Your Complainants state that of the above named children all were the children of the said
Robert of his first marriage except Jane the wife of Martin Burnett and your Oratrix Martha who
were the children of the said Robert’s second and last marriage.
Your
Complainants charge that
some time before the death of the said Robert Crow he and his son William
Crow aforesaid made
a joint purchase of a certain tract of land in Roane County containing about 100 acres,
Complainants show that said purchase was a joint one and that the said Robert furnished at least
half of the money which paid for the said land upon agreement with the said
William that they
should be joint owners of the same.
Your Complainants state however that the
name of the said
Robert was not (known) ? on this purchase and that the legal title to this entire tract bought was
taken in the name of the said William Crow leaving in this said Robert an
Equitable title to one
half the said tract.
Complainants state that some time after the purchase of said land by the said William Crow and the said Robert Crow deceased and after the legal title
to the same had been conveyed by Deed to William Crow an agreement if this verbal or written
was made between them for a division of the land and
Complainants state that such division of the
land was actually made but not by Deed or any other instrument sufficent to
convey the legal title
to any part of the land to the said Robert Crow.
The part of said tract of
land taken by the said
Robert upon the aforesaid parol division is (?) and described as follows to wit
- lying in Roane
County beginning on two Black Oaks on the line of Robert Crow (? )
- thence with the Cross fence
to the road leading to Cox’s ferry
- thence up the said road to the second
marsh to two hickories
oposite to a field cultivated by Edward Crow
- thence Northwest along a marked
line
- until it strikes
the back line of said William Crow’s tract
- thence with the courses of said line to the beginning
containing by estimation one hundred acres.
The legal title to the above described land was never
conveyed by the said William to the said Robert but the afore-said division was altogether by parol and the legal title in the said William.
Complainants charge
that at the time of the purchase of the aforesaid land by the said Robert and the said William
- all
the before named children of the said Robert by his first marriage had been
amply and largely
advanced and provided for by him wither in lands money or personal property and to a much
greater extent than the said Robert’s interest in the before described land and that
- the aforesaid
purchase by the said Robert in connection with the said William was made by
him solely with the
view and intention of giving his interest in the purchase to the children of
his second marriage
who was then unprovided for.
Complainants state that at the death of the said
Robert the before
named Jane now the wife of Martin Burnett was the only child born of the second marriage.
Your
Oratrix Martha then living in (ventro so enese ? ) unknown to her father the said Robert was born
a few months after his death.
A short time previous to the death of the said Robert the said
William Crow in whom the legal title to the said land was executed a Deed conveying the legal title to that part of the joint purchase to which the said Robert had equitable title
before described to the said land who as before stated the only child then born of the said
Robert’s second marriage.
It may be that the said William in making the said deed acted upon the
request of the said Robert but Complainants charge that if any such request was made it was
made as a verbal request and did not amount to an authority from the said Robert to the said
William sufficent in law to enable the said William to convey the said Robert’s interest in said land
to the said Jane and if any such request was made it was made by the said Robert in his anxiety to
provide for the children of his second marriage.
So it is Complainants charge that such request did
not amount to an authority as it lacked writing signing and sealing.
The land thus conveyed by
the said William Crow to the said [land] (inserted) is the same taken by the
said Robert upon the
aforesaid parol division and the Boundaries are the same as those herein
before given.
Complainants state that the title to this [possibly a page missing here]
say to what extent the said Robert Crow was interested in the aforesaid
purchase and what
division was made of this land between him and the said Robert.
Let him also state the nature of
the request on authority given him by the said Robert to convey the said land
to the said Jane if
any such authority existed.
Let the said (Andrew ?) answer and say whether he has not bought the
said land and what knowledge he had of your Oratrix claim to the same
previous to his
purchase.
Complainants pray that all proper process may issue to compel the said
defendants to
answer this Bill and that publication be made as to the nonresidents.
And upon the hearing of this
cause Complainants pray (that [strike through] that the title to a (?) of
the said land be decreed in
your Oratrix by this Court and if they are mistaken in this profane prayer
they ask such other
further or different relief as they may be entitled to by the acts of the Honorable Court.
February ? (?)
Wm. P. Rutherford
and wife Martha
