Henly Donnelson vs. Missouri Fur Company
View original image: Page  001
[missing figure]

District of St LouisSt Louis in the com-
mon pleas of the term of November in the year of our Lord one thousand eight Hundred and ten

District of St LouisSt Louis

Henly Donnolson by
his attor
ney complains of Wm -
August - Manuel Lesaw - Benjamin Wilkin
son- AndrewAndrew Henry HenryAndrew Henry - Louis - and
by the name and state of the St LouisSt Louis for Company of a plea of
on the case for that whereas the said defend
ants on the nineteenth day of april in the year of our said one thousand eight hundred and nine at St LouisSt Louis in the Dis
trict of St LouisSt Louis and within the
of this Court by A. P. their agent
made a certain writen agreement with the
said plaintiff and then and there delivered
the said agreement to the said plaintiff
by virtue thereof and by of the force of the statute in such case made and they the said
defendants became to pay to the said
plaintiff five hundred dollars and being so
liable they the said defendants in con
sideration thereof after ward to will on the
same day and year at the place and within
jurisdiction last aforesaid under took and
then these forthfully promised to pay to
the said Plaintiff five hundred dollars
when they afterward requested

And where as afterwards trait on the
same day and year at the place and within
the jurisdiction last aforesaid they the said
defendants was to the said plaintiff

in the same of five hundred dollars for work

View original image: Page  002
[missing figure]
and labour case and diligence of him the
said Plaintiff in and about the said business of
the said defendants fame performed and
to the said defendants by the said Plaintiff
at the special instance and request of the said
defenants and being so they the
the said defendants in consideration there of
then and these faithfully promised to pay to
the said plaintiff five hundred dollars when
they he these unto afterwords requested

And whereas afterward, the same
day and year at the place and within the
last aforesaid in consideraton that
the said plaintiff at the like instance
and request of the said defendants would
in to the service of the said St LouisSt Louis MissouriMissouri fair company they the said defendants then and
there faithfully to furnish to the
said plaintiff an equipment such as
or custom any for and hunting or to
pay to the said plaintiff five hundred dollars
when they should he there to afterwards requested
and the said plaintiff that he did enter
in to the and remain for the
term of one year from the date of the in
statement here with filed

And whereas afterwards trait on the
same day and year at the place and
within the jurisdiction last aforesaid in considera
tion that the said plaintiff at the like instance
of the said defendants would enter into
the service of the said company they the said
defendants faithfully promised then and
there to pay to the said plaintiff so much
money as he the said Plaintiff stand there
for reasonably deserve to have and the
said Plaintiff that he did enter into the

View original image: Page  003
[missing figure]

Territory of LouisianaLouisiana
District of Saint LouisDistrict of Saint Louis

Sct

The United StatesUnited States of AmericaAmerica to the Sheriff of
the district of Saint LouisSt Louis
Greeting

We command you to summon Wm Clark, Wm Morrison
PeterPeter Manor, Peter Chouteau, August P. Chouteau , Manuel Lesaw , BenjaminBenjamin Wilkinson
WilkinsonBenjamin Wilkinson , Andrew HenryAndrew Henry , Reuben Louis and Sylvestre Labadda , by the
name and of the St. LouisSt LouisMissouriMissouri Fur Company Fur CompanyMissouri Fur Company if they be found
within your bailwick that they be and appear before the judges of our
Court of Common pleas to be holden at the town of Saint LouisSt Louis in
and for the district of Saint LouisSt Louis on the first Monday of November
next then there to answer unto HenlyHenly Donnolson DonnolsonHenly Donnolson of a plea of on the case to the damage of the said HenlyHenly Donnolson DonnolsonHenly Donnolson the sum of
Seven hundred dollars and have you then there this writ

[missing figure]

Witness the Honorable SilasSilas Bent BentSilas Bent Esquire presiding
judge of our said Court at the town by SaintSt Louis
LouisSt Louis aforesaid this Sixth day of October in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and Ten and of our inde-
pendence the thirty fifth

View original image: Page  003
[missing figure]
No. 48
Henly DonnolsonHenly Donnolson by MissouriMissouri Company

This is an action
trespass on the case
for work and labour
done in the said
company

a summons
for the defendants
to appear at the
November

nov. 1810

View original image: Page  004
[missing figure]

service of the said defendants the
Company aforesaid and did faithfully
the said company for the term of one year
from the 19th of april 1809 and that he
therefore reasonably to have of the
said dependants other five hundred dollars
to wit at St LouisSt Louis aforesaid in the District
aforesaid whereof of they the said defendants
there had notice yet the said dependants
on any one of them on their agent them
after requested have not furnished the said
equipment any part there of or paid the said
sums of money or any part thereof but to
furnish the same or to pay the same on
any part thereof have hitherto -
and still refuse to the said plaintiff
his damages of seven hundred dollars and
therefore he suit by


his Attorney

View original image: Page  004
[missing figure]

St. LouisSt Louis MissouriMissouri fur Company to Henly DonnolsonHenly Donnolson one year's
work ----
St LouisSt LouisMay 2d 1810â

View original image: Page  005
[missing figure]
Henly DonnolsonHenly Donnolson
vs
St LouisSt Louis MissouriMissouri
fur. Company â

Discontinue this suit
Saint LouisSt Louis8th October 1810

& Plaintiff Attorney