Since I have been very lax in posting to the OGS blog recently, I have gotten permission to copy an article that I did for another group, Special Connections, the Blog of the Subject and Special Collections Division of the Ohio Library Council. This group encourages cross posting and especially would like readers to visit their site -
https://sscdblog.wordpress.com/ - and click on the "Follow" button at the bottom of the screen.
Did you
ever stop to think that courthouses are perhaps the most important libraries
with special collections and are hidden in plain site? Generally speaking, most
do not employ librarians or archivists. They are in architecturally significant
but often antiquated structures. Many record storage areas are environmentally
inadequate and collections are literally kept in basements and attics. Yet
courthouses are often at the forefront of digitization of current materials. At
the same time, funding is sometimes not pointed to their vast historical
resources. When these treasures concerning everyday people are included in larger
digital projects, then the question of preservation of the original document
comes into question. To top that, state archivists today are often fighting for
their existence let alone being able to provide much guidance in records
management when it comes to local government records.
My
example today is the lowly “case file”. A “case” is a general term used to
indicate some type of argument brought into court to be settled, and the “file”
contains the supporting documentation for either side, often a summary with
affidavits, and lists of the plaintiff’s and defendant’s witnesses (including
subpoenas) - along with any financial obligations and decisions. Litigious
types and criminals often surface on a yearly basis. Bundled by court term
(cases heard over a multi-day period), I have many times been the first to cut
the string that bands them together. Imagine reading 150-year old contemporary
accounts that apparently were not even viewed by the recognized 19th
century county historian. How could they have overlooked this stuff? I’ll give
you three examples.
Isabella Ireland
vs. John Ireland: “To wit, on the tenth day of October eighteen hundred &
sixteen your Petitioner was duly joined in marriage with one John Ireland, to
wit, at Madison Township”… “that on or about the 10th day of
February AD 1817 he left your petitioner & has not since returned”… “said
Ireland & he had acquired a small tract of land situate in said County
[Richland] of about sixty-five acres & had built thereon a rough log cabin
in which she has continued to reside for the last twenty-five years or
thereabouts”….”that she has a daughter unmarried who is dependent upon her for
a home”…”said log cabin which is greatly dilapidated & wholly unfit for the
residence of herself & daughter”…”[Ireland] resides in the County of
Knox”…”has committed adultery with one Betsey Irvine in said county to wit on
the 10th day of June AD 1832”…”by whom the said John has had several
children”…”that said John committed adultery with one Elizabeth Sawyer to wit
in said County of Knox to wit on the 5th day of June AD 1834”…”that
said John committed adultery with a person whose name is unknown to
petitioner”…”and that the said John has been an habitual drunkard” and she
prays for the marriage contract to be dissolved.
An 1822
affidavit of Joseph Workman in a land debt case resulting from a general
depression and the failure of the German Bank of Wooster: Question: “Are those
kind of lands as valuable now as they were in the year 1815?” Answer: “They are
not near so valuable as they were by nine tenths.” Question: “Was the Grist
mill and Saw mill built on the east half of said quarter section before you
sold it to Mr. Lake?” Answer: “No, there was about twenty acres cleared and the
principal part under fence and two small cabins of an indifferent kind.”
Question: “Did Mr. Lake go on to build the sawmill & gristmill directly
after he purchased of you?” Answer: “Yes, he built the sawmill in 1816 and had
it in operation and in 1817 he built the grist mill and had it in operation.”
Question: “Has not William Black been in possession of the premises for some
time past?” Answer: “Yes, he has been in possession of the mill since Mr. Lake
moved away in the spring of 1821 and is now living there.” Land disputes and
water rights cases often include original deeds – this one includes several for
the property dating back to 1810 [Winn Winship, Register of the Virginia
Military District School Lands Office, to Joseph Gladden] – and they give
settlement dates for each party and the history of any improvements.
After
some 30 plus years of working with manuscripts, there are some discoveries that
still fall in the OMG category. Too volatile for the Internet, I’ll have to
substitute the milder case of John Iler vs Harriet Cromer. “No terms can be
employed too severe against this one,” says Parker & Burr, attorneys, in
their September 1833 brief. “You, meaning the said Harriet, was shagged last
night and my big dog done it, by God,” said Iler, “a crime not to be named
among Christians”. “On cross examination defendant’s counsel first enquired of
the witness if the defendant did not say, that if anyone done it to Harriet it
must have been his (defendant’s) big dog – without saying that his big dog had
in fact done it – to which enquiry witness answered that defendant said that
his big dog done it.” Iler was eventually charged $175 for slander in the case.
Common
Pleas and its accompanying appellate branches (Supreme Court 1803-1851,
District Court 1851-1883, Circuit Court 1883-1912, Court of Appeals 1912-Date)
were not the only courts to offer case files. One finds them with Probate
estates, criminal records, Coroner’s inquests, penitentiary inmates, and more.
These tell the true story of early Ohio – or at least the story part! So, stop
in at your local courthouse, inquire of the librarian or archivist (if any),
and just start reading those musty case packets!
Richland County Supreme Court Records (now at the Ohio
Genealogical Society Library):
Ireland vs. Ireland,
September Term 1840
Larwill & Bowen vs.
Lake & Bentley, Directors of the German Bank of Wooster, November Term 1822
Iler vs. Cromer, November
Term 1833
Richland County Courthouse Photo,
Paul White Collection, Folder 64, Richland Co Chapter OGS
