Introduction to State of Illinois v. D. Brown and Edwards
State of Illinois v. D. Brown and Edwards
Nauvoo, Hancock Co., Illinois, Mayor’s Court, 15 November 1842
Historical Introduction
On 15 November 1842, JS, acting as a justice of the peace in the mayor’s court in , Illinois, presided at a preliminary examination of defendants Daniel Brown and Thomas Edwards, who were accused of stealing lumber. The previous day, William Niswanger filed a complaint before JS, claiming to be the owner of nine or ten cottonwood logs located “near Thompsons Lime-kiln.” Niswanger alleged that Brown “willfully & maliciously . . . conveyed away feloniously” the logs. Furthermore, Niswanger believed that Edwards “was aiding & abetting in the removal of said Logs.” Based on the complaint, JS issued a warrant for Brown and Edwards, which was served on 15 November by Constable James Flack. The warrant did not explicitly identify a charge, but the docket entry for the case indicated that the men were charged with a felony, presumably .
JS convened a preliminary examination on 15 November to evaluate whether there was probable cause to believe that Brown and Edwards had stolen the logs. Five witnesses appeared for the prosecution, while two testified for the defense. JS also examined Niswanger. During the examination, defense witnesses indicated that the defendants had been careful to haul only their own logs. After hearing the “proofs and allegations,” JS discharged the prisoners and ordered Niswanger to pay the six dollars in costs. On 11 May 1843, Constable served a writ of execution, authorizing him to sell some of Niswanger’s property to cover the costs.
Calendar of Documents
This calendar lists all known documents created by or for the court, whether extant or not. It does not include versions of documents created for other purposes, though those versions may be listed in footnotes. In certain cases, especially in cases concerning unpaid debts, the originating document (promissory note, invoice, etc.) is listed here. Note that documents in the calendar are grouped with their originating court. Where a version of a document was subsequently filed with another court, that version is listed under both courts.
View entire transcript |
Cite this page
Cite this page
