Bookmark
Us
Print PreviewState vs. Samuel and Reuben Rogers
Kristin did a super job of putting this information together. Thanks for
sharing it Kristin.
Reuben
Rogers in this case is the son of Joseph b. ca 1758 and the grandson
of Benjamin (the Immigrant). This Reuben
Rogers was also known as Major Reuben. He served in the War of 1812.
Major Reuben was b. ca 1785 probably in Montgomery (now Wythe) Co, VA
and d. 19 Apr 1867 in Washington Co, TN.
Samuel Rogers
in this case was of course the son of Major Reuben. This Samuel b. ca
1816 was the husband of Alscy (Alsie) Vine.
Joseph
mentioned in the testimony is of course the son of Major Reuben b. ca
1785 and brother of Samuel b. ca 1816. This Joseph was b. ca 1813 in Washington
Co, TN.
Thema: [ROGERS-BEN] State vs. Samuel and Reuben Rogers, part 1
Datum: 4/25/2001 5:24:39 AM GMT Daylight Time
From: kristin108@hotmail.com (Kristin Whitson)
Reply-to: ROGERS-BEN-L@rootsweb.com
To: ROGERS-BEN-L@rootsweb.com
Dear Cousins,
A little while ago I sent information about the State vs. Samuel and Reuben
Rogers. I have been very interested in this case because it is a family story in
my family that my Rogers moved to Jefferson County, TN from Washington County,
TN around 1890 because some of the Rogers had gotten into some sort of
trouble and J.J. Rogers (my great-grandfather) and possibly Samuel Rogers (my
great-great grandfather, presumably named for his Uncle involved in the State
vs. Samuel and Reuben Rogers) feared for their
lives. So I was looking through criminal records for Rogers. Actually, I have
found that criminal records, next to pension applications often give some of the
best information about the people’s lives, their character, and what went on
during their lives that was important to them.
I am happy to say I was able to find many of the original documents relating to
this case at the Archives of Appalachia in Johnson City, Tennessee. It turns out
that the original records for Washington County were sent there from the
courthouse in Jonesborough. Since I had found these references (I previously
sent) to the case in the minute books, I knew a little about the case. However,
I was under the false impression that unless a case was appealed to the State
Supreme Court that all transcripts from a case 164 years ago had probably been
destroyed.
However, when I asked for these records at the Archives, they brought out boxes
of the original documents from the basement. I quickly found the State vs.
Samuel Rogers (fortuitously in the first box I opened right on top!). I am
positive that the Court Clerk had bundled together these papers in 1838, tied
them with a bit of string, and they had not been opened until I untied them and
the dust crumbled away from the string and
papers. I thought in such a fragile condition they wouldn't copy them either but
they did.
I will send on the most interesting papers that contain the court testimony
following. It turns out that most of the papers are the State vs. Samuel Rogers
but there are some of the State vs. Reuben Rogers as well. Included are the
grand jury indictment papers, Samuel Rogers own statements, testimony in the
trial against Samuel, Reuben Rogers bail papers, subpoenas for witnesses in the
trial, receipts for payment of witnesses, jailors, etc.
Also, I found it interesting to see Samuel Rogers own signature, and Reuben
Rogers' along with the people who bailed him out of jail, John Blair (US
Congressman from Washington County, and Elijah Embree, maybe the richest man in
that area and owner of the Iron Works). I also noted that the jury for Reuben
Rogers trial was sequestered at the Chester Inn, which is a very historic site
in Jonesborough where three presidents spent the night and many other
dignitaries (there is good information about it on the web).
I am positive that some testimonies, etc. are missing from the papers I found as
well. Whether they are gone forever or just packaged in another bundle somewhere
in a box in the basement I don't know. I do intend to go back as soon as I get a
chance and have a thorough look for them. However, the testimonies included here
I think tell us most of the story of what happened and what precipitated these
events. I think also that some of
the character of the Rogers is shown. In these documents, I get the impression
that they were stubborn, territorial individuals much like many frontiersmen, I
suspect.
What was not indicated in the court minutes that I previously sent was the name
of the man who was murdered. It was Thomas Bayless, a neighbor of the Rogers.
The Baylesses were also early settlers in Washington County and were involved in
the formation of the Iron Works. Thomas Bayless' father is listed as Daniel L.
Bayless on the IGI, and Daniel L. Bayless is listed as the prosecutor of the
case, although I suspect in this case, it means he is the person who pressed
charges, not the lawyer trying the case.
The testimony that is included is primarily from State witnesses, there is
partial testimony from one defense witness. From this testimony, I extract the
following set of events. Thomas Bayless (who seems like sort of a bully to me in
the case, although I am probably a bit biased in my reading) had killed some of
Reuben Rogers' hogs. Bayless apparently knew he would have to pay for the hogs,
but wasn't going to let Reuben charge him too much. At the Iron Works (the
'furnace' is referred to) Bayless and Reuben Rogers got
into an argument. Bayles said he was going to 'whip' Reuben for charging too
much. Reuben Rogers said he was an old man and a cripple and would not fight
Bayless. (In his pension application, we learned Reuben Rogers had a hernia from
his 10 days march to Horseshoe Bend in the War of 1812 and walked with a staff
for most of his life after that.) Bayless said that he would not only 'whip'
Reuben Rogers, but would 'whip' Reuben's sons too.
Apparently nothing happened that day, but the next day, the Rogers were having a
dinner party on the River at Joseph Rogers' (Reuben's other son) house. (I think
perhaps a mid-July barbeque since many hogs had been killed). This is where the
fight resulting in the death of Thomas Bayless actually took place. There were
many witnesses.
Although both Samuel and Reuben were first charged with first degree murder, in
the minutes I sent earlier, they were allowed to be tried separately. Reuben
Rogers was found not guilty and after the jury was out for 3 days, Samuel was
found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. This is certainly a most interesting
and tragic case.
In the mean time, I will start sending the testimony of the trial. If anyone
would like, I can scan in Reuben and Samuel's signatures or John Coppenger's
signature or anything else from my copies and them.
Indictment - State Vs Samuel Rogers And Reuben Rogers
Murder in the first degree
Daniel L. Bayless Prosecutor
Witnesses before the Grand Jury: Edward Baker, Wilson Scott, Elihu Baker,
Abraham Starns, Thomas I. Wilson, William Rolston, John Rolston, William Dunken,
Smith Tally, Samuel Patrick, Jacob White, Sarah White, Thomas F. Brown, John C.
Hams, James H. Vance. Sworn in open Court and Sent to the Grand Jury 15th Nov
1837 by John Ryland, Clk.
Case presented to the grand jury:
State of Tennessee}
Washington County }
Circuit Court Nov Term In the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred thirty
seven.
The Grand Jurors for the state of Tennessee being duly summoned elected
empanelled sworn and charged to enquire for the body of the County of Washington
aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid Present That Samuel Rogers late of the
County of Washington aforesaid laborer, and one Reuben Rogers late of the County
of Washington aforesaid laborer, not having the fear of God before there eyes,
but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil, on the nineteenth
day of July in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty seven,
with force and arms, in the County aforesaid, in and upon one Thomas Bayless, in
the peace of God and of the State, then and there being Feloniously willfully
deliberately Maliciously and premeditatedly, did make an assault, and that the
said Samuel Rogers and the said Reuben Rogers, with certain Knife of the value
of twenty five cents, which they the said Samuel Rogers and Reuben Rogers in
their right hands had and held, the said Thomas Bayless, in and upon the left
side of
the belly, and three inches above the left groin of him the said Thomas Bayless
then and there Feloniously willfully deliberately maliciously and
premeditatedly, they did strike and thrust, giving to the said Thomas Bayless
then and there with the Knife aforesaid, in and upon the said left side of the
belly and three inches above the left groin of him the said Thomas Bayless, one
mortal wound of the breadth of one inch and of the depth
of three inches of which said mortal wound the said Thomas Bayless from the said
nineteenth day of July in the year aforesaid until the twenty third day of the
same month of July in the year aforesaid in the County aforesaid, did languish
and languishing did live on which said twenty third day of July in the year
aforesaid, the said Thomas Bayless in the County aforesaid of the said mortal
wound died. And as the Jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid do say that
the said Samuel Rogers and the said Reuben Rogers, the
said Thomas Bayless in manner and form aforesaid, feloniously willfully
deliberately maliciously and premeditatedly did kill and murder in the first
degree. To the evil example of all others in like cases offending contrary to
the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and
dignity of the state.
John M Brabson
Attorney General
For the first solicitor District
Indictment handed down by the grand jury:
And the Grand Jurors for the first solicitor district aforesaid upon their oath
aforesaid do further present, and say that Samuel Rogers late of the County of
Washington aforesaid laborer, and Reuben Rogers late of the County of Washington
aforesaid laborer, not having the fear of God before their eyes, but being moved
and seduced by the instigation of the Devil, on the nineteenth day of July in
the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty seven, with force and
arms, in the County aforesaid, in
and upon one Thomas Bayless, in the peace of God and of the State, then and
there being Feloniously willfully deliberately Maliciously and premeditatedly,
did make an Assault, And that the said Samuel Rogers with certain Knife of the
value of twenty five cents, which he the said Samuel Rogers, in his right hand
then and there had and held, the said Thomas Bayless, in and upon the left side
of the belly, and three inches above the
left groin of him the said Thomas Bayless then and there Feloniously willfully
deliberately Maliciously and premeditatedly, he the said Samuel Rogers did
strike and thrust, giving to the said Thomas Bayless then and there with the
Knife aforesaid, in and upon the said left side of the belly and three inches
above the left groin of him the said Thomas Bayless, one mortal wound of the
breadth of one inch and of the depth of three inches of which said mortal wound,
the said Thomas Bayless, from the said nineteenth
day of July in the year aforesaid until the twenty third day of the same month
of July in the year aforesaid in the County aforesaid, did languish and
languishing did live on which said twenty third day of July in the year
aforesaid, the said Thomas Bayless in the County aforesaid of the said mortal
wound died. And that the aforesaid Reuben Rogers, then and there feloniously
willfully deliberately maliciously and premeditatedly was present
aiding helping abetting and comforting assisting and maintaining, the said
Samuel Rogers the Felony and Murder aforesaid, in manner and form aforesaid to
do and commit. And so the Jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say,
That the said Samuel Rogers and Reuben Rogers the said Thomas Bayless then and
there in manner and form aforesaid, Feloniously willfully deliberately
Maliciously and premeditatedly did kill and murder in the first degree. To the
evil example of all others in like cases offending contrary
to the _______ the statute in such case made and provided, And against the peace
and dignity of the state.
John M Brabson
Attorney General for the first solicitorial District
Petition of Saml Rogers
State of Tennessee }
First Judicial Circuit }
to the Hon Samuel Powel one of the Judges of said State
The Petition of Samuel Rogers citizen of Washington County who is now confined
in the common jail of said County on a charge of an assault with an intent to
commit murder in the second degree (for such is the charge in the State’s
Warrant) on the body of Thomas Bayles Would respectfully represent to your Honor
the facts connected with the unfortunate occurrence which have caused his
present imprisonment – On or about the 19th of July last the deceased, himself,
his father and several others were present at the house of Joseph Rogers in said
County and that after a short time the deceased commenced abusing your
Petitioner, and called him a liar at which time your Petitioner was a
considerable distance from the diseased and after some angry words passed the
deceased advanced on your petitioner perhaps a rod from where he was standing
and struck your petitioner, a scuffle immediately ensued and during the scuffle,
one or two persons interfered and separated them. The deceased complained that
some one had struck him or kicked him in the side. During the quarrel the
deceased had a knife open in his hand as your petitioner believes and so had
your Petitioner but was standing off
interrupting no one whittling a stick and had no thought or design to use the
knife on the deceased Bayles nor anyone else. After the affray was over Bayles
started home and after being at home some time as your petitioner is informed
became sick and an examination made it was ascertained he had a stab wound in
the lower part of his body near the groin. This was the first time either the
deceased or your petitioner or any one present had any idea he was stabbed and
your petitioner most solemnly declares that if the deceased were stabbed with
the knife held in the hand of your petitioner it must have been accidental in
the struggle and scuffle between them and without the knowledge or comment or
intention on the part of your petitioner.
Your petitioner well remembers that the deceased immediately after he had first
stricken him seized your petitioner round his right wrist and held it very tight
and shortly thereafter they were separated. The deceased himself declared as
your petitioner is informed shortly before his death, that if he was stabbed by
your petitioner it was accidental in the scuffle and not by the intention of
your petitioner and opined as a reason that he had a part grip of your
petitioners hand. Your petitioner had no hostile feelings toward the deceased
nor were there ever any angry feelings manifested until the sudden affray which
terminated unfortunately in the death of the said Thomas Bayles. He died on
Sunday succeeding the Wednesday of the truly lamentable reencounter. Your
petitioner further states that he was at his brothers house when the affray took
place and the deceased with others came there & that until the deceased attacked
him, he had no idea of having an affray with him or any human being that he
never open his mouth and said an angry word to the deceased until he commenced
on him with abuseful language calculated to provoke any man and soon after came
to where your petitioner was standing and struck him. The deceased was a man of
great muscular power & esteemed himself & had made threats as your petitioner
believes he can prove to which not only yr. Petitioner but his father &
brothers.
The premise is considered your petitioner prays your Honor to grant him the
constitutional writ of Habeas Corpus, directed to William Dorser the Sheriff of
Washington County to bring the body of your petitioner before your Honor at such
time & place as will suit the convenience of your Honor, to the end that your
Petitioner on examination of the witnesses, (if an examination he deemed
necessary by your Honor after having first inspected the evidence taken down by
the magistrates, may be bailed and to do & receive whatsoever by the laws &
constitution of the State he is entitled to and have such relief as is
consistent with justice &c and yr. Petitioner will even pray &c.
State of Tennessee
Washington County
Personally appeared before me the Subscriber, and the acting justices of the
peace for the County of Washington Samuel Rogers, the petitioner and made oath
that the facts set forth in the preceding which are of his own knowledge are
true, and those states on the information of others he believes to be true.
Sworn to Subscribed Before me the 3rd Day of Aug 1837. Samuel Rogers
(signature)
Saml Greer, Justice of the Peace
Reuben Rogers Bail Bond:
Recognizance
State VS R. Rogers
State of Tennessee }
Washington County}
Know all men by these presents that we Reuben Rogers & Jno Blair & Elijah Embree
Are held and firmly bound with the State of Tennessee in the final Sum of two
thousand Dollars Severally and Sounly to be Levied of our good & Chattles Lands
& Tenements to be void on Condition the said Reuben Rogers make his personal
appearance at the next term of the Circuit Court to be held for Said County at
the Court House in Jonesboro On the 2nd Monday in November next and then & there
answer the Charges of the State against him for Committing an assault on the
body of Thos Bayles by Stabbing him with an Intent to Murder and not depart
thence without leave otherwise to remain in full force & Virtue & in Law Witness
our hands & Seals this 23rd July 1837
Test
Saml Greer, J Peace (Seal)
Reuben Rogers (Seal)
John Blair (Seal)
Elijah Embree (Seal)
Samuel Rogers Mittimus:
Mittimus
State VS Saml Rogers
State of Tennessee }
Washington County}
To the Shff or Jailor of Sd County
You are hereby Commanded to receive into the Prison of the Said County the Body
of Saml Rogers and him Safely keep So you have him before the next Circuit Court
to be held for Sd County on the 2nd Monday in November next then & there to
Answer the Charge of the State against him for Committing an assault & Battery
on the Body of Thos Bayles by Stabbing him with an Intent to Murder or is thence
discharged by due Course of Law herein fail not Given our hands & Seals this
23rd day of July 1837
Saml Greer (Seal) J Peace
Joseph McLin (Seal) Justice of the Peace
Wm K Blair (Seal) Justice of Peace
Request for a separate trial:
State Vs S. Rogers}
Samuel Rogers
Maketh oath that he is advised and believes it true that the testimony of Reuben
Rogers who is Jointly indicted with him on this case will be material witness
for him on the trial of this cause without the benefit of which he cannot safely
come to trial, and that Justice to him requires that said Reuben Rogers should
be first tried. He further states that this
application is not for delay but the attainment of Justice. Wherefore he prays
that your Honor will order and direct that the said Reuben Rogers shall be first
tried
Samuel Rogers
Sworn to in open court
Nov. 17th 1837. John Ryland, Clk
List of Subpoenas for Witnesses:
Witnesses for the State:
Edwin J. Baker, Thomas J. Willson, Willson Scott, Smith Tally, William Duck,
John Ralston, Elihu Baker, Abraham Starnes, Saml Patrick & Mrs White (wife of
Jacob White), William Rolson, Elijah Embree, Thomas H Brown, Jacob White, John
Copenger, Doctor John C Haness & Jas H Vance, Christopher McInturff, William
Tinker, Benjn P. Hopkins, James Nelson, Mark Foster and Henry Hickey , Daniel L.
Bayless.
Witnesses for the Defendant:
Richd Bell, George Tucker, Jesse Clark, Wm A Duck & Joseph Rogers, Benjamin
Howern, William Carrol, Piggay Rolston, Sarah Starnes & Sarah Rolston, Mitchell
Rolston, Hutson Luttrell , William Bayles, Fredrick Starnes.
The following is the testimony of some of the witnesses at the trial.
Apparently, the "transcript" of the trial does not include the attorney's
questions, only the witnesses answers. Therefore, it appears disjointed at times
(also the lack of punctuation is not helpful.) We can only guess as to what the
questions were.
State Vs Saml Rogers & Reuben Rogers Stabbing
Edward Baker
They had a little Sate & after that was over they were sitting Thomas Baley was
sitting down in the yard S Rogers was standing a little of(f) cutting a stick &
Thomas Baily named to Rogers about a little story that had been talked about. S
Rogers denied it T Bales gave him Rogers No Lye & S Rogers return it they passed
the Lye am turn or thru them Bayles _________ up & struck him on the head as man
as I can tell They then Scufled of(f) a little way I am of the bystands ______
that Rogers had his knife out & opn I wetup (?) ran in & took the knife out of
his hand at which time Bayles had a hold of his arm by the wrist I scpct for the
purpose of keeping him from stabbing him Witnes then caught a hold of Rogers &
follow him away from Bayles that separated Bayles & S Rogers Witness then turn
round & discovered that Reubin Rogers & Bayles was in a sort of Tussle The
witness does not know which Rogers was trying to part them as Than facl ___ Cuy
Witness saw R. Rogers with his arms over Bayless’ shoulder I do not know whether
he was trying to shove foul play his hand was some where about his neck or face
or somewhere. R. Rogers jabbed him with his little reed cane but witness does
not know whether it was before T Bayles struck him R. Rogers or not but Bayles
did strike R. Rogers Somewhere on the head with his fist after they were sort of
pulled back Rogers jabbed at Bayles with his cain but do not know whether he
struck him or not Witness then turned away from R Rogers & Bayles and S Rogers
had a rock in his hand & Swore damn his Soul if he did not kill Bayles Witness
told him Rogers to lay down the roak & he done so.
They kept Jaweney on Thomas Bayles rather shovd on R Rogers & Rogers gave back a
few steps R. Rogers picked up a stam Seath told him to lay down the rack & he
done so The party remained on the ground one Hour or one Hour & half.
Cross Examination
After the affray witness went on home with Bayles. Witness did not hear Bayles
say he was stabbed but said he was kicked after witness took the knife from S
Rogers he put in his pocket and kept it until the quarrel was nearly over.
Witness gave the knife to R. Rogers & he to Constable Scott.
Thomas J. Wilson
Witness did not see the comment of the affray – Reuben R. and Thomas B. were
fighting when he first saw them. They was parted in a very few minutes after I
saw them – not more that an minute. Witness went home with T. B. but did not see
the wound that night, and not until next morning. When I saw it next morning, it
appeard to have been made with some sharp instrument – it went through on apron,
pantalons, pants pocket and shirt, into his groin. He complained that he had
been kicked the first evening. Witness
believes that Thomas B. is now dead, or will die afore evening. Witness is of
impression that his death proceeded from the wound. Does not pretend to say how
he got the wound – does not know how he got it. Witness states that B.
complained of the kick immediately after Reuben R. and him were parted.
Qu. By Court.
The day before the trial, Reuben R. and Thomas B. had a quarrel on the back of
the furnace. Thomas B. told R. he would whip him. T. told R. R. that if he wd
get down off his horse he would whip him. R. replied that he was too old and a
cripple, and could not fight. Bayles then said he would whip him. Rogers said if
he did, he would take his life – but B. did not strike him, and then the dispute
ended. Saml R. was not present at this dispute. After the affray a fight was
over the next day, witness heard Thomas B. Say that he wd whip Reuben R. or any
of his sons. Reuben told him that he did not brag on his sons fighting, but he
had seen the day when he (R.) could have torn his (B.) white eyes out. After
they were parted, Bayles said maybe he could catch them out one at a time, but
did not say what he would do with them. When on the ground he complained of
being hurt. Reuben R. asked him if he was hurt much. Bayles said he was not –
Witness was under the impression that R. R. was tantalizing Thomas B.
William Duncan
I don’t know very much about it. The first thing he saw was Baker trying to get
the knife from Saml Rogers’ hand. I think Joseph Rogers then came in between
them. And tried to shove them apart. Reuben R. was at Bayles back – I tried to
pull him away. Thomas said that Reuben had been gouging him – they had then some
severe words. Thomas then struck Reuben, lightly – I think W. Rogers then aimed
to get a rock – he got one in his hand – W. Scott, I think it was took the rock
from Reuben R. While W. Scott was taking the rock, Thomas B. was waking up
towards Reuben – they were quarrelling both of them very severely. After S. had
taken the rock from Rogers, he (R) held his stick as though he was going to jab
at Thomas B. Thomas at this time was approaching R. R. at the time. R. Said Damn
him, let him come. After the affray T. B. complained of being hurt- R. Rogers
asked him if he was much hurt - B. answered that he was not much hurt – he said
that some of them had kicked or struck him. I took a different route home from
that which B. went, but started about the same time and reached Bayles house as
soon as he did. I stopped with Bayles at his house a qur of an hour – When we
parted, he went into his house, and I started up the road toward my house. I
supposed I had got 100 yards, or such a matter when his wife called to me to
come back. When I got back, Thomas was sitting on a plank at the door – he was
trying to puke – I then went up to
him and examined the wound – it was in his groin the cut did not appear larger
than the end of my little finger, but the side of the wound seemed to be popped
out – I then went to get John Ralston to go after the Doctor – I have seen the
wound since it appeared to have been cut with a knife – Witness attended on him
– he is Bayles brother-in-law – when I left him this morning, he was very bad,
and not expected to live.
(Cross 2d by R.)
Witness don’t know who stabbed B. don’t know how it was done. Saw the cut in the
pantaloons before they were taken off. Witness don’t believe B. Could have been
stabbed after he left the ground. Witness did not hear Thomas threaten to whip
Reuben Rogers or any of his sons that day. After the affray, witness heard
Thomas say “Maybe he would catch them one at a time – don’t remember whether B.
said he would whip them or not – Witness saw the cuts in the pantaloon before
the Doctor arrived.
Wilson Scott
Was not present at the commencement of the affray – Witness was in the house,
when he saw that there was some disturbance out of doors – went out, and heard
some one say that there was a knife away then. I then went up and got hold of
Samel Rogers arm – Edward Baker then took the knife out of Samul’s hand. We then
pulled them apart, but they got together again, we then separated them a second
time. I was standing between them when Reuben R. cam up – Thomas B. struck at
him. Reuben tried to hit Thomas with a
cane, but I don’t think his stick touched him. They then appeared to quarrel
more loudly than I had heard before, Rogers stepped off and got a rock – Witness
went to him and got the rock out of his hand – they then moderated – While they
were sitting down Bayless put his hand where his groin two or three times and
said he would like to know who it was that kicked him. Bayless appeared to be
very pale – more pale than common. After Baker took the knife from Saml R., he
kept it some minutes then asked whose knife it
was – Sam. R. or somebody else said that it was his (Rogers) knife – I said that
Rogers ought not to have it at that time, and I took it myself. I kept it until
they separated and we had got over the river. I then gave it to Saml Rogers. The
knife had two blades – the larger blade was 5 to 6 inches long. Saml Rogers
claimed the knife as his. The long blade was open when it was taken from Samul
Rogers. Witness states that he served a damage warrant on Thomas Bayless afore
the affray for hogs killed belonging to
Reuben Rogers. Bayles said he expected to have the hogs to pay for, but if
Rogers cut too high a shine, he would whip him.
(Cross Examined)
Did not see any one stab Thomas Bayles Don’t know how it was done.
Smith Talley
Witness was some distance off when he first saw the fight – Reuben Rogers and
Bayles was fighting when I first came up – Bayless was standing and Reuben was
jabbing with his stick. Saw nothing of the stabbing. Bayles complained directly
after the affray, that somebody had kicked him.
Cross Examined
After the affray, witness heard Thomas Bayless say that he did not intend to let
all three get on him in that way at once, but that he would catch them one at a
time and whip them.
Elihu Baker
Witness heard a quarrell – the lie passed, when Bayles got up and struck Samul
Rogers – they then closed in – Witness thinks he saw S. Rogers make two passes
with his knife at Bayless – Their backs were turned to witness at the time. He
thinks he saw the knife in Rogers hand and saw him make two passes at B. Witness
saw Baker trying to take the knife out of R.s hand. Don’t know that Samul R.
struck B. with the knife.
Cross 2d
Shortly after the fight witness heard B. complain that he was kicked – witness
went on towards home with him – did not hear B. complain very much on the way.
Witness supposes he was with B. one hour and a half after the affray. Heard no
threats made by B. or any one else before the affray.
John Ralston
I heard Bayles ask Samuel R. how he happened to tell his family that he intended
to kill him (Rogers/stock when they came upon the island or on his farm Rogers
said he had heard him say so and named the place at which he had heard it.
Bayles then told him that he lied. Rogers then said that Bayles was a dam’d liar
– After the fight began some of the company observed that there was a knife –
witness did not see the knife until they were taking it away from Rogers. Heard
B. complain that some one had kicked him. Did not
see any motion made with the knife – don’t know who made the wound. Witness saw
Mr. Bayles strike Reuben Rogers. Witness turned off after the affray began.
Witness states that Thomas B. and S. R. were always frindly after the fight as
far as he knew
Witness on behalf of the Defts
Jesse Clark, Esq. examined
Richd Bell examined
George Tucker
Saw Reuben Rogers with a rock in his hand, and heard him observe. “Don’t you see
him rushing on me, and me giving back.” Heard Thomas B. before the affray
threaten that he would whip Joe Rogers. After the fight, when there was some
talk about the knife, witness heard Bayless ask Rogers why he didn’t throw down
the knife. Samuel R. then asked B. if he had made any attempt to use the knife
on him. Bayless replied that he had held his hand, and that if he had not he did
not know but what he might have done.
From: "Kristin Whitson" < kristin108@hotmail.com>
Subject: [ROGERS-BEN] State vs. Samuel and Reuben Rogers, part 2
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:58:10 -0500
Indictment - State Vs Samuel Rogers And Reuben Rogers
Murder in the first degree
Daniel L. Bayless Prosecutor
Witnesses before the Grand Jury: Edward Baker, Wilson Scott, Elihu Baker,
Abraham Starns, Thomas I. Wilson, William Rolston, John Rolston, William Dunken,
Smith Tally, Samuel Patrick, Jacob White, Sarah White, Thomas F. Brown, John C.
Hams, James H. Vance.
Sworn in open Court and Sent to the Grand Jury
15th Nov 1837 by John Ryland, Clk.
Case presented to the grand jury:
State of Tennessee}
Washington County }
Circuit Court November Term In the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and thirty seven.
The Grand Jurors for the state of Tennessee being duly summoned elected
empanelled sworn and charged to enquire for the body of the County of
Washington aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid Present That Samuel Rogers late
of the County of Washington aforesaid laborer, and one Reuben Rogers late of the
County of Washington aforesaid laborer, not having the fear of God before there
eyes, but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the devil, on the
nineteenth day of July in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
thirty seven, with force and arms, in the County aforesaid, in and upon one
Thomas Bayless, in the peace of God and of the State, then and there being
Feloniously willfully deliberately Maliciously and premeditatedly, did make an
assault, and that the said Samuel Rogers and the said Reuben Rogers, with
certain Knife of the value of twenty five cents, which they the said Samuel
Rogers and Reuben Rogers in their right hands had and held, the said Thomas
Bayless, in and upon the left side of the belly, and three inches above the left
groin of him the said Thomas
Bayless then and there Feloniously willfully deliberately maliciously and
premeditatedly, they did strike and thrust, giving to the said Thomas Bayless
then and there with the Knife aforesaid, in and upon the said left side of the
belly and three inches above the left groin of him the said Thomas Bayless, one
mortal wound of the breadth of one inch and of the depth of three inches of
which said mortal wound the said Thomas Bayless from the said nineteenth day of
July in the year aforesaid until the twenty third day of the same month of July
in the year aforesaid in the County aforesaid, did languish and languishing did
live on which said twenty third day of July in the year aforesaid, the said
Thomas Bayless in the County aforesaid of the said mortal wound died. And as the
Jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid do say That the said Samuel Rogers
and the said Reuben Rogers, the said Thomas Bayless in manner and form
aforesaid, Feloniously wilfully
deliberately maliciously and premeditatedly did kill and murder in the first
degree. To the evil example of all others in like cases offending contrary to
the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and
dignity of the state.
John M Brabson
Attorney General
For the first solicitorial District
Indictment handed down by the grand jury:
And the Grand Jurors for the first solicitorial district aforesaid upon
their oath aforesaid do further present, and say that Samuel Rogers late of the
County of Washington aforesaid laborer, and Reuben Rogers late of the County of
Washington aforesaid laborer, not having the fear of God before their eyes, but
being moved and seduced by the instigation of the Devil, on the nineteenth day
of July in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty seven,
with force and arms, in the County aforesaid, in and upon one Thomas Bayless, in
the peace of God and of the State, then and there being Feloniously wilfully
deliberately Maliciously and premeditatedly, did make an Assault, And that the
said Samuel Rogers with certain Knife of the value of twenty five cents, which
he the said Samuel Rogers, in his right hand then and there had and held, the
said Thomas Bayless, in and upon the left side of the belly, and three inches
above the left groin of him the said Thomas Bayless then and there Feloniously
willfully deliberately Maliciously and premeditatedly, he the said Samuel
Rogers did strike and thrust, giving to the said Thomas Bayless then and there
with the Knife aforesaid, in and upon the said left side of the belly and three
inches above the left groin of him the said Thomas Bayless, one mortal wound of
the breadth of one inch and of the depth of three inches of which said mortal
wound, the said Thomas Bayless, from the said nineteenth day of July in the year
aforesaid until the twenty third day of the same month of July in the year
aforesaid in the County aforesaid, did languish and languishing did live on
which said twenty third day of July in the year aforesaid, the said Thomas
Bayless in the County aforesaid of the said mortal wound died. And that the
aforesaid Reuben Rogers, then and there feloniously willfully deliberately
maliciously and premeditatedly was present aiding helping abetting and
comforting assisting and maintaining, the said Samuel Rogers the Felony and
Murder aforesaid, in manner and form aforesaid
to do and commit. And so the Jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say,
That the said Samuel Rogers and Reuben Rogers the said Thomas Bayless then and
there in manner and form aforesaid, Feloniously willfully deliberately
maliciously and premeditatedly did kill and murder in the first degree. To the
evil example of all others in like cases offending contrary to the _______ the
statute in such case made and provided, And against the peace and dignity of the
state.
John M Brabson
Attorney General for the first solicitorial District
From: "Kristin Whitson" < kristin108@hotmail.com>
Subject: [ROGERS-BEN] State vs. Samuel and Reuben Rogers, part 3
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 00:21:58 -0500
Petition of Saml Rogers
State of Tennessee }
First Judicial Circuit }
to the Hon Samuel Powel one of the Judges of said State
The Petition of Samuel Rogers citizen of Washington County who is now
confined in the common jail of said County on a charge of an assault with an
intent to commit murder in the second degree (for such is the charge in the
States Warrant) on the body of Thomas Bayles Would respectfully represent to
your Honor the facts connected with the unfortunate occurrence which have caused
his present imprisonment On or about the 19th of July last the deceased,
himself, his father and several others were present at the house of Joseph
Rogers in said County and that after a short time the deceased commenced abusing
your Petitioner, and called him a liar at which time your Petitioner was a
considerable distance from the diseased and after some angry words passed the
deceased advanced on your petioner perhaps a rod from where he was standing and
struck your petitioner, a scuffle immediately ensued and during the scuffle, one
or two persons interfered and separated them. The deceased complained that some
one had struck him or kicked him in the side. During the quarrel the deceased
had a knife open in his hand as your petioner believes and so had your
Petitioner but was standing off interrupting no one whittling a stick and had no
thought or design to use the knife on the deceased Bayles nor anyone else. After
the affray was over Bayles started home and after being at home some time as
your petitioner is informed became sick and an examination made it was
ascertained he had received a stab in the lower part of his body near the groin.
This was the first time either the desceased or your petitioner or any one
present had any idea he was stabed and your petitioner most solemnly declares
that if the deceased were stabed with the knife held in the hand of your
petitioner it must have been accidental in the struggle and scuffle bettwen them
and without the knowledge or coment or intention on the part of your petitioner.
Your petitioner well remembers that the desceased immediately after he had first
striken him seized your petitioner round his right wrist and held it very tight
and shortly thereafter they were seperated. The deceased himself declared as
your petitioner is informed shortly before his death, that if he was stabbed by
your petitioner it was accidental in the scuffle and not by the intention of
your petitioner and opined as a reason that he had a part grip of your
petitioners hand. Your petitioner had no hostile feelings toward the deceased
nor were there ever any angry feelings manifested until the sudden affray which
terminated unfortunately in the death of the said
Thomas Bayles. He died on Sunday succeeding the Wednesday of the truly
lamentable reencounter. Your petitioner further states that he was at his
brother’s house when the affray took place and the deceased with others came
there & that until the deceased attacked him, he had no idea of having an affray
with him or any human being that he never open his mouth and said an angry word
to the deceased until he commenced on him with abuseful language calculated to
provoke any man and soon after came to where your petitioner was standing and
struck him. The deceased was a man of great muscular power & esteemed himself &
had made threats as your petitioner believes he can prove to which not only yr.
Petitioner but his father & brothers.
The premise is considered your petitioner prays your Honor to grant him the
constitutional writ of Habeas Corpus, directed to William Dorser the Sheriff of
Washington County to bring the body of your petitioner before your Honor at such
time & place as will suit the convenience of your Honor, to the end that your
Petitioner on examination of the witnesses, (if an examination he deemed
necessary by your Honor after having first inspected the evidence taken down by
the magistrates, may be bailed and to do & receive whatsoever by the laws &
constitution of the State he is entitled to and have such relief as is
consistent with justice &c and yr. Petitioner will even pray
&c.
State of Tennessee
Washington County
Personally appeared before me the Subscriber, and the acting justices of the
peace for the County of Washington Samuel Rogers, the petitioner and made oath
that the facts set forth in the preceeding which are of his own knowledge are
true, and those states on the information of others he believes to be true.
Sworn to Subscribed Before me the 3rd Day of Aug 1837. Samuel Rogers
(signature)
Saml Greer, Justice of the Peace
Reuben Rogers Bail Bond:
Recognizance
State VS R. Rogers
State of Tennessee }
Washington County}
Know all men by these presents that we Reuben Rogers & Jno Blair & Elijah Embree
are held and firmly bound with the State of Tennessee in the final Sum of two
thousand Dollars Severally and Sounly to be Levied of our good & Chattles Lands
& Tenements to be void on Condition the said Reuben Rogers make his personal
appearance at the next term of the Circuit Court to be held for Said County at
the Court House in Jonesboro On the 2nd Monday in November next and then & there
answer the Charges of the State against him for Committing an assault on the
body of Thos Bayles by Stabbing him with an Intent to Murder and not depart
thence without leave otherwise to remain in full force & Virtue & in Law Witness
our hands & Seals this 23rd July 1837
Test
Saml Greer, J Peace (Seal)
Reuben Rogers (Seal)
John Blair (Seal)
Elijah Embree (Seal)
Samuel Rogers Mittimus:
Mittimus
State VS Saml Rogers
State of Tennessee }
Washington County}
To the Shff or Jailor of Sd County
You are hereby Commanded to receive into the Prison of the Said County the Body
of Saml Rogers and him Safely keep So you have him before the next Circuit Court
to be held for Sd County on the 2nd Monday in November next then & there to
Answer the Charge of the State against him for Committing an assault & Battery
on the Body of Thos Bayles by Stabbing him with an Intent to Murder or is thence
discharged by due Course of Law herein fail not
Given our hands & Seals this 23rd day of July 1837
Saml Greer (Seal) J Peace
Joseph McLin (Seal) Justice of the Peace
Wm K Blair (Seal) Justice of Peace
Request for a separate trial:
State }
Vs }
S. Rogers}
Samuel Rogers
Maketh oath that he is advised and believes it true that the testimony of Reuben
Rogers who is Jointly indicted with him on this case will be material witness
for him on the trial of this cause without the benefit of which he cannot safely
come to trial, and that Justice to him requires that said Reuben Rogers should
be first tried. He further states that this application is not for delay but the
attainment of Justice. Wherefore he prays that your Honor will order and direct
that the said Reuben Rogers shall be first tried
Samuel Rogers
Sworn to in open court
Nov. 17th 1837. John Ryland, Clk
List of Subpeonas for Witnesses:
Witnesses for the State:
Edwin J. Baker, Thomas J. Willson, Willson Scott, Smith Tally, William
Duck, John Ralston, Elihu Baker, Abraham Starnes, Saml Patrick & Mrs
White (wife of Jacob White), William Rolson, Elijah Embree, Thomas H Brown,
Jacob White, John Copenger, Doctor John C Haness & Jas H Vance, Christopher
McInturff, William Tinker, Benjn P. Hopkins, James Nelson, Mark Foster and Henry
Hickey , Daniel L. Bayless.
Witnesses for the Defendant:
Richd Bell, George Tucker, Jesse Clark, Wm A Duck & Joseph Rogers,
Benjamin Howern, William Carrol, Piggay Rolston, Sarah Starnes & Sarah
Rolston, Mitchell Rolston, Hutson Luttrell , William Bayles, Fredrick
Starnes.
From: "Kristin Whitson" < kristin108@hotmail.com>
Subject: [ROGERS-BEN] State vs. Samuel and Reuben Rogers, part 4
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 00:30:35 -0500
The following is the testimony of some of the witnesses at the trial.
Apparently, the "transcript" of the trial does not include the attorney's
questions, only the witnesses answers. Therefore, it appears disjointed at times
(also the lack of punctuation is not helpful.) We can only guess as to what the
questions were.
State Vs Saml Rogers & Reuben Rogers Stabbing
Edward Baker
They had a little Sate & after that was over they were sitting Thomas Baley was
sitting down in the yard S Rogers was standing a little of(f) cutting a stick &
Thomas Baily named to Rogers about a little story that had been talked about. S
Rogers denid it T Bales gave him Rogers No Lye & S Rogers return it they passed
the Lye am turn or thru them Bayles _________ up & struck him on the head as man
as I can tell They then Scufled of(f) a little way I am of the bystands ______
that Rogers had his knife out & opn I wetup (?) ran in & took the knife out of
his hand at whih time Bayles had a hold of his arm by the wrist I scpct for the
purpose of keeping him from stabbing him Witnes then caught a hold of Rogers &
follow him away from Bayles that saperated Bayles & S Rogers Witness then turn
round & discovrd that Reubn Rogers & Bayles was in a sort of Tussle The witness
does not know whith Rogers was tryin to part them as Than facl ___ Cuy Witness
saw R. Rogers with his arms over Bayles s Shouldr I do not know whether he was
tryin to Shove fewl play his hand was some where about his neck or face or
somewhere. R. Rogers Jabed him with his little reed cane but witness does not
know whether it was before T Bayles struk him R. Rogers or not but Bayles did
strike R. Rogers Somewhere on the head with his fist after they
were sort of pulled back Rogers Jabed at Bayles with his cain but do not know
whether he struk him or not Witness then turned away from R Rogers & Bayles and
S Rogers had a rock in his hand & Swore damn his Soul if he did not kill Bayles
Witness told him Rogers to lay down the roak & he done so. They kept Jaweney on
Thomas Bayles rather shovd on R Rogers & Rogers gave back a few steps R. Rogers
picked up a stam Seath told him to lay down the rack & he done so The party
remained on the ground one Hour or one Hour & half.
Cross Examination
After the affray witness went on home with Bayles. Witness did not hear
Bayles say he was stabbed but said he was kicked after witness took the
knife from S Rogers he put in his pocket and kept it untill the quarrel was
nearly over. Witness gave the knife to R. Rogers & he to Constable Scott. Thomas
J. Wilson Witness did not see the comment of the affray Reuben R. and Thomas B.
were fighting when he first saw them. They was parted in a very few minutes
after I saw them not more that an minute. Witness went home with T. B. but did
not see the wound that night, and not until next morning. When I saw it next
morning, it appeard to have been made with some sharp instrument it went through
on apron, pantalons, pants pocket and shirt, into his groin. He complained that
he had been kicked the first evening. Witness believes that Thomas B. is now
dead, or will die afore evning. Witness is of impession that his death proceede
from the wound. Does not pretend to say how he got the wound does not know how
he got it. Witness states that B. complained of the kick immediately after
Reuben R. and him were parted. Qu. By Court.
The day before the trial, Reuben R. and Thomas B. had a quarl on the back of the
furnace. Thomas B. told R. he would whip him. T. told R. R. that if he wd get
down off his horse he would whip him. R. replied that he was too old and and a
cripple, and could not fight. Bayles then said he would whip him. Rogers said if
he did, he would take his life but B. did not strike him, and then the dispute
ended. Saml R. was not present at this dispute. After the affray a fight was
over the next day, witness heard Thomas B. Say that he wd whip Reuben R. or any
of his sons. Reuben told him that he did not brag on his sons fighting, but he
had seen the day when he (R.) could have torn his (B.) white eyes out. After
they were parted, Bayles said maybe he could catch them out one at a time, but
did not sa what he would do with them. When on the ground, he complaind of being
hurt. Reuben R. asked him if he was hurt much. Bayles said he was not Witness
was under the impression that R. R. was tantalizing Thomas B.
William Duncan
I dont know very much about it. The frist thing he saw was Baker trying to get
the knife from Saml Rogers hand. I think Joseph Rogers then came in between
them. And tried to shove them apart. Reuben R. was at Bayles back I tried to
pull him away. Thomas said that Reuben had been gouging him they had then some
severe words. Thomas then struck Reuben, lightly I think W. Rogers then aimed to
get a rock he got one in his hand W.
Scott, I think it was took the rock from Reuben R. While W. Scott was
taking the rock, Thomas B. was waking up towards Reuben they were
quarrelling both of them very severely. After S. had taken the rock from Rogers,
he (R) held his stick as though he was going to jab at Thomas B. Thomas at this
time was approaching R. R. at the time. R. Said Damn him, let him come. After
the affray. T. B. complaind of being hurt- R. Rogers asked him if he was much
hurt - B. answered that he was not much hurt he said that some of them had
kicked or struck him. I took a different route home from that which B. went, but
started about the same time and reached Bayles house as soon as he did. I
stopped with Bayles at his house a qur of an hour When we parted, he went into
his house, and I started up the road toward my house. I supposed I had got 100
yards, or such a matter when his wife called to me to come back. When I got
back, Thomas was sitting on a plank at the door he was trying to puke I then
went up to him and examined the wound it was in his groin the cut did not appear
larger than the end of my little finger, but the side of the wound seemed to be
poped out I then went to get John Ralston to go after the Doctor I have seen the
wound since it appeared to have been cut with a knife Witness attended on him he
is Bayles brother-in-law when I left him this morning, he was very bad, and not
expected to live.
(Cross 2d by R.)
Witness dont know who stabbed B. dont know how it was done. Saw the cut
in the panteloons before they were taken off. Witness dont believe B.
Could have been stabbed after he left the ground. Witness did not hear
Thomas threaten to whip Reuben Rogers or any of his sons that day. After the
affray, witness heard Thomas say Maybe he would catch them one at a time dont
remember whether B. said he would whip them or not Witness saw the cuts in the
pantaloon before the Doctor arrived.
Wilson Scott
Was not present at the commencement of the affray Witness was in the
house, when he saw that there was some disturbance out of doors went out, and
heard some one say that there was a knife away then. I then went up and got hold
of Samel Rogers arm Edward Baker then took the knife out of Samuls hand. We then
pulled them apart, but they got together again, we then separated them a second
time. I was standing between them when Reuben R. cam up Thomas B. struck at him.
Reuben tried to hit Thomas with a cane, but I dont think his stick touched him.
They then appeard to quarrel more loudly than I had heard before, Rogers stepped
off and got a rock Witness went to him and got the rock out of his hand they
then moderated While they were sitting down Bayless put his hand where his groin
two or three times and said he would like to know who it was that kicked him.
Bayless appeared to be very pale more pale than common. After Baker took the
knife from Saml R., he kept it some minutes then asked whose knife it was Sam.
R. or somebody else said that it was his (Rogers) knife I said that Rogers ought
not to have it at that time, and I took it myself. I kept it until they
separated and we had got over the river. I then gave it to
Saml Rogers. The knife had two blades the larger blade was 5 to 6 inches long.
Saml Rogers claimed the knife as his. The long blade was open when it was taken
from Samul Rogers. Witness states that he served a damage warrant on Thomas
Bayless afore the affray for hogs killed belonging to Reuben Rogers. Bayles said
he expected to have the hogs to pay for, but if Rogers cut too high a shine, he
would whip him.
(Cross Examined)
Did not see any one stab Thomas Bayles Dont know how it was done.
Smith Talley
Witness was some distance off when he first saw the fight Reuben Rogers
and Bayles was fighting when I first came up Bayless was standing and
Reuben was jabbing with his stick. Saw nothing of the stabbing. Bayles
complained directly after the affray, that somebody had kicked him.
Cross Examined
After the affray, witness heard Thomas Bayless say that he did not intend to let
all three get on him in that way at once, but that he would catch them one at a
time and whip them.
Elihu Baker
Witness heard a quarrell the lie passed, when Bayles got up and struck
Samul Rogers they then closed in Witness thinks he saw S. Rogers make
two passes with his knife at Bayless Their backs were turned to witness at the
time. He thinks he saw the knife in Rogers hand and saw him make two passes at
B. Witness saw Baker trying to take the knife out of R.s hand. Dont know that
Samul R. struck B. with the knife.
Cross 2d
Shortly after the fight witness heard B. complain that he was kicked
witness went on towards home with him did not hear B. complain very much on the
way. Witness supposes he was with B. one hour and a half after the affray. Heard
no threats made by B. or any one else before the affray.
John Ralston
I heard Bayles ask Samuel R. how he happened to tell his family that he
intended to kill him (Rogers/stock when they came upon the island or on his farm
Rogers said he had heard him say so and named the place at which he had heard
it. Bayles then told him that he lied. Rogers then said that Bayles was a damd
liar After the fight began some of the company observd that there was a knife
witness did not see the knife until they were taking it away from Rogers. Heard
B. complain that some one had kicked him. Did not see any motion made with the
knife dont know who made the wound. Witness saw Mr. Bayles strike Reuben Rogers.
Witness turned off after the affray began. Witness states that Thomas B. and S.
R. were always frindly after the fight as far as he knew
Witness on behalf of the Defts
Jesse Clark, Esq. examined
Richd Bell examined
George Tucker
Saw Reuben Rogers with a rock in his hand, and heard him observe. Dont
you see him rushing on me, and me giving back. Heard Thomas B. before the affray
threaten that he would whip Joe Rogers. After the fight, when there was some
talk about the knife, witness heard Bayless ask Rogers why he didnt throw down
the knife. Samuel R. then asked B. if he had made any attempt to use the knife
on him. Bayless replied that he had held his hand, and that if he had not he did
not know but what he might have done.
This page was last updated on: May 16 2008 09:17:54
