Viewing page 2 of 234

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Hanover August 29th 1868

Dear Col:
Yours was recd yesterday & I reply at my earliest convenience.

Inclosed you will find a copy of the attachment which I issued & upon the oath of G.W. Thompson that he verily believed that Haines & Terrell intended removing their effects from the leased premises before the rent would become due & that unless an attachment issued, there would not be left on the premises property sufficient to satisfy s'd rent when it becomes [[strikethrough]] payable [[/strikethrough]] due.  For the law I refer you to the Code of Va 1860 Chap: 151. Page 646. Sec: 4. from this law you will perceive I have no discretion, any one making the oath I am bound to issue the attachment & there my functions cease. The county court disposing of the case, It may be well to mention that it is also my duty to require of a party who sue out an attachment to require of him a endemnifing bond with good security payable to the officer serving the attachment, or to any other person whose property he may levy on, for any unlawful or wrongful proceeding in the premises or for damages by the retention of the property from it rightful owner, which stands. I took in the sum of $90 and is with the papers in the Clerk office. The Court has made an order for the sale of the oats which is in the hands of the Constable, s'd sale on a credit until the 1st of next Jany: when the rent becomes due - The proceeds to be applied to satisfy s'd rent. I have seen the order & why it stated that

Transcription Notes:
s'd = said. A lot of this is really really faint. Good luck! ---------- Reopened for Editing 2023-12-08 15:26:43