Preston and Others v. George W. Coons, Administrator of the Estate of Milton Duty, et al.
View original image: Page  093
[missing figure]

Estate of said Duty which were appraised in
the fall of the year eighteen hundred and thirty
eight at the sum of seven thousand
seven hundred and twenty five dollars
and this defendant further states that there
are notes due by perons in the State ofMississippi
MississippiMississippi to the amount of twenty four
hundred and fourteen dollars and nineteen
cents in addition to the notes before mentioned,
belonging to the Estate of said Duty, now
in the hands of Sanderson, the admi-
nistrator de bonis non with the will annexed
of the said Duty in said state of MississippiMississippi.
That said Duty owned in real estate
of the time of his death to the knowledge of
this defendant - and this defendant does
not know of any other property or effects
of any kind whatever belonging to
said Duty'sDuty's Estate than that above
stated, and is informed and believes that
the above statement contains all the property
and effects of said Duty'sDuty's Estate in the hands
of this defendant, and of the aid adminis-
trator in the state of MississippiMississippi or elsewhere
and for a more full statement of the condition
of the said Estate this defendant here
files an authenticated trancript of his proceedings as
administrator of said Estate in the probate
Court of St. Louis County, together with a copy
of the inventory of the effects of said Estate -
and of the demands allowed against said
Estate - which said transcript is marked

View original image: Page  094
[missing figure]
C. No. 1 and prayed to be taken as part
of this answer-

This defendant further states that all the demands
in said transcript specified have been duly proved
and allowed by the proper Court against the
said Estate of said Duty, and be believes them
to be just and legal demands - that the
demands in said trancript specified in from
of John & WilliamWilliam Henderson and also in
of the planters BankBank of Mississippi of MississippiBank of Mississippi , which in
said bill are charged to be false and
illegal were established by judgments
in the St. LouisSt Louis Court of common pleas
after having been long and strenuously
contested by counsel employed by
defendant - and this defendant
by any
or in respect
to the allowance of any demand against
said Duty'sDuty's estate, and says that all
the charges and insinuations in respect
thereto in said bill, areutterly
false and unfounded- this defendant
further state thats ever since he has
Charge of the said Dutys Estate as
administrator, he has endeavored to
perform his duty as such, and has used
even to collect all monies
due said Estate and to realize the
most out of the effects and assets -
which came to his hands - and
this defendant further states that