[possibly from the 1882 History of Augusta County, Virginia]

FOLKLORE
The progress of science has convinced mankind that the material universe is everywhere subject to fixed and immutable laws. In the infancy and less mature state of human knowledge it was otherwise, and man was constantly disposed to refer many of the appearances, with which he was conversant, to the agency of invisible intelligence; sometimes under the influence of good, but oftener of malignant disposition. Omens and portents told these men of good or ill fortune. These superstitions prevailed, to a vast extent, among our English ancestors. Queen Elizabeth consulted Dr. John Dee, an astrologer, respecting a lucky day for her coronation; James I employed much of his time in the study of witchcraft and demonology, and in 1664, Sir Matthew Hale caused two old women to be hanged upon a charge of unlawful communion with infernal spirits. A belief in such supernatural agency has existed in all ages and countries, among the Jews, Chaldeans, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans, down to within recent times.
The history of mankind, therefore, will be very imperfect, and our knowledge of the operations and eccentricities of the mind lamentably deficient, unless we take into our view what has occurred under this head. The supernatural appearances, with which our ancestors conceived themselves perpetually surrounded, must have had a strong tendency to cherish and keep alive the powers of the imagination, and to penetrate those who witnessed, or expected such things, with an extraordinary sensitiveness. But whatever were their advantages or disadvantages, at any rate it is good for us to call up in review things which are now passed away, but which once occupied a large share of the thoughts and attention of our ancestors, and in a great degree tended to modify their characters and dictate their resolutions. Vast numbers of persons have been sacrificed as witches in different ages and countries, and stringent laws once existed against dealers in witchcraft in Virginia. As late as 1705, Grace Sherwood was punished in Virginia for witchcraft. An able jury of ancient women was impaneled, and, after search, reported “that she was not like them, nor any other woman.”
The witch was, by our ancestors, supposed to be a woman who had formed a contract, signed with her blood, with a mighty and invisible spirit, the great enemy of man, and to have sold herself, body and soul, to everlasting perdition for the sake of gratifying, for a short term of years, her malignant passions against those who had been so unfortunate as to give her offense. They considered such a crime as atrocious above all others, and regarded the witch with inexpressible abhorrence. The witch was thought to possess the power of inflicting strange and incurable diseases, particularly on children; of destroying cattle by shooting them with hair balls; of inflicting spells and curses on guns and other things, and of changing human beings into horses, and, after bridling and sadling them, riding them, full speed, over hill and dale, to their places of meeting. The wizard, or man witch, was supposed to possess the same ample powers of mischief, but to exercise his powers, for the most part, to counteract the malevolent influence of the witches. These wizards, or witch masters, as they were commonly called, went about exercising their art, and many of these impostors were smart enough to make a good living, without work, out of their calling; were pure and unadulterated hypocrites.
All incurable diseases were ascribed to the supernatural agency of a malignant witch, such as epileptic and other fits, dropsy of the brain, rickets, &c. For the cure of diseases inflicted by witchcraft, the picture of the supposed witch was drawn on a stump, or piece of board, and shot at with a bullet containing a little bit of silver. This bullet transferred a painful and sometimes mortal spell on that part of the witch corresponding with the part of the portrait struck by the bullet. Another method was to get some of the child's water, which was closely corked up in a vial, and hung up in a chimney. This inflicted the witch with stranguary, which lasted as long as the vial remained in the chimney. The witch could only relieve herself from a spell inflicted on her by borrowing something, no matter what, of the family to which the subject of her witch-craft belonged. Such family was never in a hurry to accommodate her with a loan.
When cattle or dogs were bewitched, they were burnt on the forehead by a branding iron, or, when dead, burnt to ashes. When disease and pestilence prevailed, fires were lit to ward off both. This was, doubtless, a relic of an older custom, when an animal was offered as a burnt sacrifice to appease the wrath of the gods. If an animal was infected by murrain, the diseased part was cut out while the beast was alive, and solemnly burnt in a bonfire. To the modern scientific mind, these would seem wise precautions to hinder the spread of infection. Any one who knows the rural mind, even at the present day, will be quite sure that the precaution was magical, not sanitary. Witches were often said to milk the cows of their neighbors. This they did by fixing a pin in a new towel for each cow intended to be milked. This towel was hung over her own door, and by means of certain incantations, the milk was extracted from the fringes of the towel after the manner of milking a cow.
The first German glass-blowers, in America, drove witches out of their furnaces by throwing in live puppies. Bewitched persons sometimes vomited quantities of crooked pins; the palms of their hands were turned outwards, and, if they spoke, it was not in their own voice, but that of the devil, by whom they were possessed, at least, they were said to do so. Such were some of the extravagant fancies of our forefathers, and may afford us a salutary lesson. At many remote points on the Western frontier, similar settlements to the one we have described on Lewis creek were made by a like class of immigrants. The same virtues of hospitality, of disinterested kindness, prevailed in all these backwoods communities, and were, to some measure, the result of their situation. Unselfish and liberal, these pioneers sought no recompense but the approval of their own consciences, and it has been well said that the greater part of mankind might derive advantage from the contemplation of their virtues. Such were those majestic men of the frontier, the men of 1732-1776-1812, whose souls grew like the shadows of the mountain ridge they walked beneath, “wild, above rule or art, rugged, but sublime!”
The first settlers of Augusta were, for the most part, the descendants, paternally or maternally, of the ancient Caledonians, who boasted that they had never been subjected to the law of any conqueror. They belonged to various Highland clans, and were strongly imbued with the prejudices, feelings, sentiments, &c., of their peculiar clans. One of the circumstances connected with their condition as followers of a chieftain was, that every clan bore the name of their hereditary chief, and were supposed to be allied to him, in different degrees, by the ties of blood. This kindred band, or admitted claim of a common relationship, led to a freedom of intercourse highly flattering to human pride, and communicated to the vassal Highlanders a sentiment of conscious dignity and a sense of natural equality. And every individual sought to show his attachment to his leader as the head of his family. This feeling strongly exhibited itself in the Augusta colony, which, from intermarriages, soon assumed something of the character of a numerous and increasing family. The poorest preserved with pride the facts of this consanguinity, and whatever the distinctions of rank that may have arisen from the unequal acquisition of wealth, they mutually respected themselves and each other. The haughty backwoodsman yielded a cheerful obedience to the head of the clan or colony; whom they regarded somewhat as a father, and who may be supposed to have exercised among them the authority of a judge in peace, and of a leader in time of war.
Such, briefly, was the colony of Augusta from 1732 to 1745, and a more interesting spectacle of undisturbed felicity, quiet progress, notwithstanding the primitive condition of the community, and the roughing incident to their remoteness from commercial centers, it would be difficult to imagine or describe. Of luxury, there was little or none, unless it might be termed a luxury to be without want, without beggars, and with the enervating diseases which attend on idleness and opulence. There were no diamonds or pearls, but plenty of bright eyes and rosy cheeks; no shimmering silks or brilliantly colored velvets and satins, resplendent with gold and silver lace, but plenty of woolen stuffs, recommended by their warmth and healthfulness; no theaters, operas, fancy balls, saloons, or their attendant licentiousness, but plenty of fun and frolic. When we consider the condition of the people, and their fertile, salubrious and beautiful country; that they married and multiplied, and their virtue, instead of degenerating, was confirmed by time, and the more they increased the more examples they furnished to animate succeeding generations, one feels how impossible it is to describe the happiness of this fortunate people. Could they be other than the favored of Heaven? They who recognized God in everything, and constantly approached him with gratitude and veneration. Religion cooperated with nature to soften and polish their manners. Nature left but little unfinished; that little, religion completed.
The brief foregoing account of the manners and customs of the colony will hold good, generally, up to and long after the Revolution.
MARY GREENLEE, THE SO-CALLED WITCH, HER DEPOSITION IN THE BURDEN CASE
Mary McDowell, who married James Greenlee, was the daughter of Ephraim McDowell, one of the early settlers on Burden’s grant, and a great aunt of the late Gov. James McDowell, of Rockbridge. She was a woman of more than ordinary brightness and vivacity of intellect, but many aberrations of mind and eccentricities of character and conduct. Early disappointment in a love affair heightened her natural peculiarities, and these, with her superior abilities and her independence, cause her neighbors to regard her as a witch. Nothing in those days was too wild and remote from the reality of things, not to meet with an eager welcome, at least, from many. She was, no doubt, as were all witches, thought to have signed in her own blood a contract with the devil, to abjure the Christian religion and all reverence for the true God; that she would steadily refuse to listen to any one who should desire to convert her or convince her of the error of her ways and lead her to repentance. Many of our ancestors, no doubt, believed this contract was duplicated, to prevent mistakes, and that while the Prince of Darkness retained one copy, the other was in possession of Mrs. Greenlee, and often consulted by her. Such, notoriously were the supposed conditions and custody of these compacts with Satan. On one occasion, at a “quilting party” at her own house, and when hospitably pressing one of the ladies to eat more, she said gaily, “The mare that does double work should be best fed.” The rash ignorance of the party construed this to mean that she herself was a witch, and this woman the mare she rode in her nightly incursions to the consecrated haunts of diabolical intercourse. Her crimes, and many were attributed to her, were said to have proceeded from malignity and resentment, and she was supposed to go forth at night into the open air, and there, amidst darkness and the storm, to curse her victims and pursue her unholy incantations. No wonder the more superstitious of her neighbors shrank from her with holy horror, poured out curses upon her from the bottom of their hearts. In a somewhat mysterious way, {typo corrected} some of the stock of Mr. Craig, an inhabitant of the Triple Forks, disappeared, and the loss was attributed to Mrs. Greenlee, for witches were understood to have the power of destroying life, without the necessity of approaching the person or beast whose life was to be taken. One method was by exposing an image of wax to the action of the fire, while in proportion as the image wasted away, the life of the individual, who was the object contrived against, was undermined and destroyed. Another, was by incantations and spells. Either of these was styled “compassing, or imagining the death.” Possessed of such subtle and dangerous power, and indulging in such practices, in the opinion of her neighbors, one can readily understand the indignation and abhorrence with which she must have been regarded.
From so much of the story of Mrs. Greenlee as is preserved, it is probable her vanity was flattered at the terror she inspired in her simple neighbors, and that she was greatly amused at the fright she caused these rustics. Possibly, in the end, she deluded herself, and began to think her imprecations had a real effect; that her curses killed, provided, always, that she indulged in any, which is open to doubt.
Mary Greenlee inherited not only the hard intelligence, but the pluck, of her Covenanter stock; was the kinswoman of the Founder, surrounded by a powerful family, and indulged few fears of coming to the ordeal of fire and water. In that superstitious age, however, to pursue, at the expense of her ignorant neighbors, a mysterious conduct might be likened to whetting the knife that was to take her life, digging her own grave. That she escaped trials under the ancient laws of Virginia is, in view of all the facts, surprising. Rather would we have expected to hear that she had been seized by the hair of the head, or nape of the neck, and drawn before a judge. The belief in witchcraft of our ancestors was sincere, and this is the less to be wondered at when we consider that these superstitions are cropping up in the civilized life of the present day in “spirit manifestations.” The belief, however, in these matters is now confined to a class who may be, not inappropriately, styled “cranks.”
Let us rejoice that light has broken in upon us, and that amidst the inevitable ills of this life we are no long harassed, like our forefathers, with imaginary terrors and haunted by frightful images.
In the Burden case, Mrs. Greenlee underwent, in 1806, a long examination, testing her temper and memory. In the midst of the examination the question was put to her, “How old are you?” She tartly replied, “Ninety five the 17th of this instant; and why do you ask me my age? Do you think I am in my dotage?” Her deposition, which follows, cannot fail to be read with interest. It casts much light upon our early days, supplies valuable information as to the early settlers, their manners and customs, and has not ineptly been styled the corner-stone of our county history.
DEPOSITION OF MRS. JAMES GREENLEE, TAKEN NOVEMBER 10, 1806, IN THE SUIT OF JOSEPH BURDEN PLAINTIFF, VS. ALEX. CUETON AND OTHERS, DEFENDANTS.
That she, with her husband, James Greenlee, settled on Burden’s large grant, as near as she could recollect, in the Fall of the year 1737. * * * That shortly before her settlement on said grant, she, together with her husband, her father, Ephraim McDowell, then a very aged man, and her brother, John McDowell, were on their way to Beverly Manor, and were advanced as far as Lewis’es creek, intending to stop on South river, having, at that time, never heard of Burden’s tract. That she remembers of her brother, James, having the Spring before, gone into said Manor and raised a crop of corn on South river, about Turks, near what was called Wood’s Gap. That about the time they were striking up their camp in the evening, Benj. Burden, the elder, came to their camp and proposed staying all night. In the course of conversation, said Burden informed them he had about 10,000 acres of land on the waters of James river, or the forks, if he could ever find it, and proposed giving 1,000 acres to any one who would conduct him to it. When a light was made, he produced two papers, and satisfied the company of his rights. The deponent’s brother, John McDowell, then informed him, said Burden, he would conduct him to the forks of James river for 1,000 acres; showed said Burden his surveying instruments, &c., and finally it was agreed that said McDowell should conduct him to the grant, and she thinks a memorandum of the agreement was then made in writing. They went on from thence to the house of John Lewis, in Beverley Manor, near where Staunton now stands, who was a relation of deponent’s father. They remained with him a few days, and there, she understood, further writings were entered into, and it was finally agreed they should all settle in Burden’s tract. That said John McDowell was to have 1,000 acres for conducting them there, agreeable to the writing entered into, and that the settlers were, moreover, to have 100 acres for every cabin they should build, even if they built forty cabins, and that they might purchase any quantity adjoining at 50 shillings per hundred acres. The deponent understood that said Burden was interested in these cabin rights, as they were called, for that any cabin saved him 1,000 acres of land. These cabin rights were afterwards counted, as deponent understood, and an account returned to the government, then held at Williamsburg, and she has heard, about that time, many tests of the manner in which one person, by going from cabin to cabin, was counted, and stood for several settlements.
She recollects, particularly, of hearing of a serving girl of one James Bell, named Millhollen, who dressed herself in men's clothes and saved several cabin rights, perhaps five or six, calling herself Millhollen, but varying the Christian name. These conversations were current in that day. She knows nothing of the fact but from information. She understood that it was immaterial where the cabins were built; that they were to entitle the builder to 100 acres as aforesaid, whenever he chose to lay it off, and that he had a right to purchase, at 50 shillings as aforesaid, any larger quantity. One John Patterson was employed to count the cabin rights, as she understood. He was accustomed to mark the letters on his hat with chalk, as she has been informed, and afterwards deliver the account to her brother, John McDowell, and remembers to have heard that her brother had expressed his surprise at so many people by the name of Millhollen being settled on the land, but which was afterwards explained by the circumstance of the servant girl above mentioned, and was a subject of general mirth in the settlement. She does not know whether this plan of saving several cabin rights by one person appearing at different cabins, was suggested by Burden, the elder, or not. She understood that every person saving a cabin right got 160 acres for each right so saved, as he, Burden, was to have a cabin for every 1,000 acres. When the party with which she traveled, as aforesaid, came, as they supposed, into the grant, they stopped at a spring, near where David Steele now lives, and struck their camp, her brother and said Burden having gone down said branch until they were satisfied it was one of the waters of James river. The balance of the party remained at that spring until her brother John and said Borden, as she understood, went down to the forks formed by the waters of the South and North river, and, having taken a course through the country, returned to said camp. They then went on to the place called the Red House, where her brother, John, built a cabin and settled where James McDowell now lives. The first cabin her husband built was by a spring, near where Andrew Scott now lives, but when deponent went to see it, she did not like the situation, and they then built and settled at the place called Browns. They sold this after some short time, and purchased the land on which her brother, James, had made an improvement, now called Templetons, and where she resided until about the year 1780, being within sight of where her father, then near a hundred years of age, resided. This was the first party of white people that ever settled on the said grant. The said Burden, the elder, remained on the grant from that time, as well as she can recollect, for perhaps two years and more, obtaining settlers, and she believes there were more than a hundred settlers before he left them. She believes he was in the grant the whole time from his first coming up until he left it before his death, but how long before his death he left it, she does not know. He resided some time with a Mrs. Hunter, whose daughter afterwards married one Greene, and to whom, she understood, he gave the tract whereon they lived. When the said Borden left the grant, she understood he left his papers with her brother, John McDowell, to whose house a great many people resorted, as she understood, to see about lands, but what authority her brother had to sell, or whether he made sales or not, she does not know. Her brother, John, was killed about Xmas before her son, Samuel, her first son of that name, was born. He was born, as appears by the register of his birth in the Bible, about April, 1743. The date of this register is partly obliterated, in the last figure, but from the date of the birth of the preceding and subsequent child it must have been, as she believes, in 1743, that said Samuel was born.
Young Benj. Burden came into the grant before her brother's death. She recollects this from the circumstance of his being then in ordinary plight, and such that he did not seem much respected by her brother's wife, and when she afterwards married him she could not but reflect on the change of circumstances. She understood that he was altogether illiterate. She said Benjamin, junior, lived with her brother, John, whilst in the grant, but returned to his father's before the death of said John, and after his father's death returned, fully empowered by his father's will to complete titles and sell lands, and then married the widow of her said brother, and continued to live at the place where her said brother settled as aforesaid, until his death. This place, now called the Red House place, is about three quarters of a mile from Templetons, where the deponent resided as above.
Joseph Burden, (a son of old Ben. Burden, the grantee,) had resided at his brother, Benjamin's, some years before his, (Benjamin's) death; had gone to school, and was here at his death; had the small-pox about the time of her brothers death, some time after which (deponent does not recollect precisely, but believes it was not long,) he went away, not being very well liked, as she understood, and not made very welcome; was then but a lad about 18 or 19, as well as she can recollect from his appearance. This deponent recollects John Hart, who had removed to Beverley Manor some short time before the removal of this deponent and her friend, as above stated, but she cannot say whether he surveyed for the said Benjamin or not; she understood he was a surveyor. The people who first settled and purchased did not always have their lands surveyed at the time of the purchase; as she understood, some had their lands surveyed and some had not, but when it was not surveyed, they described it by general boundaries. Beatty was the first surveyor whom she knows that surveyed in the grant. The said Borden had been at Williamsburg, and some one, perhaps the Governor's son-in-law, by name Needler, and his other partners, had in a frolic given him their interest in said grant. She understood there were four of them, the Governor, Gooch, his said son-in-law, and two others whose names she does not recollect, who were interested in the order of Council for said land, and that Burden got it from them, as above; this was his information. She well recollects that her brother, John, assisted one Wood to make the survey of said large grant after they removed to it, as aforesaid, it being at the time of their removal, as aforesaid, held by order of Council, as she understood. The said Woods and her brother made the survey, she believes, after the cabin rights were taken in, as above stated. Many people came up, and many settlements and cabins were made immediately after their settling on the tract, as aforesaid.
Being interrogated as to the value of the lands remaining unsold by Ben. Burden, she stated that one Harden, who, she understood, was an executor, and who was in the country after the death of young Ben. Burden, (which occurred from small-pox in 1753,) and after John Bowyer had married the widow, and who, she understood, was settling Burden’s business, but she does not know by what authority, she recollects that her said Harden offered to her brother, James, the unsold lands for a bottle of wine, if he would clear him of the quit rents. She also recollects that her said brother consulted with her father about the proposition, who advised him to have nothing to do with it, for it would probably run him into jail. This, she thinks, was shortly after Bowyer’s marriage. She does not know whether Benj. Burden, jr., was distressed on account of the quit rents or not, but recollects that shortly before his death, Col. Patton was at her house; a horse of said Burden broke out and came there, which said Patton wished to have caught, that he might take him for some claims against said Burden, but she did not hear what. She had, however, said horse sent home, fearing that as there had been some misunderstanding between deponents husband and said Burden about this land, he might think they had aided in said seizure. The deponent further states that her husband purchased 1,000 acres of land of old Burden at an early day for fifty shilling per hundred, which she understood he had located on the Turkey Hill, as it is called. After the death of old Burden, his son, Benjamin, disputed giving a deed for the whole quantity there, alleging it was all valuable land, and afterwards, for the sake of peace, it was agreed that a part should be taken there, apart joining Robert Cutton, which was sold to one Buchanan, and a part near John Davidson. This arrangement was made at the time Harden was present, as aforesaid, who seemed willing to give the land, and advised this deponent, whose husband was then abroad, to agree to take it at those places, which she did. All the land purchased by her husband was purchased from old Burden; indeed, he had purchased this 1,000 acres before they came to the tract, at Lewis’, as before stated, provided he like the land when he saw it, which he did.
The deponent being asked what she knew of the persons named in a mutilated paper purporting to be an account of entries and sales, beginning at No. 1: McDowell, Jno., to No. 22: Moore, Andrews,” on the first side, where the papers appeared to be torn off; beginning on the other side at “No. 42: Martin, Robt., and ending at No. 62: at Brown, Robt.,” and whether those persons were settled in the grant at an early day or owned lands in it?
Answered: That she knew a number of the persons therein named. Many of them lived in Beverley Manor, and others in the Calf Pasture, and elsewhere, but she did not know many of them to have lands in Burden’s tract. The McDowells and her husband she had before spoken of. She also knew John Moore, who settled at an early day where Charles Campbell now lives; Andrew Moore, who settled where his grandson, Wm. Moore, now lives. Wm. McCausland also lived in the grant, as did Wm. Sawyers and Robt. Campbell, Samuel Woods, John Mathews, Richard Woods, John Hays, Chas. Hays, his son, Samuel Walker, &c., all of whom settled in the grant at an early day. The deponent being interrogated if she knew Alex. Miller, and if he was an early settler?
Answered: That she did know said Miller. He was the first blacksmith that settled on the tract. She recollects of his shoeing old Burden’s horse, and understood he purchased land of said Burden. He lived on land adjoining one John McCroskey’s land, who also purchased his land from old Burden. He also joined the plantation, now Stewart’s mill place, as she believes, whereon one Taylor, who, she believes, married Elizabeth Paxton, formerly lived. She recollects being at the burial of said Taylor, who was killed by a falling of a tree not long after his marriage. Said Millers land, she has understood, has been in possession of people of the name of Teeford since the said Millers removed. The deponent recollects one McMullen, who resided some distance above the place where Robt. Stewart’s mill now stands, but up the same branch, and near a spring. Said McMullen was living on said land, and had a daughter married there when this deponents daughter, Mary, was a sucking babe. She recollects this from having gone to the wedding when a daughter of said McMullen was married, and having left her child at home. Her daughter, Mary, was born, as appears from the register of her birth, in May, 1745. Humphrey’s Cabins, as they were called, were over the hill, at another spring, not far from where said McMullen lived. She knows not from whom McMullen purchased, but rather thinks her brother, James McDowell, gave him a piece of land there for teaching school. There was no mill where Stewart’s mill now is, in the lifetime of Ben. Burden, jr. John Hays’ mill was the first mill in the grant, and built very early after the settlement.
The deponent said the people paid no quit rents for two years from the time the grant was first settled. She understood this exemption was granted by the Governor at the instance of one Anderson, a preacher. When they had to pay quit rents, they raised money by sending butter to New Castle, to Williamsburg, and other markets below, and got also in return their salt, iron, &c.
Being asked whether Joseph Burden was frequently in this country after the death of young Ben. Burden, she answered that he was frequently in this country some time after the death of said Benjamin. He called at her house, inquiring for a horse, and she thought she knew his name, and afterwards heard he lodged in the neighborhood, at one Wm. Campbell’s. She saw him again at her house about twelve or fifteen years ago. He made some inquiries of her about her husband's estate or something of that kind. She does not recollect the particulars, but she had very little conversation with him. She also heard of his being through this country some little time before this, but does not recollect how long, nor did she see him.
Question by the defendant's agent: Did not many persons, from time to time, in the lifetime of old Burden, settle in the grant, under an expectation of getting the lands at the usual price, and without first contracting with said Burden? Answer: I believe they did. I think many settled before they had an opportunity of seeing Burden, and Burden would frequently direct them to deponent's husband, to shew them the land, as they said.
Do you not believe that the first deeds were made for the cabin rights?
Answer: I suppose the cabin right, with such land as the settler had purchased, would be deeded together, and perhaps these were the first made.
Did Ben. Burden, jr., appear when he first entered on the affairs of the estate, to be disposed to do justice to the devisees?
Answer: I thought he did. He appeared to be a good man. She understood he was the heir-at-law, and did not hear of the sisters’ claims, except to five thousand acres, which she understood had been assigned to them on Catawba, where the land was good.
Did he ever leave this country and go to Jersey, after he came up and got married?
Answer: No, I believe he did not. I am pretty confidant he did not.
Did you know of Archibald Alexander and Magdalen Bowyer selling lands?
Answer: I did not know they were executors, and had a right to sell. I understood John Bowyer sold a great deal and gave away a great deal. Alexander was as respectable a man as any I knew. Bowyer, she understood, claimed what Ben. Burden claimed, though she had no conversation with him about his claim.
Being asked whether Alexander paid Burden any money on account of the estate?
Answered: She never heard that he had, and from her intimacy with the wife of said Bowyer, she believes she would have heard of it, had it taken place.
Question by same: When Burden produced his right to the land, as you have stated, were you not satisfied, and did not the company appear satisfied, that the right was completely in him?
Answer: Yes, the papers appeared perfectly satisfactory. Did you not understand that your brother, James McDowell, built a cabin and purchased the land where Thos. Taylor, above mentioned, resided?
Answer: My brother, James, purchased a considerable tract, perhaps four or five hundred acres, either at or where Stewart’s mill now stands. It run, as she understood, on a large hill, but whether in one or two tracts, she known not. This tract, she understood, he sold to some person, but does not know who. She does not know whether he had it surveyed or not, but supposes it was merely designated by general boundaries. She thinks if she was on the land, she could point out the tree whereon his name was cut, if it is yet standing. It stood near a deep hole in the creek. Knows not how he acquired it, but understood he had built a cabin on it and saved a cabin right, but never saw the cabin, nor does she know where it stood, but the land was called his very shortly after they went to the grant, and in the lifetime of old Burden.
Sworn before us, 10th November, 1806.
JOSEPH WALKER, J. GRIGSBY.

---

BACK -- HOME

Copyright © Genealogy Trails