Preston and Others v. George W. Coons, Administrator of the Estate of Milton Duty, et al.
View original image: Page  119
[missing figure]

CoonsCoons , was ever destroyed or suppressed by any
one at any time before or since the death
of said Duty- nor does this defendant believe
that any such receipt has ever destroyed
or suppressed by any one -
And this defendant further states that he did not on the of said Dutys wealth the complainant
PrestonPreston , or any one else to bring him the trunk
of said Duty containing the papers and
money of said Duty, as in said Bill
charged, but the said PrestonPreston pointed out
the trunk without being asked and brought
the same to their defendant on the said
night efore being requested so to do-
And this defendant further says that he
does not know nor does he believe
that he tore up or destroyed, on the night
of the said Dutys death any paper or papers
of any kind whatever, as in said
bill alleged, either in the presence or absence of
the complainants or of any other person or
persons present in the house of said
Duty at the on the night of his death
as in said Bill alleged
And this defendant
utterly denies ever having heard or received
from the said James AdamsJames Adams or any
one else on the night of the death of said
Duty or at any time, any
against his conduct as charged
in said bill or of ever having replied that he could not help it- And this defendant admits
is to be true that he did on the night of the
death of said Duty, after an examination

View original image: Page  120
[missing figure]
of the said papers as before stated in his
answer, take and carry away the said
trunks and all the papers of said Duty,
except some worthless envelopes and pieces of
blank paper, which may have been left
upon the floor where the said examination
was made, but whether or not any such
were left there, this defendant has no
recollection or knowledge
this defendant says he was
away the trunks and papers on the said night
because he did not think it safe or proper for
the papers and money to remain
in the trunks neither of which had any lock
or key in the house of said Duty-
said Duty having
no white persons in his family and his
house and household affairs being
soleyin charge of the complainant-
This defendant also admits that
he became the administrator of said
Dutys Estate immediately after the death
of said Duty, and thus among the
first claims allowed against the
estate of said Duty were those of the
said David CoonsDavid Coons , amounting to the
sum of thirty six hundred and sixty five dollars
and twenty eight cents and a half, or will
appear on the transcript of proceedings in
the probate court heretofore filed
and made part of his answer-
And this defendant further says-
that the said claims allowed in