According to one compilation based on the 1800 tax listings of Kentucky, there were 28 people with the surname McDowell listed on the "Second Census" of Kentucky. We have investigated the existing records of each of those people in detail and report on many of them in this file. For reference purposes,we duplicate that list in Appendix IV with a hyperlink to each person. On the other hand, a number of them are connected to other McDowell threads including, for example, the descendants of Ephraim McDowell of Virginia. We have included those McDowell records in other family trees at this website which can be accessed in the Table of Contents.

Robert McDowell - Margaret McCormick

John McDowell - Nancy Ann Linville

John McDowell - Nancy Suzanne Burks

Bullitt County Appendices

George McDowell - Mahala Jenkins

John McDowell - Deborah MNU

John McDowell - Mary Aydelott

See John W. McDowell

John McDowell - Catharine MNU

Alexander McDowell - Unknown

Joseph McDowell - Margaret MNU

Alexander McDowell - Jane MNU - Dorcas Wasson

Charles McDowell - Rachel Eleanor Redd

APPENDIX I: 1834 Will of William McDowell

APPENDIX II: 1863 Will of Horatio McDowell

APPENDIX III: 1813 Will of Robert McDowell

APPENDIX IV: 1800 Kentucky Tax Listings

APPENDIX V: Court Cases John McDowell Versus John Lemon

Parents: Unknown

William McDowell [PMT: 1761 Studley, Hanover VA - 24 August 1835] married Elizabeth (Burgess) [1760 - 1846]. We have not found definitive proof of William's birth year, nor that her last name was Burgess, nor of her birth and death years. William and Elizabeth had the following children based on his 1834 Will and other records.

Next he served as security for the tax commissioner.

He was recommended to become a coroner in the county but refused.

In 1808, the court recommended him as a Justice of the Peace, but he apparently never served in that capacity.

Parents: William McDowell and Elizabeth Burgess

James Burgess McDowell [19 June 1789 - 12 September 1864 MCA/FG] married Martha "Patsy" Long on 13 December 1809 in Nicholas County KY. They had the following children.

Parents: William McDowell and Elizabeth Burgess

John Burgess McDowell [15 December 1792 - 13 December 1863 PMT] was married first to Deborah Reveal [c1795 - c1826] on 28 December 1814 in Nicholas County KY by Stephen Ruddle. According to PMT, they had the following chidren.

The above 1820 census record apparently should have been 3 Females instead of males.

Parents: William McDowell and Elizabeth Burgess

Horatio Burgess McDowell [3 July 1798 - 20 December 1863 WAS/FG] married Elizabeth A. Long [24 May 1799 - 11 August 1874 WAS/FG] on 30 June 1818 in Nicholas County KY. They had the following children.

Parents: Unknown

Robert McDowell [1746 Studley, Hanover Cty VA PMT - 1811] married Margaret McCormick according to some sources, but we can only prove her Christian name. PMT sources claim that his parents are Johnathan McDowell [1714 - 1779] and Hannah Depuy [1719 - 1779] of Pennsylvania, but we cannot confirm that claim. They had the following children.

Their report was returned to court on 27 January 1812.

We suspect that the third female aged 16 to 26 in the 1820 Census is Mary, the wife of Thomas McDowell. They were married in 1818 in Nicholas County.

Parents: Robert McDowell and Margaret McCormick

Thomas McDowell [c1796 - Bf 1860] married Miss Mary McDowell on 12 August 1818 in Nicholas County with bondsman Zenus Powell. We believe that Thomas and Mary appear in the 1820 Census with his mother Margaret, Mary being the third female aged 16 to 26. Mary apparently died after the census and Thomas married Prudence McCoy [10 March 1805 - 21 July 1848 CLO/FG] on 19 January 1821 [bond date] in Nicholas County KY with the permission of her father John McCoy. They had the following identified children.

Note that Thomas pays the taxes for the full 100 acres in the period 1818 through 1820 for his mother and before she splits the land into two 50-acre tracts for her two sons.

Parents: Thomas McDowell and Mary McDowell

Livonia McDowell [10 November 1827 - 17 April 1900 ROSE/FG] married James M. Steele [c1828 - ] on 19/22 October 1849 in Putnam County IN.

Parents: Robert McDowell and Margaret McCormick

Robert E. McDowell [c1801 - ] married Mary Noah [c1802 - Bf 1880]. His middle intial of "E" and the maiden name of Mary is taken from the INDC of their son Thomas. They had the following children.

Parents:

Thomas McDowell [c1740 - c1818] married Unknown. According to his Will, Thomas had the following children.

From 1796 through 1802, no McDowells were found on the Rockingham Property Tax Lists.

Parents: Thomas McDowell and Unknown

James McDowell [By 1765 - ] married Mary Sparks.[5] The identification of "Mary" as his wife is based on the following Lincoln County court records. Records for the estate of William Wright do not appear in Lincoln County Will Books.

Parents: James McDowell and Mary MNU

Mary "Polly" McDowell [1787 - 25 April 1845 MECH/FG] married Thomas Phillips on 15 February 1804 in Harrison County KY with bondsman William McDowell. PMT reports Mary as the daughter of James McDowell [1747 - ] and Sarah Gorrell [26 July 1763 PA - 5 September 1834, MDOW/FG], but we don't believe this to be correct.

Parents: James McDowell and Mary Sparks

Washington McDowell [15 October 1801 (KY on 1850 Census) - 28 July 1866 BET/FG] married Elizabeth Kirby [25 November 1808 (KY on 1850 Census) - 12 February 1862 BET/FG] on 13 January 1824 in Ripley County IN.

Parents: Thomas McDowell and Unknown

John McDowell [1774 - 21 October 1821 PMT death date] married Jane (Rebecca) Young [1784 Augusta VA - 1837 Ripley IN], the daughter of Samuel Young and Jane Jennet Hayes, on 27 December 1804 in Bourbon County KY with bondsman Samuel Young. They had the following PMT children.

Duncan McDowell [c1798 KY - 1860 Shelby Ripley IN] is a man of color. We have selected several of his records for display and to avoid confusion with other McDowell records. Other records exist including some in Indiana.

Many of the McDowells of West Virginia move to Bourbon County KY and their genealogy is reported in a separate file.

We have been unable to identify the following road records with a specific McDowell in Bourbon County. There appears to be no John McDowell who clearly matches with the person in his road record. He likely lives in another county but possesses land in Bourbon County.

We have been unable to identify the parents of the following females who were married in Bourbon County KY.

Parents: Unknown

John McDowell [1766-1775 - c1815] married Nancy Ann Linville [1766-1774 - Aft 1830]. We note that his son Joseph reports that he was born in Pennsylvania. They had the following children.

He appeared as a Justice on the bench on the dates reported in the following table.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Ann Linville

Joseph W. McDowell [c1788/1789 - 21 June 1874] married first to Sarah "Sally" Jett [4 November 1782 Farquier Cty VA - June 1838], the daughter of John William Jett and Elizabeth Porter, on 26 June 1815 in Bracken County KY with bondsman John Washburn. They had the following children.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Ann Linville

Thomas McDowell [c1796 - c1873] married first to Isabella Horton/Hooten [1801 - 2 November 1848 MCD/FG] on 20 December 1814 in Bracken County KY with bondsman Daniel McLaughlin. They had the following identified children.

Parents: Thomas McDowell and Isabella Horton

Joseph McDowell [15 June 1819 - 10 October 1883 FOS/FG] married Nancy J. Woodward [c1846 - 2 January 1914 /KYDI] on 17 February 1843 in Mason County KY with bondsman James McDowell. It's not clear who James is. They had the following children.

Note: Oscar C. McDowell [14 December 1870 - 8 February 1882 FOS/FG] is the son of John J. McDowell.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Ann Linville

John McDowell [c1799 - Bf 1870] married Elizabeth Adams [c1799 - ] on 18 May 1820 in Bracken County KY with bondsman Andrew Adams. They had the following children.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Ann Linville

Edmond McDowell [c1810 - ] married Margaret Bradley [May 1813 - ] and they had the following children.

Parents:

John McDowell [c1764 - 15 October 1838 (date Will probated)] married Nancy Suzanne Burks [c1770 - c1877] on 1 September 1791 in Jefferson County KY. The following children were named in John's Will.

An inventory of notes and money which came into the hands of Woodford McDowell is abstracted below with only the items that name a McDowell included.

The settlement was filed at the court.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Burks

Robert McDowell [c1800 - ] married Lucy MNU. The identity of their children has not been determined. Robert and Lucy appeared in the following census records.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Burks

John McDowell [14 October 1799 - 10 December 1881 BET/FG] married Matilda Standiford, daughter of James Standiford, on 17 December 1821 in Jefferson County KY. They had the following children.

We note that John is listed next to his son John in the 1870 Census and thus has the abbreviation "Sr" next to his name which some people have claimed to be an "L", but the "r" is visible.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Burks

Artimesia McDowell [c1803 - 1842 ] married Reuben Dawson Northern Morgan [c1795 - 1848] on 4 September 1825 in Bullitt County KY. The death of Artimesia in 1842 is reported in a Bullitt County court record. They had the following children.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Burks

Emily McDowell [c1805/1810 - 1873] was declared insane and never married. A collection of documents for Emily exist.[3]

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Burks

Woodford McDowell [7 July 1808 - 2 May 1890 HEB/FG] married first to Elizabeth Phelps on 11 April 1830 in Bullitt County KY, second to Louisa Grable [23 June 1819 - 6 July 1849 HEB/FG], the daughter of Philip Grable and Margaret Crawford and first married to Henry Trunnell on 20 September 1838 in Bullitt County KY, on 20 April 1848 in Bullitt County KY, and third to Mary E. Grable [29 June 1833 - 6 July 1910 HEB/FG], the daughter of Philip Grable and Margaret Crawford, on 20 December 1849 in Bullitt County KY. He had two sons with Elizabeth and a daughter with Mary.

Note that Emily in the 1850 Census and subsequent census records is Woodford's sister.

Parents: John McDowell and Nancy Burks

Susan G. McDowell [7 November 1812 - 2 January 1843 SUN/FG] married Zeno T. Robards [c1810 - ] on 10 March 1835 in Bullitt County KY. After a dissolution of the marriage reported below, she remarried him on 16 January 1841 by H.C. Ulen.

This appendix contains in chronological order the participation of John McDowell of Bullitt County in various court cases.

The Macher/Machir court case was transferred to the Nelson County Circuit Court and the clerk of that court recorded all the extant documents for the case on a number of pages in the court records. The following is a transcription of those pages.

Be it remembered that heretofore to wit that is to say at a Supreme Court continued and held for the Bardstown District at this Courthouse in Bardstown on Tuesday the 21^st day of April 1801 on the motion of John McDowell he having made oath to the allegations of his Bill the commonwealth writ of __ &C with Injunction &C is granted him to stay all further proceedings on a Judgment obtained against him in the Court by John Machir on his entering into Bond in the Clerks Office of this Jonathan Irons his Security in the penalty of three hundred and Sixty pounds conditioned as the law directs (which Bill afsd in the attorney words &C Vizt)
"To the honorable the Judges of the Supreme Court for the District of Bardstown sitting in Chancery your Orator John McDowell humbly complaining flaws unto your honours that wishing to settle himself on Salt River in the Vicinity of Bullets Lick and finding that a certain John Macher (whom your orator forays may be made a Deft to this Bill) claimed a Tract of 500 acres of land which suited your Orator as to situation and quality (in part) very well he made propositions to purchase the same that when your orator found that the Deft would not sell on any other ___ than to refund the purchase money with Interest in proportion to the quantity of Land which might be lost your Orator mentioned the claim of one Paul Buchner which interfered with said land and which your orator as it was an early and Special location was appre__sive would hold the land that the sd Deft then represented to your Orator that the title Buckner had agreed to yield up his title to the interference to any purchase from him the said Deft on receiving of the purchase money in proportion to the interference should his title thereto be adjudged the Superior one and that he the said Deft could and would extinguish said Buckners claim to said land your Orator further states that believing the information and representation of the said Deft to be true he on the 30^th day of January 1798 purchased of the said Deft the afsd 500 acres of land for the sum £600 and by articles of agreement of that date covenanted to pay the said Deft in parcels at stated periods and the said Deft covenanted to convey the said land to your Orator by Deed containing clauses to refund the purchase money with Interest in proportion to such loss or losses as should happen and your Orator entered on the said disputed part of the said land and made Improvements which he conceives to be worth £150 (one hundred and fifty pounds) your Orator further states that the said articles of agreement speaks nothing of the said Defts engagement to extinguish Buckners claim to the land so sold by the said Deft to your Orator wherefore he says they are materially defective and that he was overreached and imposed on and would not have executed the said articles if he not have believed that the Defendant could and would have vested your Orator with Buckners as well as his own title to the said tract or have been liable to your Orator for the value of as much as would be held by Buckner your Orator further states that there are other claims on the said land and that the presentation the said articles to refund was never intended by the said Deft to embrace or include Buckners title as by reference to a letter dated the 7^th day of July 1798 and written by the said Deft to your Orator will appear and which he prays to be made part of his Bill in which he the said defendant assured your Orator that he would endeavour to procure Buckners written agreement as to the said land. Your Orator further states that he entered on and improved the most valuable part of the said land and under the impression that the contract would be fully and fairly executed made considerable payments to the said Deft and would have discharged all the purchase money if the said Defendant had not neglected to settle with Buckner and obtain his title for your Orator and if the said Buckner by reason of such neglect had not compelled your Orator to purchase the said interference at the rate of £3 per acre amounting to £500 300 or thereabout your Orator further states that after he had delayed payment for the reasons aforesaid the said Deft brought first in your honorable Court on the said articles of agreement and without making your Orator any further title to the said land hath obtained a Judgment against your Orator for £180 Damage and Eleven dollars and Sixty five and a half cents which your Orator repleved all which actings and doings of the said defendant and his confederates are contrary to equity and good conscience and tend to injure and aggrieve your Orator. In said consideration whereof and for as much as your Orator is without remedy in the premises by the rules of the common law and can only be relieved in this honorable Court where contracts are equitably enforced or their operation suspended or defeated and matter of fraud cognizable to the use therefore that said Deft may make true full and perfect answer to all and singular the allegations matters and things in this Bill set forth in as full and ample manner as if the same were herein again repeated and interrogated and that all proceedings may be enjoined and the said Judgment replevy Bond or Execution till the said Deft secures your Orator against Buckners title to said land or till he the said Deft shall convey the said land to your Orator and covenant to warrant the land against the said Buckner and all persons claiming under him or his heirs may it please your honors to grant to your Orator the Cwealths writ of [SPa] with Injunction &C and all such other and further relief to which he may be agreeably entitled and he will ever pray &C.

April 21^st 1801: Errors at law released

Mr. Buckner has promised me thus I shall have the land that interferes with the claim I sold you if his is best and I shall endeavor to enter into an agreement with him on paper, for that purpose, at next meeting for fear of accident I sold George to Mr. Alexander Marshall who has since sold him to Mr Lewis Craig who wished to return him & says he is not found that his feet which have been frost bitten (of which you never informed me) is detrimental to him you will recollect that your bill of sale upholds him found and if I take him back on that account I am obliged to have recourse to you I want no difficulty or trouble about the business do wish you to take him back and make the best of him I will take the boy as you and I can agree in exchange as a good handy wench you will please to give me an answer by first post as I have prevailed with them not to bring [first] or do any thing in the business aside I can hear from you. It is necessary I presume to remind you that the first of Nov. is approaching and that I shall expect the sale to the day as I can dispose of it for cash if delivered agreeable to contract. I am Sir you humble Pew!

Washington 7^th July 1798

This answer sworn to legally in the customary manner by John Machir before me a Justice of the Peace for Nelson County this 21^st day of July 1801

November and December rules continued
1802 January February March rules continued
April May and June rules continued
July August and September rules continued
October November and December rules continued
And now the said District Court being abolished by an act of assembly entitled as act to establish Circuit Courts the papers and recorded thereof were transferred to the Nelson Circuit Court.
And at rules held in the Clerks Office of the Nelson Circuit Court in the months of October November and December in the year 1803 this suit was continued for replication
1804 January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August September, October, November and December rules this suit was continued
1805 January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August September, October, November and December rules this suit was continued
1806 January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August September, October, November and December rules this suit was continued
1807 January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August rules this suit was continued. September rules set for hearing by Defendants (Note there is an Indorsement on the papers in these words "October Court remanded" but no such order is apparent on the Record.)
Note there is a replication filed among the papers which is endorsed "Rec^d March 1808" which replication is in the words following Viz^t "This Repliant having to himself all advantages of Exception to the manifold insufficiencies of said Respondents answer for replication thereto saith that he will ever and prove his said Bill to be true and sufficient in law and that the said answer is insufficient uncertain and untrue to be replied unto by the repliant without that any other matter or thing whatsoever in the said answer contained material or effectual to be replied unto and herein not replied unto confessed and avoided traversed or denied is true all of which things the repliant is ready to prove as this honorable Court may award and humbly prays as in his bill he hath already prayed.
March, April, May, June, July and August rules continued September rules set for hearing by Defendant
And at a Court held for the Nelson Circuit on the 3^rd day of July (being a continuation of the June Term 1809 "Ordered that the Cause be continued until the next Term and for reasons appearing to the Court It is ordered that either party have leave to take the Deposition of Alexander K. Marshall.
And at a Court held as afs^d on the 18^th day of October in the year afs^d On the motion and Oath of the Complainant ordered that the suit be continued until the next Term
And at a Court held at aforesaid on the 5^th day of April (being a continuation of the March Term) 1811 "Ordered that this suit be continued until the next Term
And on the 6^th day of April in the Term aforesaid "On motion of Complainant by his attorney ordered that he have leave to amend his Bill whereupon he produced his amended bill ordered that the same filed (which amended Bill is in the words following Viz^t "The amended Bill of John McDowell to a bill in Chancery exhibited by him against John Machir and now depending in the Nelson Circuit Court. This Complt further orates that being advised said Philip Buckners claim afs^d was Superior the said Mackirs and as the said Buckner was making attempts to sell the 100 acres afs^d part of the said 500 acres this Complt was induced to make a conditional purchase of the said 100 acres from the said Buckner that if the said Buckners claim should be adjudged Superior to the said Machir's Complt should give said £3 per acre for s^d 100 acres. This was the least price for which he could obtain it the discovery of Irons Salt Lick made since the purchase by complt of Deft having considerably increased the value of said 100 acres not long after the contract between Complt and s^d Buckner and before any payment was made by complt to said Buckner to wit on the 20^th May in the year 1802 the s^d Machir released to said Buckner his the Defendants claim to the s^d 100 acres whereby the Complt was compelled to complete the purchase made by him as aforesaid with said Buckner and he believes said Machir knew the true situation of the contract between said Buckner and Complainant before and after the time of Executing said release he further states the said Macher on the 24^th May 1780 made his entry for the said 500 acres in these words "1780 May &C the said entry is vague and uncertain on the 13^th Dec^r 1784 the said entry was surveyed contrary to Location. It was surveyed on a Branch two miles and a quarter Below Bulletts Lick altho there was and is a run nearly about the same size called the second Big run Below Bulletts Lick and which run is about three miles and a Quarter Below said Lick and it is surveyed wrong in other respects surveyed right no part of it would cover the said 100 acres on the 29^th June 1780 William Farmer in the proper office made the following entry 1780 June &C the said entry is special and precise and was surveyed correctly on the 6^th October 1796 by the proper survey as Pattents have been issued upon Both of said Claims But the said Macher fraududently obtained the Prior Grant the legal Title to said 100 has Been [__ly] conveyed to Complainant The said Buckner conveyed it to him on the [blank] day of [blank] by Deed with general warranty duly recorded. This Complt makes certified copies of said release entries & surveys with a certified copy of s^d Deed from Buckner to him part of this amendment. This Complt requires Deft to answer the matters herein contained and prays such relief as he may be entitled to &C. Pope Quinton & Grayson for Complt
Whereas an entry made in the name of William Farmer for seven hundred acres on Salt River opposite the mouth of Long Lick run purchased and now claimed by Philip Bucker interferes with an entry & survey made in the name of John Machir for Five hundred acres which said Machir for some time past sold John McDowell the [current possessor] Now this Indenture witnesseth that the said Buckner and Machir mutually agree to compromise the said difference and Interference __ following Terms" Machir having the Oldest Patent against [relinquishment] said Buckner his heirs and assigns one hundred acres of Land out of his claim to Bond on the river and his upper line for which the said Marhir has allowed the said McDowell a credit for Four hundred dollars agreeably to their Contract. In consideration whereof the said Buckner agrees to relinguish and release to said Machir his heirs and assigns the right ___ accruing from said Entry in the name of said Farmer to all the remaining parts of the Entry made in the name of said Machir. And it is further agreeably and Between the said Buckner and Machir that the right of the said McDowell to investigate the said Interference shall not be invalidated by the compromise should he chose to resort to Law for the adjustment of the Interference and in that case the said Machir hereby transfers unto s^d Buckner the recourse he has against said McDowell for the four hundred Dollars above specified. And this agreement mutual agreement shall only and always be [bringing] on the said Buckner and Machir so far as they are or may be hereafter interested in the said Interfering claims. In witness whereof the said Buckner and Machir have hereunto set their hands and seals this 20^th of May 1802.

I William Murphy Deputy Clerk of the Washington District do certify that the article of agreement Between Philip Buckner and John Machir was this day produced before me acknowledged in the office of said Court given under my hand this 20^th Day of May 1802.

I Marshall Key Deputy clerk of the County Court of said County do certify that the foregoing is a true copy from the records Deposited in the clerks office of said Court given under my hand this 24^th day of March 1810

1780 June 29^th William Farmer enters 700 acres upon a Treasury Warrant on the North side of Salt river opposite the mouth of Long Lick about 1½ miles from Bullitts Lick to run up and down Salt river & out for quantity. A Copy.

Surveyed for William Farmer 700 acres of Land in Jefferson County by virtue of a treasury Warrant No. 1803 dated the 29^th of June 1780 about 1½ miles from Bullitts Lick on the north side of Salt river opposite the mouth of Long Lick to begin at an Elm and Hickory standing on the Bank of Salt river Just above the mouth of a gut at the upper side of the Field known by the name of Nonsense thence N31W 330 poles to two hickories thence S59W 330 poles to three pines on the west side of a knob thence S31E 251 poles to a white Oak and Buckeye on the Bank of Salt river about nine or ten poles above the mouth of a Big run thence up with the meanders of said River the following courses N31E 90 pl S45E 7 pl S35E 45 pl N55E 46 pl N33E 52 pl N20E 24 pl N43E 52 pl N27E 30 pl N3E 3 pl to the Beginning. October the 6^th 1796.

1780 May 24^th John Machir enters 500 acres at the mouth of a large run about 4 miles below Bullitts Lick extending to the lime ridge on the north side and up said run on Both sides for Quantity.

Surveyed for John Machir 500 acres of Land in Jefferson County by virtue of a Treasury Warrant No. [blank] lying on Salt River about three miles below Bullitts Lick and on a run emptying in on the north side of the said River Beginning at a Beach and ash tree 62 poles Below the mouth of the said run on the river Bank running thence N60W 310 poles to three sugar trees & a Sweet gum thence N57E 310 poles to a sugar tree & Beach on the south side of a hill thence S60E 310 poles to a Walnut and two hickories on the Bank of the river thence with the meanders of the river down to the Beginning.

Alexander Brechenridge Received of John McDowell one Negro Boy by the name of Constant for ninety pounds in part for the Lands that Interferes with the land that John McDowell purchased of John Machir which interference strikes Machirs upper corner/course on Salt River at two hickories and Black Walnut which said Land be the Quantity more or less where ascertained I will warrant and defend from the claim of any person or persons whatever and do by these presents oblige myself and my heirs to convey in fee simple to the said John McDowell what ever Part may be obtained from the said Machir at three pounds per acre. I further oblige self to receive one hundred pounds in salt at twelve shillings per Bushel and the Balance in X Horses as [fur] on the Interference of mine with Macher & in case I should not obtain one hundred acres then I do oblige myself to make up the quantity of one hundred acres now adjoining the said McDowell and Jonathan Irons Tract of Land that they now Live on in witness I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 10^th day of October 1800.

And at a court held as aforesaid on the 3^rd day of July (being a continuation of the June Term) 1811 "Ordered that this suit be continued till the next Term.
And at a court held as aforesaid on the 29^th day of October in the year aforesaid ordered that this suit be continued until the next Term.
And at a court held as aforesaid on the 20^th day of March in the year 1812" The Deft by his attorney moves the Court to dissolve the Complainants Injunction and after argument on both sides by the counsel and due consideration by the court it is ordered that the said motion be overruled.
And at a court held as aforesaid on the 9^th day of April (being a continuation of the March Term) The Complainant this day produced in Court his amended Bill which is ordered to be filed.
The amendment of John McDowell to his Bill in chancery [which] By him agst John Machir now defending in the Nelson Circuit Court. He further states that on the 10^th day of March in the year 1803 he paid Guy Phelps D.S. the sum of £63.6.7 who collected the same by virtue of an Execution then in his hands in the name of the Deft against the Complainant [Glescoe] upon the Judgment rendered on account of the purchase money of the Land in the Bill mentioned the Judgment and Execution with the receipt of said Phelps herewith filed and __ part hereof. On the 22^nd March 1804 he paid John ___ agent of the Defendant for that purpose the sum of £29.16.10 __ account of an Execution there in the hands of the Sheriff on payment said purchase money. The said Execution with the receipt of said Caldwell for said money heewith filed is made part hereof.
He further states that the 100 acres of Land covered by Buckners as in the Bill mentioned is the Best part of the 500 acres of which it is [Macher] a part and that it is worth all the rest and that without the expectation of securing that part by having Buckners claim there to quieted by Deft he would not have made the purchase of him in the Bill mentioned he prays &C.

Sworn to in the usual Form before me 19^th March 1812.

And at a Court held as aforesaid on the 2^nd day of July & being a continuation of the June Term 1812 "The Defendant by his attorney produced in Court and filed his answer to the Complainants amended Bill and thereupon the suit was continued till the next Term which answer is in the words following Vizt.
The answer in Chancery of John Machir to the two amendments to the Bill in Chancery exhibited and now defending in the honorable the circuit court of Nelson in which John McDowell is complainant and the said John Macher is Deft. The Deft saving and reserving to himself all Benefit of Exceptions in the said two amendments for answer he says that with regard to the arrangements between the complt & Philip Buckner and the motives which led the said Complainant to make such arrangement your Deft is wholly ignorant he could not at least have Been induced to that measure by the compromise made between the said Buckner and your Deft because your Defts compromise was subsequent to the complts purchase of Buckner your Deft observes with some surprise the allegation in the amended Bill that the complainant was compelled to complete the Bargain with Buckner in consequence of the adjustment made by your Deft with Buckner the fallacy of this statement can be shown by adverting to the Tract that the compts bargain with Buckner was anterior to your Defts adjustment with him your Deft has procured an attested copy of his agreement with Buckners (the original being out of his possession &C outrule) (which copy he prays may be considered a part of this answer by refering thereto it will appear to the court that this arrangement could not have been the effect of coercing the complainant to any measure whatever in as much as the right of the complainant to pursue his own measure with regard to Buckner was carefully saved to him. Your Deft cannot with certainty say when he first learned that the complainant had made a contract with Buckner but thinks it was not till after the contract yr Deft had made with him your Deft thinks so because in the contract between himself & Buckner he reserved to the complainant the right of Defending the Title of the Land if he chose to do so a right the reservation of which would have been totally nugatory had your Deft known the complainant had settled the claim by purchase.
It may be true that the complt has filed correct copies of the entries report to in the [amendment] but on this point (if it is at all important in the contrest now existing yr Deft puts the complt on proof whether yr Defts entry is Special or otherwise or correctly or incorrectly surveyed are points on which your Deft cannot decide and submits to the court if indeed those points are at all in question between the complainant and the Defendant which yr Deft thinks is not the case on a very strongly supports are introduced for the purpose of Embarrassment and allay he denies the fraud however impared to him in procuring the older patent to the Land in controversy.
In answer to the second amended Bill yr Defendant observes of [thatisser] __ the Complt did pay any money to the Deputy Sheriff holding your Defendants Execution agst the Complainant and which is not already created by the return of the Sheriff he admits the complainant should have a credit therefor but not now having access to the records of your court he cannot admit or deny that the payment to Guy Phelps is such an one as now entitles the complainant to a credit he prays your honors to withhold the credit if it should appear by referring to the records that any of your Defendants Executions against the Complt has been diminished by the payment now claimed. Your Deft admits that John Caldwell was his agent any payments to John Caldwell are good agst your Deft in answer to that allegation in the second amendment of the Bill that the 100 acres of Land covered by Buckners claim is the best part of the 500 acres sold by the Deft to the Complt that it is worth all the rest and that without it the complt would not have purchased of yr Deft at all your Deft can say nothing except that your Deft did not induce the Complt to enter into the sd Bargain by any said representation or concealment the complainant knew the Land & the claims on well as better than did the Deft and yr Deft took on himself no responsibility except what is expressed in his contract with the complt with regard to the 100 acres given up by yr Deft to Buckner the complainant may if he pleases Litigate Buckners right thereto if he does not chose to do so yr Deft has already endorsed a credit for the money (400$) which was to be refunded in the event of loss your Deft Denies all Fraud with which he stands charged without that that &C and prays to be dismissed with the Benefit of his Judgment at Law and his costs & shall pray &C

Kentucky Maison County }Set
This day came John Machir before the subscriber a Justice of the Peace in and for the said county and made oath that what is contained in the above answer to the amended Bills therein refered to as far as he states from his own knowledge is true and these statements made from the information of others he believes to be true given under my hand and seal this 19^th day of May 1812.

And at a Court held as aforesaid on the 6^th day of October 1812 ordered that the motion to dissolve be laid over until the 3^rd day of the next Term until which time this cause is continued.
And at a court held as aforesaid on the 31^st day of March 1813 by consent of the parties by their attorneys ordered that this Suit be laid over until the calling of the other cause between the same parties which causes are to be united and tried together.
And on the 9^th day of April (being a continuation of the March Term) "This day came the parties by their attornies and by their agreement it is ordered that these suits be and they are hereby consolidated and shall be heard and tried and decided together and thereupon the same was heard upon the Bills answers Exhibits and Depositions and duly considered by the Court. It is the opinion of the Court that the Complainant is entitled to the credit for sixty pounds 3/7 paid by him March 10^th 1803 to Guy Phelps Sheriff of Bullitt County also for twenty nine pounds 16/10½ paid March 2^nd 1804 to John Caldwell agent for the Deft and also then it is the opinion of the Court that the Deft undertook as a part of the contract between him and the complt in the Bill mentioned to extinguish the [claim] of Philip Buckner to the four hundred acres of Land [line unreadable] mentioned and not having done so but released his title to said one hundred acres of Land to said Buckner and that thereupon the complainant is entitled also to the further credit of one thousand Dollars the same paid by complainant to s^d Buckner for the said one hundred acres of Land which said credit exceeds the amount of the Judgment at Law in the Bill mentioned and enjoined. Whereupon It is ordered and Decreed that the Defendant be perpetually enjoined from proceeding upon the Judgment at Law and it is further ordered and Decreed that the Deft pay to the complainant his costs by him in this suit consolidated expended.

March 10^th 1803 then received of Mr John McDowell Sixty three [missing word: pounds] six shillings and seven pence in part of an Execution in the name of John Machir as the said McDowell which takes three pounds three shillings for commission leaves £60.3.7. Guy Phelps D.S.
March 22^nd 1804 received of John McDowell Twenty nine pounds sixteen Shillings and ten pence half penny on account of an Execution in the hands of the Sheriff of Bullitt County John Machir deft sd John McDowell for £190.2.1½ with Interest from 22^nd October 1800 with credits &C for John Machir. Jno Caldwell
Articles of agreement made the 30^th day of January 1798 between John Machir of Mason County and John McDowell of Bullitt County Kentucky witnesseth that said Machir hath this day sold unto said McDowell a tract of Land near Bulletts lick granted to said Machir by the State of Virginia for five hundred acres for which said McDowell is to pay him Two Thousand dollars as follows he is [missing word: to] pay two likely young negro fellows healthy sensible and sound and likely riding horses and negro boy instead of one of the fellows if Machir prefers him the above property to be valued by indifferent men mutually chosen if the parties cannot agree and paid on demand to the amount of three hundred pounds the remaining three hundred pounds to be paid in salt delivered in Washington at the market price one half the first day of November next and the other half the first day of November one thousand seven hundred and ninety nine. It is understood by the parties hereto that Machir is not to warrant the title to above ment^d tract of Land but is to enter into covenant in the Deed to refund with Interest in proportion to the quantity lost at the rate of Four dollars per acre except the quantity may not be contained within the lines agreeably to the patent which said McDowell takes his own risk on account of Machirs having made an abatement in the price therefor. In Witness whereof the parties have hereunto interchangeably set their hands and seals the Date above written.

I assign the within and foregoing article of agreement to Jacob Froman Sen^r his heirs and assigns and do hereby require the title in the within mentioned tract of Land to be made to the said Froman his heirs or assigns but is hereby expressly understood that I am not nor are my heirs Exors admors to be liable in any manner or means whatever by reason of this assignment it being so agree between the parties but it is also to be understood that there is a suit now Depending in my name against the sd John Machir in the Nelson Circuit Court which I am to prosecute with due diligence and if when the same shall be decided I shall owe said Machir anything I am to pay the same and this far I am to be liable by this assignment and no further witness my hand and seal this 31^st day of March 1808.

I assign over all my right and Title of the within mentioned Bond to Patrick McGee and Absalom Isaac and Joseph Froman as witness my hand and seal this 23^rd of February 1811

This day appeared before me Samuel Miranola Esqr a Justice of the Peace for the County of Bracken Philip Buckner who being duly sworn Deposeth That to the best of my Knowledge five years ago or upwards and previous to Machirs sale to McDowell Machir and myself did agree verbally to sell our claims on Salt river about two third miles from Bullitts Lick Jointly my tract of seven hundred acres Machir of five hundred acres which interfered with Each other at four dollars per acre and that we would settle the Interference between ourselves respecting the claims in the said Land and __ that prior to Machirs selling his five hundred to McDowell I had offered my claim of the balance of the seven hundred (having sold about two hundred acres to a Mr Irons) with Mr. Machirs five hundred acres at 4 dollars per acre and I did inform McDowell of the Interference between Machir and myself and that we were not bound to each other if we sold separately and after Machir had sold the land to McDowell Machir offered to purchase from me the interference but I asked such a price that he would not give it observing that he would only have to discount four dollars per acre if the cause was lost and this proposal of Machirs to me was soon after the said Machir had sold the land to McDowell and before Machir had brought suit against the said McDowell for the payments and further this Deponent sayeth not given under my hand this 10^th day of December 1801.

Bracken Co. Sc
Sworn and subscribed before me one of the Justices of the Peace for said on this day of Decer 1801 at the house of Philip Evert in the Town of Augusta.

The Deposition of Henry Crist Taken at the tavern of James Alexander in Shepherdsville on the twelfth day of October 1803 between the hours of Ten Oclock in the morning & Two oclock in the evening to be read as evidence for John McDowell in a certain suit in chancery depending in the Nelson Circuit Court between s^d McDowell complainant and John Machir Deft. the Defponent being first sworn Deposeth Question by the Complt at the time of making the Contract between the Deft John Machir and myself for his land below Bullitt lick to which you are a witness did or did not I express it as my opinion that the part of said land which is interfered with by Philip Buckners claim was the best part and that I would not purchase of him at all unless such part were made secure? Answer, yes. Question by the Complt after the Deft had drawn the agreement that he was to make me a Deed with special warranty for his land aforesaid without saying anything more about Buckners claim did I or did I not refuse signing the agreement on that account? Answer, yes. Question by Complt when I refused signing the sd agreement for the reason aforesaid did or did not the Deft that the omission of a covenant to warrant against Buckners claim should make no Difference that he would quiet Buckners interference and that Buckner and himself had agreed that either might sell and that whoever sold first should pay no more than the purchase money to the other in case his claim should be adjudged the superior and was or was it not upon such assurance that [Missing word: I] signed the agreement? Answer yes.

Bullitt County sct. The above Deposition was taken subscribed and sworn to before us at the place and time above mentioned October 12^th 1803.

The Deposition of Adam Shepherd at the tavern of James Alexander on the 12^th October 1803 betwee the hours of ten Oclock in the morning and two Oclock in the evening in Behalf of John McDowell to be read as evidence in a suit in chancery depending in the Nelson Circuit Court between s^d McDowell complt and John Machir Deft the Deponent being first sworn Deposes. Question by Complt did or did not the Defendant John Machir employ you as an agent to manage the Dispute between him and Buckner concerning the interference of their lands below Bullitt Lick? Answer he did desire me to attend to it. Question by Complt did you or did you not with Philip Buckner attend at my house for the purpose afs^d and thence go over some of the lines with the survey and did you or did you not express it as your opinion that the Deft had Better relinquish to Buckner? Answer I did express it as my opinion that Buckners claim was the Best. Question by complt did you or did you not then hear Buckner tell me that if I did not purchase the one hundred acres of interference that he would sell to Jonathan Irons who he said had been __ proposals to him for the land? Answer, yes. Question by complt did I or did not advise advice with you [blurred: as ] the subject and did you or did you not advise me to enter into a conditional contract with him on the subject as the interference was where I had made my improvements & as it covered the best part of the land and lest he might sell? Answer, yes. Question by Complt before the conditional contract entered into between Buckner and myself had or had not Jonathan Irons made a discovery of salt water on land adjoining and had or had not such discovery considerably increased the value of the said one hundred acres? Answer, yes.

Bullitt County Sct. The above deposition taken and subscribed and sworn to before us Justices of the Peace for sd county at the time and place above mentioned October 12^th 1803.

Nelson Circuit Sct John Machir vs John McDowell } Execution Issued on the 26^th January 1803 for Debt £140.2.1½ Interest from 22^nd October 1800 at 6 per cent. Cr on Original Judgment for $400 endorsed Sheriffs return. By virtue of this writ to me directed I have offered the property for sale and not sold for want of Bidders. The Deft paid sixty three pounds six shillings and seven pence. I have paid the same to the Sheriffs order after taking my commission for the said sum of sixty three pounds six shillings and seven pence.

John Machir vs John McDowell & James Barker } Execution issued 16^th January 1803 for £161 Dam^e costs $11.66. Replevied.
£161.0.0 Amount of Replivin Bond Dam.
3,10.0 Replevin Bond Dated 26^th costs
3.15.7 March 1803 Com.
£163.5.7

Be it remembered that heretofore to wit that is to say on the [blank] day of [blank] 1803 John McDowell filed in the clerks office of the Nelson Circuit Court his Bill in chancery with injunction against John Machir wich Bill is in the words following (Viz)
To the Honorable the Judges of the Circuit Court for the Circuit composed of the County of Nelson sitting in chancery your Orator John McDowell humbly complaining shews unto your honors that wishing to settle himself on Salt river in the vicinity of Bullitts Lick and finding that a certain John Machir (whom your orator prays may be made a Deft to this Bill) claimed a tract of five hundred acres of land which suited your orator as to situation and quality (in part) very well he made propositions to said Machir to purchase the same that when your Orator found that the Deft would not sell on any other Terms than to refund the purchase with Interest in proportion to the quantity of land which might be lost your orator mentioned the claim of one Phil. Buckner which interfered with said land and which your Orator as it was an early and special location was apprehensive would hold the land that the said Deft then represented to your Orator that the said Buckner had agreed to yield up his title to the interference to any purchaser from him the said Deft on receiving of the purchase money in proportion to the interference should his title thereto be adjudged the superior one and that he the said Deft could and would extinguish said Buckners claim to said land your Orator further states that believing the information and representations of the said Deft to be true he on the 30^th day of January 1798 purchased of the said Deft the afsd 500 of Land for the sum of £600 and by articles of agreement of that date covenanted to pay the said Deft in parcels at stated periods and the said Deft covenanted to convey the said land to your Orator by Deed containing clauses to refund the purchase money with Interest in proportion to such loss or losses as should happen and your Orator entered on the said Disputed part of the said land and made improvements which he conceives to be worth two hundred and fifty pounds. Your Orator further states that the said articles of agreement speak nothing of the said Defts engagement to extinguish Buckners claim to the land so sold by the said Deft to your Orator wherefore he says that they are materially Defective and that he was overreached and imposed on and would not have excepted the said articles of agreement if he had not have believed that the Deft could and would have vested your Orator with Buckners as well as his own title to the said land or would have been liable to your Orator for the value of as much as would be held by Buckner your Orator further states that there are other claims on the said land and that the stipulation in the said articles to refund was never intended by the said Deft to embrace or include Buckners title as by reference to a copy of a letter dated the 7^th day of July 1798 and written by the said Deft to your Orator will appear (the original being filed in a former suit in chancery with injunction between your Orator Complt and the said Machir Deft now depending before your honors and which he prays to be made a part of his Bill in which he the Deft assures your Orator that he would endeavor to procure Buckners written agreement as to the said land your orator further states that he entered on and improved the most valuable part of the said land and under the impression that the contracts would be fully and fairly executed made considerable payments to the said Deft and would have discharged all the purchase money if the said Deft had not neglected to settle with Buckner and obtain his title for your Orator and if the said Buckner by reason of such neglect had not compelled your Orator to purchase the said interference at the rate of £3 per acre amounting to £300 or thereabouts your Orator states that after purchased the said land of the said Deft and before he your Orator purchased of the said Buckner the said land had increased very considerable in its value from the Discovery of Iron Lick which discovery was made about two years after the said purchase by your Orator from the said Deft. And your Orator supposed that the said Buckner considering the said increased value and that the part of the said tract of 500 acres with which his claim interfered was of realty more valuable than any part of the remainder in the same proportion would not comply with the aforesaid verbal agreement said to have been entered into by him with the said Deft and as the land included within the said interference would render the Balance of the said tract quality more valuable to your Orator if possessed by him and having made his improvements as aforesaid thereon he was induced to give the said £3 per acre your Orator further states that after he had delayed payment for the reason aforesaid the said Deft Brought suit in the late Supreme Court for Bards Town District on the said articles of agreement and without making your Orator any further title to the said land hath obtained a Judgment against your Orator on which Judgment your Orator replivied by virtue of which Replevin at execution has been sued out against him and his security for the sum of £163.5.7 with interest thereon &C and 33 cents costs all which acting and doings of the said Deft and his confederate are contrary to equity and good conscience and tend to injure and aggrieve your Orator. In tender consideration whereof and for as much as your Orator is without remedy in the premises by the rules of the common Law and can only be relievable in the Honorable Court where contracts are equitably enforced or their operation suspended or Defeated and matters of fraud cognizable To the end therefore that the said Deft may make true full an perfect answers to all and singular the allegations matters and things in this Bill set forth in as full and ample manner as if they were herein again repeated and interrogated and that all proceedings may be enjoined on the said Judgment replevy Bond and Execution until the said Deft secures your Orator against Buckners title to said land or until who the said Deft shall convey the said land to your Orator and covenant to warrant the same against the said Buckner and all persons claiming nder him or his heirs may it please your Honors to grant to your Orator the Commonwealths writ of Sp^a with Injunction &C and such other and further relief to which he may be Equitably entitled and he will ever pray &C.

I hereby release all errors in the proceedings at Law in the Judgment &C on which is above prayed to be enjoined Sir you will please to issue.

Sir You will please to issue an injunction agreeably to the prayer of the within Bill upon the said John McDowell giving Bond with Thomas S. Slaughter, Joseph Lewis and Jacob Yoder or either one of them his security conditioned according to law given under our hands this 10^th day of August 1803. To the clerk of the Crct Court of Nelson County.

And thereupon the following summons with Injunction issued __
The Commonwealth of Kentucky to the Sheriff of Nelson County Greeting we command you to summon John Machir to appear before the Judges of our Nelson Circuit Court at the court house in Bards Town on the first day of our next June Term to answer Bill in Chancery exhibited against him by John McDowell and this he shall in no wise omit and have then there this writ witness Thomas Speed Clerk of our said Court this 16^th day of April 1804 and in the 12^th year of the Commonwealt.

To enjoin the within named John Machir his agent attorney and all others concerned for him from having any other or further proceeding on a certain Prosecution on a replevin Bond given by said John McDowell and his securities to said Machir for the sum of £163.5.7 with Interest thereon &C and 33 cents costs until the same shall be heard in equity on a Bill filed for that purpose by the said John McDowell.

I acknowledge the service of the within subpoena 16^th April 1804.

And at rules held in the clerks office of the said court in the month June in the year aforesaid "answer filed & time which answer is in the words following (Vizt)"
The answer of John Machir to a Bill in chancery exhibited against him in the Nelson Circuit Court by John McDowell. The Defendant now and at all times hereafter saving and reserving and reserving to himself all manner of Benefit of Exception to the many Errors uncertainties & untruths in said Bill contained for answer thereto or so much Thereof as it is material for him to answer and he answereth and saith that true it is he claimed five hundred acres of land near Bullitt Lick and sold it to the complt on the Terms in the article of agreement in the Bill mentioned and upon no other Terms as the complt has erroniously stated in his Bill the Deft admits that he believed Buckner would have been willing to relinguish to any person he the Deft would sell to what was land in Buckners claim might embrace within the Defts Boundaries (Buckner having previously asked the Deft to sell in conjunction their claims and the Deft as a matter of courtesy to the complt not from any obligation or sense of obligation to the sd complt promised him to use his endeavors with Buckner to get him to relinquish his right and this Deft did all his endeavors to procure an Extinction of Buckners claim so far as it interfered but when he came to speak with Buckner about the Terms he asked so much more than this Deft had any reason to believe the said McDowell would give to that this Deft declined any further effort in the business. This Deft at the time of the sale of sd land refused to warrant against the claim of Buckner as of any person else had the contract been otherwise he is persuaded the said complt would not have signed the article without the insertion of the condition which he now affects to have believed was so important in the contract. The stipulation in the article (which article is made a part of this answer) were this Deft believes and has every reason to believe well understood by sd complt at the time of the contract & only obliged this Deft to refund by a Better claim for this Deft would not have made the contract on any other Terms. This Deft denies overreaching the sd complt in the contract he denies that there was any thing essential in the contract omitted in the written article he admits he wrote the Letter stated in the Bill but denies that it is evidential of the contract between him and the Complt but only of his endeavor out of mere courtesy as stated above to procure the extinction of Buckners claim so far as it interfered acted from motives of friendship to the complt and not from motives of obligation for none such could exist from the nature of the contract. The Deft has been always been ready to convey the lands to the said complt upon his making the payments agreeably to the contract and there is now in the hands of his agent at Bards Town (he believes) a Deed executed in Dec^r 1798 in the presence of respectable Witnesses for said land to said complt for this Purpose the Deft is now ready and always will be willing to have a Deed legally executed to the complt agreeably to the contract upon his making the payments stipulated therein for which Judgments have been obtained the Deft denies that the clauses to refund did not embrace the claim of Buckner for there was no claim excepted or understood to be excepted from that clause he denies fraud and prays to be hence dismissed with his costs in this behalf most unjustly sustained.

Clerk's office, Nelson Circuit Court April 16^th 1804

John Machir this day made Oath before me that the allegations in this answer so far as stated from his own knowledge are true and what is stated from information he believes to be true.

Note The article of agreement refer^d to and made part of Defts answer is copied on the 20^th page of the preceding record.)
and at rules held as aforesaid in the months of July August Sept^r October November December in the year afsd this suit was cont^d
1805 January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, Sept^r October, Nov^r and Dec^r in the year afsd this suit was cont^d
1806 January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December this suit was continued.
1807 January, February, March & April rules this suit was continued. May rules "rules for replication. June, July and August continued. September rules "dismissed for want of Prosecution. And at a court held for the Nelson Circuit at the court house in Bards Town on the 23^rd day of October in the year 1807" On the motion of the complainant by his attorney ordered that the office dismission herein entered be set aside and that this suit be remanded to the rules.
And at a court held as aforesaid on the 13^th day of July (being a continuation of the June Term 1811)" ordered that this suit be continued until the next Term.
And at a court held as aforesaid on the 11^th day of April (being a continuation of the March Term 1812 "ordered that this suit be continued until the next Term
And at a court held as aforesaid on the 11^th day of July (being a continuation of the June Term 1812) "ordered that this suit be continued until the next Term
And at a court held aforesaid on the 6^th day of October 1812 "ordered that this suit be continued until the next Term
And at a court held as aforesaid on the 9^th day of April being a continuation of the March Term 1803 (in Decree on the 19^th page of the preceeding Record)