Iberian Publishing Company's On-Line Catalog:
Pendleton County Virginia

WOLF HUNTERS ON THE VIRGINIA FRONTIER, 1776-1818 [bounty lists & certificates from Amherst, Augusta, Bath, Botetourt, Grayson, Greenbrier, Hampshire, Hardy, Mopntgomery, Patrick, Pendleton, Rockbridge, Russell, Shenandoah, Washington, and Wythe counties [dates vary] transcribed & edited by Karen Wagner Treacy. 8 1/2 x 11, vi, 169 pages, full name index.

Locating an ancestor on the Virginia frontier in the late colonial and early republican period can be a daunting task. As the historian and archivist Robert Clay once remarked in a lecture, an individual he was researching in Virginia’s frontier region "appeared in a random document one morning, fully grown, and disappeared the following morning never to be heard from again.”

Oftentimes, early frontiersmen created few records and left little trace of their passing. Nowhere is this more evident than in the rapidly changing frontier west of the Blue Ridge. Starting with a trickle of settlers, there probably were no more than 160 families residing west of the mountains by 1735. By 1776 and the American Revolution, the number of settlers had grown to tens of thousands, attracted by the rich soils and pasture lands of the Shenandoah Valley and beyond, into Kentucky.

As the new government sought to bring order to the region, parent counties like Augusta and Lunenburg, which originally were little more than artificial lines when first drawn by surveyors in the wilderness, underwent division and subdivision into smaller political units to accomodate the new settlers. The trio of counties on Virginia’s frontier in the early 1740s [Frederick, Augusta, Lunenburg] would be divided and further subdivided over the next seven decades into more than sixty political units.

Author Karen Treacy has discovered an enlightening and unexpected record in the bounty system for wolf hunters. Early farmers and herders sought legislative relief from the scourge of wolf packs. The Virginia legislature responded by establishing the bounty system. In a time when an average laborer’s earning was $6-10/month, the $1 to $6 or 100# tobacco from a wolf scalp (depending on the currency and inflation of the time) was an attractive economic draw for every class of frontiersman, even those constantly moving folk mentioned by Clay.

This book is an important record not only for the two and a half thousand individuals cited but also for a valuable historical window into the activities and growth of Virginia’s frontier society.


To view a digital copy (pdf) of the index to this book, visit Index-Bounty Lists
(Close the pdf file with the left arrow to return to Iberian's catalog)

[WOLF] $34.95    

---

Augusta District, Virginia, Court Records, 1789-1791 (of the District composed of the Counties of Augusta, Rockbridge, Rockingham & Pendleton)
Karen Wagner Treacy, 2022, iv, 335 pp., index.
The author's Introduction is reproduced here:
It started with a dead body found in a cave. Rumors of grave-robbing came to the coroner's jury. Unacceptable comments on race were made and published. Mutual suits for slander were filed. Typical days for the Augusta County District Court?

It nearly was. While the above suit and countersuit between Alexander Humphreys and Michael Garber (beginning on page 164) is the most spectacular account in this volume, it is far from being the only scandal. In 1786 the papers in the office of Richard Madison, late Clerk of Court, were found to be in such disarray that his estate was sued for the cost of refiling them. In 1791 Sheriff Thomas Hughart was prosecuted for perjury for understating the amount of taxable property on the county rolls. Papers filed in that case (beginning on page 159) include both Hughart's list of taxables and the auditors version of the same.

There are suits about violent assaults ("after much disputing Mr Yeager flew to his Gun and snapt it at sd Evans that he the sd Evans seized the Gun and Bringing the Gun down struck Yeager on the forehead so as the Skin hung down over his eye" page 298) and vicious slander (page 182 "these false scandalous & defamatory words following that is to say she the said Mary meaning may perhaps not be with child at this time but the reason of it is that she ye said Mary meaning has made away with it meaning that she ye said Mary had been pregnant with a bastard child & had destroyed or murdered it ye said child") and extravagant language in general ("the sd Deft knowing the premises and greatly envying the happy state and condition of the said Alexander and contriving and maliciously intending the sd Alexander in his good name fame condition and reputation to hurt, injure, degrade and him in his Business aforesd to prejudice and damnify and to cause the sd Alexander to be esteemed and reputed a person guilty of Murder" page 273). Drama, faded to a rusty brown ink, still adheres to these pages.

The bulk of cases coming before the District Court were for debt. Many cases summarized in my earlier volume of Augusta District Virginia Court Records 1789-1797, New Papyrus Publishing, Athens GA, 2019, (hereafter Augusta District) appear in this one in greater detail. This present volume covers 1789-1793 and is a companion volume to the previous record. There is much overlap: this volume covers fewer cases but in greater detail and includes supporting documentation.

Some of the entries have quite interesting economic data. Several cases reference the severe inflation that took place as a result of the Revolutionary War. The Scale of Depreciation is mentioned, in October of 1780 it is specified as being Seventy three for one. An amount stated in the currency of another state is annotated with its value in Virginia currency. Many promissory notes require payment in gold or silver. The customary units are pounds, shillings, and pence, but dollars and other coinage are also mentioned. It is noted that the penal sum built into contracts is double the contracted amount (page 87), and that the penal for retarding execution of damages (by filing an appeal) is ten percent (page 122 and 253).

A lawsuit over the construction of a mill includes a very detailed list of parts and labor (page 104). A Richmond merchant supplying a Staunton merchant gives us an equally detailed view of items stocked in the Staunton store, and local produce shipped to Richmond (page 124). A suit in 1791 mentions the timber value of various trees illegally cut on the plaintiff's land (page 281). Notes of obligation were frequently reassigned as a form of currency, usually for 'value received' but at least once as the result of a bet on a horse race (page 270).

Slaves and slavery appear in many cases. They figure in failure to complete contract suits and more acrimoniously in suits arising from slaves given in wills or marriage portions. A will quoted on page 186 says "And first I leave and bequeath unto my beloved Wife Agness I leave and bequeath my Dwelling house and my Molatta Wench and ... two Mares one known by the name of Phenix and the other Munsey." Note the wife and the mares are identified by name. Slaves also had a tendency to become 'lost' and come into the possession of someone else 'by finding', generally on the same day, and lawsuits attempted to sort out the ownership. The soundness of a convict servant man (page 200) is argued in the same way as slaves are required to be sound.

Still, it is the cases with sexual implications that catch the attention. A jury in a breach of promise suit gave judgement for the woman. The man appealed the two hundred pounds damages to the higher court in Richmond (page 66). On page 152 a man sued for being accused of buggery, on page 91 a woman was tried and acquitted of infanticide. A man was slandered by an accusation of rape, alleging he came in through the bedroom window while the husband of the house was out fishing (page 202).

Women did demonstrate some independence in certain cases. Mary Devericks maintained her right to select her own 'next friend' to defend her from slander as she was unable due to her age to represent herself (page 273). Mary Teas undertook as Special Bail for John Reid that if he were cast (lost) in the case he would "Satisfy the Condemnation of the Court or Render his Body to prison in execution for the same" or else Mary Teas would do it for him (page 228).

The Revolution made little explicit impact in these pages. I found the use of 'Washington's birth night' as a calendar reference in 1789 interesting (page 98). In 1775 a Richmond merchant wrote " I wonder what their mad associations will come I am giddy when I think about the dispute it is too ardous a matter almost to think of. I wish they had taken more compleat methods" (page 139). Virginia was still called a 'Collony' in 1786 (page 55).

As a person with some experience trying to decipher old records, I sympathize with Andrew Reid copying records from 1746: "The above is a true copy so far as the original Deed can be Read it being shattered and worn so that the Clerks Name is entirely afaced" (page 84). It is not the fault of the clerks that I could not decipher Germanic names, but I included the images in hopes someone else can read them. The orthography of this volume was overall of high quality. The dramatic content was higher still.

To view a digital copy (pdf) of the index to this book, visit Index-Adcr2
(Close the pdf file with the left arrow to return to Iberian's catalog)

[Adcr2] $37.95     (printed version)

---

Augusta District, Virginia, Court Records, 1789-1797 (of the District composed of the Counties of Augusta, Rockbridge, Rockingham, Pendleton and Bath)
Karen Wagner Treacy, 2019, viii, 272 pp., index.
Some examples from the author's Introduction are reproduced here:
The Court met twice a year, in April and September, in the Courthouse at Staunton, in Augusta County.

For finicky detail, this may possibly be the most challenging volume I have transcribed. One entry alone (page 34 of original manuscript) contained 41 names. I have done my best to reproduce the text as it is written, misspellings and all. For the index I adopted one standard spelling, as far as I could be reasonably sure that the entries referred to the same person. However, do check also other probable spellings. I am certain I have misread many names. Sorry. Quantum in me fuit!

Many of the cases were sent up from their respective county courts, but many were filed here as the court of origin. Unless agreed by the parties or dismissed by the plaintiffs, very few were settled at the first hearing. Most carried on from court to court, being continued even in spite of a jury verdict upon an appeal for a new trial. This makes the material in this volume quite repetitive. I have edited some entries, to remove the 'boilerplate' and focus on what really happened. All names have been retained, of course. Where I have omitted or abbreviated material, the summary is given in square braces. I shall give here, in the introduction, examples of the terminology which is repeated over and over.

An example from the beginning of page 12:
John McClery Plt
against In Debt
James Hawthorn & James Scott Defts
This day came as well the plt by his Attorney as William Scott Security for the Deft James Scott by his attorney, and There upon came also a Jury to wit Mathew Gamble, James Montgomery, Adam Bratton, James Hogg, John Bradshaw, James Knowls, Joseph Bell, James Guy, Joshua Parry, James Divier, George Benson and Edward Erwin who being elected tried and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joined upon their oath do say that the said Deft hath not paid the Debt aforesaid as the plt in replying hath alledged, and they do assess the plts Damages by occasion of the detention of the said Debt to one penny besides his Costs. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the plt recover against the said Deft James Scott and William Scott his Security aforesaid Three hundred and one pounds eight Shillings, the debt in the declaration mentioned and his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid assessed, and his Costs in this behalf expended & the said Deft in Mercy &c.
But this Judgment is to be discharged by the payment of One hundred and three pounds two Shillings, with Interest on One hundred and fifty pounds fourteen Shillings to be computed after the rate of five per centum per Annum from the twenty third day of September 1784 'til the eighth day of August 1785 and then on one hundred and Ten pounds two shillings 'til the 27th day of September 1785, and then on One hundred and three pounds two shillings 'til paid and the Damages aforesaid and the Costs.

From pages 240-241:
- Aminidab Seekright plt
against In Ejectment for one tenement one Garden & one lot of land in the Town of Staunton known by the number Ten containing half an acre of arable Land on Water Street with the appurtenances lying & being in the County of Augusta of the Demise of Michael Fackler and Jacob Geiger
Ferdinando Dreadnought Deft
This day came the plaintiff by his attorney and on the motion of William Chambers by his attorney he is admitted defendant in this suit in the room of the said Dreadnought, pleads the general Issue, confesses the lease entry & ouster in the declaration supposd & enters into the common rule to insist only on the title at the trial. Wherefore the conditional Judgment obtained by the pltf in this cause is set aside & this suit is ordered to be continued until September Court next. And on the motion of the plaintiff by his attorney It is ordered that the Surveyor of Augusta County do go upon the Lands in controversy on the next Saturday after the third Tuesday in May next if fair, if not then on the next fair day, and survey and lay off the same as each party may require & return three fair platts & reports of the same to the Clerks office (page 241) sometime before September Court next, and that Alexander St Clair & Alex'r Humphreys Gentlemen Justices of the peace for the County of Augusta do then & there meet him and take the depositions of such witnesses as shall be produced on either side, which are to be returned with the said platts & reports and that the Sheriff of the said County attend the said Survey and remove force if any shall be offered.

In many cases concerning land title fictitious names are employed, such as Aminidab Seekright and Ferdinando Dreadnought. Others are Thomas Trytitle or Henry Goodtitle against David Notitle, or Soloman Saveall against Simpleton Spendall. As the case progressed, some individual would petition to be named the defendant in the case 'in the room' of the said Dreadnought or Spendall. If no one appeared to defend the case, the court would respond in this fashion.

From pages 21-22:
- Soloman Saveall plt
against In Ejectment for one plantation one messuage, one garden, & one hundred & thirty acres of land lying and being in the parish and county of Augusta of the demise of Joseph Malcom
Simpleton Spendall Deft
This day came the plt by his Attorney and it (page 22) appearing by the affidavit of Oliver McCoy that John Beveridge tennant in possession of the premises has been duly served with a Copy of the plts declaration and of the Note thereunder written, and the said John Beveridge not appearing, it is ordered that unless he having Notice of this order or those under whom he claims or some or one of them do appear here on the first day of April Court next and make himself herself or themselves Deft or Defts in this suit in the room of the said Spendall plead the General Issue, confess the lease, entry & ouster in the Declaration supposed, and enter into the common rule to insist on the title only at trial, Judgment shall be given for the plt and a writ of possession awarded him.

When a suit for possession was defended:
From page 97:
Aminidab Seekright plt
against In Ejectment for one plantation one messuage one garden and one hundred and fifteen acres of land in the County of Rockingham of the Demise of Andrew Cutler and Agness his wife & James Bowyer and Margaret his wife
Ferdinando Dreadnought Deft
Uriah Garton is on his motion admitted Deft in this suit in the room of the said Ferdinando Dreadnought and thereupon by Rich'd Stuart esq'r his Attorney comes and Defends the force and Injury, when and where the Court will consider thereof pleads the General Issue, confesses the lease entry & ouster in the Declaration Supposed and agrees to insist on the title only at the trial.

A person involved in a suit often was required to give security for his or her appearance or to guarantee financial liability. Usually this was the defendant, but not always. This was recorded in the following form:
From page 54:
William Chambers undertook that if the Deft be Cast in this suit he shall pay and satisfy the condemnation of the Court, or render his body to prison in execution for the same, or that he the said William Chambers will do it for him.
or (from page 431)
Robert Willson came personally into Court and undertook for the plaintiff that in case he be cast in this suit he will satisfy & pay the Defendant all such Costs & Damages as may be awarded against the s'd plff and that he will also discharge the officers fees due or to become due from the s'd plaintiff.

Punishments administered by the court were burning in the left hand for grand larceny (administered by the Jailer in the presence of the court, on several occasions) and hanging. Hanging was decreed for Elizabeth Hazle, in October 1791, for murder (the case originated in Rockingham County, where she was examined for suspicion of killing her base born child, see Chalkley), and for John Bullett, in October 1793, for horse stealing. The Sheriff of Augusta County was responsible for the executions. Two judges were present when hanging was ordered.

If the defendant was found not guilty of a major offense, that verdict was publicly announced.
From page 493:
The Commonwealth
against On a Commitment from the Examining Court of Rockingham County under a Charge of feloniously & forcibly making an Assault on Sally Olinger & by force & against her will having carnel knowledge of her Body
Jacob Goode Deft
This day Came the attorney prosecuting for the Commonwelth and the said Sally Olinger & Ann Good two of the witnesses for the Commonwealth not appearing tho' solemnly called & no good cause being shewn why this Cause should be continued the said prisoner was led to the Bar in Custody of the Keeper of the public jail, and thereupon proclamation being made as the manner is & nothing appearing or being alledged against him & is ordered that he be discharged from his imprisonment.

A typical exoneration by the jury is as follows:
From page 37:
Henry Miller Plt
against In Trespass
Samuel Erwin Deft
This day came the parties by their attornies and thereupon came also a Jury towit. John Tate, Peter Hanger, James Buchanan, James Johnston, James Megongal, Jonathan Reid, Robert Douthat, Matthew Gamble, Andrew Steele, Gilbert Christian, Anthony Mustoe, & Hugh McDowell, who being elected tried and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joined upon their oath do say that the Deft is not guilty of the Trespass in the declaration Mentioned, as in pleading he hath alledged. Therefore it is Considered by the Court that the plt take nothing by his bill but for his false clamour be in mercy &c. And that the Deft go thereof without day and recover against the said plt his costs by him about his defence in this behalf expended.

Fines for non-attendance for jury duty were imposed as follows.
From page 5:
- Alexander Gibson, John Brown, Peter Hanger & James Brown of the County of Augusta, and John Bowyer, Alexander Stuart & Andrew Moore of the County Rockbridge, who were summoned to appear here this day as Grand Jury men were severally solemnly called but came not. Therefore it is considered by the Court, that for their said contempt they severally make their fine with his Excellency Beverley Randolph esquire Governor or chief Magistrate of this Commonwealth, and his successors, for the use of the Commonwealth, by the payment of four hundred pounds of Tobacco each, unless they shall shew sufficient cause of their inabillity to attend at the next Court.

Later, the standard fine for non-appearance was eight dollars.

Monetary fines and damages were usually in pounds, shillings, and pence, but sometimes in dollars, and occasionally in tobacco. When interest was ordered it was always at five percent except for out of state obligations, where it followed the legal rate of that state.

Only a few entries take note of current events.
From pages 499:
On the motion of the Defendants by their attorney a Dedimus is awarded them to take the Depositions of Thomas Turk & Robert Craig who are affraid to attend the Trial on account of the small pox.

I rather enjoyed the tavernkeeper on page 455 when he gently put his hands on the Defendant to put him out of his Tavern where he was breeding a riot & disturbing the peace of the House. Unfortunately the jurors decided against him. I am curious why Michael Garber gave testimony by affirmation (page 175), the only such instance in the record.

Those researching family history will find a few of the controversies over land to contain a surprising amount of family relationships. See entries for Mary Teas, Hugh Divier, and Robert Reed, for example. These records may also be helpful in establishing a death date. For convenience, I have added a section to the index of occasions where a cause abated (or a motion was made to have this occur) because of the death of one of the participants. Marriages are also mentioned such as Sampson Mathews & Cathrine his wife late Cathrine North, or James Beaty & Isabella his wife late Isabella Paul, Esther, Jane & Jenny Paul, Heirs of John Paul sen'r dec'd.

Some entries of particular interest follow the slave Robert Nailor, who petitioned for permission to sue his master for his freedom. An attorney was appointed for Nailor, who sued his owner, Samuel Meek, for assault and battery and false imprisonment. Meek was ordered not to sell or mistreat Nailor while his case was under adjudication, and was in fact brought up on contempt charges for doing so. The case came up on several occasions, but was not settled within the pages of this volume, being repeatedly continued as Nailor sought depositions from witnesses in other counties. Later Nailor was addressed as being in the possession of James Cochran, who was ordered to produce him in court, and to provide assistance in obtaining depositions. I wish I knew how this turned out.

That's the way it is with many of the cases here. We see the legalities, but not the story behind them. Why did Samuel and Jane Estill sue repeatedly to eject her mother from her land? Why did George Benson and Thomas Feemster have such a confrontation about stolen butter? Why did Sally Olinger not follow through with her charge of rape? Why did the Justices of Pendleton County sue their Clerk of Court? We only wade through 526 pages of suits and countersuits because beyond the facts of the cases we glimpse the people and personalities.
To view a digital copy (pdf) of the index to this book, visit Index-Adcr
(Close the pdf file with the left arrow to return to Iberian's catalog)

[Adcr] $35.00     (printed version)

---

PENDLETON CO., VA 1810 CENSUS transcribed, with an index by John Vogt. 10 1/2 x 8 1/2, x, 18 pages, illustrations, maps, index. This is the first surviving census for Powhatan, since both the 1790 and 1800 censuses have been lost. A complete index is included for easy access. This document should be a complement to the fine work of Roger Ward (below) on land taxes in the county.

[PEND10] $8.95     (printed version)

---

The above title is also available as a digital e-book in PDF format:

[EPEND10] $6.00     (electronic version)

---

Pendleton Co. 1815 Directory of Landowners by Roger G. Ward. 2005. 21 pages, map, 5 1/2X8 1/2.
For a full description of the 1815 LAND DIRECTORY Records and a listing of available counties, see combined volume below

[Vd80] $7.00

---

The above title is also available as a digital e-book in PDF format:

[EVd80] $5.00     (electronic version)

---

1815 DIRECTORY OF VIRGINIA LANDOWNERS & GAZETTEER, vol. 5 Southwestern Region (Includes the counties of Augusta, Bath, Botetourt, Giles, Grayson, Greenbrier, Lee, Monroe, Montgomery, Pendleton, Rockbridge, Russell, Scott, Tazewell, Washington, and Wythe ) abstracted by Roger G. Ward. 1997, vi, 240 pages, indices, maps.
In 1782 the General Assembly of Virginia enacted new tax laws which created within each county an enumeration of land and certain personal property. These early land tax laws required a tax commissioner in each district of a county to record a list of the names of persons owning land or town lots, the quantity of land owned and its value, and the amount of tax owed. By 1813, a brief geographic description (usually citing an adjacent stream, road, or other landmark) was required; in 1814, the distance and direction from the courthouse for each parcel was also added to the tax rolls.
The present work is an alphabetical listing of all 1815 landowners found in each county, as well as the accompanying description of the location of the said property. We have not included the number of acres, taxes assessed, or any transactions between landowners which may have been noted on the tax rolls; also, in many cases the geographic location was provided as "adjacent to John Smith", etc. and, while useful many times to a genealogist, was considered to be beyond the objectives of this project. The reader is encouraged to consider the information here-in as an "outline" of early landowners in Virginia rather than a "text" due to the year-to-year variation in information provided to the clerk (or recorded by the clerk), omissions, lack of "identifiers" to determine if "same name" was also "same person" within a district or across districts, marginal quality/clarity (in a few cases) of the microfilm copy, and, not least, errors on the part of either the original clerks or the current author while transcribing.
Some of the approaches to utilizing the 1815 landowner information include:

1. observe distinct clusters of the same surname within a county in order to clarify the common surnames such as "Smith", "Anderson", etc;
2. identify non-resident landowners and their county (or state) of residence (these people often being former residents of the current county);
3. determine neighbors with different surnames (often being relatives);
4. use the 1815 information as a "bridge" from the 18th and 19th century deed/will books to the 17th and 18th century land grants/patents in the county;
5. evaluate the 1810 to 1840 census information which generally grouped neighbors;
6. substitute this information for missing deed/will books in the "burned" counties; and, clarify/enhance vague deed/will information in the counties with more complete records.

FORMAT OF PRESENTATION: Each entry is listed as: Surname, name, personal identifiers (if any); location/place-name of land; miles/direction from the 1815 courthouse. If multiple owners are listed for a property, the listing is duplicated under each of the owner's surnames (i.e "Smith and Brown" is also listed as "Brown, --see Smith"); when multiple owners share a common surname, the property is only listed once. When a landowner had land at more than one location/place-name, the miles/direction listing for each parcel is in the same sequence as the location listing (i.e. James RV, Slate CK; 12N, 5SW.). In the few cases where a landowner had "many" parcels, the miles/direction notation is attached to the location listing (i.e. Sandy RV- 5NE, Willow CK-7S, etc.)

[Vdl5] $32.00    (paper version)

---

The above title is also available as a digital e-book in PDF format:

[EVDL-5] $20.00     (electronic version)

---

For records pertaining to PENDLETON COUNTY, VIRGINIA see:

• Augusta, Hardy, Rockingham, Highland and Pocahontas Counties
• Guide to Virginia Militia Units in the War of 1812
• Chart on the Formation of Virginia Counties
• Atlas of County Boundary Changes in Virginia, 1634-1895
• Index to the 1810 Virginia Census

Please see our HELP PAGE for mail-order instructions, wholesaler policies and other contact information.

---

|| Virginia/W.Va. || General Reference || Military Records ||
|| Other States || E-Books || New Titles || Home Page || E-Books ||

---

Copyright 2026 Iberian Publishing Company