Favorite Genealogy Websites


All information contained on this site is subject to errors. If you have any corrections please notify us at Thank you.
  • Depositions Friday 19th day of May 1871

    D. W. Clark Clk
    The taking of Depositions in the cause resumed according to adjournment this 19th day of May 1871

    James Armstrong being sworn according to law deposing says—
    I was at Lawrence Epps house a short time before Mr. Cummins and his wife Jane Cummins left for Arkansas. I think it was only a day or two before they left. I have examined the note marked Ex. “A” to J. C. Epps deposition. I do not know anything about the execution of the note, never having seen it before. On the day that I was at Lawrence Epps as before mentioned I heard the old man Epps say that he allowed for Mrs Cummins to have one hundred dollars for waiting on him and his wife during their sickness.
    According to my best recollection it was my understanding that he intended for her to have this amount more than the other children. I do not remember his exact language but this is my recollection of the substance of what he said. Further Depossent saith not—
    Signature of J B Armstrong
    Claims attendance one day and travel 30? Miles

    Isham Sorrells being sworn according to law deposing says—
    I was in Petersburg on the day on which Mr and Mrs Cummins passed through going to Arkansas. They were stopped according to my understanding by the creditors of Mr Cummins: and it was agreed by Mrs Cummins and Mr Cummins and J C Epps that Mrs Cummins would let J. C. Epps have her interest in her fathers land, and J. C. Epps would pay Mr Cummins debt: And Lawrence Epps agreed to convey to J C Epps Mrs Cummins interest in his land, that is Lawrence Epps land. I was one of the men called upon to value the land, but do not remember the valuation put upon it.
    All the forgoing deposition objected to irrelevancy and incompetiency— Bright & Son

    I have examined the note Marked Ex “A” to Mr J. C. Epps deposition. I don’t know anything about the note. I never saw it before that I remember of. On the day above spoken of that Mrs and Mr Cummins passed through Petersburg and while they heard Lawrence Epps says that he had given Mrs Cummins a note for $100.00 for waiting on him and his wife in their affliction and that he was sorry he had to give her the note and did not have the money to give her as she had to leave. I do not know whether this conversation took place before the transaction about the land; but it was about the time. In this same conversation he said that he intended for her to have $100.00 more than the other children.
    Cross Examined
    I do not recollect who was present at the time of the conversation with Lawrence Epps, above mentioned. That is the conversation about the note for the $100.00 spoken of in my examination in chief. I was very well acquainted with Mrs. Cummins. I would consider her a woman of good sense and a good manager. She managed her farm very well; so as to support herself and family. If I heard anything said about Mr Cummins owing Mr Lawrence Epps his part of the wagon, I do not recollect it.
    And further depossent saith not– signature of Isham Sorrell
    Claims attendance one day and traveled 22 miles

    Joseph Cole being called and sworn was not examined.
    Claims attendance one day and travel 20 miles.

    James Epps (James Craton jr.) being recalled by consent and sworn deposing says—
    I heard in 1860 an agreement made between my grandfather Lawrence Epps and my father J C Epps in which it was agreed that my father was to go to and have the use of the place for taking care of my grandfather. In the Fall of 1860 my father under this agreement sowed wheat on the place—He did not remain there for the reason that Mrs Cummins moved into the house of my grandfather and he had no room for my father__ When my grandfather found that my father could not come he asked me to come and live on the place and he promised me that if I would fix the fencing he would let me have as much ground as I could attend. I complied with the …can’t read…fixing the fencing. I cultivated …..can’t read…. more or less in corn.
    And further depossent saith not– signature of James Epps

    E. T. Thomas being recalled by consent, deposing says:
    James C. Epps tore the name off the note, spoken of in my former examination, on the day after Mrs. Cummins started to Arkansas—that is to the best of my recollection it was on that day. The reason why I think it was on the day after she departed for Arkansas, is ? that J. C. Epps on this day was telling me about the land transaction spoken of in Mr Sorrells deposition, and after he got through telling about it he carelessly put his finger in his vest pocket and pulled out the note and tore the name off it. It was then that I asked him if he knew what he was doing.
    Please state what was your reason for asking Mr. J C Epps the question, “If he knew what he was doing in tearing off the name from the note?”
    (Objected to by Complainant Counsel for incompetency and impertinence)
    I can not positively say at this time. He did not state on the day to the best of my recollection how he came by the note. He may have so stated but I have no recollection of it. He stated to me on that day about the substance of what Mr Sorrells says in his deposition, concerning the land transaction.
    Cross Examined
    I do not say positively that it was in the day after Mrs Cmmins departure for Arkansas that I saw J C Epps tear the name off the note, but speak only from the bests recollection I have upon the subject.
    (Interrogatory by Complainant Counsel)
    Question: Do not your recollection very indistinct about all these transactions above mentioned?
    Answer: When these things first came up and were talked of they appeared very indistinct, but now my recollection seems distinct concerning them. I have had a great deal of sickness such as fevers, and have taken a good deal of such medicine as is calculated to impair the recollection: and my recollection is somewhat impaired in consequence.
    The reason why my recollection is more distinct now about the matter than when they were first mentioned is from hearing them talked of by other and for reflecting on them myself.
    And further depossent saith not — signature of E. T. Thomas
    Claims attendance one day

    Post to Twitter

    Published on January 25, 2010 · Filed under: James C Epps vs Hugh M Epps et al;
    No Comments

Leave a Reply

CommentLuv badge