevocal language the true nature of the agreement
and undertaking of the said Nathaniel Broton
or of the liability of Nathaniel Broton
and Christopher Coulliet to
pay to your orator the aforesaid sum Nine hundred and twenty-four Dollars
and forty two cents. Your orator expressly charges that the object and
intention of all the parties as they were expressed when the said receipt
was signed, were to subject the said Nathaniel
Broton to the payment of the aforesaid sum of money. And
your orator knowing or believing the said Nathaniel
Broton to be good for the above mentioned account of money,
and to gratify the said Nathaniel Broton
consented that Christopher Coulliet
might sign the receipt as security with Nathaniel
Broton, and it was in that manner Christopher
Coulliet became bound to your orator for the purchase of
the above mentioned goods. And your orator further showith that it was
the understanding and agreement between your orator and Nathaniel
Broton and Christopher Coulliet
and so the receipt ought to have explained it that your was to receive
the sum of nine hundred and twenty four dollars and forty two cents, his
price of the amount of Goods advanced to Nathaniel Broton - and that in
consideration that your orator would advance the above mentioned goods
at certain reduced prices, and wait for his money till goods were sold,
that then your orator was also to receive one third part of the profits,
after paying all resonable and necessary expenses. Your orator further
states that he has frequently applied to the said Nathaniel
Broton in a peaceable and friendly [manner] for the payment
of the aforesaid sum of nine hundred and twenty four Dollars and forty
two cents. And for an account of the nett profit of the aforesaid goods.
And your orator had hoped that he would have complied with his just and
reasonable request, as in justice and Equity he ought to have done. But
now so it is, may it please you honor, the said Nathaniel
Broton and the said Christopher
Coulliet, combining and confederating themselves together,
and to and with diverse other persons unknown to your whose names, when
discovered, your orator prays, may be inserted into this bill with apt
words, to charge them. Contriving to defraud your orator and to defeat
your orator of his just right and dues. They refused to pay your orator
the said sum of Nine hundred and twenty four Dollars and forty two cents
an to account with your orator for the one third part of the nett profits
of the aforesaid goods. The said Nathaniel
Broton othertimes pretends that the aforesaid goods were
sold and delivered to Christopher Coulliet,
and that he is not bound to the payment of the purchase money, except as
security to Coulliet. At other
times he pretends that he is only bound according to the terms of the inaccurate
and unsatisfied reciept set forth in the exhibit above mentioned which
binds him if he is bound at all to pay and account for no more than one
third part of the nett profit of the aforesaid goods. At other times, the
said Nathaniel Broton pretends
that your orator sold and advanced the said good to Christopher
Coulliet and that he is not by any agreement expressed or
understood, bound to your orator for the payment of the purchase money
or to account to your orator for one third part of the nett profits of
said goods. All which actings and doing of the said Nathaniel
Broughton and the said Christopher
Coulliet and the other confederates are contrary to right,
equity, and good conscience, and tend to the great injustice of your orator.
For tender considerations whereo and for as much as matters of this nature
are most properly cognizable in a court of Equity where relief can be granted
according to the nature of this case and in as much as your orator is unable,
acording to the strict rules of the common law, to explain the reciept
set forth in the above mentioned exhibit without the bennefitt of the facts
within the revelation adnd knowledge of the said Nathaniel
Broton and the said Christopher
Coulliet. To the end, therefore, that the said Nathaniel
Broton and the said Christopher
Coulliet, may, upon there several corporal oathes, true
and perfect answers made to all and singular the promises as fully and
particularly as if the same were here again repeated and interoggated,
and that the said Nathaniel Broton
merely set forth whether he did not apply to your orator for the goods
aforesaid, whether he did not undertake and agree to recieve from your
orator the goods mentioned in the above named exhibit "A".
Whether he did not recieve them. Whether he did not agree to pay your orator
for the sum of nine hundred and twenty four Dollars and forty two cents
the amount of said goods and also to account to your orator for one third
of the nett profits of said goods when they should be sold and all reasonable
and neccesary charges and expenses were paid whether the said goods have
been sold and what has become of the procedes thereof. What is the net
balance of said procedes. What part of this procedes of the sales of said
goods did the said Nathaniel Broton
receive. Whether monies arriving from the sales of the above mentioned
good, or the other goods for the purposes of securing himself and to satisfy
your orators demands against the said Nathaniel
Broton and the said Coulliet.
What amount did the said Nathaniel Broton
so recieve and for what purpose were this placed in his hand. Was it not
the understanding of all the parties when the reciept set forth in the
above exhibit was signed that Nathaniel Broton
and Christopher Coulett should
pay to your orator the sum of nine hundred and twenty four Dollars and
forty two cents and also acount and pay to him one third part of the nett
profits after the sale of the said goods. And your orator prays that the
said Christopher Coulett may
file true and perfect answer make to all the part of that bill and particularly
to all the matters to which the said Nathaniel
Broton in particular request to answer. And grant such other
and further relief as to your honor may deem just and proper.
And your orator prays your honor for a writ of subpoena to be directed
to the said Nathaniel Broton and
the said Christopher Coulett requiring
and commanding them on a certain day and under certain penalty therein
expressed to appear, plead, answer, or demure to the said bill and your
orator is in duty bound will ever pay
J. Dellet Compt.
Solictitor
State of Alabama }
Monroe County }
Personally appeared John B. Lorez
and being duly sworn said that the mstters and things stated in the forgoing
bill are true in far as the same are relatedfrom his own knowledge and
so far as they are related from the information derived from other persons
he believes to be true.
John B. Lorez
Sworn to before me this 3rd day of July 1820
L. Wood J.C.C.
John B. Lorez
}
vs
}
Nathaniel Broton &
}In Equity / Circuit Court September Term 1820
Christopher Coullett
}
It is ordered by the court that the defendant Mr. Coulett, who is absent from and without the limits of this State, do appear and plead, answer, and demure to the bill in the above case on or before the third Monday in March next or Judgt. will be taken from complaintant against him - and that this order be published three months in the Alabama Courier.
John B. Lorez
}
vs.
}
Nat. Broughton & } In
Equity / Circuit Court, March Term 1821
C. Coullett
}
Defendants Counsel moved for leave to file the answer.
John B. Lorez
}
vs.
}
Nat. Broughton & } In
Equity / Circuit Court, March Term 1821
C. Coullett
}
The defendants move for leave to file the answer. Leave grantd. It is ordered that the parties, complaintant and respondant, take the testimony of witnesses on giving mutually fifteen days notice of the time and place for taking such testimony.
State of Alabama }
Monroe County }
And the defendant, saving to himselves all manner of exceptions to the
many imperfections and defects in the complaintants bill answers to the
same or to so much thereof as ought from the complaintant at the time set
forth and charged in the Compt. Bill. And that the said goods were recieved
as appeared for sale at the residence of this defendant, but that the defendant
is far from being a party in the stock or trade furnished by said Compt.
to said Coullett know nothing
of the contract or agreement between said Compt. and Coullett
more than what was related to this defendant by the Compt. himself a short
time before this defendant returned from the state of Georgia to the state
of Alabama. He was called upon by the complaintant who informed this defendant
that he was soon to furnish said Coulett
with a parcel of goods which he (the Compt.) wiched Coullett
to carry to Alabama in company with this defendant as he removed his family
and that said Coullett was a
young man whose interest here the Compt. wished to advance, being a relation
of the Compt., and that if this defendant would, when he should settle
himself in Alabama, erect a suitable store house for said Coullet
and board him (said Coullett)
during the time it should be neccesary to vend said goods, that this defendant
should, for his troubles and expense in this, recieve the one-third of
the profits arriving from the sale of said goods. And when he had commenced
his journey, he went by the residence of the Compt. with his family. When
he found said Coullett prepared
to recieve the goods with him, the defendant remained during one night
at the residence of the Compt. during which timethe instruument of writing
annexed to the schedule "A" in the Compt. Bill was
signed by this defendant and Coullett.
But this defendant wholely denies the charge contained in the Compt. Bill
as false and injurous, that it was intended as an acknowledgement of the
reciept of said goods on behalf of this defendant and that this defendant
was thereby subjected to the payment of the said purchase money set forth
and charged in the Compt. Bill or for the payment of any sum of money whatever.
So furthermore, the defendant expressly understood and believed that the
sole and only purpose of that instrument was to carry into affect the proposition
made by the Compt. to this defendant as before related and to point out
the share and manner of the distribution of the profits arriving from the
sale of said goods. And this defendant states that this was all the agreement
or contract that was ever entered unto between the Compt. and the defendant
and that the instrument annexed to schedule "A" of Compt. Bill contains
all and every provisions it was designed to contain as this defendant was
instructed by the Compt. to believe.
The defendant further states that on his arrival in Alabama, Monroe County,
aforesaid this defendant, in compliance with the agreement, between this
defendant and the Compt. did erect a suitable storehouse for said Coullett
and did board said Coullett
during the time he was vending the goods aforesaid and declares that for
so doing a right to one third of the profit arriving from the sale of said
goods, did occur to this defendant as he verily believes. And believing
also that all that he had undertaken or agreed to do was done by building
the said storehouse and furnishing board to said
Coullett. This defendant never superintended sale of said
goods, or excercised any care toward them, believing them to be under the
sole direction and management of said Coullett.
Therefore, to the many interogations made this defendant, he further knows
that he never was bound for the payment of the sum of money set forth in
the Compt. Bill or any other sum for the purchase of said goods. He never
did apply to recieve said goods, but only to acompanying said Coullett
when he did recieve them as before set forth in this answer. He believes
the goods were sold,but not by this defendant, but by said Coullett.
This defendant has no knowledge of what became of the parcels, the whole
being under the control of said Coullett
as before stated. The defendant never did recieve the books and accounts
of said Coullett his [ ? ];
he recieved some account and notes but for a small amount for which this
defendant gave his reciept which Coullett
allowed this defendant was his own defendants third part of the profits
of the sale of said goods of which accounts and notes this defendant declares
that not more than fifty Dollars have been collected: he never recieved
any account to secure himself from the [ ? ] of paying the Compt. as set
forth by this Compt. Bill. It never was the understanding that his defendant
was to pay to the Compt. the sum stated in schedule "A" in Compt. Bill
or any other sum for the articls therein stated and this defendant further
answers that it is fairnesstis Compt. did call for the account sales which
were left with him. But this defendant so far from refusing to give them
up. He proposed and wished to do so upon the condition that the compt.
would indemnify him against Coullett
and release him from the provisions of the reciept aforesaid executed to
said Coullett .
Owen & Gayles
Socts. for the defendant
State of Alabama }
Monroe County }
Personally appeared before me Nathaniel Broughton
and made oath that the facts stated in this answer of his own knowledge
are true and those from information he believes to be true.
Nath. Broughton
Sworn to before me, one of the Justices }
of the Peace for Monroe County this 20th }
March 1821 Samuel H. Draughon,
J.P. }
The subpeona which follows (?) in the transcript to follow the bill.
State of Alabama }
Monroe County } To the Sherriff of the County of Monroe
Greeting.
We command you to take Nathaniel Broughton and Christopher Coullette if he be found in your county and then safely keep so you have their bodies before the judge of the circuit Court setting on Chancery at Claiborne on the third Monday of September next ensuing to answer a bill in Chancery prepared against them in our said court by John B. Lorez, a copy of which bill accompanying this writ you will deliver to the said Nathaniel Broughton and Christopher Coulette. Hereof fail not and have you there at that time this writ witness Able Farrar, Esq., Clerk of the Court aforesaid on the seventh day of August, the Year of Our Lord One thousand eight hundred twenty one, of American Independence the Forty Fifth year.
Signed 17th August 1821
Attest Able Farrar
John B. Lorez
}
v.
}
Nat'l Broughton,
} Replication
Christopher Coullett
}
The complaintant for replication to the answer of N Broughton, one of the defendants in the above case, by James Dillet, his solicitor, comes and says that the facts stated in his said answer were not sufficient to prevent the complaintant from having and obtaining a decree of this court in favor of said comp't according to the matters and things set forth in his said bill. Wherefor he prays judgement.
John B. Lorez
}
vs.
}
Broughton and Coullet }
Order for taking testimony (?) ten day notice of time and place only to
be given bill to be taken for complaint against Coullett
and set for hearing at next term.
John B. Lorez
}
v.
}
Nat'l Broughton,
} Bill in Equity
Christopher Coullett
}
Personally appeared before on John B Lorez,
the comp't in the above stated case is and being duly sworn deposeth and
says that Nathaniel Broughton
and Christopher Coullett are
jointly indebted to him as copartners in the purchase of a quantity of
goods to the amount of nine hundred and twenty four dollars and forty two
cents that Christopher Coullett
resides beyond the jurisdiction of this (?) court to wit in the state of
S Carolina as this depondant has been informed. This depondant further
states that he is well satisfied that said
Coullett is not in circumstances to pay to the deponant
any part of the aforesaid debt in the event of his being decreed so to
do. And this deponant also states that he is apprehensive that the said
Nathaniel
Broughton, for the purpose of answering the decree which
this court may pronounce in the above cause and to defraud this defendant
of his said debt as here stated wil remove himself and property beyond
the jurisdiction of this court to prevent which this deponant praise the
court to grant a writ, to restrain the said
Broughton
from going beyond the limit of the state of Alabama until a final decree
and judgement is had in the above case.
Sworn to before me this 1st day of October 1821
Gordon Robinson J.P.
John B Lorez
It is ordered that a writ of no exit (?) in this case against Nathaniel Broughton and that he give bail in the sum of eighteen hundred and forty eight dollars and eighty for cents - October 6th 1821 Signed R Saffold - one of the Judges of the State of Alabama
State of Alabama }
Monroe County } To the sherriff
of said county greetings.
Whereas it has been represented to this judge of the circuit court of the
county sitting in Chancery on the part of John
B Lorez, complainant, against Nathaniel
Broughton, defendant, that the said Nathaniel
Broughton is greatly indebted to the said complainant and
that this said complainant is apprehensive that the said Nat'l
Broughton (?) to go or will go into parts beyond the jurisdiction
of this court which will to to the great prejudices of the said complainant.
Wherefor in order to prevent this injustice you are hereby commanded that
you do without delay cause this said N Broughton
personally to come before you and give good and sufficeint bail in the
sum of eighteen hundred and forty eight dollars and eighty four cents that
he the said Nathaniel Broughton
will not go or attempt to go into parts beyond the limit of the stte of
Alabama. And in case the said Nathaniel Broughton
shall refuse to you such bail or security thereon, you are to commit him,
the said Nathaniel Broughton,
to the jail of the county of Monroe thee to be kept in safe custody until
he shall do it of his own acord. And when you have takn said security,
you are forthwith to make and return a certificate thereof unto the said
court of Chancery distinctly and plainly together with the writ witness
Able
Farrar, Esq., Clerk of said court, this the sixth day of
October in the year of our lord one thousand and eight hundred and twenty
one and of the Independence of the United States of America, the forty
sixth year.
Signed
6th October 1821
Attest. Able
Farrar
Take bail in $1848.84 according to judge's order filed in clerk's office.
Recieved 6 October
1821, John M Childs D.S.
Executed the 20th of March 1822 - John M
Childs - for John Yancey,
Sherriff
State of Alabama }
Monroe County }
Know all men by these present that we Nathaniel
Broughton and William L Jameson
are held and firmly bound unto John Yancey
Sheriff in the ful sum of three thousand six hundred and ninety six dollars
for the payment of which, we and each of ourselves, our heirs executors
and administrators jointly and severly firmly by this presents (?) with
our seals and dated this twenty first day of March 1822.
The condition of the above obligation is such, that if the above bound
Nat.
Broughton do appear at the next circuit court to be holden
in Monroe Countyon the first monday of April next and to answer to John
B Lorez of a plea of debt and shall abide the order and
oblidgement of said court then the above obligation will be void, otherwise
to remain in force, fine & venture. I Assign this written bail to the
plaintiff in the case on 22nd March 1822 - John
Yancey, Sheriff
Signed Nath Broughton and Wm. L. Jameson
John B. Lorez
}
v.
} Bills in Equity
Nat'l Broughton,
}
Christopher Coullett
}
The examination of Nathaniel Cannon,
a witness in the above case, taken by consent of himself to be read in
evidence on the trial of said cause.
Mr. Cannon states that he knew
the parties, complainant and defendants, that this witness himself in Company
with said Broughton when witness
and Broughton were moving to
the Alabama territory in the state of Goergia. Witness said Broughton
and those in company camped one night near John
B Lorez house or store in the state of Georgia. Broughton
told witness that himself and Christopher Coullett
were to recieve a parcel of goods from John
B Lorez in copartnership that the said goods were to be
brought on to Alabama and sold. That Broughton
and Coullett were to receive each one third of the profit
of said goods and John B Lorez
was to recieve one third of the profits arriving from the sale of the said
goods in consequence of the credit which he had given, said Broughton
and Coullett on the purchase of said goods. Witness saw
no goods delivered by John B Lorez
to Broughton and Coullett in
the state of Georgia but after witness and Broughton
and Coullett arrived in Alabama, Broughton
and Coullett opened a store. Some three or four months after
the store had been opened in Alabama, Broughton
told witness that he was afraid that Coullett
would waste the goods that John B Lorez
held him Broughton bond for
the price of said goods. Witness has heard Broughton
charge Coullett to keep a corect
accout of said goods so that Mr. Lorez might
be satisfied. Do you know anything of any notes and account left by Coullett
in the hands of Broughton? Answer
- I do not and I never heard Broughton
say anything about any otes and accounts
- Cross examined by defendant -
Are you Certain that Broughton told
you that the goods were delivered to him and Coullett
in copartnership? He (Broughton)
did not tell me they were delivered, because they were not being delivered,
but he said he (Broughton and
Coullet)
Were to have goods from Lorez.
Do you know what amount of goods was to be delivered? - I did not kow at
that time but after I came to the Alabama, Broughton
told me he had recieved nearly one thousand dollars worth.
Did you never acertain whether the goods were delivred to Coullet
and that Broughton was to receive
a part of the profits for his services in erecting a storehouse? - I never
understood that they were delivered to Coullett
alone but in copartnership. Who Brought the goods to Alabama? - They were
in a cart. The horse and cart which contained the goods were received in
Georgia. Coullett drove the
cart to Alabama.
Who built the storehouse that contained the goods? - I cannot say who built
it but I was living with Broughton
and helped to work on the house.
You knew nothing about the business but what you heard from Broughton.
- No, I do not.
Is coullet related to Lorez/comp't?
- So I have heard, that is I have heard that Lorez
married Coullet's aunt.
Do You know whether these goods were sold or not? - I do not know if all
were sold. I have seen some sold.
Did you not learn from Broughton
that if the goods were wasted, that he was liable for the payment to Lorez?
- I understood from Broughton
that he was to be liable for of all that was due for the goods, both purchase
money or profit, if Coullett
was unable to pay for them.
Sworn to before on the 30th Sept 1821
Nathaniel Cannon
Gordon Robinson J.P.
The Examination of Wm. W. McConnico:
Do you or do you not know anything respecting a copartnership between N
Broughton the defendant in the case and Christopher
Coullett the other Def't respecting some goods which had
been owed by them from John B Lorez?
- Answer: I think about Feby. or Jany. 1817 N
Broughton and Christopher Coullett
arrived in this county with goods, they stated to me, to the amount of
about one thousand dollars. And that they were to sell the goods and divide
the profits arising from the sale of said goods equally with Mr.
Lorez.
Sworn to before me this 30th Sept 1821
Gordon Robinson J.P.
Wm. W. McConnico
D.D. Shumate sworn by consent;
Witness knows Lorez, Broughton,
and Coullett - Witness heard
Broughton
say about the time
Coullett
left this country say about 2 years ago. He said he must follow Coullett
for property.
Lydia Nilles sworn states;
Witness knew N Broughton, Heard
him say about the time Coullet
went off that he would be liable for goods for which
Coullet had wanted, but did not here him say to whom he
would have to account.
- Cross - I knew nothing of the goods which is the subject of this suit.
Taken by consent
Mrs. Sarah Searley being
sworn, states -
She heard her uncle mr. N. Broughton
before and after he started from Georgia to come to Alabama that he had
to call at Mr. Lorez in Georgia
for the purpose of getting some goods to bring out to Alabama. When he
left Lorez a cart load of goods
was brought in to Alabama. The goods were opened in Alabama. Witness heard
Broughton
say he was intitled to one-third of the profits of said goods. And after
Coullett
the country, heard
Broughton
say he was afraid he would have to pay for the goods. Witness saw Broughton
in Lorez' store in Georgia making
choices of goods. Witness heard Broughton
say that he had a copartnership in the store with Coullett
that he had given his paper and was afraid he would hae to pay him for
the goods. Witness saw Broughton
when he returned from following Coullett and
he gave his wife some papers and told her to take care of them. He had
got them from Coullett and if
Lorez
came, he would try and make himself whole. Heard Broughton
say when he went after Coullett
that if he did not give him notes and accounts to make himself whole he
would put him in jail. Sworn to and subscribed before me
this nineth day of April 1822 - Charlse
O. Foster - J.P.
Signed - Sarah (x) Searley
The State of Alabama }
Monroe County }
John B. Lorez
}
v.
}
Broughton & Coullett
}
John Snowden, being duely sworn by Charles
O Foster, A justice of the Peace in the presence of the
solicitor of the complainant and the defendant, deposed as follows towit
- Deponant knows the parties, complainant and def't. When witness with
others to wit Broughton, Coullett
and coming to this country the company stopped at J.B.
Lorez in Georgia and comped near there. When we came off,
JB
Lorez wished witness and some others with Broughton
and
Coullett to take some blankets
to this country. Witness refused to take any except as many as he would
use on the road. Which witness gave to Coullett
on arriving at Claiborne. Witness bought a big cart of Lorez
and paid Coullett for it when
I got to Claiborne by Lorez
order.
Also sworn - James Snowden
Witness states that on coming to this country in passing through Georgia
the company camped at or near Lorez
house in Georgia. When the company left there, which was the Friday witness
, his brother, Broughton, Coullett
and others. Coullett drove a
cart loaded with goods but whose they were witness knew not. He heard nothing
nor does he know anything of any bargain about the goods. The morning the
company left Lorez, Lorez
applied to witness to bring on some goods. Witness refused except to bring
a few blankets with the priviledge of using them on the road. The blankets
were delivered to Coullett on
arriving in Alabama by Lorez
directions and the cart that Coullett
drove with goods started from Lorez
and had not previous been in company with the Broughtons.
Witness was presently at Coullett's
store on Limestone in Alabama. Coullett
had the management of the store and never saw Broughton
take any control therein.
Malcolm McNiel also sworn -
The cart that contained the goods was drove by Coullett.
Witness brought a keg of powder by request of Coullett.
Lorez,
Broughton
& Coullett was to pay me.
Mr.
Broughton said witness might as well take more of the goods.
It would keep Coullet along.
Witness did deliver to Coullett
the powder and did not get paid for it. Witness looked to no one but Coullett
for pay. Witness helped to build the store, employed by Coullett.
Broughton's
hands built the house and witness made the counter and doors and windows.
Coullett
paid
witness for the same. Witness, when about the store, never saw Broughton
have any control over the same. In a short time after the store was opened
on Limestone,
Broughton McConnico
and Young purchased a quantity
of goods and Coullett was employed
to keep the store that contained them at Young's.
And Coullett took the goods
from the first store and kept them in a corner of this store and sold them
seperately as Coullett told
witness the Young store was
not made a part of the second. As Coullett
told witness tho kept in the same house, witness never knew Broughton
to have any hand in selling the goods. Witness knew the goods of the Young's
store. They were kept in the corner of the second store to themselves.
They consisted of homespun (?) and handkerchiefs. Witness knew them to
be the goods of the first store. Witness heard Broughton
say he got some account from Coullett
when he went away.
John B. Lorez
}
vs.
} In Chancery - April Term, 1822
Nathaniel Broughton }
Christopher Coullett }
Upon having the bill and answer in this case, and the evidence taken by
this order of court, it is ordered a judged and decreed that the defendant
Nathaniel
Broughton and Christopher Coullett
do pay to the complainant the sum of Nine hundred and twenty four dollars
and forty two cents and also the sum of three hundred and eighty dollars
twenty eight cents interest on the first mentioned amount from the first
of January Eighteen hundred and seventeen. It is further ordered and decreed
that the def't. pay the cost of this suit.
H.Y. Webb
Exhibit "A" (The following exhibit is attached to the bill)
<<<List of goods>>>
Recieved the following articles of John
B Lorez to be sold. After the expenses are paid, the profits
to be equally divided between John B Lorez,
Nathaniel
Broughton, and Christopher Coullett.
Nathaniel
Broughton
Christopher
Coullett
State of Alabama }
Supreme Court } December Term, 1822
Broughton & Coullett
}
vs.
}
John B Lorez
}
Nathaniel Broughton and Christopher
Coullett come and say that there is manifest error in this,
that the court below did not consider the answer of said defendants below
as true. There is error in this that the court below decreed in favor of
said complainant below when there was no republication to the answer of
said defendants below. There is error in this, that the cause does not
appear to have been set down for a hearing. There is error in this, that
thee does not appear to have been any order of publication.
Wm. Crawford
H. Hatchlocke
Attorney for Plaintiffs
The following proceedings were held }
in the court of Errors and Appeals }
Know all men by the presence that we Nathaniel
Broughton , Joseph Nettles,
and Malachi Nettles are held
and firmly bound unto John B Lorez
in the full sum of twenty seven hundred and thirty eight dollars and forteen
cent, which payment will and truly to be made. We bind ourselves and each
of our heirs express and jointly and severly firmly by these present. Sealed
with our selas. Dated this 21st day of February 1823. The condition of
the above obligation is such that whereas the above bound Nath'l
Broughton has this day obtained a writ of error to set aside
a certain judgement or decree obtained in Chancery at april Term 1822 by
said Lorez against the said
Broughton
and one Christopher Coullett
in our circuit court, excercising Chancery jurisdiction. Now therefor should
the said Nath'l Broughton prosecute
his said writ of error to affect or failing so to do, pay all court and
charges attending the same. then the above obligation to be void, otherwise
to remain in full force and virtue.
Teste. Able Farrar, Clk.
Nath. Broughton
Malachi Nettles
Joseph Nettles, Sen.
Circuit Court }
Monroe County } State of Alabama
To the clerk of said county, greetings. Because in the record of proceedings
and also in the giving of judgement in a certain decree in the court aforesaid
between John B Lorez and Nathaniel
Broughton and Christoher Coullett,
manifest error hath inten(?) to the great damage of the said Broughton
and Coullett as by the complainant
we are informed and being witness that the error, if any therein, be correctly
full and speedy justice done the parties in this behalf. Do command you
that if judgement fittingly given, send to the Supreme Court of the state
aforesaid, distinctly and plainly given under your hand and seals, the
records and proceedings aforesaid, with all things concerning the same,
together with(?) so that they may have them on the second Monday of December
next, at the town of Cahaba, that the records and readings aforesaid ,
being inspected, we may cease to be further done thereupon your correcting
that error what is right according to the cantons and Law of the state
of Alabama ought to be done
Witness
Able Farrar, Clk. of
the Court aforesaid the 20th February 1823 and 47 years of American Independence.
JP 20th February 1823
Attest - Able Farrar, Clk.
The tanscript required in said writ, having been sent according to our Supreme Court the following certicate was sent down:
The State of Alabama
To the Clerk of the Cicuit Court of Monroe County, greeting. Whereas at
our Supreme Court for said state held at the town of Cahaba in the second
Monday of June in the year of Our Lord One thousand eight hundred and twenty
three, a writ of error came on to be heard and determined wherein Nathaniel
Broughton and Christopher Coullett
was plaintiffs and John B Lorez Defendant
in error and the record & proceedings in the court below and the decree
rendered therein and the matter and things for error assigned having been
seen and inspected by our said Supreme Court it came to our said court
that in the records & proceedings in the court below & the decree
rendered therein there is no error.
Wherefore it is considered by our said Supreme Court that the decree in
the case aforesaid rendered in the court below be in all things affirmed
and stand in full force and effect and that the complainant in the court
below recover against the defendant in the court below the amount of the
decree rendered in said court together with ten percent damages with interest
and also the costs which have occured in the cause aforesaid , both in
our said Supreme Court and your said Circuit Court, exercising Chancery
Jurisdiction. You are therefore hereby commanded to force an execution
on the decree aforesaid now remaining in your said Circuit Court against
the said Nathaniel Broughton and
Christopher
Coullet for the amount of the said decree with the ten percent
damages besides interest together with the sum of dollars and cents, the
amount of the cost in our Supreme Court. Herein fail not.
Witness
Jesse Bunt, Clerk of
the Supreme Court of the State aforesaid at office in the town of Cahaba
on the fourteenth day of June 1823 and of the independence of the United
States of America, the Fourty seventh year.
Jesse Bunt, Clerk
Upon which the following execution issue:
Decree
1232.70 }
10% cost dam.
123.27 } <<<These figures are turned sideways>>>
Int. on Decree
116.22 } <<<on the original document >>>
Cost
79.45 }
$1551.64 }
State of Alabama }
Monroe County }
To the sheriff of said county, greeting. You are hereby commanded that
of the good and chattles lands and tenements of Nathaniel
Broughton and Christopher Coullet,
if to be found within your county, you cause to be made the sum of fourteen
hundred and twenty eight dollars and seventy seven (?) cents, which John
B Lorez, lately in our Circuit Court exercising Chancery
Jurisdiction, hath recovered against them for his damages. Also the sum
of one hundred and twenty three dollars and twenty seven cents, which the
said John B Lorez were adjudged
to him for his damages in the Supreme Court of Appeals and Errors, as well
reason of the non performance of certain promises and assumptions by the
said Broughton and Coullett
to the said Lorez lately made
as for his cost in that behalf expended. Whereof the said Broughton
and Coullett are convicted as
appears to us of record, and that you have the said sum of money at the
next term of our Circuit Court to be holden on the first Monday of October
next, to render unto the said John B Lorez
his damages aforesaid. Herein fail not and have you then and thee this
writ. ---Witness Able Farrar,
Clerk of the court aforesaid this the 16th day of June One thousand eight
hundred and twenty three and of the Independence of the United States of
America, the Forty-seventh year.
Issue 16th June 1823
Attest. - Able Farrar, Clk.
by
Thomas Fleming, Clk.
John B Lorez
}
vs.
}
Broughton and
}
Coullett
}
Decree in Chancery....................................................................$1232.71
assined above
with 10% damages................................................_______
Clk. To his
full and former taxes..................................................
21.20
Bond, (?)Admin
tax and alias taxes.............................................
4.50
Transcript 6500
words @ 20cent...............................................
13.00
$38.70
Sheriff " &
farmers taxe................................$3.75
DO " Chiles..................................................3.25
DO " Godbold..............................................2.75
Att'n J.
Dellit..............................................15.00
Advertising
for Coullett to appear................14.00
County tax.....................................................2.00
$40.75
Am't of cost $79.45
Recieved 17th June 1823 -- John D. Goldbold, Sheriff
Levied on Six negroes - Bond forfeited
John D. Goldbold, Sheriff
Attest - Able Farrar Clk.
by Thomas Fleming Clk.
State of Alabama }
Monroe County }
Know all men by these present that we, Nathaniel
Broughton and Joseph Nettles,
Sen., are firmly bound unto James
D. Goldbold sheriff in the full and just sum of thirty two
hundred dollars for the fateful payment of which, we and each of us bind
ourselves, our heirs executors and administrators, jointly and severally
, firmly by these presents sealed with our hands and seals and dated this
19th day of June 1823.
The conditions of the above obligation is such that whereas James
D Godbold sheriff of Monroe County did on the 19th day of
June levy an execution on six Negroes vis(?)
Joe, (?), Sookey, Betty, Will, and Saphroany, the property
of said Broughton at the suite
of John B Lorez. Now therefore,
if the said Broughton shall
deliver the said property to the said sheriff on the first Monday of July
next at the courthouse or shall well and truly pay to the said sheriff
the amount of the said execution and the cost thereas, then the above obligation
will be paid. Otherwise, to be and remain in full force and virtue.
Signed, sealed and delivered in presence of J.
D. Goldbold, Sheriff
"I assign this written bond to the Plaintiff in this case this 11th
July, 1823
(Signed) J.D. Goldbold,
Sheriff"
Nathaniel Broughton
Joseph Nettles, Sen
Whereupon the following Execution I paid;
State of Alabama }
Monroe County }To the Sheriff of said county, greetings.
You are herby commanded that of the goods and chattles, lands and tenements
of Nathaniel Broughton &
Christopher
Coullet and Joseph Nettles,
Sr., the bails of said N. Broughton,
if to be found within your county, you cause to be made the sum of fifteen
hundred and fifty five dollars and twenty six cents, which John
B Lorez lately in our circuit court exercising Chancery
Jurisdiction, hath recieved against them, the said Broughton
and Coullett, with damage against them in the Supreme Court
of Appeals and Errors for his damages, as well by reason of the nonperformance
of certain (?) & assumptions by the said Nath'l
and the D. Christopher to the
said John B. lately owed as
for his cost in that behalf expended. Whereof the D.
Broughton & Coullett are convicted as appeared to us
of record & whereas a fine is from our said court against the goods
and chattles, lands and tenaments of Nathan
& Christopher & the D.
Nath'l Broughton, having given a forthcoming bond for the
property levied thereon, which was returned forfieted as appears of record.
Whereupon you are hereby commanded to execute the property of the D. Nathaniel
Broughton, Chr. Coullett,
and the said Joseph Nettles, Sen.,
according to the force and effect of the said forthcoming bond and according
to the statute of such case made and provided and that you hae the said
sum of money at the next term of our circuit court on the first Monday
of October next to render to the said John
B Lorez his debt and damages aforesaid. Herein Fail not,
and have you then and there this writ. Witness Able
Farrar of the aforesaid, the twentieth day of July 1823
and fortyeighth year of American independence.
Attest Able Farrar, Clk.
21st July 1823
John B Lorez
}
v. Nathaniel Broughton }
& Christopher Coullett
}Decree in Chancery affirmed in Supreme Court and after (?) $1232.75 (?)
returned by the Sheriff levied on six negroes bond forfieted.
Clerk fees and
former (?)
$38.70
Sheriff return
taxing & present (?) 0.87
$39.57
Sheriff Yancey
and Former (?)
$3.75
Sheriff Chiles&
former (?)
3.25 -- 7.00
Sheriff Godbold
& Do Do
$2.75
fees on present
return
2.75 -- 5.50
J. Dellet fee
on Chancery
15.00
$67.07 (?)
(next page)
Amount Brought
forward
$67.07
Advertising
for Coullet to appear
14.00
County tax two
dollars
2.00
Amount of costs
$87.07
With further interest on $1232.70 from the 10th June 1823 til paid.
Attest Able Farrar, Clk
Recieved 21st July 1823 - J.D. Godbold,
Sheriff
Recieved on this Execution one thousand dollars and paid to plaintiff's attorney - (signed) J.D. Godbold, Sheriff
Decree
$1232.70 }
Interest
116.22 }
10 percent damage 123.27 }
Costs
83.94 }
$1556.13 }State of Alabama, Monroe County. To the sheriff of said County,
greetings.
You are hereby commanded that of the goods and chattles, lands and tenaments
of Nathaniel Broughton and Christopher
Coullett and Joseph Nettles,
Sr., their bail if to be found in your county you cause
to be made the sum of one thousand fife hundred and fifty six and 13/00
dollars which on Jno. Lorez
lately in our circuit court, exercising Chancery Jurisdiction hath recovered
against them the said Broughton and Coullet
with damages ajusted in the Supreme Court of Appeals and Errors for his
damages as will by reason of the nonperformance of certain promises and
assumptions by the said Nathaniel and Christopher
to the said John B. lately made
as for his cost in that behalf expended. Where of the siad Broughton
and Coullett are convicted as appears to us of record and
wherein a (?) paid from our said court against the goods and chattles,
lands and tenaments of Nathaniel and Christopher
and the Nathaniel Broughton,
having given a forthcoming bond for the property levied thereon, which
was returned forfieted as also appears to us of record. Wherefor you are
hereby commanded to execute the property of the said Nathaniel
Broughton and Christopher Coullet
and the said Joseph Nettles, Sen,
according to the force and effect of the said forthcoming bond. And according
to the statute in such case made and provided and that you have the said
sum of money at the next term of our Circuit court to be holden on the
first monday in April next term, render unto the siad John
B Lorez his debts and damages and aforesaid. Herein, fail
not and have you then and there this writ. Witness Saml
McColl, Clerk of said court, this 22nd day of October, 1823
and forty eighth year of American Independence.
Attest Saml McColl, Clk
by Tho.
W. Fleming, D.C.
Bill of Costs
Clerk A. Farrar to his fees
$39.57
McColl
0.87
$40.44
Shff. Yancey
$3.75
Ds Jmo Chiles
3.25
$7.00
Do. JD Godbold
5.50 12.50
Attn. James Dellet in Chancery
15.00
Advertising for Coullet to appear
14.00
County Tax
2.00 31.00
$83.94
With the further interest on $1232.70 from the 16th June 1823 til paid.
Saml McColl, Clk. by Tho
W Fleming, DC
Return Recd. 22 October 1823 - Levied on two negro boys named Essex
& July the property of Nathaniel
Broughton this 4th day of November 1823 - JD
Godbold, Shff (?) - Satisfied and paid to Plff. Atty.
JD Godbold, Shff
State of Alabama }
Monroe County } I do hereby
certify that the forgoing pages numbered one to eight contain a true transcript
of the record and proceedings had in the (?) cases of John
B Lorez v. Nathaniel Broughton
and Christopher Coullett from
the commencement of the same in our Circuit Court, exercising Chancery
Jurisdiction, down to the Satisfaction of execution by the said Nathaniel
Broughton.
Given under my hand and private seal for want of seal of office this 23rd
day of October in the year of Our Lord one
thousand eight hundred and twenty four and of the independence of the United
States of America the forty ninth year.
Attest
Sam. M.Coll Clerk of
the Circuit Court of Monroe County
============================================================================
In Equity (?)
Nathaniel Broughton }
v.
}
Christopher Coullett }
State of Alabama }
Monroe County } I Abner
L Lipscomb, Chief Justice of the Supreme court of the State
aforesaid and presiding judge of the Circuit Court aforesaid do hereby
certify that the within named Samuel McColl
if the Clerk of the said Circuit Court, that full faith and credit are
due to his acts as such. And that this certificate is in due form of law
Given under my hand and private seal (for want of a seal of office) this
23rd day of October, in the year of Our Lord, one thousand and eight hundred
and twenty four and of the independence of the United States of America,
the 49th year.
Abner L. Lipscomb
