USA > Pennsylvania > Fayette County > History of Fayette County, Pennsylvania : with biographical sketches of many of its pioneers and prominent men > Part 33
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131 | Part 132 | Part 133 | Part 134 | Part 135 | Part 136 | Part 137 | Part 138 | Part 139 | Part 140 | Part 141 | Part 142 | Part 143 | Part 144 | Part 145 | Part 146 | Part 147 | Part 148 | Part 149 | Part 150 | Part 151 | Part 152 | Part 153 | Part 154 | Part 155 | Part 156 | Part 157 | Part 158 | Part 159 | Part 160 | Part 161 | Part 162 | Part 163 | Part 164 | Part 165 | Part 166 | Part 167 | Part 168 | Part 169 | Part 170 | Part 171 | Part 172 | Part 173 | Part 174 | Part 175 | Part 176 | Part 177 | Part 178 | Part 179 | Part 180 | Part 181 | Part 182 | Part 183 | Part 184 | Part 185 | Part 186 | Part 187 | Part 188
An event which occurred in the year 1835, the striking of the names of a number of prominent members of the bar of Fayette County from the roll of attorneys, should not be omitted in this connection. There had been for a long time frequent and ever- | do to unavoidable misfortunes. A ruffian, however, recurring disagreements and misunderstandings be- tween the attorneys in question and the Hon. Thomas H. Baird, then president judge of the district. This state of affairs finally culminated in an open rupture, the first act in which was Judge Baird's addressing to the recusant lawyers the following communication :
if told by his counsel that injustice has been done him in the administration of the law, may feel dis- posed to seek vengeance on the judge. In the ease re- ferred to I think the cause and effect can be distinctly traced. The earnestness and positiveness of the coun- sel on the trial, and expressions thoughtlessly dropped afterwards, perhaps inflamed an. unprincipled fellow to make an attack.
"It may be, however, that it would not have occa- sioned it had he not been encouraged by other per- sons, I have only my suspicions, and make no charge against any one. I exculpate the counsel in
117
THE BAR OF FAYETTE COUNTY.
that case, and I exculpate the whole bar from the most distant idea of producing such a catastrophe. All that I mean to say is that the practice I have mentioned has a direct tendency to incite to such out- rages, and that in the particular case (in connection with other causes) it did lead to the violence.
" The same cause may produce the same effect. I must be always exposed to such consequences if mat- ter of excitement continues to be furnished to wrong- headed brutal suitors. If I could have the confi- dence and support of the bar, and the assurance of a change in their manner towards each other and to- wards the court in the public conduct of business, the office I hold would be rendered dignified, honor- able, and pleasant, but otherwise it must become alto- gether intolerable. On my part there is no want of good feeling, and I take this occasion to declare that there is not one of you for whom I entertain unkind sentiments. On the contrary, there is no one whose interests I would not advance, or whose honour I would not maintain so far as in my power. As to myself, I have no right to claim your friendship, though I should be glad to have it; but I think, in the discharge of my official duties, I onght to have your courtesy and respect, and when I err, forbear- ance in manner and recourse discreetly to the proper remedy (which I am always disposed to facilitate), and not to inflammatory expressions of disapproba- tion or contempt addressed to the public or the party.
" I have thus disclosed to you frankly my feelings and views. In reply I wish your sentiments and deter- mination as to the future in relation to the grievances I have presented, and propose, therefore, that you should take a few minutes to confer together, and in- form me of the conclusion to which you may arrive.
"I am truly yours,
" THOS. H. BAIRD.
" MESSRS. EWING, TODD, DAWSON, AND THE OTHER GENTLEMEN OF THE BAR OF FAYETTE COUNTY PRESENT."
To this communication the gentlemen addressed made the following reply :
. " UNIONTOWN, PA., Oct. 3, 1834.
" DEAR SIR,-We have delayed replying to your letter under date of the 12th of September, 1834, ad- dressed to the members of the bar of Fayette County, until the present time, to afford an opportunity for con- sulting together, and also for mature reflection upon the matters to which you refer. We regret, in com- mon with your Honour, that we have not been able, in harmony and with satisfaction to ourselves and the people of the county, to transact the business of our courts. The public confidence seems to be withdrawn alike from the bar and the court. Perhaps your Honour's retiring from the bench, as you have inti- mated a willingness so to do, and giving the people the power to select another would be the means of
producing a better state of things and a more cordial co-operation from all sides in the dispatch of the business of the county. This expression of our views is made in candour and sincerity, without a wish to inspire one unpleasant thought or unkind feeling, but under a sense of duty to the county in which we live, to your Honour and to ourselves.
" Very respectfully yours, etc.,
" JOHN M. AUSTIN, A. PATTERSON,
" JOHN DAWSON, R. P. FLENNIKEN,
" JOSHUA B. HOWELL, R. G. HOPWOOD,
" J. H. DEFORD, WM. MCDONALD,
"J. WILLIAMS, W. P. WELLS.
"TO THOMAS H. BAIRD, ESQ., WILLIAMSPORT, WASHINGTON CO."
At the next succeeding term of the Court of Com- mon Pleas, held Jan. 6, 1835, before Judge Baird and his associates, Charles Porter and Samuel Nixon, the following action was taken, as is shown by the record, viz. :
"The Court grant a rule upon John M. Austin, John Dawson, Joshua B. Howell, John II. Deford, Joseph Williams, Alfred Pat- terson, Robert P. Flenniken, Rice G. Hopwood, William Me- Donald, and William P. Wells, Esquires, to show cause why they should not be stricken from the list of Attorneys of this court."
To this rule the respondents made answer as fol- lows :
" The undersigned, who are required by a rule of court, entered this day, to show cause why they should not be stricken from the list of attorneys, present this their answer to that rule. We earnestly but respect- fully protest against the legal power and authority of the conrt to enter and enforce such a rule for the canse alleged. The rule appears to be founded and predi- cated on the letter of the undersigned, addressed to Judge Baird, dated Oct. 3, 1834. To enable a full understanding of the whole matter a letter of Judge Baird, dated Sept. 12, 1834, is herewith presented. It is evident that the letter of the undersigned which contains the offensive matter is a reply and response to the letter of Judge Baird to them addressed. It is certainly respectful in its terms, and, as is sincerely believed and positively asserted, contains neither in words, meaning, nor intention the slightest contempt or the least disrespect to the court or any of its mem- bers.
"The respondents would be entirely at a loss to comprehend how it could be possible to give their let- ter, from its terms, an offensive interpretation were they not informed from another source that the fol- lowing paragraph is considered objectionable : 'The public confidence seems to be withdrawn alike from the bar and the Court.' We by this paragraph expressed our honest conviction, and intended no contempt to the Court. It is a response in some measure to that part of Judge Baird's letter in which he himself says that the circumstances to which he refers were calculated to make a lodgment in the public mind injurious to
148
IIISTORY OF FAYETTE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.
the authority and respectability of the Court, and par- ticularly of himself, its organ.
" It will also be perceived from the two letters re- ferred to that the correspondence did not take place between the bar and the court; it was between the respondents and Judge Baird, at his instance and re- quest. The occurrence asserted as constituting some undefined offense did not take place in presence of the Court ; it took place out of Court and in pais.
"Far, very far, therefore, are we from being guilty of any offense against the Court. As to Judge Baird personally, the letter distinctly and unequivocally states that our views were ' made in candour and sin- cerity, without a wish to inspire one unpleasant thought or unkind feeling.'
" JOHN M. AUSTIN, J. H. DEFORD, WM. MCDONALD,
" JOHN DAWSON,
" JOSHUA B. HOWELL,
J. WILLIAMS,
" WM. B. WELLS,
R. P. FLENNIKIN,
" ALFRED PATTERSON,
RICE G. HOPWOOD."
The above answer was supplemented by the follow- ing, dated Jan. 7, 1835, and signed by the same at- torneys, except McDonald and Hopwood, viz. :
" The undersigned, after reiterating the protest con- tained in a former answer, make this further reply to the rule entered yesterday against them. When the former answer was prepared it was not known that the publication of the correspondence between the bar and Judge Baird in the newspapers constituted a portion of the supposed offense against the court, the record not presenting that aspect of the case.
"They now reply to this matter, and to canse a more perfect understanding thereof they present here- with a letter from Judge Baird to the undersigned, dated Dec. 15, 1834.1 We now ask that the three let- ters on record may be carefully examined in connec- tion with our former answer to the rule to show cause. We cannot but think that the court will then be satis- fied that the last letter of Judge Baird contains im- putations and strictures not warranted by anything said in our communication to him when properly understood.
"In some way the existence of the controversy
1 The letter of Judge Baird, here referred to, concluded as follows :
" In conclusion, I will only say that upon ' mature reflection' it is my determination not to resign at present, and that it is also my abiding determination nover to resign upon the ground stated in your letter. I hope to be able to take my sent on the bench in Fayette County on the first Monday of January next. If I have lost any degree of mmblic confi- dence it shall be my endeavor to regain it by a faithful performance of my judicial functions. With the aid of my brother judges, I will try to preserve the order and discipline of the court by a discreet Unt energetic exercise of the power which the law gives us; and perhaps you may be satisfied that the laxity which has, no doubt, been a considerable cause of complaint, was more owing to my kind feelings towant you than to any want of moral courage to encounter the consequences that may result from the honest discharge of public duty. I shall perform my official functions with a sincere de-ire to do right, and shall expect from the members of the bur that they behave themselves ' with all good fidelity to the court as well as to the client."
I am, etc., " TH. H. BAIRD."
reached the public ear. It immediately assumed a false shape in connection with au assault committed upon the judge by a suitor in court. Misapprehen- sion about the nature of the correspondence was pro- duced. For want of correct information false asser- tions were made and false inferences drawn. It became a public matter, involving seriously public interests. The correspondence related to public affairs. The letters by no means being private and confidential, we considered it our imperative duty, in justice to ourselves and in justice to the public, to lay the whole correspondence as it really was before the whole community. It was accordingly done, and for the purposes intimated. The court will clearly perceive that in this act there was no offense com- mitted against the conrt, but it was a proceeding ren- dered every way necessary, as it gave the true state of the controversy and supplied the place of false rumors in relation both to Judge Baird and our- selves."
William McDonald made a separate answer to the court January 7th. On the next day Judge Baird delivered the opinion of the court (Judge Samuel Nixon dissenting), the material part of which is here given :
" Jan. 8, 1835.
" The court has given to the papers presented by the respon- dents in this case the most careful consideration and the most favorable construction their import would at all admit. It is with the deepest regret, we are constrained to say, that they are by no means satisfactory. We cannot regard them as re- moving the offensive and injurious operation of the matter which has been published to the world in relation to this conrt, and which forms tbe gravamen of the rule. All that we have required is that the gentlemen would distinelly place in their answer a disavowal of any intention to impute to the court, or its members, anything which would lower them (in their official character) in the esteem and confidence of the people. This has been and is still refused. No alternative therefore remains. We must abandon our judicial honor, respectability, and an- thority, or endcavor to sustain them in what we conceive to ho the legitimate mode. . . . It is ordered that the names of John M. Austin, John Dawson, Joshua B. Howell, Wmn. P. Wells, Alfred Patterson, John Il. Deford, J. Williams, and R. P. Flenniken be struck from the list of attorneys of this conrt.
" In the case of William McDonald the rule is discharged.
. In the case of Rice G. Ilopwood the rule is continued."
The next day (January 9th) Rice G. Hopwood made a separate answer, and the court discharged the rule in this case.
Eight members of the bar of Fayette County then stood suspended from court. These gentlemen pre- sented their case to the Legislature of the State, and on the 14th of March, 1835, an act was passed, by the provisions of which the Supreme Court of Pennsyl- vania was "authorized and required to take jurisdic- tion of a certain record and proceedings in the Court of Common Pleas of the county of Fayette, of the term of January, 1835, whereby the names of eight attorneys were, on the 8th day of January, 1835, or-
149
FAYETTE CIVIL LIST.
dered to be struck from the list of attorneys of the said court; and during their session commencing at the city of Philadelphia on Monday, the 16th of March, 1835, proceed to hear and determine the questions arising upon the said record and proceed- ings in any shape which may be approved or pre- scribed by the court ; and shall cause the decision of the said Supreme Court to be duly certified to the Court of Common Pleas in the county of Fayette, and make all orders and direct all measures which may be necessary and proper and which shall be effectual in the premises." 1
The rule of the court, answers of respondents, and letters of Judge Baird were presented to the Supreme Court, in session at Philadelphia, March 31, 1835. The eight gentlemen whose names had been stricken from the roll appeared by their attorneys, who pre- sented the following bill of exceptions :
"First. The Court of Common Pleas of Fayette County erred in considering the said attorneys as the authors of a letter to the Hon. T. H. Baird, under date of 3d October, 1834, liable to the penalty of being struck from the roll fur an alleged libel upon the court.
" Second. The court below erred in considering that by the writing or publishing of the said letter the said attorneys did 'misbehave themselves in their offices of attorneys' respec- tively.
" Third. The court below erred in considering that by the writing er publishing of said letter the attorneys had departed from their obligation to behave themselves in the office of at- torney within the court according to the best of their learning or ability, and with all good fidelity as well to the court as to their clients.
" Fow.th. The order of the court below that the names of the said attorneys be struck from the list is unconstitutional, illegal, and oppressive, and the same should be furthwith re- versed and annulled."
Messrs. Dallas and Ingersoll were the attorneys for the gentlemen of the bar, and J. Sergeant for the proceedings of the Court of Common Pleas of Fay- ette County. Lengthy arguments were made. After due deliberation the opinion of the court was de- livered by Chief Justice C. J. Gibson, who thus an- nounced its decision :
" In conclusion it appears that a case to justify the removal of the respondents has not been made out, and it is therefore considered that the order which made the rule absolute be vacated and the rule discharged, that the respondents be re- stored to the bar, and that this decree be certified to the Com- mon Pleas of Fayette County."
" Decreed accordingly."
FAYETTE CIVIL LIST.
In this list the names are given of persons who have held county offices, and also of those, resident in Fayette County, who have held important offices in or under the State or national government.
SHERIFFS.2
Robert Orr,3 appointed 1784.
James Hammond, appointed Nov. 21, 1786.
Joseph Torrence, appointed Oct. 25, 1787; Nov. 5, 1788 ; Oct. 30, 1789.
Joseph Huston, appointe 1 Nov. 14, 1790. James Paull, appointed 1793.
Thomas Collins, appointed Nov. 1, 1796.
Abraham Stewart, appointed Oct. 26, 1799. James Allen, appointed Oct. 28, 1802.
Pierson Sayres, appointed 1805.
Jacob Harhangh, appointed 1808.
Andrew Byers, appointed Nov. 7, 1811.
Morris Morris, appointed Nov. 17, 1814. John Withrow, appointed Oct. 29, 1817. Daniel P. Lynch, appointed 1820.
George Croft, appointed 1823.
William Salters, appointed Oet. 30, 1826. John A. Sangston, appointed Oct. 22, 1829. Gideon Johns, appointed Oct. 22, 1832. Matthew Allen, appointed Nov. 11, 1835. George Meason, appointed Oct. 20. 1838. William Morris, elected Oct. 11, 1841. Wesley Frost, elected Oet. 8, 1844. William Snyder, cleeted Oct. 12, 1847. Matthew Allen, cheted Oct. 8, 1850. James MeBride, elected Oct. 11, 1853. Samuel W. Boyd, elected Oet. 14, 1856. Eli Cope, elected Oct. 11, 1859. Thomas Brownfield, elected Oct. 14, 1862. Samuel W. Boyil, elected Oct. 10, 1865. David L. Walker, elected Oet. 13, 1868. Isaac Messmore, elected Oct. 10, 1871. Calvin Springer, elected Nov. 3, 1874. Edward Dean, elected Nov. 6, 1877. James II. Hoover, elected Nov. 2, ISSO.
" The office of sheriff was held by appointment until 1839, when it becamo elective.
3 For more than three years after Fayette became a separate county it remained under the jurisdiction of the sheriff of Westmoreland. Ref- erence to this, as well as to the fact that the other county offices were at first held in common with Westmoreland, is found in the following extracts from letters written by Ephraim Donglass to President John Dickinson, of the Suprenie Executive Council, viz. :
"UNIONTOWN, February 2, 1784.
" . . . From an unhappy misconception of the law for dividing West- moreland, this county has not an officer of any kind except such as were created or continued by the net or appointed by the Council. Denied a separate election of a member in Council and representative in Assembly till the general election of the presout year, they unfortunately con- cluded that this inability extended to all the other elective officers of the county, and in consequence of this belief voted for them in con- junction with Westmoreland."
" UNION TOWN, 11th July, 1784.
"Sın,-In obedience to the commands of your honorable Board of the 5th of June last, I take this opportunity of informing Council that there las yet been no sherill for the county of Fayette separate from that of Westmoreland, the sheriff of that county continuing to do the duty of that office in this as before the division, and no bond has been taken for lus performance of it in this county distinct from the other. .. . "
At the time of the erection of Fayette County, Matthew Jack was sheriff of Westmoreland. On the 28th of October, 1783, Robert Orr was appointed by the Court deputy sheriff of Westmoreland, to act as sheriff of Fayette. He continued to act in that capacity till the appointment of James Hammond as she: iff of Fayette.
1 Rawle's Reports, vol. v. page 191. Case of Austin and others.
150
HISTORY OF FAYETTE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA.
PNOTHONOTADIES.
Ephraim Douglass,1 appointed Oet. 6, 1783; resigned Deeem- ber, 1808.
Richard William Lane, appointed Jan. 1, 1809.
John St. Clair, appointed April 6, ISIS; Feb. 12, 1821.
Jobn B. Trevor, appointed January, 1822.
Thomas Mckibben, appointed May 12, 1824.
James Todd, appointed Sept. 30, 1825; Dee. 2, 1826.
Henry W. Beeson, appointed Feb. 4, 1830; Jan. 23, 1833. Richard Beeson, appointed July 11, 1833.
Thomas Sloan, appointed Jan. 13, 1836 ; Jan. 3, 1839.
Richard Beeson, appointed Fcb. 6, 1839 ; elceted Oct. 8, 1839. Daniel Kaine, elected Oet. 11, 1842; Oct. 14, 1845.
Richard Hoskins, elected Oct. 10, 1848 ; Oct. 14, 1851.
Robert T. Galloway, elected Oet. 10, 1854.
Thomas B. Searight, elected Oct. 13, 1857; Oet. 9, 1860. George W. Litman, elected Oct. 13, 1863; Oet. 9, 1866. John K. MeDonald, elected Oet. 13, 1869 ; Oet. 8, 1872. Joseph M. Oglevee, elected Nov. 2, 1875 ; Nav. 5, 1878. Thomas B. Senright, elected November, 1881.
COUNTY COMMISSIONENS.
1787 .- Zachariah Connell, Joseph Caldwell, Thomas Gaddis. 1789 .- James Finley, James Ilammond, Thomas Gaddis.
1790 .- James Hammond, Joseph Torrenee.
1702 .- James Patterson, Uriah Springer.
1793 .- Matthew Gilebrist, John Oliphant, Nathaniel Ewing. 1795 .- Nathaniel Ewing, William Lynn, Thomas Collins. 1796 .- Nathaniel Ewing, William Roberts, Caleb Mount. 1797 .- Nathaniel Ewing, Caleb Mount, James Allen. 1798 .- John Fultoo, James Allen, Caleb Mount. 1799 .- John Falton, Jesse Becson, James Wilson. 1800 .- Jesso Beeson, John Fulton, Andrew Oliphant. 1801 .- Jesse Beeson, Andrew Oliphant, Morris Morris. 1802 .- Morris Morris, William Downard, George Dearth. 1803 .- William Downard, Morris Morris, David Howard. 1804 .- William Downard, David Howard. John Miller. 1805 .- David Howard, John Miller, James Campbell. 1806 .- John Miller, James Catophell, John Shreve. 1807 .- James Campbell, John Shreve, Jasper Whetstone. 1808 .- John Shreve, Jasper Whetstone, Joha Roberts. 1809 .- Jasper Whetstone, John Roberts, Abel Campbell. 1810 .- John Roberts, Abel Campbell, William Cunningham. 1811 .- Abel Campbell, William Canningham, John Clark.
1 The following memorial of Ephraim Douglass, making application for the appointment, is found in Pennsylvania Archives, x. 118 :
"To the Honorable the Supreme Executive Council of the Common- wealth of Pennsylvania:
"The memorial of Ephraim Douglas humbly sheweth that having, true to his principles, made an early sacrifice of his interest, he entered into and continued in the service of his country till the loss of health, conspiring with other misfortunes, obliged him to return at a time when his return to civil life offered him no pro-pect of a retire to his former pursuits in it. That he has since earned a precarious subsistence by the accidental services he has been occasionally employed to perform; but being now altogether without business, and strongly desirons of obtain- ing some permanent independent employment, he looks up to your honorable body for the accomplishment of that desire with all the con- fidence which a knowledge of your justice and readiness in rewarding your faithful servants can inspire.
"That your memoriahist having heard of a new county being created from a part of Westmorel und, begs leave humbly to offer himself a can- didate for the office of prothonotary in the county of Fayette, and prays your acceptance of his services.
" Your memorialist, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
" EPHRAIM DOUGLASS. "PHILADELPHIA, 2dl October, 1783."
Mr. Donglass received the appointment against William McCleery, who was also an applicant for the office.
1812 .- William Cunningham, John Clark, Thomas Boyd. 1813 .- John Clark, Thomas Boyd, Morris Morris. 1814 .- Thomas Boyd, George Craft, Harris W. Colton. 1815 .- Harris W. Colton, John Sparks, Amos Cooper. 1816-17 .- Amos Cooper, William HInrt, James Todd. 1818 .- William Hart, James Todd, Griffith Roberts. 1819 .- James Todd, Griffith Roberts, Moses Vanee. 1820 .- Griffith Roberts, Moses Vance, Isaac Core. J821 .- Muses Vance, Isaac Core, Andrew Moore. 1822 .- Isaac Core, Andrew Moore, Abner Greenland. 1823 .- Andrew Moore, Abner Greenland, Robert Boyd.
1824 .- Abner Greenland, Robert Boyd, Nathaniel Mitchell, 1825 .- Robert Boyd, Nathaniel Mitchell, Jesse Taylor. 1826 .- Nathaniel Mitchell, Jesse Taylor, Abner Greenland. 1827 .- Jesse Taylor, Abner Greenland, Hugh Espey, Jr. 1828 .- Abner Greenland, Ilugh Espey, Jr., Robert Patterson. 1829-30 .- IIngh Espey, Jr., Robert Patterson, James Adair. 1831 .- Hugh Espey, Jr., James Adair, Andrew Ilertzog. 1832 .- Andrew Hertzog, Hagh Espey, Jr., James II. Patterson. 1833 .- James II. Patterson, Andrew Hertzog, James Adair. 1834 .- James Adair, James II. Patterson, Peter Stentz. 1835 .- Peter Stentz, James Adair. Joseph Gand. 1836 .- Joseph Gadd, Isane L. Hant. Robert Long. 1837 .- Isaac L. Hunt, Robert Long, E. P. Oliphant. 1838,-Robert Long, E. P. Oliphant, John W. Phillips. 1839 .- John W. Phillips, Squire Ayres, Jesse Antrim. 1840 .- Squire Ayres, Jesse Antrim, James Allison. 1841 .- Jesse Antrim, James Allison, Thomas McMillan. 1842 .- James Allison, Thomas McMillan, Ingh Espey. 1843 .- Thomas MeMillan, Hugh Espey, Thomas Donean. 1844 .- Hugh Espey. Thomas Donean, Robert Bleakley. 1845 .- Thomas Denean, Robert Bleakley, P. F. Gibbons. 1846 .- Robert Bleakley, P. F. Gibbons, Lee Tate. 1847 .- P. F. Gibbons, Lee Tate, II. D. Overholt. 1848 .- Lee Tate, II. D. Overholt, William Crawford.
1849 .- JI. D. Overholt, William Crawford, John Beatty. 1850 .- William Crawford, John Beatty, Jacob Ilaldeman. 1851 .- John Beatty, Jacob Haldeman, Jacob Wolf. 1852 .- Jacob Haldeman, Jacob Wolf. Joseph Cunningham.
1853,-Jacob Wolf, Joseph Conningham, Mark R. Moore. 1834 .- Juseph Cunningham, Mark R. Moore, David Deyarmon. 1835 .- Mark R. Moore, David Deyarinon, Jacob F. Longa- naeker.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.