Preston and Others v. George W. Coons, Administrator of the Estate of Milton Duty, et al.
View original image: Page  103
[missing figure]

In St. LouisSt Louis Circuit, sitting as a Court of Chancery,
November Term 1841

Preston, Braxton, et al,
vs.
Geo.W.CoonsGeorge W Coons .adr.oc. et al.

The exceptions taken and filed by the afore
said complainants to the answer of Geo.W.CoonsGeorge W Coons ,
administrator of the estate of MiltonMilton Duty deceas
ed, one of the defendants in this case:

First. For that the said Geo.W.CoonsGeorge W Coons has not set
forth in his said answer whether or not the
said Duty, on the 26th day of October A.D. 1836, made and published his last will
and testament nor whether the said will
was proven before the Probate Court of WarrenWarren County
CountyWarren County , in the State of MississippiMississippi, on the day,
in said Bill alleged - nor whether John JJohn J Guion .
GuionJohn J Guion and David DDavid D . Gibson were the ex
ecutors named in said will - nor whether
said executors having refused or neglected
to qualify as such, at the time mentioned
in said Bill, one HenryHenry Fernandes was
appointed and qualified as administrator.

Second. For that said Geo.W.CoonsGeorge W Coons has not
answered whether or not said will of said
Duty contained the directions in regard to the
disposition of the estate of said Duty, the payment of his
debts, the sale of certain slaves in said
will mentioned for the payment of said
debts, nor whether said last mentioned
slaves have been sold for that purpose

View original image: Page  104
[missing figure]
before the removal of said Duty from the StateMississippi
of MississippiMississippi - nor whether all of your orators
and oratrices, not otherwise disposed of,
belonging to said Duty on the
day of his death, were to be set free and
manumitted and sent to the State of MissouriMissouri
by the provisions of the said will - nor whether
the only specific legacies made by said will
are and were as is particularly specified
and set forth in said complainants Bill
of Complaint

Third. For that the said Geo.W.CoonsGeorge W Coons hath not
answered and set forth whether or not said
Duty, in his lifetime, made one David CoonsDavid Coons
in said Bill of Complaint mentioned, his
financial agent, and paid into the hands
of said DavidDavid all money arising from the
hire of your orators and oratrices, as he received
the same and also money derived from other
sources.

Fourth. For that said Geo.W.CoonsGeorge W Coons has not
set forth in his said answer
whether the said Duty had any
use for money except in the pork business,
and for his personal expenses, and whether said Duty did not execute
to said David CoonsDavid Coons his notes or due bills for the
sum of between three and four thousand
dollars, or the greater part thereof.

Fifth. For that the said Geo.W.CoonsGeorge W Coons has
not set forth whether or not the said
Duty did not receive the proceeds of the
sales of his pork sent to the South princi