Marty and Karla Grant
[Home] [What’s New?] [Books for Sale] [Christian] [Genealogy] [Search] [Support] [About] [Contact]
Heirs of George Cathey (1725-1790) as named in Neill vs. Cathey
[Cathey Home] - [Table of Contents] - [George Cathey (1725)] - Neill vs Cathey
The lawsuit Neill vs Cathey pertains to land that George Cathey (1725) and William Campbell entered in Tennessee in 1784 on behalf of William Neill. Since both Cathey and Neill were dead by 1823, when the suit was filed, the document contains the names of all their known heirs at the time, thus it’s a very helpful record. It isn’t entirely accurate though, but still quite valuable.
Wilson Co., TN Circuit Court Minutes Nov 1821 - Nov 1825 p. 98, pp 111-115
p. 98
Robert Neil vs. Robert Cathy (sic) & others.
Defendants didn’t appear.
[I didn’t transcribe all of this since there wasn’t much to it.]
p. 111
Robert Neil, complt
vs
George Cathey, defts
Violet Cathey
Robert Patton and his wife Rebecca
John Reed and his wife Esther
Andrew Neil and his wife Mary
Robert Gillespie and his wife Anne
George Cathey Junr
William Mahaffy and his wife Betsy
James Cathey
Andrew Cathey
Jane Adkins
Samuel Lusk and his wife Betsy
Benjamin Burgen and his wife Mary
George Patton
John Logan and his wife Rebecca
Daniel Cain
Robert Cain
James Reed
James Neil
Hardy Hightower and his wife Harriet
Alexander Neil
[list continues on p. 112]
Samuel Neil
Gilbreath Neil
James Neil and his wife Sally
Hannah Howes
John Plumley Sen
William Plumley
and John Plumley Jr
[Text of case begins on p. 111]
The cause to be heard before the Honorable Robert Mack on this – day of May 1823 upon the bill of the complainant heretofore taken pro confesso and the substance of the bill that William Neil the complainant’s father, some time in the month of October 1783 gave to one George Cathey sixty five pounds ten shillings and ten pence for the purpose of entering and securing for him lands int he western country, now the State of Tennessee. That the said George with the money thus furnished applied it in purchasing a warrant land entry for 640 acres in partnership with one William Campbell and that on the 26th of June 1793 a grant was issued thereon by the State of North Carolina to said George and William for 640 acres of land on the South Side of the Cumberland River on Spencer’s Creek described as follows: Beginning at a sassafras and white oak North west corner to a survey of Andrew Boyd’s runs thence North with Boyd’s line one hundred and twenty poles to a his North West corner stake .
[p. 112]
Continued North one hundred and seventy two poles further to a stake in all 342 poles thence west 352 and a half poles to a sugar tree and elm? North east corner to a survey made by John Jennings passing? Benjamin Eason’s south east corner at three hundred and thirty four poles, thence south one hundred and fifty poles to a stake on the north boundary line of Michael Gleaves’ survey, thence east with his line seventy six poles to said Gleaves north east corner locust & hickory thence south with said Glean’s line 226 poles to his south east corner white oak and cherry being on the north boundary of Stokely Donnelson survey which includes the main fork of Spencer’s Creek thence east 276 poles and a half to the beginning.
The said bill also exhibits a receipt with the signatures of George Cathey which he charges to have been executed by the said George by which it is acknowledged he had recd the above sum from said William Neil for the purpose of securing the said William a tract of land which is dated the 8th Day of October 1783 and was mutually agreed and understood between the said William & George that the said William was to have all the interest and title to said tract of land which was veste din the said George by the said grant.
The bill also charges that William Neil gave to his son John Neil the above tract of land and delivered over to him the above receipt which was then thought to be sufficient to vest the title in said John Neil. The bill also charges that the complainant afterwards purchased said land from John Neil his brother who delivered to him the above receipt and also executed a deed to him thereof which is appended and made a part of complainant’s bill. That by virtue of said purchase his complainant took possession of said land and continued to cultivate & occupy the same and had possessed the same for 20 or 21 years and had made valuable improv—
[p. 113]
ments thereon.
The bill also charges that William & George Cathey sons of George Cathey the grantee and who were also his executors, executed their bonds to John Neil to convey him said tract of land while the said John was owner thereof and that said bond has been lost or mislaid.
The bill also states that Violet Cathey one of the daughters of said George decd, and John Reed who had intermarried with Esther another of the daughters of said George decd, executed a deed of relinquishment to the complainant for 248 acres of said land, which said deed is also appended and made a part of said bill, which 248 acres was the one half of the 640 acres after deducting for a part that was take by older claims and the deed for the 248 acres was the division which had been made between him and William Campbell the other grantee.
The bill also exhibits a release executed by Alexander Neil and James Neil brothers to the Complainant dated the 24th August 1819 releasing all their rights and claim to said tract of land.
The bill also exhibits one other deed of relinquishment dated 1st of August 1821 given by John Neil, James Neil, Sarah Neil, John Plumley, William Plumley, Archibald Plumley, Jacob Howes, Hannah Howes, Benjamin Howes & William Howes relinquishing all their rights and title to the Complainant for said land.
The bill also charges that Complainant possessed said tract of land for upwards of 20 years and made valuable improvements with the knowledge, approbation and consent of all the heirs & legatees of George Cathey decd and with the knowledge and consent of all the heirs & legatees of William Neil decd.
That George Cathey, Violet Cathey, Jane Adkins, Samuel Lusk and his wife Betsey, Benjamin Burgen and his wife Mary are the children & heirs of said George Cathey decd.
That George Patton, John Logan and his wife Rebecca are grandchildren of said George Cathey Senr decd by his daughter Margaret who intermarried with Elija Patton and who are both
[p. 114]
deceased.
Also Robert Cain & Daniel Cain are grandchildren by said George decd by his daughter Elizabeth who intermarried first with Robert Cain, also James Reed grand child of said George decd by his daughter Elizabeth by her second husband Robert Reed, the said Robert Cain, Robert Reed and Elizabeth now all dead.
Also Robert Patton and his wife Rebecca who is daughter of said George decd.
John Reed and his wife Esther, who is also a daughter of said George decd.
Also Andrew Neil and his wife Mary the said Andrew being a son of William Neil decd and his wife Mary a daughter of said George decd.
Also Robert Gillespie and his wife Anne grand daughter of said George decd by his son William Cathey and George Cathey, James Cathey and Andrew Cathey and William Mahafy and his wife Betsey grand sons and daughters of said George deceased by his son William Cathey now dead.
And also the defendants James Neil, Mary grand daughter of said William deceased by his son Archibald who is also deceased.
Also Hardy Hightour and his wife Harriet grand daughter of said William decd by his son Archibald.
Alexander Neil, Samuel Neil, Gilbreath Neil sons of said William decd and James Neil and his wife Sally, Hannah Howes daughters of said William decd.
Also William Plumley & John Plumley Jr, grand children of said William deceased by his daughter Betsey who had intermarried with John Plumley Senr and is now deceased.
All of the above named defendants are the legal heirs Legatees of George Cathey the grantee now decd and the legal heirs & legatees of William Neil also decd. That all the right, title, interest, property, claim and demand which all or either of the above named defendants heirs and legatees as aforesaid have in and to the above described tract or parcel of land be divested out of them and vested in the Complainant being the object & prayer of
[p. 115]
the bill. And upon due consideration of the matter and charges contained in said bill, the charges in said bill being proved and due publication having been made: ths court doth order adjudge and decree that the above named defendants and their heirs and assigns be divested of all right title interest, property claim and demand of, in and to the above described tract of land land (sic) granted to George Cathey & William Campbell as heirs and legatees of said George Cathey decd and William Neil decd either in law or equity with the hereditaments thereunto (sic) belonging or appurtaining (sic) and it is further ordered adjudged and decreed that the title to a moiety of said tract of six hundred & forty acres of land with his hereditaments and appurtenances either in law or equity be vested in the Complainant Robert Neil his heirs and assigns forever; To have and to hold the same and every part and parcel thereof with its hereditaments thereunto belonging or appurtaining (sic) either in law or equity, to the only proper use benefit and behoof of him the said Robert Neil his heirs and assigns forever.
And this court doth further order adjudge and decree that the Complainant pay the Costs of this suit.
[There are exhibits attached, primarily the deeds and receipts mentioned in the case. I didn’t transcribe those.]
The above suit is extremely valuable for George Cathey and William Neill researchers since their heirs are named. George Cathey did leave a Will ca 1790, but like most early Burke Co., NC records, it was destroyed in 1865 during the Civil War. This document is a decent substitute though not without problems. Primarily it gets some of the heirs wrong, or out of place at least. It also leaves out some entirely. I’m speaking of the George Cathey heirs only. I don’t know how accurate the William Neill heirs are listed as I’m no expert on that family.
The 1823 record shows this family:
George Cathey, dead by May 1823, wife not mentioned. His sons William Cathey (also dead by May 1823) and George Cathey were listed as his Executors. We know William died in Dec 1812. George in 1790.
Heirs of George Cathey Senr in 1823:
Violet Cathey
John Reed and wife Esther Reed
George Cathey
Jane Adkins [listed as child of George, actually a grandchild]
Samuel Lusk and wife Betsey [listed as child of George, actually a grandchild]
Benjamin Burgen and wife Mary [listed as child of George, actually a grandchild]
Elijah Patton and wife Margaret, both deceased [Elijah wasn’t deceased]. Their children named:
George Patton
John Logan and wife Rebecca
[This is where Jane Adkins, Mary Burgen and Betsey Lusk should have been listed]
Elizabeth Cathey and first husband Robert Cain and second husband Robert Reed, all three deceased. [Robert Reed was not deceased] Their heirs
Robert Cain
Daniel Cain
James Reed
[There were some other children who weren’t mentioned in this case]
Robert Patton and wife Rebecca
Andrew Neil and his wife Mary. Andrew is also a child of William Neil.
William Cathey, deceased. His children:
Robert Gillespie and his wife Anne
William Cathey
George Cathey,
James Cathey
Andrew Cathey
William Mahafy and his wife Betsey
[Margaret wife of Allen Campbell should have been named but was not]
[Sarah wife of Samuel Robinson/Roberson should have been named but was not]
[Jacob Cathey should have been named but was not]
[Thomas Cathey should have been named but was not]
[Ann, wife of Alexander Neil should have been listed, but perhaps left out because her husband was already included in William Neil’s heirs?]
Heirs of William Neil in 1823:
John Neil
Robert Neil, complainant
Alexander Neil
James Neil
Andrew Neil married to Mary Cathey daughter of George Sr.
Archibald Neil, deceased. His heirs:
Mary Neil
Hardy Hightour and wife Harriet.
Samuel Neil
Gilbreath Neil
Sally Neil wife of James Neil
Hannah Howes
John Plumley Sr and wife Betsey (now deceased), her children:
William Plumley
John Plumley Jr
From the outline above you can see that some of George Cathey’s “children” were actually his grandchildren. Two sons-in-laws were listed as deceased by 1823 but were actually still living. Daughter Ann Cathey Moore Neill wasn’t listed at all though still alive. Her husband was listed under the Neill heirs so perhaps that’s why she was left out.
From this we can conclude that whoever put the list of heirs together, presumably Robert Neill or one of his siblings, was personally acquainted with the Cathey family but not well enough to get every detail right. This is a common problem with suits of this nature during that era.
Revised: September 3, 2023
Copyright © 1996-2023 Marvin A. Grant, Jr. All Rights Reserved.
[Home] [What’s New?] [Books for Sale] [Christian] [Genealogy] [Search] [Support] [About] [Contact]