Search

Back to top

Search Constraints

Start Over You searched for: Places Knox County (Ohio) Remove constraint Places: Knox County (Ohio)
Number of results to display per page
View results as:

Search Results

Collection

John Berry account book, 1854-1875

1 volume

John Berry, a farmer in Howard Township, Knox County, Ohio, maintained this account book from 1854 to 1875. It documents expenses related to farming operations, such as wages for hired men and women performing various tasks with crops, livestock, and the production of wool. It includes accounts for the purchase and sale of sheep, cattle, and hogs, and the breeding and insurance of horses. The accounts also relate to wool, flour, corn, oats, hay, and other farm goods, as well as various farm implements. The volume notes the erection of various buildings and infrastructure like barns and bridges, work done on the schoolhouse, and it includes documentation of exchanges with others for goods like shoes, clothing, fabric, and other items for farm and personal use. Berry documented several years' total sales and expenditures and overall assessments of his stock. He wrote a register of births for his seven children between 1850 to 1867 and listed various Biblical passages, titled "A few text of scripture for the Abolitionist to read." Recipes for keeping cider sweet and treating dysentery are also included.

Seven items are laid into the front of the volume, including an advertising brochure for the Ohio Farmers Insurance Company, an obituary for James M. Berry (1852-1923), two blank Knox County Bank checks, one Howard Township 1871 tax receipt, and two slips of paper, one listing the deaths of Lucy Berry, James Berry, and Sarah Harding.

Collection

State of Ohio vs. William S. Bergin documents, 1877

28 items

This collection is made up of briefs, arguments, lists of precedents, manuscript form affidavits, and other documents related to the trial of William S. Bergin for the murder of Thomas J. McBride, barkeeper and proprietor of the Bergin House hotel in Mount Vernon, Ohio, on June 15, 1877. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity (i.e. he was intoxicated when committing the murder), but the jury convicted him and he was sentenced to death. These papers appear to have been compiled by Bergin's defense counsel during the process of seeking a retrial in August 1877.

This collection is made up of briefs, arguments, lists of precedents, manuscript form affidavits, and other documents related to the trial of William S. Bergin for the murder of barkeeper and proprietor of the Bergin House hotel in Mount Vernon, Ohio, on June 15, 1877. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity (i.e. he was intoxicated when committing the murder), but the jury convicted him and he was sentenced to death. These papers appear to have been compiled by Bergin's defense counsel during the process of seeking a retrial in August 1877.

The collection includes two briefs; witnesses' statements about the language used in the confrontation, a 14-page document with statutes on first degree murder and evidence in the Bergin case; a 9-page argument; a list of points made by the plaintiff; and an organized list of precedent cases for drunkenness, homicidal impulse, homicidal mania, insanity with apparent sanity, hereditary insanity, sane today--insane tomorrow, murder in the 2nd degree, and the number of the insane in Ohio.

The collection's 18 affidavits appear to be manuscript forms for Bergin's defense to use in arguing for a retrial. They include several different handwritten forms produced by a clerk. With only three exceptions, the affidavits do not identify a particular individual, leaving blanks for their name and for the date of the sworn statement. Despite their incomplete state, some of these were still signed and stamped by a notary. The incomplete forms include duplicate text focused on different arguments for a retrial. For example, six of the affidavits discredit Sarah Rose as a witness; several of them are sworn statements by jurors that they had already formed their opinions of the case before the trial; and others claim the jurors were allowed to separate into their own boarding houses or mingle with crowds of people without police supervision.