The family research continues, as does the consolidation projects. Today, I found copies from a transcription type compiled records book titled, "Tattnall County, Georgia Loose Papers, 1801 - 1845, Volume One". The work was abstracted by Sabina J. Murray and Compiled by the Huxford Genealogical Society. I copied these pages a long while ago. (As in several years ago, maybe as far back as 2008. Yea, really!!)
Here are a few entries from this work, all having to do with one Steven/Stephen Bowen.
Here are a few entries from this work, all having to do with one Steven/Stephen Bowen.
"April Term 1816- [Indictment] The Grand Jury indicted Daniel Highsmith, yeoman, for assulating Steven Bowen at the house of James Handcock on 9 October 1815.
(True Bill) Alex M. Allen, Atto. Genl.
The defendant, being an old man, is sentenced to pay a fine of $15., costs of prosecution, and then be discharged."
(Note - - I am having trouble with this last line, in view of all the following, subsequent entries.)
"5 August 1816 -[Petition] Stephen Bowen says he is not ready to come to trial this term with Daniel Highsmith for want of evidence which he has used all lawful means to obtain.
Wm. Johnson, J.P."
"9 April 1817 - [Affidavit] Stephen Bowen says Daniel Highsmith abused and ill-treated him without any attempt on the part of Bowen. Bowen admits he did make use of some harsh expressions such as that Highsmith was not a man of truth, but was provoked to it by a shower of abuse on the part of the defendant.
Jas. Perry, Clk.
A. M. Allen, Pltff. Atto."
"9 April 1817 - [Affadivit] Personally appeared Daniel Highsmith, the defendant in an indictment, the State vs Highsmith, who being sworn saith that Stephen Bowen, the prosecutor, did on the 9 October 1815 make use of the most opprobrious epithets calling this deponent "a damned Rogue and a Tory", standing in a threatening attitude which caused this deponent in the heat of passion after (having warned the prosecutor not to repeat the same again) which he did to make a slight assault on the prosecution by striking the prosecutor with the arm and not the fist of the deponent, which was alone induced by the provoking language of the prosecutor used to this defendant.
John T. Sharpe, J. P."
"9 April 1817 - [Affidavit] Arthur Boyd says on 10 October 1815 he came to the house of James Handcock and while Daniel Highsmith was lying on the floor of the house and Stephen Bowen was standing over him abusing Highsmith by calling him a Rogue or Tory, Highsmith warned Bowen not to repeat the names again, if he did he would strike him. Bowen repeated the names. Highsmith arose and struck or shoved Bowen with his arm. Arthur Boyd believes the assault would not have been made if the prosecutor had not used such language and persisted in the same.
John T. Sharpe, J. P."
"9 April 1817 -[Affidavit] James Handcock says Daniel Highsmith was abusing Stephen Bowen at Handcock's house on 10 October 1815. Handcock was afraid Daniel Highsmith would attack Bowen so he took him by the arm and led him away. Highsmith threatened Bowen and James Handcock believes if it had not been for his intervention Highsmith would have attacked him.
James Perry, Clerk"
OK, now. Seems Daniel took a bit unkindly to be called a "damned Rogue and a Tory". Imagine that?
It also seems that Daniel and Stephen Bowen are in-laws. Or, in this case, out-laws?? I am still figuring it out, but, Daniel is either a brother-in-law or heaven forbid, a father-in-law. See Stephen Bowen married Rachel Highsmith, reported to be a daughter of one Daniel.
I am still building the families, but, there are a number of Daniels. Two, maybe three, father, son, grandson.
I have no idea if James Handcock is kin, I don't think so.
Of course, in this time frame, it gets pretty interesting and frankly, difficult to research. Sometimes these little snippets prove or disprove family trees I see floating around, even my own! LOL
Believe me, this was not the only tuff between Bowen clan members I found in this book. There is the case of Bani Boyd, or Banish/Baniah Boyd, with wife, or maybe a companion, by the name of Nancy Bird (daughter of Andrew) who was a bit underage when Bani reportedly "stole" her. That case was dated 1816. And, the fact that I do have a Bani Boyd who married a Nancy Bowen in 1811. Nancy Bowen would have been about 18 years of age in 1811, give or take. And, he married another lady in 1821.
And, there is Mary Ann Bowen who in 1832 states she was "violently assaulted and roughly handled by Wade W. Coleman" and attempted to rape her. I have not even tried to figure out who her parents were - - yet - - I will.
And, there is Mary Ann Bowen who in 1832 states she was "violently assaulted and roughly handled by Wade W. Coleman" and attempted to rape her. I have not even tried to figure out who her parents were - - yet - - I will.
And, there is one named Daniel Highsmith who married a Millie in 1816, and even though he has tried to be a good husband, "Millie has beat his daughter and done other malicious acts. He wants a divorce."
As I review the pages I have from this book I keep finding more and more "tifts" that involve Bowen and Highsmith clan members.
As I review the pages I have from this book I keep finding more and more "tifts" that involve Bowen and Highsmith clan members.
Oh, yea, these pages are packed with rogues, rape, beatings, divorce and a accusation of being a "damned Tory" now and then.
* In case you wondered, as did I:
Opprobrious
adjective
1. conveying or expressing opprobrium, as language or a speaker:
opprobrious invectives.
2. outrageously disgraceful or shameful:
opprobrious conduct.
Yea, that!
** And, if you are curious about Tories - - there is a LONG article at Wikipedia about Loyalists during the American Revolution.
*** Photo courtesy of Pixabay and WilliamCho
**** Image chosen because I could not locate something appropriate using the search term Tory or Rogue. Just sayin - -
.
No comments:
Post a Comment