Why Could the Sheriff Not Find Great-Grandma Fannie Neill in 1908? Part 5-Wrap-up

On 10 February 1908, the Hancock County Sheriff said that my great-grandmother "could not be found in Hancock County, Illinois" and left a summons with her husband, Charles. This post concludes the series on where I think Fannie was in 1908.

While it is possible that she was out of the area (perhaps visiting a pregnant sister), I'm inclined not to think so based upon the following reasons:

• The Neills had two small children of their own in February of 1908; Cecil and Ralph, both under the age of five. It seems unlikely that Fannie would leave Charlie alone with the children.
• The Neills were tenants on the Rampley farm that was the subject of the partition suit filed in 1907 and, if they couldn't purchase it, would be forced to move. It's doubtful the young couple would have been able to purchase the 205 acre piece of property. 
• William Rampley (one of the plaintiffs in the 1907 partition suit) obtained a separate judgment while the partition suite was in process from a Justice of the Peace against Fannie Neill totalling $186.98. This amount was garnished from her interest in the Rampley farm. It's possible that this case was already "brewing" in February of 1908.

It seems very reasonable that, given the situation, when the sheriff came to the door Fannie either refused to answer or Charles told her not to. You can't force someone to answer the door and the legal matters involved are not criminal in nature--she wasn't avoiding arrest. It isn't very difficult to imagine, given the situation, that she simply didn't come to the door. 

If the only information I had was the fact that Fannie "couldn't be found," I wouldn't be so quick to draw this conclusion. But given the items in the second and third bullets, it seems reasonable that Fannie was in Hancock County in 1908. 

Why Could the Sheriff Not Find Great-Grandma Fannie Neill in 1908? Part 4

The problem with court records is that while they provide significant detail into our relatives' lives, they often leave out details.

We've seen that Fannie Neill "couldn't be found" when the Hancock County Sheriff came knocking in 1908 to give notice that the farm she was renting from her father's estate was subject to a partition suit filed by her mother and brother William.

The partition suit apparently wasn't the only legal action William took against Fannie.

The final account in the partition suit references a judgment against Fannie Neill by her brother William for $180.68 that was obtained before Squire Martin. The reference to the judgement does mention what the judgment resulted from, but it could very well have had to do with the farm that the Neills were renting--perhaps for grain, supplies, or other expenses

Apparently when he issued the judgment, Squire Martin attached it to the Neill's interest in the farm of Riley Rampley and the amount was taken from Fannie Neill's amount when the partition suit among the heirs of Riley Rampley was settled.

In this era, cases for small amounts of money could be heard in front of a justice of the peace instead of the county court. That seems to be what happened here.  Where those records are is another matter entirely. How necessary they are to my research is also another matter. I'm not certain it's worth my time to search them out.

There may have been a little more going on here than simply the partition suit. Without seeing the records, it's difficult to speculate about William Rampley's claim against the Neills. It's also possible that they simply decided to let the amount come out of their inheritance--which apparently it did.

Stay tuned for a wrap up post.

Why Could the Sheriff Not Find Great-Grandma Fannie Neill in 1908? Part 3

It struck me as odd that great-grandma Neill could not be found by the Hancock County Sheriff in February of 1908 when he came to their residence in Walker Township. It seemed odd that she'd be off helping a sister with a baby or something and leave her husband behind with two children under the age of five.

As in most cases, a complete reading of the records gives one a better picture--and also makes it clear that there's always more going on than what gets left behind on a piece of paper.

The packet of court papers in the 1908 Hancock County, Illinois,  partition suit involving the family of Riley Rampley is rather large. Sometimes when a file is rather large, it can be tempting to gloss over certain items, particularly when a document appears to be full of legalities. That's when details can be missed. The image that is a part of this post comes from the "Decree Appointing Commissioners to Make Partition," filed in June of 1908.

The initial filings in the case indicated that Charles Neill was the tenant on the Rampley farm with a lease expiring on 1 March 1908. This order indicated that Neill (and probably his family as well) was still on the farm on as of June 1908. The compounding factor here is that Charles Neill's wife, Fannie, was a member of the Rampley family herself.

There is no mention in the court papers as to when the Neill family actually moved from the farm. It is also not mentioned how the Neills reacted to the litigation involving the property on which they were living. Their reaction is not difficult to imagine.

Stay tuned....

Why Could the Sheriff Not Find Great-Grandma Fannie Neill in 1908? Part 2

This sale referenced in this sale bill was the result of a 1908 Hancock County, Illinois, court case involving the widow of Riley Rampley and his children. Riley had died in 1893 leaving a farm, a widow, eleven children, and no wil. His estate was never brought to probate and in 1908, this partition suit was filed in the Hancock County court.

This is the court case to which Fannie Neill received a summons in February of 1908 when the sheriff returned a notice that she could not be found in the county and left a notice with her husband.

I'm not certain why Nancy  and her one son William (along with his wife Amanda who had a dower interest in the interest in the real estate her husband had inherited) were the plaintiffs in the suit. There were defendants in the case besides Riley's heirs. The Berrys and Alva Kelley were also defendants in the suit because they held mortgages to the farm that had been executed by several of Riley's heirs after his demise.

The tenants on the Rampley farm also had to be defendants--but they were also heirs.

And that may have been part of the problem---but just a part. Stay tuned.

Why Could the Sheriff Not Find Great-Grandma Fannie Neill in 1908?

On 10 February 1908, Carl Bertschi, Hancock County Sheriff went to the farm of Charles and Fannie Neill in Walker Township.

The problem was that Fannie was no where to be found and the summons was left with her husband Charles.  The sheriff made no comment about Fannie's whereabouts, just that she could not be found in Hancock County.

Where was Fannie Neill in February of 1908? Was she missing? Why didn't she come to the door?

Do you always look at the summons that appear in the court records you utilize? Are there clues or stories hiding in those seemingly innocuous slips of paper?

Stay tuned. There's more to this story...I think.