Tuesday, February 5, 2019

52 Ancestors - SURPRISE: Buyer Beware


In the world of genealogy, just about every discovery comes as a surprise. Therefore, nothing should be a BIG surprise. After you get used to the presence of Black Sheep ancestors who stole a horse or beat their wife or killed someone, a simple lawsuit between neighbors seems to be just a mild hiccup in someone’s day. However, I confess to being a bit surprised by the events of 1867 that led John W. Jollett to enter into a lawsuit against his neighbor Monteller Utz.

John Wesley Jollett and Sarah Elizabeth Smith Jollett Jollett Hollow Page County, Virginia https://jollettetc.blogspot.com
John Wesley Jollett and his wife Sarah Elizabeth
photo courtesy of Jan Hensley
John Wesley Jollett was my 2X great-grandfather’s older brother. He was a farmer, a father of five, a veteran of the Civil War, storekeeper, postmaster and most memorably a respected Methodist minister in the Naked Creek community of Page County, Virginia. The church known today as Jollett United Methodist Church stands on land he donated for the purpose of building a church.

Jollett United Methodist Church https://jollettetc.blogspot.com
Jollett church

Utz vs Jollett

Despite all the good he might have done, there is a bit of a black-mark against his character. If you were to ask Monteller Utz, John W. Jollett flat-out duped him into buying a worthless horse.  

Clip from Utz vs Jollett Chancery Cause 139-1869-024-0003 https://jollettetc.blogspot.com
Clip from image #4
Page Co, VA Chancery Cause Utz v Jollett 139-1869-024 
Details of the suit and counter-suit reveal that Utz needed a work horse and Jollett had one to sell for $150. That equates to almost $2700 today. Utz did not have cash but trusting Jollett’s word that the horse could pull anything put behind it, he willingly signed a note promising to pay the agreed amount within two and a half months.

That after said horse was in his possession he ascertained by fair and repeated trials that he did not suit him and did not measure up to the positive representations of said Jollett, but on the contrary refused to work at all and in fact proved worthless to your Compt [Complainant]. Your Compt further states that he offered to return the horse to said Jollett who refused to receive him and indeed declined to accept any proposition of compromises, several being made by your Compt, with a desire to adjust the matter amicably and without material injury to himself.

Utz took the horse home and put it to work, at least he tried to. Apparently Utz tried several times to work with the horse but it just refused to work at all. Utz wanted out of the contract. Jollett refused. Not only did Jollett refuse to take back the horse, but also he would not even compromise with his dissatisfied neighbor.

Was the man of the cloth a man of his word?

Why Jollett would not take back the horse is anyone’s guess. Maybe he reasoned “a deal is a deal.” Maybe he thought Utz was wrong about the horse. Or - gasp! - maybe he didn’t want to be saddled with a worthless horse either. (NOTE: pun intended)

Utz had a witness, one who agreed with him. Frank Eppard said he knew of the horse even before Utz purchased it and that it was indeed worthless as a work horse. Nevertheless, the Court sided with John W. Jollett and compelled Utz to pay the $150, plus 6% per year dated from January 1867 until paid up. The case was finally dismissed in 1879.

If Monteller Utz was telling the truth, then Jollett’s behavior seems surprisingly un-Christianlike, especially for the one preaching “Do unto others” and “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”


Amy Johnson Crow continues to challenge genealogy bloggers and non-bloggers alike to think about our ancestors and share a story or photo about them. The challenge is “52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks.

Wendy
© 2019, Wendy Mathias. All rights reserved.

16 comments:

  1. A mystery that we'll never know the answer to!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Not at all what anyone would expect of someone of the stature of John Wesley Jollett. But an interesting story to tell future generations!

    ReplyDelete
  3. For whatever reason, the court sided with John Wesley Jollett, so I'm thinking there had to be some evidence they saw that was not reported in the court documents for them to do so. It would be interesting to know the character of Monteller Utz and if he was so inclined to do things like this.

    betty

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Funny you should say that. I found several lawsuits involving Monteller Utz trying to get out of paying a debt. The last suit showed ads for auctioning off Monteller's land. One of several creditors mentioned was John W. Jollett.

      Delete
  4. There doesn't seem to be any end to the surprises we find. I love finding the stories, but I know there is always so much more to the story and the not knowing the unrecorded details drives me crazy. Fun find ....and as always, you make it fun to read.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a great day when a new story comes to light.

      Delete
  5. 6% back in those days seems like a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Perhaps the common belief of the day was "let the buyer beware," something it sounds like Mr. Utz hadn't done if he trusted his neighbor about the qualities of the horse. But I agree that this whole situation puts a black mark against John Wesley for misrepresenting the horse in the first place, and then refusing to accommodate Mr. Utz in the second place. But as Betty suggested, perhaps there's more to the story than the court documents show. I wonder if newspapers of the time published brief articles about situations like these.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I found no news articles, but I did find more lawsuits against Utz. He had inherited his father's land, but apparently he was not a good money-manager. Ultimately his land was auctioned to pay his debts to SEVERAL creditors including John Jollett. That doesn't excuse the horse issue if it were indeed worthless as a work horse.

      Delete
  7. What an interesting legal documentation of these neighbors disagreement. I agree with you (and other commentators) that the story behind the legal papers must have had some other aspects. But just having what's available shows that the price was pretty high, and the sale was without any testing of the horse's abilities.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sure there was more to the story. I would love to find news articles, but so far I have found nothing. Admittedly, I have been limited to what is available online.

      Delete
  8. Another interesting read! That is a great old picture of John Wesley Jollett and his wife!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It really is a fine photo. I love a FULL photo more than just a headshot.

      Delete