Home » Court » Two of Them

Two of Them

Have you ever suspected that there were two men of the same name in a community but lacked the proof? Once I discovered John Crawford owning land on the Hanging Fork of Dix River, I’ve wondered about the possibility of two John Crawfords.

Thanks to the help of other researchers, I’ve placed two brothers, James and William living along Paint Lick Creek. We’ve suspected that their brother’s (John) widow was Rebecca Crawford who purchased land from George Douglass.

The deeds found for the John Crawford land on Hanging Fork do not support his being the father of the Sarah and Mary Crawford who married William and James Sellers in Lincoln County, Kentucky. Thus, it is unlikely that he is the husband of Rebecca Crawford.

As I was reading the Lincoln County Court Order book for 1783, I came across verification of TWO John Crawfords living in the area at that time. These records also show that William and James Crawford were also living in that vicinity at that time.

In the November Court of 1783, William Crawford was a defendant in a case brought by Jonathan Taylor. This petition was dismissed.

During that same court (November 1783) a jury was seated for the case of Ebenezer Miller, Executor of Cough Overton deceased against Arthur Owings. That jury included James Crawford, John Crawford and John Crawford. Yes – TWO – John Crawfords are listed on the jury.

Just in case I thought the clerk mistakenly wrote the name down twice, another case, William Overall against James Wray, also has James Crawford, John Crawford and John Crawford on the jury.

So, my theory is that the William Crawford named as a defendant and the James Crawford on the juries are the brothers living along Paint Lick. I believe one of the John Crawfords is the John Crawford owning land on Hanging Fork. I believe the other John Crawford is the brother to James and William and husband of Rebecca Crawford (or Mary Crawford).

If my theory about the second John Crawford is correct, then I should find mention of his death in these court proceedings or in the proceedings for Madison or Garrard counties. Thus, I need to continue reading court order books!
______

Image 157
November Court 1783

John King Assee of
James Espy who was
Assee of Jonathan Taylor
against
William Crawford Deft
Upon a petition

Ordered that the petition be discontinued

Image 158 (continues on next page)
November Court 1783

Ebenezer Miller – Executor
of Clough Overton Deceased Plt
agt
Arthur Owings Deft
In Debt

Image 159 – page 134
This day came the parties by their attor
nies and there upon came also a jury, to wit,
Mansah Singleton, James Kerr, James
Crawford, James MClure, William Pol
look, John Crawford, James Barnett
Alexander Collier, William Dyer, William
Bush, Matthias Yokum and John Craw
ford who being elected tried and sworn well
and truly to try the Issue joined upon their
oaths do say that the defendant does owe
to the Plaintiff the debt in the declaration
mentioned and they do assess the plaintifs
damages by occasion thereof to eight pounds
in discharge of that debt it is therefore con
sidered by the court that the plt recover a
gainst the said defendant his damages afore
said in form aforesaid assessed and his costs
by him in this behalf expanded and the said
defendanting mercy

Image 160
page 135 November Court 1783

William Overall Plt
against
James Wray Deft
in Trespass
This day came the parties by their Attor
nies and there upon came also a Jury
to wit, James Kerr, James Crawford,
James McClure, William Pollock, John
Crawford, James Barnett, Alexander
Collier, William Dyer, William Bush,
John Crawford, James Allen and a Nehe
miah Poor who being elected tried and
sworn well and truly to try the Issue joined
upon theor oaths do say that the defendant
is in no wise quilty of teh trespass in the De
claration mentioned as by pleading he hath
alledged it is therefore the opinion of the court
that the plaintiff take nothing by his bill
but for his false clamour be in mercy
and that the said defendant go hence without
day and recover against the plaintif his
cost by him about his defence in this behalf
responded.