Preston and Others v. George W. Coons, Administrator of the Estate of Milton Duty, et al.
View original image: Page  169
[missing figure]

state of
County of St LouisCounty of St Louis


Personally appeared before
me the undersigned, Joseph Walker, who being
duly sworn on his oath states, that a few
days before the commencement of the last
term of this court, AndrewAndrew ChristyChristy and Mrs MaryMary Coons
CoonsMary Coons , who, as executors of David CoonsDavid Coons deceased
were made defendants to the bill of
of the said complainants, at the last term
of this court, and summoned to answer said
bill at the last term, applies to this affiant
to draw their answer to said bill and stated to
him that they had no personal knowledge
of the matters & things contained in said bill relating
to their testator - that this affiant informed the said
ChristyChristy , that it would be his duty to refer to
the books and papers of his testator in his
possession and also to endeavor to obtain
information in relation to the said matters from
other services that he could rely upon
and referred the said ChristyChristy to the Clerk of said
David CoonsDavid Coons for information which this affiant
knew was in possession of said Clerk, whose name
was Gallagher - that this affiant learned
a few days afterward, that said Gallagher was tempor
arily absent from the City, and might not, return
before the end of the first week of the last

View original image: Page  170
[missing figure]
term of this Court but was expected to return before
that time.
That this affiant in order to prevent a
default, drew an answer for said ChristyChristy and
said Mary CoonsMary Coons based upon such knowledge
and information of facts, as they had communi
cated to him in the absence of said Gallagher and had the said answer prepared
and ready for filing before the end of first week
of the last term of this court -
Before the end of that
week F. W. Risque Esq counsel for
the complainants, applied to this affiant, stating
that he was about leaving the city to be absent
a large portion of the term, and requested that
no motion should be made at that term to dissolve the
injunction on the front of George W. CoonsGeorge W Coons , one
of the defendants to the bill for whom this
affiant and H.R. Gamble appeared as counsel-
this affiant told him that Mr. GambleArchibald Gamble was
the principal counsel, and he preferred to leave the
matter to him, but that so far as this affiant
was concerned, he would make no such
This affiant and the said Risque
had another conversation during the second
week of the last term, in which Mr. Risque
stated that as no answer was filed by the Executors
of David CoonsDavid Coons , he would be entitled to a decree
nisi; This affiant replied that he had an answer
drawn for them at his office, but that from the
understanding between them he did not suppose
any advantage would be taken of its not being
filed before - To which said Risque
replied that no advantage would be taken of it,
and that this affiant might filed the answer
at a future time, provided the motion for
dissolving the information on the first of G.W.CoonsG W Coons
should be postponed by this affiant till the