Thomas Wright Plaintiff Walter Reeves Defendant declaration and Coppy Continued The Court .order that the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff his necessary Charges for Attending the Action, And grant a Reference untill next Court in regard the said Walter the Defendant is not able to appeare by Reason of a wound hee hath received.
Walter Reeves Plaintiff Thomas Wright Defendant Continued. The Court upon the same Accompt above written grant a Reference till next Court.
Burlington at the Court held the 8th of the 3d moneth 1684...
Thomas Wright plaintiff Walter Reeves Defendant Action of Case Evidence John Walker and Sarah Walker Both give Evidence for the payment of twenty five shillings by the Defendant to the Plaintiff which the Plaintiff Acknowledgeth. Juryes Verdict The Jury finde for the Plaintiff and give him 19s. 11d. being the remainder of his Debt Declared for and 6d. Dammages and Costs of suite; And Judgment is thereupon Awarded by the Court.
Walter Reeve Plaintiff Thomas Wright Defendant The Plaintiff proceeds not, and the Court haveing given one Court before, doe now at the request of the Defendant grant a nonsuite for the Defendant against the Plaintiff and Judgment awarded for Costs of suite.
Att the Court held 26th 3d Mo. 1685...
John Reeves and Thomas Cleverley upon Indictment on the Complaynt of Governour Ollive. Grand Jury William Peachee, Thomas Lambert, John Lambert, Thomas Barton, Anthony Morris, John Payne, William Bates, Thomas French, Daniel Leeds, Robert Hudson, William Hunt, William Fleetwood, William Wood. The Bill of Indictment not found The said Reeves and Cleverley Continue bound to the next Court.
Burlington Court 8th 6th Moneth 1685...
Walter Reeves Complaynes on Summones against Thomas Howell, Plaintiff appeares not, and therefore at the request of the defendant a Non suite is granted against the Plaintiff.
John Haynes Attested at this Court sayth. That on the 6th Instant hee being neare the house of Walter Reeves sawe an Indian goe into the said Reeves house with an Empty Bottle and that hee sawe the same Indian re turne from thence in halfe a quarter of an Hower with the same Bottle Riled with Rum: And further that hee hath heard that the said Walter Reeves hath threatned such as should discover him for selling Rum to the Indians. Bernard Devonish alsoe Attested sayth That an Indian went with an Empty Bottle from his House and said hee could have Rum at Walter Reeves house, and that tile same Indian presently returned back againe with the Bottle filled with Rum (as the said Bernard perceived by his smelling thereat) and that the said Indian at his returne had Walter Reeves wife hatt on his head and her Coat on his Shoulder in regard it rayned. Walter Reeves called to Answer and give Accompt why the boards hee Cutt on the Publick Land and which are seized on shall not be Condemned to the Publick Use. To all which premisses the Court order said Walter to be Summoned to appeare next Court.
Burlington Court held the 4th of the 7th moneth 1685.
Walter Reeves called 3 tymes uppon the Accompt of certaine Loggs seized: That hee might prove his Tytle to them, and hee appeares not, whereupon the Loggs are Condemned to the Publique Use.
Burlington at the Quarterly Court held the 20th 12th Mo. falling by reason of the 1st day 21st 1686...
Susanna Reeves brought into Court on the Complaynt of John Woolston junr. John Woolston verbally Complaynes that the said Susanna hath slandered him and his wife in these following words, vizt, upon the examination of said Susanna taken the 15th of the 12th Moneth 1686. Shee the said Susanna sayd that her Dame Alice Huggins told her on fryday about 2 clock in the aftemoone about a moneth past, that John Woolston junr. had turned away his wife, and that shee had beene at her Mothers a weeke, and the cause was because bee found her naught with an East Jersey man, and that shee had taken one of the Children, and that John might take the other two:
The said Susanna Came into Court and there Testifyed the same againe And afterwards came into Court againe. And there openly declared that what shee had before spoken and Testifyed against the said John Woolston and his wife is utterly false, and that shee hath therein wronged them, and tliat the other things shee hath declared Concerning Branford being burnt is alsoe false.
John Woolston junr. upon his Attestation averrs that Walter Reeve about eight dayes agoe in the jurisdiction of this Court Swore Seaven oaths, Vizt, (by God) Seaven tymes over.
In the Case of Susanna Reeve; They haveing noe Indictment They finde not themselves concerned to medle further in the matter, seeing it appeares to their Judgments to be rather a matter of slander then any other matter wherein they ought to medle; And therefore they referre it to the Bench for the same.
In the Case of Susanna ReeveThe Bench give Judgment That tomorrow being the sad of the 12th Moneth instant betweene the howers of Nine and Tenne in the forenoone the said Susanna shall be sett in the Pillory in this Towne, and there to stand not exceeding one hower.
[Grand Juries Presentments] They present the County for want of a Prison in Burlington for a County prison. Alsoe they present Burlington for not keeping London Bridge in repayre. Alsoe they present the Kings High way Leading from Burlington towards Shrewsbury being out of repayre. Alsoe wee present Walter Reeves for marking his Swyne with another mans marke which is recorded before.
Att the Court of Sessions held November 3th 1691...
New Constables returned and Chosen
Northampton— Walter Reeves John Woolman remaines haveing presented none
Att the Court of Session February 20th 1692/3
New Constables for the yeare Ensueing Nottingham Thomas Tindall. Chesterfield Daniel! Bacon, Mansfield James Croft, Birch Creek alias Springfield John Tonkan, Northampton Walter Reeves instead of him Isaac Horner, Wellingborrough Thomas French, Cropwell alias Chester Elias Toy, Eversham John Haynes, Robert Engle Attested May 8th 96, Burlington Peter Fretwell and Nathaniel Buggies.
Att the Court of Quarterly Sessions att Burlington May 8th 1693.
Walter Reeves Plaintiff John Payne Defendant Action Trespasse Tryed. Jury Called: vizt, John Curtis, Mathew Watson, William Bustill, Samuell Bunting, William Evans, John Ogbourne, Henry Ballenger, Michael Bufhn, Thomas Harding, Robert Pearson, Thomas Tindall, Lawrence Morris Attested. The Plaintiffs Declaration Read; The Plaintiff not proving his Tytle where the Trespasse is by the Declaration sett forth to be made, but it appearing that the Defendant had the First Survey thereof. The Jury find for the Defendant.
Evidences for Walter Reeves Henry Morley and Thomas Cleverley,
Attested: See their Depositions below thus marked *
[* In the Action above of Walter Reeves against John Payne. Henry Morley Evidence on the behalfe of Walter Reeves Attested, deposeth that Walter Reeves came to Joshua Humphries and said he had an Attachment in James Hills hand to Attach the stack of Hay upon a peece of Marrish upon the further Branch of Rancokus Creek, the Hay belonging to John Payne and Joshua Humphries: But the said Walter said that for Joshua Humphries sake hee would wave the Attachment and lose the Charge thereof: And Joshua said if Walter would let it alone that tyme hee would stack noe more there, because it lay unconvenient for the Creek. Thomas Cleverley Attested deposeth That hee knowes litle, but onely that the Land in Controversie was Surveyed toWalter Reeves.]
AlsoeWalter Reeves Plaintiff Joshua Humphries Defendant an Action of Trespasse. The Plaintiff not goeing on with his Action against the Defendant Suffers a non Suite, which is granted and called upon the Defendants request And judgment for the defendants Cost awarded.
November 3th 1693 Court of Quarterly Sessions then holden...
Walter Reeves Plaintiff William Biddle Defendant by Consent of Plaintiff and Defendant Jury before Attested. William Biddle comes of the Bench.
The Declaration Read: The Plaintiffs Deed Read: The Plaintiffs deed is not Recorded: Noe Returne of the Survey of Land which the Plaintiff Coraplaynes for as his right by the Deed is upon Record.
[Attested] Anthony Elton Attested upon the Plaintiffs Accompt But can say nothing for the Plaintiff.
[Attested] Daniell Wills came of the Bench and is Attested: And deposeth that the Plaintiff wasas advised not to Survey the Land in question for that it was laid forth before.
[Verdict] Jury are agreed oftheir Verdict and find for the Defendant. The Court give Judgment against the Plaintiff for Costs of suite.
Court of Quarterly Sessions at Burlington February 20th 1693.
John Tonkan brought his Complaynt against Susanna Reeves for Scandalizeing him which is offered to the Grand Jury Whereupon Joseph Stock ton and John Stockton are sworne and Isaac Marriott Attested Evidences and sent to the grand Jury Grand Jury returne, And they Find the Bill or Complaynt of John Tonkan against Susanna Reeves. Whereupon Susanna Reeves is called for and appeares, And being asked whether shee will Traverse or Submitt to the Bench, Sheesaith shee submitts to the Bench. Joseph Stockton and John Stock ton being againe both Sworne to give their Evidenceto the Bench, Depose that the same Night the said Susanna Reeves layes the Scandall upon John Tonkan, that hee lay with her at John Gardners barne, they came out of Burlington in Company with John Tonkan, and the said Susanna Reeves parted from them at Yorkshire Bridge, And the said Deponents and said John Tonkan Rode togeather untill they came to Mattacopenny Bridge and then John Tonkan Rode before them to his owne house to make a Fyre against the said Stock tons should come, And that they the said Deponents stept in to Samuell Ogbournes house and warmed themselves a while and then Rode on to John Tonkans House where they found him, and hee had made up a good fyre. Isaac Marriott Attested, Defmseth that whereas the said Susanna Reeves and her father reported that the said Tonkan and said Susanna Reeves (the same day before that night in which shee reports the Scandall abovesaid) was drinking togeather at said Isaac Marriotts house, the said Deponent Deposes that hee s.aw noe such thing. Benjamin Moore Attested, Deposeth, that the said Susanna Reeves said to him. That it was not her that slandered said Tonkan, but it was her Mothers wicked lyes. [Judgment and Sentence of the Bench] Susanna Reeves haveing submitted her selfe to the Bench as above. The Bench order. That the said Susanna Reeves for her Scandaliz ing the said John Tonkan, Shall tomorrow betweene the howers of 12 and 2 be whipt betweene the Court house and the River not exceeding Forty Lashes well laid on. And Shall also pay Court Charges And* order her to be secured in Prison until the tyme of her whipping, and after until the Court Charges be paid or secured to be paid.
February 21th. (1693)...
Sheriffs returne of Executione against Walter Reeves not Served.
Ordered that Susanna Reeves shall Serve John Antram for one yeare to Commence from this day a 1st February 1693/4 in Consideration That the said John Antram hath payd downe the Charges of Court on her behalf being 44s. And also in Consideration that John Pay to said Susanna 16s. more; Provided Shee serve him the said one whole yeare, which said Susanna promises to doe.
November 10th 1694,The Court appeare and is called...
Jeremiah Basse Attourney for John Reeve versus William Righton Defendant Entred by Consent to cometo tryall next Court, declaration drawne, and Copy sent and fyling the same, but the Plaintiff orders it to be put by.
Court of Quarter Sessions held the ninth day of May 1698 at Burlington
Thomas Billingham an evidence for John Powell on the behalf of the King Against Anne Reeves Attestedand sent to the grand jury
Anne Reeves the Wife of John Reeves bound by Recognisance to this Sessions. A Bill Against the said Anne sent to the Grand Jury they retume the same Billa vera.
The Prisoner Arraigned and upon her Arraignment pleads nott guilty, And refers her self to God and the Countrey for tryall.
The Jury Called, the Prisoner required to view them as they are Called and make her Exceptions Against them, if she please; She makes no Exceptions of any, the Jury Attested, the Indictment Reade.
Thomas Billingliam an Evidence for the King Attested and deposeth that on the day mentioned in the Indictment he the said deponent was in the field and the said Anne Coming home haled him, but the deponent not Coming Immediately She the said Anne went and putt up her horse. And when she Came backe the deponent mett her, at the doore And went into the house with her, and after a little time the said Anne desired the deponent to goe and give the horse some Meate, which the deponent did, and after wards Came into the house againe, and the said Anne Askd him whether there was any Rumme in the house the deponent replyed there was, Then the said Anne Askt the deponent to milk the Cow and she would make some Milk punch, and Accordingly the deponent did, and when the deponent came in the said Anne Askt him for the Broome he replyed twas in the Chamber she bid me fetch it, so he went to goe up Staires and hee see the doore only fast with a bolt went up two or three Stepps, and the said AnneSeeinghim goeup readily Askt the deponent whether they left the doore soe, the deponent replyed he thought it was as John Powell left he thought, then the said Anne replyed said He warrant the Indians have been here and broke open the doore, (which was before She came to the doore) And afterwards she Cryed I,le warrant John Powells Money is gone, and she and the deponent went into the Chamber and she bid him looke into the Chest and see whether the Money was there, and shee bid him pull out the drawers in the Chest and see for itt, but when the deponent and Anne Sawnoe Money, she said againe that she warrant John Powells money is gone. And further the deponent saith he believes the doore of the Chamber was broke open, and further saith nott.
The Jury receive the Charge antl goe out togeather, the Jury returne, the said Anne the Prisoner Sett to the Barr, the Jury being Askt whether they tvere Agreed of theire verdict they replyed yes, and by theire Foreman Thomas Eeves say ihey find the said Anne Reeves not guilty.
7ber 24th The Court meet according to Adjournment (1707)
The Grand Jury returned gave in a presentment against John Reeves Ignoramus
Dom. Reg. versus John Reeves Ordered That John Reeves doe give in Security for his good behaviour
Dom. Reg. versus John Reeves Called not appears his Securitys called to bring in his body who did not. Ordered That unless Said Reeves doe appear dureing the Sitting of this Court that his recognizence be prosecuted.
Dom. Reg. versus John Reeves Called appears Ordered That unless John Reeves find Security for his entring into Recognizence to Answer the new breach of the Peace which was the forfeiture of his old recognizence that he Stand Comitted to the Sheriffs Custody.
At A Court of Sessions held for the County of Burlington at Burlington on Tuesday the 23th day of March 1708....
The names of the Constables Chosen for the Ensueing year as follows...