Alexander_Martin_deposition_1804

Date: 1804
Location: Stokes, North Carolina, United States
Surnames/tags: Land_dispute Slatton Slaton

Documents pertaining to lands of John Slatton (abt.1740-abt.1814), George Slatton (abt.1750-abt.1837) and William Mullins, agent for Major Slaton (bef.1756-abt.1807).

Abstract of land dispute

Land dealings in which Alexander Martin was a participant did not always go smoothly. In 1778, he and his brothers, James and Robert, made entries for tracts in what was then Surry County with Joseph Winston, entry taker. That was how James Martin acquired his original section on Snow Creek, including the lime kiln, where he built his home and, at the end of the Revolution, moved his family. One of the 640-acre sections that Alexander entered was on the north side of the Dan River near the mouth of Seven Island and Buck Island Creeks. It included improvements of John Slaton, William Mullins and George Slaton "being the said Martin's claim" and was "purchased from James Lankford in 1764." This is now in present-day Stokes County. This was the grant that Alexander Martin gave as a wedding present on 1793 to his private secretary and nephew, Thomas Rogers. Subsequently, a bank of iron ore was discovered within the survey that Rogers completed in 1795. Jonathan Haines brought a case in Salisbury District Court in 1803, claiming ten acres, including the ore bank, to have been "fraudulently" included in the Rogers' survey. The governor gave his affidavit September 11, 1804, at the home of James Davis in Stokes County. It demonstrated that Martin had twice since 1764 amended his claim to satisfy poor settlers, the Slatons and Robert Mayab [Mabe], who had not properly processed their titles but had moved onto the land and built improvements. Mayab had been a chain-carrier for surveys of the the Slatons' land.

COMMENT: on deposition synopsis below:
1) The complaint by Jonathan Haines names James Martin, Matthew Moore, Peter Perkins and Thomas Rogers as conspiring to block out Haines from any profits from an iron mine on the lands. Since Martin and Rogers were both relatives of Alexander Martin, these allegations fall in with similar allegations of nepotism and malfeasance laid at the feet of John Sevier, William Blount, and others who were accused of manipulating court records and revaluing land grants retroactively to their benefit, perhaps most famously the Richard Henderson surveys, which blighted the reputations of both Daniel Boone and later Andrew Jackson (through his Donelson connection);

2) the phrase "in consideration of the supposed Poverty of the above named persons" is ambiguous, as it could refer to William Mullins and Robert Mabe [various spellings, Mahab and Mayab] who are the "nearest" persons to the text, or to these man and John and George Slatten (as spelled here, it is Slaten in Thomas Rogers defense document). I suspect it refers to all four men;

3) Thomas Rogers, in defending himself against the charges brought by Haines, stated that he agreed that the lands of "Slatons" and Robert Mabe had been improved by them, and that they should have a "superior" title to that of Alexander Martin, therefore Rogers could not claim that land. But that the residue was Alexander Martin's to give, and that Martin gave the residue (no money changed hands) to Thomas Rogers.

4) William Mullins is shown in other records to be the "assignee" of Major Slatton/Slaton, suggesting that the 50 acres Major bought adjoining the land of John Slatton, belonged to him but he did not necessarily live there, Major also had bounty land on the Tugaloo River, so Mullins is in effect acting for Major. That neither Major Slaton nor William Mullins were named in the deposition as filing suit suggests that Major was not a resident there.

5) There is no record of a surrender of these lands by Slatons to any subsequent purchaser, so were they ejected? Did someone buy them out under the table? Still a mystery.

March 19 1804
State of North Carolina
Stokes County
In pursuance of a Commission from the Superior Court of Law and Equity held for Salisbury District in the State aforesaid to us the Subscribers two of the Justices of the Peace for said County directed [skip] to take the Deposition of Alexander Martin Esq in Behalf of Thomas Rogers, on a certain matter of controversy in the Superior Court in Equity depending herein...

SYNOPSIS Jonathan Haines complains, and Thomas Rogers and others are defendants.
Alexander Martin comes to the house of James Davis and deposes that he entered 640 acres in Surry now Stokes County for land beginning near the Mouth of Seven Island Creek in the North side of Dan River running up the river to the Mouth of Buck Island Creek including the Improvements of John Slatten William Mullins and George Slatten for Compliment, being the said Martins Claim purchased from James Lankford in 1764 and that a transcript of this was made 14 Feb 1778, and that later, John and George Slatten entered a Caveat against said Entry, for which the Sheriff was ordered to summon a jury, but nothing happened, no trial was held (?) John and George Slatten meanwhile agreed withdraw their caveat if Alexander Martin would disclaim the land that they had improved, not including it in the survey. Also, Martin agreed to exclude (disclaim) land of Robert Mahab and William Mullins, and Mahab and Mullins were satisfied. Martin still thinks he has priority on the claim for land because he sees no improvements, "but in consideration of the supposed Poverty of the above persons, Martin disclaimed as above." But Martin suspects that the amended Survey was never filed, "by Reason of the Courts of Justice were shortly after closed, and all civil proceedings of the State put a Stop to by the revolutionary war that raged in the State."

He never got around to confirming the amended survey, but he assigned and transferred "the same" to his nephew Thomas Rogers in 1795 "for and in consideration of the natural affection [Martin] bore him, as his Relation, and for sundry services he said Rogers had rendered this Deponent in public and private character and to make him a freeholder in the County of Stokes where he then resided." It was the finding of iron ore on the bank of the river after John and George . that set off this lawsuit, but we still do not find sales records by any those men showing how they disposed of it, but we do see that the surveyor's order to exclude shows up here:

Surry County, North Carolina Court Minutes Volume 1; 11 Jan 1779; Ordered Surveyor lay off that part and residue of Alexander Martin's entry Alexander Martin lying on Dann River near mouth of Seven Islands so as not to include Plantations of John and George Slaten ^[1].

Obviously this is the filing mentioned by Alexander Martin.

Sources

1. ↑ "Surry, North Carolina, United States Records," images, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CS4R-T9F1-F : March 31, 2024), image 7 of 807; North Carolina. County Court (Surry County).

• Salisbury District North Carolina, March 19 1804, deposition of Alexander Martin on complaint of Jonathan Haynes. North Carolina State Archives, North Carolina.

• Rodenbough, Charles S., Governor Alexander Martin: Biography of a North Caroline Revolutionary War Statesman, 2011, McFarland & Co, page 192. (some text used by permission of the author).