Introduction to W. Schwartz et al. v. JS
W. Schwartz, Edward Schwartz Jr., I. Schwartz, Eliza Schwartz, Horatio Schwartz, J. Schwartz, Hiram Schwartz, and Elizabeth Schwartz v. JS
Hancock Co., Illinois, Circuit Court, circa October 1843, not litigated
Historical Introduction
In October 1843, the children of Edward Schwartz, by their attorney, , notified JS of their intent to bring a legal action of “trespass and ejectment” against him for a disputed parcel of land in , Illinois. The action in ejectment was a procedure to determine legal title to the land and obtain possession. The confusion of ownership stemmed from the failure of David Wright to pay property taxes on the land in 1834. Because of the failure to pay taxes, the county seized the land and sold it to Robert R. Williams for $2.69 in 1835. Williams’s deed included a stipulation that the property was his, “Subject however to all the rights of redemption provided for by Law.” According to law, when the property was sold for taxes, Wright was allowed two years to redeem it “by paying into the county treasury . . . double the amount for which it was sold, together with all subsequent taxes thereon.” If the land was not redeemed, Williams as purchaser became vested with “a perfect title in fee simple.”
After Williams’s death in 1841, the ownership of this land became further complicated. Sometime before mid-April 1843, JS apparently made an informal arrangement to obtain the property and began selling portions of the land to various individuals, although he did not hold title to it. At the time, the land still belonged to Williams’s estate, and it is unclear with whom JS had negotiated for it. On 12 October 1843, the executor of Williams’s estate sold the land to Solomon Lawrence.
Two days after the sale to Lawrence, the family of Edward Schwartz Sr. came forward with a competing claim to the property. Schwartz had purchased the land from Wright in December 1841. After Schwartz died in September 1843, his brother George Schwartz was appointed administrator of his estate on 3 October 1843. On 14 October 1843, notified JS of the Schwartz family’s intent to bring a suit of trespass and ejectment against him to secure their claim, declaring that they held title to the land and that JS had unlawfully withheld it from them. Although Edward Schwartz’s minor children were the named plaintiffs in the case, the threatened suit was presumably brought by George Schwartz on behalf of the children. The action of ejectment required the family to show the court the records of the sale between Wright and Edward Schwartz. At that point, JS would provide the court his claim to the land, including records of the tax sale of 1835. The question at the crux of the case would be whether Wright had redeemed the land after its seizure and sale in 1835. However, because JS had no legal claim to the land, the declaration may have been primarily intended to discourage him from continuing his negotiations to obtain the property. On 7 November 1843, , one of JS’s financial clerks, wrote to Lawrence for information about a “Tax title,” presumably asking about the Schwartzes’ claim to the property. Lawrence arranged for , a prominent attorney in , Illinois, and a brother of Robert R. Williams, to write to JS assuring him that he “need have no apprehension concerning the regularity of the title.” The same day he wrote to JS, Archibald Williams made out a deed from Lawrence, conveying the property to JS. JS accepted the deed and paid Lawrence on 29 November 1843.
For unknown reasons, the Schwartz family did not follow through on their threat of legal action against JS. However, they did not abandon their claim to the property. In June 1845, the family initiated four separate suits of trespass and ejectment against subsequent church trustees and as well as three individuals who had purchased portions of the property from JS. These four cases were continued until the October 1846 term of the Hancock County Circuit Court, and a jury supported the Schwartz claim to the property in at least one of the cases. The defense objected to the verdict and requested a new trial and a change of venue. All of the trials were then granted a change of venue to Rock Island County, Illinois. The final result of the cases is unknown.
Calendar of Documents
This calendar lists all known documents created by or for the court, whether extant or not. It does not include versions of documents created for other purposes, though those versions may be listed in footnotes. In certain cases, especially in cases concerning unpaid debts, the originating document (promissory note, invoice, etc.) is listed here. Note that documents in the calendar are grouped with their originating court. Where a version of a document was subsequently filed with another court, that version is listed under both courts.
View entire transcript |
Cite this page
Cite this page
