DETERMINATION 
 
 BY THE 
 
 EXECUTORS OF JAMES B. DUKE, 
 DECEASED, 
 
 __ OF THOSE ENTITLED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DISTRIBU- 
 
 = TION TO BE MADE UNDER ITEM VI. OF THE LAST WILL 
 
 AND TESTAMENT OF SAID DECEDENT AND OF THE 
 
 AMOUNTS THEY ARE, RESPECTIVELY, ENTITLED TO 
 RECEIVE. 
 
REASUFE’ ROOM 
 
 DETERMINATION BY THE EXECUTORS OF JAMES B. 
 DUKE, DECEASED, OF THOSE ENTITLED TO PAR- 
 
 TICIPATE IN THE DISTRIBUTION TO BE MADE UNDER 
 ITEM VI. OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF 
 
 SAID DECEDENT AND OF THE AMOUNTS THEY ARE, 
 RESPECTIVELY, ENTITLED TO RECEIVE. 
 
 We, the undersigned, acting in our capacity of Ex- 
 ecutors of the estate of James B. Duke, deceased, under 
 and pursuant to the terms of his last will and testament, 
 and especially of Item VI of said will, which reads as 
 follows: 
 
 ‘*‘T give, devise and bequeath, and I direct that 
 my executors, as soon as they reasonably can after 
 my death, shall pay and distribute from and out 
 of my estate the sum of Two Million Dollars as 
 follows, namely: Said sum shall be divided into as 
 many equal portions (a) as there shall be both 
 children and grandchildren living at my death of 
 the brothers and/or sisters of my father and/or 
 of my mother, and (b) as there shall have been 
 grandchildren of the brothers and/or sisters of 
 my father and/or of my mother who died prior to 
 my death leaving a descendant or descendants 
 who may be living at my death. One of such por- 
 tions shall be paid per capita to each of such , 
 children and grandchildren who may be living at’ 
 my death and one of such portions shall be paid 
 per stirpes to the descendant or descendants living 
 at my death of each such grandchild who may have 
 died prior to my death. Only blood relatives may 
 participate in the payment and distribution of said 
 Two Million Dollars under this Item of my will. 
 
 97076 
 
2 
 
 While I wish my executors to use their best en- 
 deavors to ascertain all those entitled to partici- 
 pate under this Item, I constitute my executors 
 the sole arbiters of the ways and means of so doing 
 and of all questions arising with respect thereto, 
 especially the relation and identity of any person 
 who may claim under this Item of my will, it 
 being my intention that neither my estate nor any 
 one or more of my executors shall in any way be 
 liable for or with respect to the inclusion or omis- 
 sion of any person in the payment and distribution 
 made under this Item, or the amounts or value of 
 any such payment and distribution to any person.’’ 
 
 have ascertained and do hereby determine and declare 
 that those, and only those, persons mentioned and de- 
 scribed in the schedule hereto annexed, marked Schedule 
 A, and to be read as a part hereof, come within the re- 
 quirements of, and are entitled to participate in the dis- 
 tribution to be made under, the terms of said Item, and 
 that such persons have the identity and relationship, and 
 should be paid under said Item the amounts, set forth in 
 said schedule under their names, respectively. 
 
 In making such ascertainment and determination the 
 Hixecutors have had to pass upon a great number of 
 claims involving consideration of a great magnitude of 
 data. But they feel that only two of these claims need 
 be discussed here, namely: the Thomas Duke claim; and 
 the Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan claim. Those whose 
 claims have been, and hereby are, rejected will be found 
 listed in Schedule B annexed as a part hereof. 
 
The Thomas Duke Claim. 
 
 Briefly, this claim is that Taylor Duke and Dicey 
 Jones Duke, his wife, (who were the parents of Washing- 
 ton Duke), had a son born July 2, 1802, in Orange County, 
 N. C., who was their oldest child and named Thomas 
 Duke; that ‘‘when a young lad of a boy”’ this son left 
 home and settled in Georgia, where he married Mary 
 Jones, January 6, 1821, was a fighter and farmer and 
 later a Primitive Baptist preacher, having been pastor 
 of Hopewell Church near Carrollton, Georgia, for some 
 20 years preceding his death, September 23, 1866. 
 
 Miss Elizabeth Duke of Marshall, Texas, (who says 
 she is a great-granddaughter of this Thomas Duke) is 
 the active asserter of the claim, though it has been pre- 
 sented by Messrs. Bibb & Craven, Attorneys, of that 
 place. From her has come practically all of the data 
 submitted to sustain the claim. And she has filed powers 
 of attorney from other alleged descendants of Thomas 
 Duke, by virtue of which she represents some of them 
 and will receive for her services half of their participa- 
 tion if the claim is sustained. 
 
 A. Alleged Historical Records. 
 
 A part of the data presented by Miss Duke was three 
 typewritten sheets enclosed in her letter of January 5th, 
 1927, which described them as ‘‘a copy of records from 
 the Archives and History of the State of Georgia on 
 early settlers of that State’. Two of these sheets pur- 
 ported to give information as to the families and descend- 
 ants of Taylor and Thomas Duke, such as names, dates 
 of birth, marriage, etc. under the caption: ‘‘Record of 
 Archies and History. Early settlers Atalanta’’; and 
 among them appeared ‘‘Thomas Duke son of Taylor 
 Duke borned year of 1802 married Mary Jones’’. The 
 other sheet read as follows: 
 
 97046 
 
+L 
 
 ‘‘History of Georgia Early Settler. 
 
 Thomas Duke one of Georgia early settlers, 
 came from Orange County North Carolina when 
 a young lad of a boy; settled near Carrillton Ga. 
 
 Thomas Duke was one of Georgia grate fighters 
 widley knowned as the Bully of Georgia which was 
 recognized as the Pony Club fighters in Indian 
 time before the Civil War. After his last fight he 
 refused the Champion Ship, for a worthy call who 
 became a Primitive Baptist Minister was ordained 
 in the Fourty Third year of his life. 
 
 Had under his jurisdiction several churches 
 among them were Masadonia, Holly Springs, Sand 
 Hill, & Cross Plains. 
 
 About the year of Eighteen Hundred and 
 Fourty Five Anti Missenary spirit culemated, 
 brother Thomas Duke was a strong beliver and be- 
 came more satisfyed that his calling was to serve 
 as a Minister, was ordained in year of Kighteen 
 Hundred and Thirty Six. 
 
 Gives his history borned July, 2nd, Eighteen 
 Hundred 02. in the state of North Carolina, states 
 his father Taylor Duke was a noted man and a real 
 citizen, was Sheriff of Orange County North Caro- 
 lina also a Captian of the Militia. 
 
 Brother Thomas Duke now serving Congress 
 year of Kighteen Hundred and Sixty One. . 
 
 Witness of History. 
 
 W. F. S. Powe 
 James Pace 
 
 W. M. Bryam 
 Sam ©. Dicxson.’’ 
 
 Manifestly, the intention of Miss Duke was that these 
 enclosures should be accepted as genuine historical docu- 
 ments coming from this official source, as witness the 
 captions of the papers; and that the quoted article should 
 be considered as dating from 1861, as witness its con- 
 eluding sentence ‘‘Brother Thomas Duke now serving 
 Congress year of Highteen Hundred and Sixty One’’. 
 
5) 
 
 And this motive was confirmed by the enclosure in her 
 letter of February 16, 1927, of typewritten sheets giving 
 this very same article and data, with some other data as 
 to the Dukes, having attached the certificate, under seal, 
 of Miss Ruth Blair, State Historian, that they were ‘‘an 
 exact copy of the genealogical record of the Duke family 
 on file’’ in the Department of Archives and History of 
 the State of Georgia. 
 
 However, Miss Blair took the precaution to say in her 
 certificate that these alleged records had been ‘‘fur- 
 nished by Miss Elizabeth Duke of Marshall, Texas’’. 
 And this, in conjunction with other matters, caused the 
 Executors to investigate their authenticity. 
 
 They found, as stated by Miss Blair in the affidavit 
 she gave, that Miss Duke had come in around Christmas 
 1926 seeking information as to Thomas Duke; that she 
 had rendered Miss Duke what assistance she could, show- 
 ing her the two cards in the files on this subject, and 
 prepared under her supervision, one having on it ‘‘ Duke, 
 Thomas, H. R. Carroll Co. 1861-62-63 Ex.’’ and the other 
 having on it ‘‘Duke, Thomas, Const. Cony. 1798 Ogel- 
 thorpe Co.’’; that thereafter she received a letter from 
 Miss Duke dated January 3, 1927 (only two days before 
 she sent the typewritten sheets to the Executors as ‘‘a 
 copy of records from the Department of Archives and 
 History’’) enclosing these alleged records; that a little 
 later she received a letter from someone else in Texas 
 (whose name she has forgotten and the letter has been 
 lost) ‘‘asking for a certified copy of record and I certi- 
 fied a copy of the record filed by Miss Elizabeth Duke 
 and sent it on’’. 
 
 Miss Blair further states that Miss Duke when there 
 had given her at her request some information as to 
 Thomas Duke of which she made a memorandum; that 
 - she found the information in the papers filed by Miss 
 Duke did not agree with this memorandum and so wrote 
 
6 
 
 Miss Duke, to which Miss Duke replied under date of 
 January 14, 1927, saying she must have misunderstood 
 and concluding 
 
 ‘‘Now I am sending in my claim in the James 
 B. Duke estate. Which I feal sure you may be 
 called upon I have only furnished them with my 
 emidately family records which you hold who are 
 Taylor Duke and Thomas Duke which you can 
 give out as, authentic and documentary proof 
 which show by whom witnessed said information 
 furnished to you.”’ 
 
 Clearly, therefore, these sheets seem mere compila- 
 tions of Miss Duke in this deceptive form and have no 
 historical value, nor any other value save to the extent 
 otherwise shown that the statements in them are based 
 on actual fact. We are therefore wholly remitted to the 
 other data submitted in substantiation of the alleged 
 claim. 
 
 B. The Cobb Book. 
 
 Miss Duke in June 1927 submitted as proof of her 
 claim a copy, obtained from the Georgia State Library, 
 of a book by Private Joe Cobb entitled ‘‘Carroll County 
 and Her People’’, and published in 1906, page 35 of 
 which, as submitted by her, read: 
 
 ‘‘father of Hon. W. C. Adamson, the able Congressman from 
 the fourth Georgia district, Reeves, Sims, Johnsons, 
 Fletchers, Roberds, Lovvorns; Dr. H. M. Williams and his 
 brother, Prof. Williams, Barnes and Stephensons, of whom 
 clever W. B. (big Bill) is a descendant; and many more 
 old and new settlers, all of whom it is impossible to mention 
 who were and are honorable, moral and law abiding 
 citizens. There are twelve stores and business houses, a 
 bank, good hotel, Masonic Lodge, three churches, no bar 
 rooms and no blind tigers. It is and has always been an 
 extremely dry town, a good town in which to educate boys. 
 Justice’s Courts are held there for the 1111th District, G. M. 
 Jabez Miles, an old settler and good man was Justice of the 
 
( 
 
 Peace for many years and his decisions were always carefully 
 and honestly made, and in the main, correct and legal. 
 
 Bowdon has a_ splendid weekly newspaper, ‘‘The 
 Bowdon Intelligence,’’ which was owned and edited by J. W. 
 Yarbrough; since his death a few years ago it has been 
 carried on by Miss Susie Irwin. 
 
 Thomas Duke, one of Georgia’s early settlers, came 
 from Orange County, North Carolina, when a young lad 
 of a boy; settled near Carrollton, Ga. Thomas Duke was 
 one of Georgia’s great fighters, widely known as the 
 Bully of Georgia, which was recognized as the Poney 
 Club fighters in Indian time before the Civil war. After 
 his last fight he refused the championship for a worthy 
 call who became a Primitive Baptist Minister. He served 
 under his jurisdiction several churches, among them 
 were Masadonia, Holly Springs, Sand Hill, Cross Plains. 
 
 About the year of Highteen Hundred and Forty-five 
 Anti-Missionary Spirit culminated, Brother Thomas 
 Duke was a strong believer and became more satisfied 
 that his call was to serve as a Minister, year of Eighteen 
 Hundred and Thirty-six, and was ordained, in his Forty- 
 third year of life, year of Eighteen Hundred and Forty- 
 five. Gives his history, born July 2nd, Eighteen 
 Hundred and Two, in State of North Carolina, state of 
 his father, Taylor Duke, a noted man and a real citizen, 
 who was Sheriff of Orange County, North Carolina, also 
 a Captain of the Militia. Brother Thomas Duke, now 
 serving Congress, year of Eighteen Hundred and Sixty- 
 one. Security. 
 
 W. F. 8S. Powe, 
 JAMES PACE 
 
 W. M. Bryam, 
 Sam C. Dicxkson.”’ 
 
 A comparison at once showed that what this page said 
 of Thomas Duke was but a copy of the article above 
 quoted entitled ‘‘History of Georgia early Settler’’, 
 somewhat improved as to spelling and grammar. And 
 an investigation disclosed even more astonishing things 
 as to its incorporation in this book than the previous 
 attempt we have noted to make of it a historical docu- 
 ment. 
 
 When Miss Duke was at the Georgia State Library 
 about Christmas 1926 Miss Blair had shown her this book 
 and she had sat near Miss Blair’s desk ‘‘ two or three 
 
8 
 
 hours and read the book’’. In response to a wire from 
 Miss Duke dated May 7th 1927, Miss Ella May Thornton, 
 also of the Library, had sent her this book and another 
 book entitled ‘‘The Hephzibah Baptist Association Cen- 
 tennial 1794-1894’ and they were not returned until 
 June 28 or 29,1927. See affidavits of Miss Blair and Miss 
 Thornton. 
 Miss Blair says of the Cobb book: 
 
 ‘‘Shortly before Elizabeth Duke called at my 
 office I had occasion to read the book ‘Carroll County 
 and Her People’ by Private Joe Cobb, and know that 
 it was in splendid condition at the time it was sent 
 to Miss Elizabeth Duke. I have examined the book 
 on the 6th day of July, 1927, and found that the 
 book is badly damaged in a number of places. 
 
 I had been reading said book with the purpose 
 of securing vital dates for the Georgia Civil Serv- 
 ice Records of 1793-1927, a compilation to be pub- 
 lished by this Department within the next year or 
 so, and I am positive that at that time, neither on 
 page No. 35, nor anywhere in that book was any- 
 thing given concerning the date or place of birth of 
 Thomas Duke. 
 
 That last half of page No. 35 concerning Thomas 
 Duke has been inserted in the book since I showed it 
 to Miss Elizabeth Duke on or about Christmas of 
 1926, and the time the book was returned to the 
 State Library on June the 28th or 29th, 1927.”’ 
 
 Mr. J. J. Thomasson, the printer of the book, was. 
 located and gave an affidavit saying that he knew Private 
 Joe Cobb personally and remembered well printing the 
 book for him; that it was printed in September 1906 in 
 his office at Carrollton, Georgia, from individual type 
 set by hand by Paul B. Brown, then and now in his em- 
 ploy, as he had no linotype machine; that he printed one 
 edition of 1000 copies, no changes were made in it be- 
 tween the first and last copy printed and he knows as a 
 fact that no edition of this book was ever printed except 
 the one by him in September 1906. 
 
9 
 
 Mr. Thomasson further said that as printed by him 
 page 35 had on it only 19 printed lines (which he quotes 
 and are the same as the first 19 lines of the page as quoted 
 above) and nothing whatever as to Thomas Duke, the 
 residue of that page being blank. 
 
 Mr. Thomasson made a part of his affidavit two copies 
 of the book, which he said was as printed by him and in 
 which page 35 contained only the 19 lines. And he con- 
 cluded: 
 
 ‘‘T have been shown a photostatic copy of what 
 is said to be page (35) thirty-five photostaticed from 
 a copy of Cobb’s book, ‘Carroll County and Her 
 People’, and said to have been taken to New York 
 by Miss Elizabeth Duke, of Texas, and exhibited to 
 the EKxecutors of James B. Duke, deceased. This 
 photostatic copy of said page 35 is annexed to my 
 affidavit and identified by my signature at the right 
 hand corner. That page as shown by the photostatic 
 annexed never appeared in the edition of Cobb’s said 
 book that I printed. The last half of said photostat 
 was never printed in the book I printed and I never 
 saw it before it was shown to me a day or two ago 
 by one Charles Caldwell. 
 
 By examining the bottom half of the photostat 
 page thirty-five, annexed, it is easily seen by one 
 familiar with printing that it was set by a linotype 
 machine and not by hand from individual type. 
 
 If it appears in any copy of Joe Cobb’s book, 
 ‘Carroll County and Her People’, it has been in- 
 serted since the book was printed at my office. 
 
 It is a simple matter for anyone familiar with 
 the art of bookbinding, to take off the cover, insert 
 a newly printed leaf and replace the back on the 
 book. The copies of the book that I printed had the 
 pages of each copy stitched to-gether by harness 
 thread on a harness sewing machine, as may be seen 
 by looking at the exposed thread between the index 
 pages of the paper bound book, which pages are 
 also identified with my signature.”’ 
 
10 
 
 Mr. Paul B. Brown gave an affidavit saying: 
 
 _ “T remember Private Joe Cobb and knew him 
 since I was achild. I remember that I was in charge, 
 for Mr. Thomasson, of printing for Joe Cobb his 
 book, ‘Carroll County and Her People’. I was in 
 charge of the type setting and the printing of the 
 book and made up the pages, blocked up the type 
 and made it ready on the press to be printed. It 
 was all set by hand and from individual type. There 
 was no linotype machine in Mr. Thomasson’s office 
 or in Carroll County in 1906 when Cobb’s book was 
 printed. 
 
 I have been shown what purports to be a photo- 
 static copy of page 35 in Cobb’s book, ‘Carroll 
 County and Her People’, the bottom half of that 
 page, having an article about Thomas Duke. The 
 Photostat plainly shows it is printed from linotype, 
 the hair lines showing between the letters discloses 
 the fact that it is not handset type and shows it to 
 be linotype. Have identified photostat with my sig- 
 nature on back. 
 
 That bottom half of page 35 of said book was 
 never set up or printed in any of the 1,000 copies of 
 the said book that we printed in 1906 and there was 
 no other edition of that book printed at our printing 
 office. The bottom half of said page 35 was blank 
 in all of said books that we printed.’’ 
 
 Mr. H. B. Cobb made affidavit that he is the son of 
 Private Joe Cobb, who is now dead, and helped his father 
 correct the proof of this book; that he knows it was print- 
 by Mr. Thomasson from individual type set by hand by 
 Mr. Brown; that there was only one edition; that he has 
 had in his possession several copies of the book from the 
 time of its delivery by the printer in 1906 and there is 
 nothing whatever on page 35 about Thomas Duke, the 
 said page in his copies being as stated in the affidavit of 
 Mr. Thomasson. 
 
 ‘‘Deponent further states, that Charles Caldwell, 
 of New York, was in Deponent’s office recently, and 
 
11 
 
 showed deponent what was purported to be a photo- 
 static copy of page 35 of the book, ‘Carroll County 
 and her People’, by Private Joe Cobb, which con- 
 tained on the bottom half of said page, what pur- 
 ports to be a biography of one Thomas Duke. De- 
 ponent says, that in the first place, the language of 
 said biography, is not the language of his said 
 Father, Private Joe Cobb. At the time of being 
 shown the photostatic, it was deponent’s recollec- 
 tion, that there was no such article in said book, but 
 in order to prove, or disprove it, deponent immedi- 
 ately took the said Charles Caldwell to his home on 
 Dekalb Ave. in the City of Atlanta, and in deponent’s 
 Library, they examined the several copies, all.of 
 which showed the bottom half of page 35, to be 
 blank.”’ 
 
 Mr. Walker M. Cobb made affidavit that he is 54 anda 
 nephew of Private Joe Cobb; that he assisted in selling 
 the book and 
 
 ‘‘T have had a copy in my possession ever since 
 this book was printed. I have looked at it July 5, 
 1927, and find the bottom half of page 35 blank and 
 there is not a thing on that page in my copy of the 
 book about Thomas Duke.’’ 
 
 Mrs. Mary Alice Turner makes an affidavit that she 
 has had a copy of this book since it was printed and 
 
 ‘‘T have carefully examined page 35 of that book. 
 It contains no mention whatever of the name Thomas 
 Duke. The bottom half of page 35 in said book is 
 blank and has always been blank ever since the book 
 was printed’’. 
 
 C. The Hephzibah Book. 
 
 Miss Duke in June 1927 also submitted as proof a 
 copy of a book published in 1894 entitled ‘‘The Hephzibah 
 Baptist Association Centennial 1794-1894”’ by W. L. Kil- 
 patrick, D. D. We have already seen that she obtained 
 this book from the Georgia State Library in response to 
 
12 
 
 her wire of May 7, 1927, and returned it on or about June 
 28 or 29, 1927. 
 
 As presented by Miss Duke, this copy had page 33 
 numbered and partially printed, the page that would be 
 34 if numbered was blank and unnumbered, the page that 
 would be 35 if numbered was unnumbered and had print- 
 ed on it only ‘‘ Period II, 1815-1840’’, the page that would 
 be 36 if numbered was blank and unnumbered, there then 
 occurred a page which we skip for the moment and then 
 followed a page numbered 37 on which began ‘‘Chapter 
 I Missions—Introductory Remarks’’. 
 
 ‘The skipped page was wholly unnumbered and blank 
 on the side facing page 37. On the other side there was 
 printed: 
 
 ‘‘ResoLvep :—Anti-Missionaries ; 
 
 Brother Thomas Duke, one among many who 
 resented action of the association favorable to 
 missions, he lived in Sand Hill community ‘Primi- 
 tive Baptist,’ but who were known to the world at 
 large as ‘Anti-Missionaries.’ Some of old members, 
 the Reeds, Uphaurs, Coles, Chandlers, Holecombs, 
 Henry Haynes, Robt. Splight, Elder Thomas James, 
 father of several sons, old pioneer preacher, always 
 ready to preach and defend the doctrines of his 
 church in the New Hope association. Over forty 
 years there were many others who went to Anti- 
 Missionaries. Churches were established, Brother 
 Thomas Duke was ordained in the year of eighteen 
 hundred and thirty-six. Churches he served under 
 his jurisdiction were Masadonia, Holly Springs, 
 Sand Hill, Cross Plains. Rev. Thomas Duke came 
 from Orange county, North Carolina, young lad of 
 a boy, and battled his way among both good and bad, 
 was strong believer that every one should be a law- 
 abiding citizen. His father, Taylor Duke of Orange 
 county, North Carolina, was of same type, served as 
 sheriff in Orange county, North Carolina and Cap- 
 tain Militia, Ench Phillips, David Hamrick, Carnes, 
 McGarity, Merrill, and many others, including Janes, 
 who came from North Carolina, were all good and 
 
13 
 
 honest citizens of Little Tallapaosa, river com- 
 munity, were strong against ‘Hephzibah Baptist 
 Association’.’’ 
 
 It will be observed that this skipped page constituted 
 an extra page in the book or else showed the page num- 
 bering at fault, since had it been placed there originally 
 page 37 should have been numbered 39. It was ascer- 
 tained that neither the index nor table of contents had 
 any mention of Thomas Duke or the other people men- 
 tioned on the quoted page. And it was discovered that 
 much of the language of the quoted page was identical 
 with that used in the Cobb book published some 12 years 
 later. Thus in Chapter XX., page 59, the Cobb book says 
 “some of the old members were the Reids, Upshaws, 
 Coles, Chandlers, Holeombs and others’’, then mentions 
 ‘“‘Henry Haynes”’ and ‘‘Robt. Speight’’ and continues 
 ‘Elder Thomas James, father of several sons, was an old 
 pioneer preacher and was always ready to preach and 
 defend the doctrines of his church.’? The Cobb book 
 then mentions Enoch Phillips and says: ‘‘Some other 
 preachers of that denomination were David Hamrick, 
 Holeomb, Carnes, McGarity, Merrill and perhaps 
 others.”’ 
 
 Investigation was made as to the Hephzibah book and 
 the situation was found a replica of that with respect to 
 the Cobb book. A copy of the book was located in the 
 Samuel Colgate Baptist Historical Collection at Hamil- 
 ton, N. Y., and another obtained from the Americus Book 
 Company; and neither contained the page in question 
 though otherwise identical with the copy presented by 
 Miss Duke. Further, Miss Thornton, of whom we have 
 spoken, after an inspection of the book upon its return 
 to the State Library, said in her affidavit: 
 
 ‘‘There now appears in said book a page im- 
 mediately preceding page No. 37 which seems to 
 bear evidence of not having belonged to the book as 
 
14 
 
 originally printed. * * * This page has the appear- 
 ance of being old or soiled and the blank leaf im- 
 mediately in front has been cut in two and is fastened 
 with four white seals on one side and three white 
 seals on the other side.’’ 
 
 D. The Church Minutes. 
 
 Miss Duke in June 1927 also submitted as proof two 
 books containing, in chronological order (from July 29, 
 1837, to February 27, 1896) the minutes of the meetings 
 of Hopewell Primitive Baptist Church, located near Car- 
 rollton, Georgia. 
 
 These minutes show a Thomas Duke was : aes of 
 this church practically from 1845 to his death in 1866. A 
 great number of them are signed by him as Moderator. 
 The minutes for May 31, 1845, record the reception of ‘‘a 
 petionary letter from our sister at Countaline by the 
 hand of two members, viz: Dorothy and Jones, request- 
 ing this church to send here Deacons to thare meeting on 
 the second in July next to meet with ministers and dea- 
 cons from other churches for the purpose of examining 
 the qualifications of brother T. Duke to the ministry’’. 
 Those for December 6, 1845, record that it was ‘‘moved 
 and seconded that this church request the church at 
 Countaline to ordain T. Duke to the ministareal office the 
 filowing to have the request to the church at Countaline 
 Pr,’ Philips) Pr Ss Hamniek?: 
 
 These minutes also contain, an obituary of Thomas 
 Duke, prepared and presented by a committee on Novem- 
 ber 10, 1866, in response to a resolution adopted October | 
 12, 1866, saying he joined the Baptist Church in 1838 at 
 Talapoosy Church, Carroll County, Georgia, commenced 
 ‘‘exorcising in the ministry’’ soon thereafter, was or- 
 dained in 1846, had been ‘‘sevearly afflicted for a great 
 while’’ and had died ‘‘23rd Sept. A. D. 1866’’. There is 
 also the obituary of ‘‘Mary Duke wife of Elder Thomas 
 Duke’’ dated July 9, 1870, which says she died ‘‘on the 
 third day of January last’’. 
 
15 
 
 But nowhere in these minutes is there any mention of 
 the parentage of Thomas Duke or of any circumstance 
 as to his birth except in an alleged application by him to 
 be ordained a minister which appears, in pen and ink, on 
 the inside of the front cover page of the oldest book, just 
 preceding the page beginning with the minutes for July 
 29, 1837, and which reads as follows: 
 
 ““June the ‘6’ 1846 on Sept the ‘6’ 1846 Church 
 Requsted brother Duke aplication filed Dear brothen 
 and sisters of Church of Christ at Hopwell Church 
 I come before you for the purpose of prensenting my 
 aplication for becoming a Gospel minister of the 
 primitiave assosation: I believe in only one God 
 one time the father the Holy Ghost and that God 
 elected an chosen his people in Christ before founda- 
 tion of the world that they should be Holy. I am 
 bitterly oposed to Hepizabh Baptist association and 
 feal my duty to go out in the world and defend our 
 primitave Baptist douments have been my past 
 always ready to fight for my country and fellows 
 and expect to continue in life serving the almighty 
 God. I was born on July ‘2’ 1802 in Orange County 
 North Carolina in Little River cuminity my father 
 Taylor Duke my mother Dicey Jones Duke before 
 me honorable and believed in the up rite of our 
 country to secure repesent of my qualification I 
 refure you to Brother S. Hamrick E Phipplle and 
 Brother Jones when have life long frind 
 
 Thomas Duke 
 Pr S§ Hamrick, C. C. L.’’ 
 
 It will be observed that this application is addressed 
 to Hopewell Church and bears date considerably subse- 
 quent to the date of the meeting (December 6, 1845) at 
 which that church had sent by two of its members its re- 
 quest for ‘‘the church at Countaline to ordain T. Duke 
 to the ministareal office’’. 
 
 The records of Countaline Church contain no such 
 application but show that Thomas Duke was ordained 
 there on February 7, 1846, on the request of ‘‘Brother 
 
16 
 
 R. S. Hamrick from the Hopewell Church’’ made Janu- 
 ary 10, 1846, in accordance with the above directions of 
 Hopewell Church on December 6, 1845. For this we have 
 the affidavit of Joseph F. Jones, who says: 
 
 ‘‘T am Clerk of County Line Primitive Baptist 
 Church and have been such clerk for about 16 or 17 
 years, and have in my possession the books and rec- 
 ords of the County Line Primitive Baptist Church 
 in Carroll County, Ga. 
 
 I have never seen any such letter among the 
 church books or records as that dated, ‘June 6, 1846 
 on Sept. 6, 1846 Church requested Brother Duke ap- 
 plication filed’ and last line ‘Jones whom have life 
 long friend.’ ‘Thomas Duke’ and Pr. 8. Hamsick, 
 C. C. L.’.. No such letter was ever among the rec- 
 ords as far as I know. It was never customary to 
 write such an application, and it does not sound gen- 
 uine to me as a Primitive Baptist. The church must 
 find the .gift in the man, and if a man asked for his 
 ordination, he would never get it. 
 
 The Minutes of County Line Church, dated Jan., 
 10; 1846 on page 52 of the record state: 
 
 ‘6. Miscellaneous Matters. When Brother 
 R. S. Hamrick from the Hopewell Church re- 
 quested the ordination of Thos. Duke, which was 
 granted and Friday before the second Lord’s 
 Day in February next was set for the ordina- 
 tion, and that James Head and Johnson Pait for 
 the Presbertery and Clerk write to Cedar Creek 
 for Pait and deacons and Head and Hollard and 
 Lapsetter bear the letter.’ 
 
 The letter referred to, means the letter from 
 County Line Church to the Presbytery. 
 
 The County Line Church record for Feb. 7, 1846 
 shows that Brother Thomas Duke was ordained, and 
 no such letter as dated June 6, 1846 and on Sept. 6, 
 1846 was ever presented to the Church or the Pres- 
 bytery.”’ 
 
 Mr. John 'T. Eady, Clerk of Hopewell Church for 15 
 or 20 years dating from 1883, had sent these books to 
 
17 
 
 Miss Duke. She had seen him when at Carrollton, 
 Georgia, shortly before Christmas 1926 in her quest for 
 information as to Thomas Duke and he had promised to 
 look up the church records for her. This he did, going 
 over them twice with Mr. Hollaway, the present clerk, 
 searching for references to Thomas Duke and turning 
 down pages for Miss Duke’s notice. His letter of May 
 20, 1927, enclosing the books to Miss Duke mentions the 
 obituary but not this application. And in his affidavit 
 of July 5, 1927 Mr. Hady says: ‘‘I never read the ap- 
 plication of Thomas Duke dated June 6, 1846 before it 
 was shown to me a few days ago by Mr. Charles Cald- 
 well’’. 
 
 Mr. Fred W. Hollaway, the present Clerk of Hope- 
 well Church, makes affidavit that 
 
 “‘Last Fall, brother J. T. Kady, asked me if I had 
 all three of the church books and I told him I had 
 them. He asked me if I had noticed anything about 
 Thomas Duke in them. I told him I did not recall 
 anything in particular. He said he would come to 
 my home the next Sunday and we would go over them 
 to-gether. He came to my house the next Sunday 
 and we got out the two old books and went over them. 
 At that time, as I recall it, we were looking to see if 
 Thomas Duke had any middle name. The only way 
 we found his name was Thomas Duke. Sometime 
 this year, about April, or May, he again came to my 
 home and said a lady was looking for information 
 about Thomas Duke and we again got out the two 
 old church books and spent more than an hour in 
 going over them, trying to find out all we could about 
 Thomas Duke’s obituary and Mary Duke’s obituary 
 and remember some pages being turned down. We 
 did not find anything in either book that gave the 
 name of the father or mother of Thomas Duke, or 
 the date or place of his birth. That was just the kind 
 of information we were looking for. We looked 
 through both books carefully, looking over them 
 page by page. As both books had in them something 
 about Thomas Duke, I gave both of them to Brother 
 
18 
 
 Eady. I wrapped them up to-gether and gave both 
 of them to him at the same time. At that time the 
 Paper book had a stiff paper back, covering it. Its 
 appearance was altogether different from the paper 
 covering now shown to me, which contains the writ- 
 ing on the inside of the first page beginning: ‘June 
 the 6, 1846 on; Sept. the 6, 1846 Church requested 
 Brother Duke application filed, etc.’ and ends with 
 last line ‘Jones, whom have life long friend’ and 
 underneath, ‘Thomas Duke’ and ‘Pr. 8. Hamrick, 
 C. C. L.’. I never saw until to-day the writing on 
 that page, and to the best of my knowledge that writ- 
 ing was not on that page, nor anywhere else in that 
 book at the time I turned the books over to Brother 
 Eady. To the best of my belief, that writing has 
 been inserted in the book since the book left me. 
 Brother Kady and his wife were at my house when 
 I turned the books over to him. He said that he 
 wanted to send them on to a woman in Texas. 
 
 I have looked at that book a number of times for 
 the particular purpose of finding information about 
 Thomas Duke between the two visits of Brother Hady 
 and I am sure that if that inside of the first page 
 about Thomas Duke’s application had been in it, 
 while in my possession, I would have seen it. I had 
 my interest aroused by Brother Hady’s first visit 
 and from time to time read it to see what more I 
 could find.’’ 
 
 Mr. Edward L. Turner, who immediately preceded 
 Mr. Hollaway as Clerk of Hopewell Church, says in his 
 affidavit : 
 
 ‘While Clerk, I had the old church records in my 
 possession and occasionally on rainy days, especi- 
 ally, I would read over the church minutes, but more 
 especially the Minutes of the last 15 or 25 years, 
 but have looked back to see the first minutes which 
 began in 1837. 
 
 July 1, 1927 was the first time I ever read what 
 purports to be an application by Thomas Duke for 
 ordination. It is written on the inside of the front 
 cover of the old minute book of the Hopewell Primi- 
 
1M, 
 
 tive Baptist Church. The application begins, ‘June 
 6, 1846—on Sept. 6, 1846 Church requested Brother 
 Duke application filed.’ I have identified a photo- 
 stat copy of that application by my signature on the 
 back of it. I never saw the original application 
 before July 1, 1927 to the best of my memory, 
 nor the photostat copy until July 1, 1927. I 
 never knew who were the parents of Thomas 
 Duke the Primitive Baptist Preacher, never 
 heard anybody say where he was born or where he 
 came from and never read anything about it until 
 July 1, 1927. I have carefully read that paper said 
 to be the application of Thomas Duke for ordina- 
 tion, and it is entirely contrary to Primitive Baptist 
 methods so far as I have known them all my life. It 
 does not impress me as being a genuine paper.’’ 
 
 And Mr. William O. Jennings, who was church clerk 
 for 10 or 12 years immediately preceding Mr. Turner, 
 says: 
 
 ‘¢While I was clerk, I had the church records in my 
 possession, including the paper back book with first 
 church record of meeting, dated July 29, 1837. 
 
 July 1, 1927 is the first time I have ever seen or 
 read the writing on the inside of the front cover be- 
 ginning at top ‘June 6, 1846—on Sept. 6, 1846 Church 
 requested Brother Duke application filed.’ Have 
 identified photostat of application with my signature 
 on back. From time to time on rainy days, I have 
 taken down the old church books and read them to 
 find out what the church did way back yonder and I 
 never read that application for ordination by Brother 
 Duke and if that writing had been there on that page 
 while the records were in my possession I would 
 have seen it and read it and it would have made such 
 an impression on my mind that I could not have for- 
 gotten it, because it is so contrary to the spirit and 
 practice of the Primitive Baptist Church. It don’t 
 sound like Primitive Baptist usage. It is entirely 
 out of place for a man, who is about to be ordained 
 to tell about his father or his mother and the man is 
 taken for what he is and not for who his father or 
 mother were. 
 
20 
 
 If there had been any application ordered filed 
 by the Church, the minutes of the Church on that 
 date would certainly have shown such action was 
 taken and there is no such record in the Church min- 
 utes of June 6, 1846 and there was no meeting at 
 all on Sept. 6, 1846. The minutes expressly note 
 there was no conference or meeting on Sept. 5, 1846.’’ 
 
 Furthermore, it was found that the records at Talla- 
 poosa Church contained no evidence of such an applica- 
 tion but so far as they refer to Thomas Duke cor- 
 responded entirely with the records for Hopewell and 
 Countaline. For they show only on July 21, 1838, his 
 joining ‘‘by experience’’, on September 22, 1838, his ap- 
 pointment as delegate to the Association, on December 
 22, 1838, a letter granted to him, on May 24, 1845, a 
 letter ‘‘from the Church at County Line”’ asking ‘‘ Minis- 
 tereal aid in the ordination of Thos. Duke’’ and on June 
 21, 1845, Bro. Tippitt appointed to attend this ordination 
 if he wished. See affidavit of Mr. Joseph B. Copeland, 
 the present Clerk of that church, which further says: 
 
 ‘‘T have read what is said to be an application by 
 Thos. Duke to be ordained as a Primitive Baptist 
 Minister. It is dated June 6, 1846 and on Sept. 6, 
 1846, and is to the Brethren and sister of the Church 
 of Christ at Hopewell and at bottom is signed 
 Thomas Duke and Pr. 8. Hamsick, C. C. L. I have 
 
 identified a photostatic copy of that application by 
 my signature on the back. 
 
 I never heard of any such application ever being 
 made in a Primitive Baptist Church and my mother 
 is a Primitive Baptist 77 years old and I have been 
 familiar with their practices and methods all my life. 
 No such application is among the records of the 
 Tallapoosa Church and such an application would be 
 enough in itself to discredit among Primitive Baptist 
 any man, who would make it. 
 
 As Thomas Duke was ordained as a Primitive 
 Baptist Minister, I can not believe he ever made 
 such an application.’’ 
 
21 
 
 Mrs. Susan Ann Hamrick, who was born in 1835, had 
 lived near Carrollton since 1853 and frequently heard 
 Thomas Duke preach, and who is ‘‘familiar with the way 
 Primitive Baptists call and ordain ministers’’, being a 
 Primitive Baptist, her parents also and her father-in- 
 law a Primitive Baptist preacher, says she never in her 
 life heard of an application to be ordained and ‘‘if a man 
 should presume to make an application himself for ordin- 
 ation I think he would never be ordained’’. And the same 
 statement is made by Mr. William M. Spence, who was 
 born 1845 and remembers very well hearing Thomas Duke 
 preach. He says the alleged application ‘‘does not 
 sound genuine to me and from what I know of Thomas 
 Duke I don’t believe he ever presented such an applica- 
 tion’’. 
 
 Mrs. J. T. Eady when seen by Mr. Caldwell said that 
 she had never read the alleged application for ordination 
 until the page was shown to her by Mr. Caldwell. And 
 she gave Mr. Caldwell an affidavit dated July 5th, 1927 
 in which she said that she had ‘‘never read the Thomas 
 Duke application for ordination dated June 6, 1846 until 
 it was shown to me by Mr. Caldwell’’. Miss Duke has 
 since sent in an affidavit, prepared by her and signed by 
 Mrs. Eady on September 13th, 1927, in which Mrs. Eady 
 says she remembers reading this application during the 
 time when her husband was Clerk of Hopewell Church. 
 But she gives no reason for this change, and her husband 
 does not join in it. 
 
 E. Affidavits submitted. 
 
 A great many of the affidavits submitted by Miss 
 Duke are mere formal presentation of the claim of the 
 affiant and may be disregarded on the question of the 
 alleged relationship of Thomas and Washington Duke 
 under the circumstances here. 
 
 There are a few on a form prepared by Miss Duke in 
 which the affiants set forth Taylor Duke’s marriage and 
 
22 
 
 his children, Thomas Duke’s coming to Georgia, his mar- 
 riage, occupation and children and that the affiants had 
 been ‘‘taught’’ by their parents ‘‘from childhood up to 
 the time of (their) death that Thomas Duke was (their) 
 grandfather and that Taylor Duke was (their) grate 
 grandfather’’. Such affidavits are: 
 
 (1) That of Mrs. Celia Frances Benefield a daughter, 
 born November 10, 1851, of Cyntha Duke, who was a 
 daughter, born August 9, 1833, of Thomas Duke, who 
 also says: 
 
 ‘“‘T was about grown when my grandfather 
 Thomas Duke died and can remember all of my 
 mother brothers and sister by name given in the 
 above statement. I can remember my grandfather 
 Thomas Duke, brother, John Taylor Duke, visiting 
 my grandfather, in Carrol County Georgia. I saw 
 him as a young man then again years later.’’ 
 
 (2) Henry Zebulon Duke, a son, born September 15, 
 1859, of George Washington Duke, who was a son, born 
 in 1821, of Thomas Duke, and who also says: 
 
 ‘“‘Remembers that his father refured to his Uncles 
 as; Uncle John Taylor, William, Robert, Washing- 
 ton, Kirkland and his Aunt’s as aunt Mary, Amelia, 
 Malinda, Rena, and they all lived in Orange Co & 
 Durham North Carolina. I also remember my father 
 telling me that after the Civil War, that his father 
 Thomas Duke lost all track of his familey, in those 
 days had no mail and no way of getting in touch 
 with any one. I recall a statement made in my home 
 by Hardy Duke, who was my first cousin, that he 
 had visited while in New York, James B. Duke, the 
 deseased, and they talked there relationship and 
 stated second cousin that there fathers were first 
 cousin.’’ 
 
 (3) Henry M. Duke, a son, born ‘‘Nov. 16th, 1966’’, 
 of Zebulon Pike Duke, who was a son, born in 1835, 
 of Thomas Duke, and who also says: 
 
23 
 
 ‘‘Remembers that his father refured to his Uncle 
 John Taylor, William Duke, Washington, Robert, 
 Kirkland and aunts as Amelia, Milinda, Rena, they 
 all lived in Orange Co. N. C. and Durham Co. I 
 recall my father talking after the Civli War that his - 
 father Thomas Duke lost everything duering the 
 war and there was no way of getting in touch with 
 his fathers familey. Also remember my father say- 
 ing that he named some of his children after there 
 uncles. One was named William James, after his 
 uncle William, also remember my father telling that 
 his father named his boys, after his brothers one of 
 my uncles was named John Taylor, he was killed 
 duering the Civli War, another one was named Wash- 
 ington, Thomas Taylor (called Tom T) and named 
 one of his daughters Malindia; Mary Ellizabeth.’’ 
 
 The other affidavits filed by Miss Duke are: 
 
 (a) Daniel M. Boone who makes affidavit in Texas 
 that he was born in Carrol County, Georgia, July 5, 1851, 
 personally knew Thomas Duke and his children and 
 “‘that he heard Thomas Duke during his life time speak 
 of his brother, Washington Duke’’. 
 
 (b) Hugh McMullen who makes affidavit in Texas 
 that he was born in Carrol County, Georgia, July 9, 1835, 
 knew Thomas Duke and saw him buried; also knew his 
 children and names them. There is then interlined just 
 above the signature of McMullen the words ‘‘Heard 
 Thomas Duke speak of his father, Taylor Duke” in a 
 handwriting which looks like Miss Duke’s and is differ- 
 ent and in a different ink from the body of the affidavit. 
 
 (c) Mrs. J. T. Eady of Carroll County, who is 67 
 years old and says she knew Thomas Duke and his chil- 
 dren, names them and says George Washington Duke 
 lived with her father Samuel C. Dickson. There is then 
 inserted just above the signature the words ‘‘and hear 
 Brother Thomas Duke speak of his father Taylor Duke 
 of North Carolina’’ in same ink and handwriting as the 
 similar insertion in the McMullen affidavit and likewise 
 different from the residue of the affidavit. 
 
24 
 
 Opposed to the above affidavits are the following: 
 (1) Mrs. J. T. Eady (Frances KE. Eady) who says: 
 
 ‘‘T made an affidavit for Elizabeth Duke on or 
 about the 23rd. day of December 1926; but I never 
 told her I heard Thomas Duke speak of his father, 
 Taylor Duke of North Carolina. I was Born Sept. 
 2, 1859 and Thomas Duke died in 1866 so I am in- 
 formed. I never heard him speak of his father or 
 mother or brother or sister. I never heard or 
 knew where he came from. 
 
 I never told Miss Elizabeth Duke that Thomas 
 Duke had a son Thomas Taylor Duke or John 
 Taylor Duke. I never heard of any of them named 
 Taylor. She talked a good deal about the name 
 Taylor.’’ 
 
 (2) Mr. C. T. Duke makes two affidavits. In the first, 
 dated July 15, 1927, he says his father was William Duke, 
 born in Carroll County, Georgia, in 1822, moved to Mis- 
 sissippi, and in 1876 to Texas and 
 
 ‘<That the father of the said William Duke and 
 grandfather of this affant was Thomas Duke; 
 that the said Thomas Duke was a Primitive Bap- 
 tist Preacher and was born in the State of North 
 Carolina, not far from Winston-Salem, North 
 Carolina; and that the said Thomas Duke moved 
 from the State of North Carolina to Carroll 
 County in the State of Georgia; that the said 
 Thomas Duke had three brothers, who this affiant 
 has heard his father, the said William Duke, speak 
 of, towit: David Duke, Johnnie Duke, and Russell 
 Duke. That affiant did not personally know Rus- 
 sell Duke and Johnnie but that he did know David 
 Duke personally and knew that David Duke was 
 the brother of Thomas Duke. That the said David 
 Duke lived at Old Panola in Panola County, Mis- 
 sissippi, and was County Tax assessor for a period 
 of 12 years. Affiant knows of his own knowledge 
 that David Duke was the brother of Thomas Duke; 
 that he knew him personally and worked for him 
 
25 
 
 while he lived in the State of Mississippi. That 
 affiant knows that Russell Duke and Johnnie Duke 
 were brothers of said Thomas Duke by what his 
 father had told him and by reason of the fact that 
 his father called them ‘Uncle’.’’ 
 
 In his second affidavit Mr. C. T. Duke says that 
 Thomas Duke was born about the year 1800 and that 
 
 ‘“‘He arrives at this conclusion by reason of 
 the fact that he knows that in the early part of 
 1867, he and his father received a letter announc- 
 ing the death of Thomas Duke; that at the time 
 this affiant and his father received the letter an- 
 nouncing the death of the said Thomas Duke, that 
 affiant and his father were living in the State of 
 Mississippi and in the Mississippi river bottom; 
 that for six weeks prior to the time they received 
 the letter announcing the death of the said Thomas 
 Duke that the county where they were living was 
 flooded with water from overflows of the Missis- 
 sippi River, and the mails were necessarily slow. 
 The said Thomas Duke either died in the latter 
 part of the year 1866 or in the first part of the 
 year 1867. That affiant knows that at the time of 
 his death he was 66 years of age; that the said 
 Thomas Duke therefore must have been born 
 sometime about the year 1800.”’ 
 
 (3) Mrs. Susan Ann Hamrick, who was born April 
 19, 1835, and had lived in Carroll County since 1853, says 
 she had frequently heard Thomas Duke preach and that 
 she ‘‘should judge at time of his death he was at least 
 75 years old.”’ 
 
 (4) Mrs. Mary A. Johnson, living with Mr. Thomas 
 J. Hady near Burwell, P. O. Carrollton, Georgia, says 
 she was born June 15, 1850, and her mother was Eliza- 
 beth Duke Bedingfield and a daughter of Thomas Duke; 
 that she knew Thomas Duke and had frequently heard 
 him preach and visited at his home; that she never heard 
 her grandfather speak of any other brother or sister or 
 
26 
 
 his father or mother or what their names were or where 
 he came from; that according to her best judgment 
 Thomas Duke was between 70 and 80 years old when he 
 died. 
 
 (5) Mr. William M. Spence was born December 1, 
 1845, in Morgan County, Georgia, but came to Carroll 
 County when about 2 years old; remembers Thomas Duke 
 very well and describes him as a tall man, muscular, with 
 fair complexion and full of fire as a preacher; that ac- 
 cording to his best judgment and recollection Thomas 
 Duke must have been about 70 to 73 years old at the time 
 of his death. 
 
 (6) Mr. Hardy Madison Smith was born June 15, 
 1840, says he knew Thomas Duke very well, had often 
 heard him preach, and remembered that Thomas Duke 
 had stayed at his father’s home three days and three 
 nights one time at an Association. He further says: 
 
 ‘‘From what Thomas Duke told me, I think he 
 was born and raised in Upson County, Ga. He 
 talked to me about old man Fletcher Burson, my 
 wife’s father and I have heard Fletcher Burson 
 talk about Thomas Duke. Duke was older than 
 Burson. 
 
 When Thomas Duke stayed those three days 
 and nights at my father’s house I was about 23 to 
 25 years old. I think it was after the war closed. 
 My best judgment would be that Thomas Duke 
 was about 70 to 75 years of age when he died.”’ 
 
 (7) Mrs. Eliza Clematine Puckett says that she was 
 born in Carroll County in the year 1860; that her father 
 was A. Hamilton Duke and his father was Thomas Duke, 
 ‘‘a Primitive Baptist Preacher and was born in the State 
 of North Carolina, not far from Winston-Salem, North 
 Carolina, and moved from the State of North Carolina 
 to Carroll County in the State of Georgia’’; that she 
 knew her grandfather Thomas Duke during his lifetime, 
 
27 
 
 had seen him many times as a child, and was present at 
 his funeral in Carroll County, Georgia. 
 
 (8) The Thomas Duke claim was presented to Mr. 
 B. N. Duke, now 72 years old, the son of Washington 
 Duke, and he said he had never heard any mention of 
 Thomas Duke as a son of Taylor Duke but had always 
 been told and understood that William J. Duke was the 
 oldest son of Taylor Duke. 
 
 (9) The Thomas Duke claim has also been presented 
 to Mr. James E. Lyon, now 82 years old, the son-in-law 
 of William J. Duke, who was intimate with the family 
 from boyhood, to Mrs. Sallie H. Garrard, a granddaugh- 
 ter of William J. Duke who lived in his home for some 
 sixteen years prior to 1872, and to Mrs. Lida Angier, 
 daughter of John Taylor Duke who went to Tennessee, 
 and these all say that they never heard of Thomas Duke 
 and had always been told and understood that William 
 J. Duke was the oldest child of Taylor Duke. 
 
 (10) The Census Records for 1810 show Taylor Duke 
 to have had then only one male member of his family un- 
 der 10 and we know that there then existed William J. 
 Duke and that his next male child was not born until 
 after 1810. 
 
 (11) And the Thomas Duke claim is contrary to the 
 William J. Duke Bible pages which list all of Taylor 
 Duke’s ten children in the order and with the dates of 
 their birth and do not give Thomas Duke as one. This 
 list is set forth and discussed fully when we consider the 
 Vaughan claim and for reasons there stated considered 
 authentic and reliable. 
 
 In order to understand some of the above affidavits it 
 should be stated that Winston-Salem is not, and never 
 was, in Orange County, North Carolina, but is located 
 some distance to the West; that Taylor Duke married 
 on or aboutAugust 14th 1801 and that he never had any 
 son named David or Russell. 
 
28 
 
 F. Alleged Bible Entries. 
 
 According to Miss Elizabeth Duke’s statedient taken 
 stenographically when she was in New York in June 1927, 
 she has produced entries from two family Bibles, namely: 
 
 (1) A Bible she brought with her to New York which 
 she said came from her grandmother’s (the Bryce’s) 
 side of the family, was sent to her by special delivery by 
 Dr. Henry M. Duke, her father’s brother, whose post 
 office address is Winsboro, Texas, and is ‘‘a relic which 
 had been taken of my grandfather’s books after his 
 death’’. 
 
 (2) A copy made by her mother, Mrs. Margaret Mag- 
 nolia Duke, of entries ‘‘from Thomas Duke Bible and 
 from old records’’. She says that this Bible was the 
 family Bible of Zebulon Pike Duke, her grandfather, that 
 it was handed her by Mrs. Eliza Russell, of Gilmer, 
 Texas, in June or July 1926, and she took it home and 
 found these sheets in it. 
 
 For purposes of comparison we quote as follows in 
 parallel columns the data thus produced so far as it con- 
 cerns the Taylor Duke family, the copy by Mrs. Mar- 
 garet Magnolia Duke being that on the left, and the omis- 
 sions in the one on the right being due to the absence on 
 a portion of the page: 
 
 Witness _Moses_ Jones 
 Taylor Duke and Dicey Jones 
 
 Married Aug. 14th, 1801 Taylor Duke and Dicy Duke 
 Orange Co. North Carolina Family 
 Children Borned 
 Thomas Duke 1802 : Thomas Duke was Born 
 year 18-2 
 William James Duke 1803 maried Sarah Roberts : William James Duke was Born 
 year 18-3 
 Mary Duke 1805 James Stagg : Mary Duke Born 18-5 
 Amelia Duke 1807 James Riggs : Amelia Duke Born 18-7 
 Rena Duke 1810 James Clifton : Rena Duke Born 1810 
 Kirkland Duke 1813 : Kirkland Duke Born 1813 
 Malindia Duke 1815 : Malinda Duke Born 1815 
 Jonhn Taylor Duke 1818 Miss Whitemore : John T. Duke Born 1818 
 Washington Duke 1820 Mary Clifton : Washington Duke Born 1820 
 Robert Duke 1822 : Robert Duke Born 1822 
 Brodie Duke 1825 : Brodie Duke Born 1825 
 In the name of God Amen. I Thomas Duke being : Amen I Thomas Duke being 
 sound deposing mind and memory and considering : memory and conserding 
 uncertainty of mortal life on this twenty th 5 Twenty day of Sept. 
 day of Sept. Eighteen Hundred and_ Sixty-Six : Sixty six declare 
 declare this stement is made of my Father, 5 my Father Mother 
 Mother Brothers and Sisters 5 ceruety 
 Security James Bryce : James Bryce 
 Dr. Henry Jones Fi Henry Jones 
 
 W. J. Williams Q J. Williams 
 
29 
 
 This contrast makes manifest that, even if genuine, 
 there existed only one Bible record, to which Mrs. Duke, 
 in copying, added information as to the marriage of 
 Taylor Duke and some of his children. For otherwise 
 we have two different sets of Bible entries on the same 
 subject certified for Thomas Duke by the same witnesses 
 on the same day, for which there seems no adequate rea- 
 son. 
 
 Mr. John F. Bryce, the son of the James Bryce whose 
 name appears as one of the witnesses, throws much doubt 
 on the genuineness. He was shown a photostatic copy 
 of the alleged Bible record and made affidavit that the 
 name ‘‘ James Bryce’’ appearing there was not the sig- 
 nature of his father. He produced an account book show- 
 ing what he knew to be the signature of his father, and 
 there has been found the will of James Bryce. Neither 
 the signature to this will nor the name as written in the 
 account book is at all similar to the signature ‘‘ James 
 Bryce’’ on the alleged Bible record. 
 
 The will of Thomas Duke was executed the very same 
 day that this Bible record is alleged to have been attested, 
 to wit, September 20, 1866, which was only three days 
 before the death of Thomas Duke. And the will has an 
 entirely different set of witnesses to wit: W. F. S. Powell, 
 U. W. Byram and James Pace. Knowing from the obit- 
 uary that Thomas Duke had been severely afflicted for 
 some while and so probably regarded death as imminent 
 when his will was executed, it seems rather strange that 
 these two documents, so closely akin in their nature, 
 should have had different sets of witnesses, if executed 
 the same day. 
 
 And it is hard to understand how Thomas Duke in 
 1866 had some of the information which these Bible en- 
 tries give. In her letter to Mr. Mapes of January 17, 
 1927, Miss Duke says ‘‘Thomas Duke ran away from 
 home as a mere lad of a boy and not having heard from 
 
30 
 
 his oldest son for years Taylor Duke therefore made 
 William James Duke his executor’’. And we know that 
 in those days communication between North Carolina 
 and Georgia was difficult and uncertain. Yet we find 
 these Bible entries giving information as to the birth 
 and marriage of children, all of which occurred while 
 Thomas Duke was in Georgia. 
 
 On the other hand we know that Miss Duke anxiously 
 sought and obtained information from which these al- 
 leged Bible records, as well as the alleged Historical 
 Records, could have been compiled, just as occurred with 
 respect to the Cobb book, the Hephzibah book and the 
 church records, by simply inserting Thomas Duke as 
 born in 1802. 
 
 On June 15, 1926, Miss Duke wrote the Postmaster at 
 Durham, N. C., asking ‘‘information on Washington 
 Duke, James Buckannon Duke Father. Where was he 
 borned if you can find out this information will appreci- 
 ate any you can give and pay you for your trouble. 
 Would like to know his Father name also his brother 
 name’’. This letter showed she was consulting Govern- 
 ment Records and had written the U. S. Ambassador in 
 England. The Postmaster referred her to Mr. James H. 
 Lyon. 
 
 On June 18, 1926, Miss Duke wrote Mr. Ben Duke, 
 the brother of James B. Duke, asking information as 
 to his ‘‘Father Bros and his Father name’’, stating that 
 ‘“‘everything my grandfather (Zebulon Duke) had was 
 destroyed by Sherman & Grant during the war all record 
 and went when his household goods went’’ so she wished 
 ‘‘as complete record as possible of your father Bros & 
 Sister also his Father name if you know it’’. Mr. Mapes 
 answered enclosing copy of Item VI. of the will. 
 
 On July 28, 1926, Miss Duke wrote to Mr. J. H. Lyon, 
 Durham, N. C., to whom she had been referred by the 
 Postmaster, seeking similar information, saying: ‘‘I will 
 be glad to pay you for your trouble if you can assist me 
 
ol 
 
 in tracing James Buckannon Father George Washington 
 Duke’’ and that ‘‘so far information I have furnish Jim- 
 mie Duke a Father of the said Washington Duke and 
 Thomas Duke.’’ This letter was answered by Mrs. 
 Angier, a daughter of John Taylor Duke, one of Wash- 
 ington Duke’s brothers. She quoted the list of Taylor 
 Duke’s children as shown in the William J. Duke family 
 Bible, giving in each case date of birth, also who each 
 married, except that she stated Malinda was unmarried 
 and that Kirkland and Brodie went to Florida. She also 
 said ‘‘Father Taylor Duke died 1850, Mother Dicey Jones 
 Duke died April 22, 1860’’. 
 
 Miss Duke wrote a special delivery letter to the 
 State Historical Commission at Raleigh, N. C., asking 
 it to wire her the information shown by the Taylor Duke 
 marriage bond. And in reply she was advised by wire 
 that the bond was dated August 14, 1801, between Taylor 
 Duke and Dicey Jones, with Moses Jones as security. 
 
 On November 2, 1926, Miss Duke wrote Mr. Mapes: 
 
 ‘*T have been delayed a little working up my data 
 due to the fact that there (was and is) only book of 
 records of the Duke family and it does not embrace 
 all the branches. I therefore was compelled to 
 search for records which was not in the above men- 
 tioned book’’. 
 
 As late as Christmas 1926 Miss Duke was in the State 
 Library at Atlanta and at Carrollton, Georgia, seeking 
 information as to Thomas Duke. And we know there 
 were books accessible to her such as ‘‘Genealogy Duke- 
 Shepherd-VanMetre Family’’ by Samuel Gordon Smyth, 
 published in 1909, and ‘‘Notable Southern Families’’ by 
 Zella Armstrong, published in 1926, which plainly state 
 that Taylor Duke married Dicey Jones, gave some of 
 his descendants and said that he was of Orange County, 
 North Carolina, and there had been Sheriff and Captain 
 in the Militia. 
 
32 
 
 And, it was not until her letters in January and Feb- 
 ruary 1927 that Miss Duke sent in any of the alleged 
 Bible and Historical Records. 
 
 Conclusion as to Thomas Duke Claim. 
 
 Under the circumstances, after a most thorough in- 
 vestigation, review and consideration, the Executors have 
 become convinced that Thomas Duke was not a son of 
 Taylor Duke and so, acting as such Executors, they as- 
 certain, determine and declare that he was not a brother 
 of Washington Duke and that his descendants are not 
 entitled to participate in the distribution to be made 
 under the terms of Item VI. of the Last Will and Testa- 
 ment of James B. Duke, deceased. 
 
30 
 
 The Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan Claim. 
 
 The claim here is that Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan, 
 wife of James Vaughan, was a daughter of Taylor Duke 
 and sister of Washington Duke, thereby making her 
 descendants participants. Upon it many affidavits have 
 been submitted and a mass of data accumulated, requir- 
 ing a rather extensive review which can best be done with 
 clarity under subheadings, as follows: 
 
 A. Early letters of Mr. C. E. Mapes for the Executors. 
 
 When this item of Mr. Duke’s will became known so 
 many inquiries began coming in that the Executors found 
 it necessary to put the correspondence and files in the 
 charge of some one. They selected Mr. C. E. Mapes for 
 this purpose and he sought as far as he could to assist 
 those seeking information. 
 
 For some little while theretofore Mr. B. N. Duke, the 
 brother of Mr. James B. Duke, had been securing such 
 information as he could about his relatives, and to the 
 information thus gathered Mr. Mapes went. He found 
 there some correspondence between Mr. B. N. Duke and 
 a Miss Edna L. Vaughan stating that Mary (Polly) Duke 
 Vaughan was a sister of Washington Duke, and he so 
 wrote in some of the letters sent out in November and 
 early December, 1925. 
 
 These letters were never intended and cannot be con- 
 strued as any indication of the views of the Executors, 
 much less as an ascertainment and determination by 
 them. They were merely a sincere endeavor by Mr. 
 Mapes to answer inquiries in a frank manner from the 
 best evidence then available, namely, the information 
 that had been gathered by Mr. B. N. Duke, and which 
 we next herein consider, 
 
34 
 
 B. Recognition by B. N. Duke, a brother of J. B. Duke, that 
 Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan was a daughter of Taylor 
 Duke and a sister of Washington Duke. 
 
 Under date of December 2, 1924, Miss Edna L. 
 Vaughan, of Warrensburg, Mo., wrote a letter to Mr. J. 
 B. Duke. There is no record that Mr. J. B. Duke knew 
 her or of her or had ever had any previous correspond- 
 ence with her, and he made no reply to this letter. But 
 the letter came to the attention of his brother, Mr. B. N. 
 Duke, who at the time was securing information as to 
 his relatives in order to help in some degree those found 
 in financial need. So he answered the letter and a cor- 
 respondence resulted. This correspondence should be 
 divided into two parts, namely, that prior to December 
 1925, and the residue. 
 
 So far as pertinent here, the statements of Miss 
 Vaughan in the first part of this correspondence are: In 
 the letter to Mr. J. B. Duke that ‘‘my father William E. 
 Vaughan was born in the same county that you were. 
 His mother Mary Duke Vaughan was a sister of Wash- 
 ington and William Duke’’ and that she was delighted 
 ‘‘to find in Who’s Who in America the Duke Brothers 
 names which instantly called to my mind that Grand- 
 mother Vaughan was a sister of Washington Duke’’; in 
 a letter of December 27, 1924, to Mr. B. N. Duke that in 
 her father’s effects she had found a ‘‘tintype of his 
 mother on back of which is written Mary Vaughan, 
 Franklinton, N. C.’’ and ‘‘will say in regard to your 
 uncle’s daughter who married a Mr. Price and came to 
 Mo. that I do not remember hearing my father speak of 
 them but I do remember hearing my father speak of your 
 uncle as Uncle Billie Duke’’; in a letter of February 2, 
 1925: ‘‘I am quite sure my father did not know that his 
 mother had so many brothers and sisters as I never 
 heard him speak of any but Uncle Wash and Uncle Billie 
 Duke’’. 
 
30 
 
 This for a while led Mr. B. N. Duke to believe that 
 Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan was a sister of his father 
 Washington Duke, he so expressed himself in the first 
 part of the correspondence, and on the basis of this be- 
 lief during that period made substantial distributions to 
 various of her descendants. Among the things said by 
 Mr. Duke on this subject in this first part of the corre- 
 . spondence are the following: 
 
 ‘‘But for the letter you addressed to my brother 
 in December your family would not have been in- 
 cluded in this list for the reason that it was not 
 known to us that such a family existed, but the re- 
 ceipt of your letter called to my mind the recollec- 
 tion that when I was a very small boy of having 
 heard my father speak of one of his sisters hav- 
 ing married a Vaughan—so your letter immedi- 
 ately brought this to my mind. My father was 
 one of a family of twelve children, 6 males and 6 
 females, and my mother was also of a family of 
 twelve children, 6 males and 6 females, so you see 
 the outcome of this had produced quite a large 
 army of our kinspeople.’’ (Letter of January 26, 
 1925) 
 
 ‘‘You see what trouble that letter you wrote to 
 my brother on December 2, 1924, has gotten me 
 into. Up to the receipt of this letter we never had 
 the slightest idea of having any kindred by the 
 name of Vaughan, as I believe I wrote you in the 
 beginning, and now this letter of yours started an 
 investigation as to this branch of the family and 
 the statement I sent you of the result of our in- 
 vestigation disclosed a most wonderfully prolific 
 family. While there is not a single first cousin of 
 my Aunt Mary Duke Vaughan living, I have dis- 
 covered through my investigation that I have liv- 
 ing 18 second cousins and that these second cou- 
 sins have an offspring of 77 children living; of 
 course these are my third cousins. This is the 
 record in point of numbers for any of my aunts, 
 or uncles on either my mother’s or father’s side 
 and I do not mind telling you that that letter of 
 
36 
 
 yours first referred to has cost me an outlay of 
 $75,000. * * * J have found that most of these 
 kinsmen live in only 15 or 20 miles of my old home 
 town, Durham, N. C., and you must admit that 
 they are a brave, independent type of people, that 
 none of them ever made known their relationship 
 to me (if they knew it), or asked me for favors of 
 any kind. * * * IfI mistake not, in one of your 
 letters you asked me to give you the names of my 
 father’s brothers and sisters. My uncles were 
 William J. Duke, my father’s oldest brother, 
 Brodie Duke, Kirkland Duke, John T. Duke and 
 Robert Duke, and I only know of four aunts, Mrs. 
 Stagg, Mrs. Riggs, Malinda who never married, 
 and your grandmother, Mary Duke Vaughan. I 
 know nothing about the names or the whereabouts 
 of the other sisters; they must have died before I 
 was old enough to remember, and there is no one 
 that I know of that I can obtain information from 
 as to them. * * * P.S. I intended to say that 
 my uncles, Brodie Duke and Kirkland Duke, 
 neither one of whom I had ever seen, went to 
 Florida and established a large mercantile busi- 
 ness and were quite successful, but both of them 
 died rather young in Palatka, Fla. Neither were 
 married, as far as I know. When in Florida some 
 years ago, I stopped off with my father in Palatka 
 to visit their graves, and arranged to have them 
 permanently cared for.’’ (Letter of March 26, 
 1925) 
 
 Karly in December, 1925, investigations which had 
 been set on foot to ascertain correctly the brothers and 
 sisters of Washington Duke in order to properly admin- 
 ister the will of Mr. James B. Duke brought to light 
 some pages from the family Bible of William J. Duke 
 which purported to give a list of the children of Taylor 
 Duke with the dates of their birth. These pages were 
 found loose in a Bible belonging to James HK. Lyon, the 
 son-in-law of William J. Duke. They were brought to 
 the attention of Mrs. Lida Angier and by her to the at- 
 tention of Mr. B. N. Duke (her letter to him of December 
 
a7 
 
 4, 1925). And they caused Mr. Duke to believe that he 
 had made an error in his correspondence with Miss Hdna 
 L, Vaughan because they did not include Mary (Polly) 
 Duke Vaughan as one of Taylor Duke’s children. A 
 Mary Duke was named, but it was established, indeed 
 was a matter of Mr. Duke’s own knowledge, that this 
 Mary Duke had married James Stagg. 
 
 Accordingly, there occurred the second part of the 
 correspondence in which Mr. Duke brought the matter to 
 the attention of Miss Edna L. Vaughan in order to cor- 
 rect the error he deemed made. This was by letter to her 
 of December 18, 1925, the pertinent portions of which are 
 as follows: 
 
 “*T received last week a letter from my cousin 
 Lida Duke Angier of Durham, N. C., enclosing a 
 transcript from an old family Bible which be- 
 longed to my Uncle W. J. Duke, in which was re- 
 corded the names of my grandparents and their 
 children, and which I am very sorry to tell you re- 
 vealed the fact that your Grandmother Vaughan 
 was not a sister of my father. 
 
 “Mrs. Angier has been helping Mr. Sands look 
 up our Duke kin in the vicinity of Durham, N. C. 
 IT had not told Mrs. Angier of my correspondence 
 with you, so she was ignorant of what had taken 
 place between the Vaughans, Whitfields, Kear- 
 neys, ete., and myself, when she wrote this letter 
 * * * 
 
 ‘‘Mrs. Angier is a daughter of my Uncle John 
 T. Duke, of Tennessee—married my wife’s brother 
 and has resided in Durham ever since her mar- 
 riage. The Mr. Lyon she refers to married Uncle 
 W. J. Duke’s youngest daughter, Virginia Frances 
 Duke; she died about three years ago. 
 
 ‘‘T confess that at the time I commenced this 
 correspondence with you in reference to the 
 Vaughan family, it had not occurred to me that 
 Polly was a nickname for Mary, and that Mary 
 Duke Stagg and Polly Stagg were one and the 
 same person. My father’s sister Mary married 
 
38 
 
 James Stagg; she was always known to me as 
 Polly; I visited her frequently. I always called 
 her Aunt Polly. She died in 1875. 
 
 ‘*Your grandmother was probably a daughter 
 of one of my Grandfather Duke’s brothers, for he 
 had two brothers. So if this is a correct assump- 
 tion, the Mary Frances Duke was my father’s 
 COUSIN: tke 
 
 ‘‘The distribution I made to a number of this 
 family was in every case entirely voluntary on my 
 part, and the fact that a mistake has been made in 
 that particular, does not disturb me a moment. 
 Of course if I had known of the existence of this 
 old family Bible at the time I received your letter, 
 this mistake as to kinship would not have oe- 
 curred.’’ 
 
 Later, in a letter of February 15, 1926, to Mr. Sands, 
 commenting on a letter of a Mr. Whitfield, one of the de- 
 scendants of Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan, Mr. Duke 
 
 says: 
 
 ‘‘Wrom the time I was old enough to remember 
 I never heard of a Vaughan, Whitfield or Kearney 
 coming to visit my father or my Aunt Malinda up 
 to the time of their deaths. My father frequently 
 talked of his brothers and sisters and their chil- 
 dren to me, my sister and brothers, but never once 
 did I hear him refer to any of these people being 
 related to him. Mr. Whitfield says in his letter 
 that Mrs. Vaughan (Mary Duke Vaughan) died 
 in 1879. I was then 24 years old and never heard 
 of the existence of such a woman. Strange, if she 
 had been a sister of my father, that I had never 
 heard him speak of her and surely if she had been 
 his sister he would have been human enough to 
 have spoken of her to us children when she died 
 and taken other notice of the event, for he was a 
 considerate and unusually kind hearted man. Fur- 
 thermore, several years before he died he made 
 quite a liberal distribution of money to his nieces 
 and nephews in and around Durham and even 
 looked up those residing in Tennessee and Mis- 
 souri (the Prices) and included them either in his 
 
39 
 
 will or sent them generous checks while he was 
 yet living. I know of this of my own personal 
 knowledge for I attended to all his business af- 
 fairs. But, in making these distributions, not one 
 of James G. Vaughan’s descendants got one dol- 
 lar nor did I ever hear such name spoken of by my 
 father in connection with any relationship. If 
 they were his sister’s children why were they com- 
 pletely ignored by my father? Their place of resi- 
 dence was very near to my father’s home and it is 
 strange, if they were his sister’s children, that I 
 never heard him speak of such sister or her chil- 
 dren from the time of my being old enough to re- 
 member, say from 1861, to the time of his death 
 rol S105 eg 
 
 And still later Mr. Duke wrote a letter to the Execu- 
 tors, to which he made oath, stating for their guidance 
 under the provisions of Item VI. of Mr. Duke’s will that 
 the children of Taylor Duke were as given in the William 
 J. Duke Bible. So were he the executor of James B. 
 Duke, making this distribution, he would undoubtedly 
 follow this Bible record and not include the descendants 
 of Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan. 
 
 C. The endorsement on the Andrew Jones certificate. 
 
 This document is a small piece of paper having, in 
 pen and ink, on one side the certificate: 
 
 ‘‘State of North Carolina 
 
 Orange County 
 This is to certify that I Andrew 
 Jones on the 24 day of Oct. 
 1835 solemnize the rite of Matrimony 
 between James Vaughn and Polly 
 Duke and joined them together 
 
 as man and wife 
 Andrew Jones’’ 
 
40 
 
 and on the other side the endorsement: 
 
 ‘‘James Vaughn 
 Son of 
 Sampson Vaughn 
 Polly Duke 
 Daughter of 
 Talor Duke 
 Andrew Jones’’. 
 
 In contrast we have another document, these William 
 J. Duke Bible pages, which give Taylor Duke’s children 
 as follows: 
 
 ‘‘Wiliam J. Duke, borned July 18th, 1803. 
 Mary Duke, borned August 22nd, 1805. 
 
 Reany Duke, borned December 20th, 1807. 
 Amelia Duke, borned March 8th, 1809. 
 Kirkland R. Duke, borned June 6th, 1812. 
 Malinda Duke, borned March 13th, 1815. 
 
 John T. Duke, borned March 22nd, 1818. 
 Washington Duke, borned December 18th, 1820. 
 Doctor B. Duke, borned September 27th, 1823. 
 Robert Duke, borned April 29th, 1825.’’ 
 
 Taking these documents at face value, there is a mis- 
 take in one, and the question is, which. In an effort to 
 obtain a correct answer a most exhaustive investigation 
 has been made by the Executors as to each, with the fol- 
 lowing result. 
 
 With respect to the certificate, the endorsement there- 
 on of the name of the parents is not an official record. In 
 1835 there existed no law requiring or authorizing it. 
 Such a statement was not even customary at that time. 
 No other marriage certificate issued prior to 1850 (when 
 printed forms came into use) has been found in these 
 files which indicates in any manner the parent of the 
 bride or groom. 
 
 No other marriage certificate by Andrew Jones has 
 been found. And nothing whatever can be learned as to 
 
41 
 
 Andrew Jones. In several of the letters of Judge Gra- 
 ham, counsel for the Vaughan claimants, he is referred 
 to as a minister, but no data is given for this statement. 
 Diligent search in the records reveals nothing. He does 
 not appear in the U. S. Census of 1830 or 1840 for either 
 Orange or Granville County. Mr. J. Clyde Ray, a lawyer 
 of Hillsboro, N. C., makes affidavit that he personally 
 searched carefully through a book he found in the Clerk’s 
 office there, containing the returns of marriages by min- 
 isters and justices of the peace, looking for that of Mary 
 (Polly) Duke to James Vaughan on or about October 24, 
 1835, and did not find anything at all about it. Inquiry 
 among the oldest inhabitants has brought the uniform 
 answer that they do not remember any minister or Jus- 
 tice of the Peace or anybody else by the name of Andrew 
 Jones. 
 
 The certificate was first brought to the attention of 
 the Executors by Mr. Robert H. Whitfield, of Creed- 
 more, N. C., one of the Vaughan claimants, by his letters 
 of June 4th and 7th, 1926, which enclosed a copy, certified 
 by Mr. R. B. House, Secretary of the North Carolina His- 
 torical Commission. It was found in the Franklin 
 County files some while after the marriage bond of 
 James Vaughan and Polly Duke had been located in the 
 Orange County files, but the date of the finding is un- 
 certain, though it was probably late in the Spring. On 
 February 11, 1926, Mr. Sands wrote Mr. Haywood, Clerk 
 of the Supreme Court, Raleigh, asking him for informa- 
 tion from the records as to the ancestors of Mary Duke 
 Vaughan, to which Mr. Haywood replied on February 
 19, 1926, saying he had been ‘‘bombarded with requests 
 similar to yours from all points of the compass’’; and 
 that ‘‘the marriage bond of the Vaughan-Duke marriage 
 is filed in the collection of the North Carolina Historical 
 Commission, but it does not give the names of the parents 
 of the bride’’, On March 17, 1926, Mr. Oscar D. Olson, a 
 lawyer of Chicago, wrote the Historical Commission for 
 
42 
 
 Mr. E. L. Vaughan, seeking the same information, and 
 Mr. R. B. House, Secretary of the Historical Commis- 
 sion, replied on March 20, 1926, saying: ‘‘I send you 
 herewith a copy of a marriage bond concerning the mar- 
 riage of James Vaughan and Polly Duke. This is the 
 only record pertaining to this marriage we have.’’ And 
 Mr. H. L. Swain, a lawyer of Raleigh, N. C., who investi- 
 gated for Mr. E. L. Vaughan, told Mr. Caldwell that he 
 and his stenographer, Miss Nellie Patrick, searched and 
 inquired as late as April 22, 1926, without finding the 
 certificate. Indeed, Mr: Vaughan seems to have learned 
 of the certificate only in the Fall—see his statements of 
 June 22nd and October 18th, 1926, and letter of October 
 6th, 1926. 
 
 As to the actual finding of the certificate we have from 
 Mrs. Susan T. West, Archival Clerk of the Historical 
 Commission, her statement dated August 6, 1927, and 
 her letter to Mr. Caldwell dated August 11, 1927. She 
 says that she is not positive as to the date but that after 
 a good many persons, including among others Mr. Robert 
 H. Whitfield, Mr. G. W. Whitfield, Mr. W. F. Kearney, 
 Mr. H. L. Swain and Miss Nellie Patrick, stenographer 
 for Mr. Swain, had searched the marriage bonds of 
 Franklin and Orange Counties, in the course of which 
 these files were together on the same table, she was 
 straightening the files up and ran across the marriage 
 bond of James Stagg and Polly Duke and this marriage 
 certificate together in the Franklin County files though 
 both belonged in and were returned by her to the Orange 
 County files. And she gives it as her opinion that both 
 the certificate and the endorsement are apparently writ- 
 ten by the same hand and at the same time, and that 
 they appear to be ‘‘true and genuine”’ and as of the 
 time they purport to have been made. 
 
 With respect to the Bible pages, we have an n affidavit 
 from Mr. James E. Lyon, who is a son-in-law of William 
 J. Duke, the eldest son of Taylor Duke. He says: 
 
43 
 
 ‘‘Mr. William J. Duke, my father-in-law, died in 
 1883. His personal effects were sold and I pur- 
 chased at the sale of his personal effects the family 
 Bible of Mr. William J. Duke, my wife being his 
 youngest daughter. I distinctly remember the old 
 family Bible of Mr. William J. Duke. It was a large, 
 family Bible probably 12 or 14 inches long by 8 or 
 10 inches wide and about 4 or 5 inches thick. My 
 recollection is that it had a leather-covered back. I 
 remember that that old Bible of William J. Duke’s 
 was rather much worn and the backs all broken. My 
 impression is that William J. Duke had gotten this 
 Bible from his father, Taylor Duke, but I am not 
 sure about this. I remember that the Bible had some 
 places in the center, or about the middle, where 
 births, marriages and deaths were recorded, and I 
 have seen such entries in this Bible of William J. 
 Duke. 
 
 ‘The sale of William J. Duke’s personal effects 
 was held at his home place and it was in that same 
 home that I was then living, and when I bought the 
 Bible we simply took it and kept it in our home. 
 That Bible was not out of the home of William J. 
 Duke except when we moved. 
 
 ‘“My wife, Virginia Frances Duke, the youngest 
 daughter of William J. Duke, removed the old leaves 
 on which were recorded the births, marriages and 
 deaths from the Bible of her father, William J. 
 Duke, and put them into a new large Bible which I 
 had purchased. They were simply put loose into 
 the new Bible. At the time my wife took these old 
 leaves out of the old Bible they had then become old 
 and worn and torn, and we put them in the new 
 Bible in the same condition as they were when taken 
 from the old Bible. I have seen them both in the 
 old Bible and in the new Bible’’. 
 
 The affidavit then quotes from these pages the list of 
 Taylor Duke’s children as above given, and as to them 
 says: 
 
 ‘‘T have always understood the above was the 
 record of the births of the children of Taylor and 
 
4+: 
 
 Dicey Jones Duke, made by my father-in-law, 
 William J. Duke. I have frequently seen my father- 
 in-law, William J. Duke, write and am familiar with 
 his handwriting, and to the best of my knowledge 
 and judgment, the handwriting of the names above 
 mentioned is the handwriting of William J. Duke, 
 my father-in-law. 
 
 ‘“ All the entries on both sides of this sheet were 
 in the old Bible at the time the Bible was purchased 
 by me, and that Bible had been for a number of 
 years in the home of my father-in-law, William J. 
 Duke, prior to the time I purchased it.’’ 
 
 The statements of Mr. Lyon are entirely supported 
 by the affidavit of Mrs. Sallie H. Garrard (dated August 
 31, 1927) a granddaughter of William J. Duke who lived 
 some 16 years in his home, and by the affidavit of Mrs. 
 Rosa Lyon Belvin, the daughter, and Mr. William F. 
 Lyon, the son, of Mr. James K. Lyon. 
 
 Thus stand these opposing documents and their evi- 
 dentiary value must be appraised and a decision reached. 
 In doing this the Executors feel that the following con- 
 siderations are pertinent: 
 
 (1) While the Executors in reaching such decision 
 are considering all data without regard to legal rules of 
 evidence, it should be noted that these statements of the 
 endorsement on the certificate, being of something not 
 required by law to be recorded, would not be admissible 
 evidence of the parentage of Mrs. Vaughan. Thus, in 1 
 Greenleaf on Evidence, Sec. 493, it is said: 
 
 ‘‘Tt must be remembered that official registers 
 are not in general evidence of any fact not required 
 to be recorded in them, and which did not oceur in 
 the presence of the registering officer. Thus, a par- 
 ish register is evidence only of the time of a mar- 
 riage and of its celebration de facto, for these are 
 the only facts necessarily within the knowledge of 
 the party making the entry.’’ 
 
45 
 
 This statement of the law has been approved and ex- 
 emplified in a number of pertinent cases. See Blackburn 
 v. Crawford, 3 Wall. (U. 8S.) 175; Hegler v. Faulkner, 
 158 U. S. 109, 111; Sitler v. Gehr, 105 Pa. St. 577; 
 Schaffer v. Korstovnikow, 88 N. J. Eq. 523; Vail v. 
 Smith, 6 R. I. 417, and Budlong v. Budlong, (R. I.) 136 
 Atl. 308. 
 
 Thus, in Blackburn v. Crawford the Court, applying 
 this rule, held a baptismal entry reading ‘‘1837, July 30 
 George Thomas, son of Thomas Crawford and Elizabeth 
 Taylor his wife born 7 September 1836; sponsors—John 
 and Sarah Evans’’ inadmissible to prove anything but 
 ‘‘the baptism of the child’’, saying ‘‘we think this propo- 
 sition too clear to require discussion’’, 
 
 In Sitler v. Gehr the Court held that a church register 
 of deaths, required by statute to be kept, was inadmissi- 
 ble to prove the parentage of the decedent. It said: 
 
 ‘“‘This burial list was competent to show the 
 death and burial of these ladies, but what the pastor 
 put down in the book as to their parentage, and the 
 time and place of their birth, was incompetent, for 
 the plain reason that it was no part of his duty to 
 make such entries. Such registers are not, in gen- 
 eral, evidence of any fact not required to be recorded 
 in them, and which did not occur in the presence of 
 the registering officer.’’ 
 
 In Vail vy. Smith an entry in a town register reading 
 ‘‘Wbenezer Smith and Miss Martha Townsend were mar- 
 ried September 4, A. D. 1800 by Rev. Samuel Watson. 
 Louise, their daughter, was born Saturday August 23, 
 1800’’ was inadmissible to prove the time of the mar- 
 riage because it was not a record which the law required 
 to be kept. It said: 
 
 “‘TIn no other light than as a private memoran- 
 dum, can we regard the written declaration of the 
 town-clerk of Barrington, here produced, as to the 
 time of the marriage of Ebenezer Smith. Since he 
 
46 
 
 does not profess to record what alone by law he was 
 authorized to record, what he has written must be re- 
 garded as his personal, and not his official act; and 
 is not admissible in evidence without accompanying 
 proof to connect it with information furnished by 
 the family.”’ 
 
 So in Budlong v. Budlong the register of an asylum 
 was produced by the matron from its archives and con- 
 tained entries from 1848 to 1896 in chronological order 
 purporting to give the names and ages and other data as 
 to the inmates, but the Court held the book inadmissible 
 as evidence because 
 
 ‘* Accepting the book as one kept at the poor farm 
 by some employee for the benefit of the town authori- 
 ties and produced from proper custody and bearing 
 on its face evidence of its ancient character and au- 
 thenticity, the circumstances shown give no assur- 
 ance of its reliability to prove the date of birth of 
 Mary E. Miller as the daughter of Lucinda Millard.’’ 
 
 The application to the certificate is plain. The en- 
 dorsement was of something not required to be recorded, 
 that did not occur in the presence of Andrew Jones and 
 that may not have been at all within his own knowledge. 
 As aptly put by one case (Schaffer v. Korstovnikow, 88 
 N. J. Eq. 523), it is a ‘‘gratuitous identification * * * 
 which must be disregarded as purely hearsay’’. 
 
 (2) An acceptance of the Andrew Jones statement as 
 correct would attribute to Taylor Duke two daughters 
 living at the same time each of whom was named Mary 
 and known as Polly and married as Polly. 
 
 That Mrs. Stagg was named Mary appears from the 
 Bible record, the Census Records of her husband for 
 1850, 1860 and 1870, her conveyance with her husband to 
 Francis A. Stagg December 17th 1870 and the statements 
 of B. N. Duke, James EH. Lyon and Mrs. Garrard and 
 others elsewhere herein quoted. These statements also 
 
47 
 
 show that she was called Polly and her marriage bond of 
 December 16, 1826, gives her name as Polly. 
 
 That Mrs. Vaughan was named Mary appears from 
 the Census Records of her husband for 1850, 1860 and 
 1870, and the affidavit of Mrs. Susan Elizabeth Vaughan, 
 which says, ‘‘I am fully conversant with facts relative to 
 his (her husband’s) mother being one Mary Duke 
 Vaughan’’ and that on the back of her tintype picture is 
 written ‘‘Mary Vaughan, Franklinton, N. C.’’ She was 
 married as Polly and is referred to as Polly Vaughan in 
 many of the affidavits filed on behalf of the Vaughans 
 and hereinafter quoted. 
 
 It is a well known fact that during the period in ques- 
 tion girls named ‘‘Mary’’ were commonly nicknamed 
 ‘‘Polly’’. And while it is possible for the same parents 
 to have two living children each named Mary and each 
 known and married by the name of Polly, it is a cireum- 
 stance so unusual as to warrant the avoidance of such a 
 result unless the evidence plainly requires otherwise. 
 Thus, Judge Graham wrote Mr. Vaughan March 22, 1927: 
 “‘Tt seems strange that Taylor Duke and his wife should 
 have two children named Polly.’’ And Mr. Vaughan felt 
 the force of this situation so strongly that he thought it 
 indicated an error in the marriage record. He says in 
 his statement of June 22, 1926: 
 
 ‘“We have always disclaimed the fact that the 
 Polly or Mary Duke mentioned in the family bible 
 record as being the daughter of Taylor and Dicey 
 Duke born in 1805 was not our grandmother as she 
 would have been thirty or more years old at the 
 time of the marriage of our grandfather, which 
 occurred around Oct. 23rd, 1835. Our records 
 show our Grandfather James Vaughan was 
 married to Polly Duke when he was around 21 
 years of age and a photostatic copy of this record 
 shows that James Vaughan took out a marriage li- 
 cense to marry Polly Duke Oct. 23rd, 1835. How- 
 ever, we take the stand that this license should 
 
48 
 
 have read Mary and not Polly, or the marriage 
 license of record as of date Dec. 10th, 1826 of 
 James Stagg to Polly Duke should have been Mary 
 Duke and not Polly; one or the other seems to be 
 wrong as the following paragraph will show. 
 ‘‘Now right here I call your particular atten- 
 tion to the fact that there seems to be a mix-up of 
 names in marriage certificates of record, or there 
 is something wrong with the transfer of lands 
 from: James Stagg and his wife to Francis Stagg. 
 These records show that the wife of James Stagg 
 was named Mary and not Polly. Which is right?”’ 
 
 (3) The Bible pages come from the one source which, 
 if the affidavits for the Vaughan claimants are to be ac- 
 cepted, would have been most likely to include Mrs. 
 Vaughan in the list of the children of Taylor Duke if she 
 had been one. They come from William J. Duke. And 
 with William J. Duke the Vaughans claim that Mrs. 
 Vaughan was on terms of the closest intimacy. In proof 
 of this they point to: 
 
 (a) The loans by William J. Duke to James Vaughan, 
 one secured by deed of trust to James Stagg, Trustee, in 
 1835, another secured by deed of trust to Frederick 
 Moise, Trustee, in 1837, and others secured by deeds of 
 trust to James R. Ball in 1860 and 1861. 
 
 (b) The marriage of William J. Duke to Joanna 
 (Ann) Blackwell, daughter of Mrs. Rosa Blackwell on 
 October 15, 1856, while James Vaughan and his wife re- 
 sided on land rented from Mrs. Blackwell, from which it 
 is argued that William J. Duke must have met his wife 
 while on a visit to Mrs. Vaughan. 
 
 (c) The affidavit of Mrs. Susan Elizabeth Vaughan 
 saying her husband told her: 
 
 ‘‘He always held a higher regard for his uncle 
 William or Billie Duke than any of his other 
 uncles. It seems, and he told us that his uncle 
 William or Billie was more considerate of children 
 than any of the Duke family. He talked many 
 
49 
 
 times of his uncle William or Billie having a son 
 about the age of himself (William Egbert 
 Vaughan) whom he called Willis or a similar name 
 and that this son and he (William Egbert 
 Vaughan) were almost always together playing 
 their boyish pranks and that his Uncle William or 
 Billie never failed to catch them in every mischiev- 
 ous act they played. He often talked of another 
 boy of his Uncle William or Billie Duke, who was 
 ealled Kirk, when relating family history. My 
 husband talked of a daughter of William or Billie 
 Duke, which was the youngest of his children. My 
 husband called her Frances or Fanny, but more 
 often ‘Tassel’ as that seemed to be her nickname. 
 When our children were noisy or talked in a high 
 pitched tone of voice my husband and father would 
 say ‘Come Tassel Duke.’ He always remembered 
 her especially for her high pitched tone of voice.’’ 
 
 When we come to consider the affidavits submitted we 
 shall find the alleged intimacy and relationship contro- 
 verted. But granting such relationship and intimacy ex- 
 isted it is food for thought that under such circum- 
 stances Mrs. Vaughan should be the only child omitted 
 from the William J. Duke Bible list which otherwise not 
 only correctly gives the children but in the order and 
 with the date of their births, even those who died early 
 and in Florida. 
 
 (4) The Bible pages come from the proper custody, 
 have been accepted as correct by many who should be 
 qualified to speak, and accord with history in ascribing 
 ten children to Taylor Duke. 
 
 The Bible comes from the possession of William J. 
 Duke, the oldest son of Taylor Duke. Mr. Lyon states 
 positively that the list of Taylor Duke’s children ap- 
 peared in these pages in 1883 when he bought the Bible 
 at the sale of William J. Duke’s effects just as they ap- 
 pear there now. According to the best of his knowledge 
 and belief the handwriting is that of Wiliam J. Duke. 
 
50 
 
 He thinks the Bible came to William J. Duke from his 
 father, Taylor Duke, but of this he is not certain. 
 
 The Bible pages have been accepted as correct in their 
 statement of the children of Taylor Duke by Mr. Benja- 
 min N. Duke, the son of Washington Duke and brother 
 of the testator, who is now 72 years old, by Mr. James H. 
 Lyon, now 82 years old, who is the son-in-law of William 
 J. Duke and has been intimately associated with his fam- 
 ily from boyhood, and Mrs. Sallie Holloway Garrard, 
 now 76 years old, who is the granddaughter of William J. 
 Duke and lived in his family for some sixteen years prior 
 to her marriage in 1872. 
 
 In Volume III. of a work consisting of eight volumes 
 entitled ‘‘Biographical History of North Carolina From 
 Colonial Times to the Present (1905) ’’, edited by Samuel 
 A. Ashe, there is a biographical sketch of Washington 
 Duke by John Spencer Bassett in which it is said of Tay- 
 lor Duke that ‘‘he was as prosperous as most of his 
 neighbors but he had a family of ten children and when 
 his son Washington came to face the world it was empty- 
 handed’’. Mr. Bassett for the years 1893 to 1906 was a 
 Professor of History at Trinity College in Durham, N. C., 
 and knew well Mr. Washington Duke, who was then liv- 
 ing in Durham. He writes the Executors: 
 
 ‘“‘The article on Mr. Washington Duke was 
 written from notes I made on conversations with 
 Mr. Washington Duke himself and from other 
 materials. I knew Mr. Duke well.’’ 
 
 On June 10, 1908, there was unveiled at Durham, 
 N. C., a memorial statue to Washington Duke. The exer- 
 cises were conducted and attended by his life-long friends 
 and a pamphlet thereof published which adopts the state- 
 ments of the Bassett biographical sketch. A similar 
 statement is made on page 239 of a book entitled ‘‘Ar- 
 morial Families of America’’ published about 1920 by the 
 National Americana Society, and on page 35 of Volume 
 
51 
 
 Three of a book by Zella Armstrong published in 1926 
 and entitled ‘‘Notable Southern Families’’. 
 
 The Executors, therefore, are of opinion that the 
 Bible pages should be accepted as a declaration by Wil- 
 liam J. Duke and preferred as a record to the unofficial 
 endorsement on the Andrew Jones certificate unless cir- 
 cumstances independent of those records and now to be 
 considered require a different conclusion. 
 
 And here, again, they find themselves in accord with 
 the authorities. In the leading case of Hubbard v. Lees, 
 L. R. 1 Exch. 255 (1866) the Court said: 
 
 ‘“The book was produced by a witness who was 
 a niece of Fanny Wells, and to whose father 
 Fanny Wells had given it. Fanny Wells was a 
 granddaughter of the common ancestor, Charles 
 Lander, and ‘had received the book from her own 
 father. It was therefore a family Bible, and the 
 witness was its proper custodian. This is all that 
 is required to make it evidence; it is in the nature 
 of a record, and being produced from the proper 
 custody is itself evidence. To require evidence of 
 the handwriting or authorship of the entries is to 
 mistake the distinctive character of the evidence, 
 for its derives its weight, not from the fact that 
 the entries are made by any particular person, but 
 that, being in that place, they are to be taken as 
 assented to by those in whose custody the book 
 has been.’’ (p. 258) 
 
 So in Union Central Infe Ins. Co. v. Pollard, 94 Va. 
 146, 155, the Court said: 
 
 ‘“‘The admissibility of an entry in a family 
 Bible does not depend upon the handwriting or 
 authorship of the entry, but upon the fact that it is 
 in the family Bible. It is of the nature of a record 
 and, being produced from the proper custody, is 
 itself evidence. The reason why it is admissible, 
 although the handwriting be unknown or made by 
 others than the family, is simply because the Bible, 
 being in the family where all have access to it, the 
 
52 
 
 presumption is that the entry would not be per- 
 mitted to remain if the whole family did not adopt 
 it and thereby give authenticity to it. Monkton 
 v. Attorney General, 11 Eng. Chy. R. at pages 
 162-3 (2 Russ. & Mylne) ; Hubbard v. Lees, 1 Law 
 Rep. (Court of Ex.) 255, 258; 1 Taylor on Evi- 
 dence Sec. 650; 1 Greenleaf on Evidence Sees. 104, 
 105.”’ 
 
 D. The Census Records of Taylor Duke’s Family. 
 
 Much reliance is placed on these records by the 
 Vaughan claimants who assert that they completely dis- 
 credit the Bible pages and prove that Taylor Duke had 
 eleven children, that the eleventh child was Mary (Polly) 
 Duke Vaughan and that she was probably born in the 
 year 1819. 
 
 Prior to 1850, although the census included in a fam- 
 ily all residing there, it simply enumerated the males and 
 females separately according to their ages and gave no 
 names except that of the head of the family. So the ar- 
 gument for the Vaughans proceeds as follows: They take 
 the Census Record of the Taylor Duke family for 1820 
 and find that it shows females 3 under 10, 2 between 10 
 and 18 and 1 between 26 and 45, whereas according to 
 the William J. Duke Bible Taylor Duke in 1820 had 
 daughters 1 under 10 and 3 between 10 and 18. They 
 then say that the census thus shows one more daughter 
 than the Bible list, that this was the Polly Duke who mar- 
 ried Vaughan, that at her marriage in 1835 she must 
 have been 16, therefore she was born in 1819 as the Bible 
 pages show a child was born to Taylor Duke in 1818 and 
 also in 1820. 
 
 While the Executors will consider the Census Records 
 as a part of the general data, the information they give 
 at this period is so meagre and the method of their taking 
 gives opportunity for such inaccuracies, that they cannot 
 attach to them the conclusive import urged. The con- 
 
53 
 
 clusion drawn is too much of a guess. A Court would 
 hold them inadmissible as evidence. 
 
 In Campbell v. Everhart (1905) 139 N. C. 503, 52 S. E. 
 201, the Court said of a Census Record, offered to prove 
 the existence of a certain person at a certain time, that 
 
 ‘it would hardly accord with the general rule in 
 regard to evidence if it was permitted to be con- 
 sidered as against entries in the family Bible 
 which were introduced.”’ 
 
 And in Gorham v. Sitttegast (1906) 44 Tex. Civ. App. 
 254, 98 S. W. 665, the Court excluded ‘‘an original Cen- 
 sus roll, taken in the manner provided by law’’ which was 
 offered ‘‘to show what persons constitute the same fam- 
 ily and their ages’’, saying: 
 
 ‘<The enumerator of the Census knows nothing 
 of the facts as to the matters he records in the roll 
 (McLane v. Paschal, 74 Tex. 26) ; he obtains all the 
 data from others and many times from those who 
 know as little in regard to their truth as he. If 
 rights of property should be made to depend upon 
 such a record they would hang upon a thread that 
 could be broken by the slightest whisper.”’ 
 
 E. The affidavits and statements submitted in support of the 
 Vaughan claim, with the report of Mr. Caldwell upon 
 some of them. 
 
 Under this category we have: 
 
 (1) Affidavits showing that searches of the U. 8. Cen- 
 sus Records and of Court, Registry and Tax Records in 
 North Carolina for the period in question indicate the 
 existence in Orange County of only the one Taylor Duke. 
 This is to fix the identity of the Taylor Duke named in 
 the endorsement on the Andrew Jones certificate. . 
 
 (2) Affidavits showing the above mentioned loans by 
 William J. Duke to James Vaughan in 1835, 1837, 1860 
 and 1861, and the former’s marriage to the daughter of 
 
54 
 
 Mrs. Blackwell while the Vaughans were her tenants. 
 These are a part of the proof offered to establish an inti- 
 mate relationship between the Duke and Vaughan fami- 
 hes. 
 
 Another part of this proof is the marriage bonds in- 
 dicating that Sampson Vaughan, alleged father of James 
 Vaughan, married May 28, 1811, Elizabeth Jones, who it 
 is said was probably a sister of Dicey Jones, the wife of 
 Taylor Duke, because Taylor Duke was bondsman, 
 whereas a Moses Jones was bondsman for Taylor Duke 
 when he married August 14, 1801, and for Sampson 
 Vaughan when on March 25, 1831, he married Nancy 
 Brown. However, in view of Eugene Lee Vaughan’s let- 
 ter of May 2, 1927, to Dr. De Forest, showing Elizabeth 
 Jones was the second wife of Sampson Jones, who had 
 theretofore married in Wales, it is probable that the 
 Sampson Jones who married Nancy Brown was a later 
 generation, as is also shown by the fact that James 
 Vaughan married in 1835. 
 
 (3) Affidavits of those interested in sustaining the 
 Vaughan claim, whether directly or through connection 
 by blood or marriage. They consist of those by 
 
 (a) Mrs. Susan Elizabeth Vaughan, widow of Wil- 
 liam Egbert Vaughan, son of Mary (Polly) Duke 
 Vaughan, and Eugene Lee Vaughan, her son; 
 
 (b) Martha May Vaughan, the widow (second wife) 
 ef John Jiles Vaughan, who was a son of said Mary 
 (Polly) Duke Vaughan, Edward Lee Vaughan, a son of 
 said John Jiles Vaughan, Mrs. Della Sikes Vaughan, 
 widow of James Brodie Vaughan, another son of said 
 John Jiles Vaughan, and Henrietta Margaret Morris, 
 the only child of said James Brodie Vaughan and Della 
 Sikes Vaughan; 
 
 (ec). John W. Whitfield and Robert H. Whitfield, sons 
 of Mildred Vaughan Whitfield, who was a daughter of 
 Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan; 
 
a}9) 
 
 (d) Benjamin P. Kearney, son of Edna Vaughan 
 Kearney, a daughter of Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan, 
 and Mattie Kearney, his wife; 
 
 (e) William Francis Kearney, son of Mary Susan 
 Vaughan Kearney, a daughter of Mary (Polly) Duke 
 Vaughan; 
 
 (f) I. H. Kearney, a close relative of the above named 
 Kearneys. 
 
 These affidavits concur in testifying most positively 
 to a tradition in the Vaughan family that Mrs. Vaughan 
 was the sister of Washington Duke. They produce no 
 Bible records, letters or written data of any kind. They 
 are based almost wholly on remembered statements of 
 the descendants of Mrs. Vaughan, that they had heard her 
 eall William and Washington Duke brother and Malinda 
 Duke sister, without other circumstance mentioned, ex- 
 cept the following: 
 
 I. H. Kearney says he knew Mrs. Vaughan well, had 
 seen Washington Duke at her house and heard her say 
 he was her brother and call him ‘‘Brother Wash’’; 
 
 Mattie Kearney, who lived in Texas at one time, nar- 
 rates a visit to Washington Duke in Durham in 1898 to 
 obtain employment for her husband, Benjamin P. Kear- 
 ney, whom she explained to Mr. Duke was a grandson of 
 his sister, Mrs. Vaughan, and Mr. Duke introduced her 
 to his son as ‘‘one of our kinsfolk from Texas’’; 
 
 Kdward Lee Vaughan (55 in 1927) says he remem- 
 bers hearing his grandmother, Mrs. Vaughan, say that 
 Washington Duke was her brother; also seeing Washing- 
 ton Duke at her burial in 1880; also one or two occasions 
 when Washington Duke visited her at Franklinton and 
 she called him ‘‘Brother Wash’’, but this last he re- 
 tracted as an error when seen by Mr. Caldwell; 
 
 And Robert H. Whitfield, who was born December 7, 
 1870, says he had heard his grandmother speak of Wash- 
 ington Duke as ‘‘Brer or Brother Wash’’, has been often 
 
56 
 
 in the home of Washington Duke, recalls two occasions 
 when he was in the home of affiant’s mother and affiant 
 always called him ‘‘Uncle Wash’’; did not know William 
 J. Duke or Kirkland Duke; ‘‘Don’t recall Uncle Wash 
 speaking of my grandmother Vaughan as his sister 
 though that was my general understanding of the rela- 
 tionship’’; has inquired for the Vaughan family Bible 
 but has not located it, if it ever existed. 
 
 The affidavit of Mrs. Susan Hlizabeth Vaughan 
 should have special mention. She was born in 1840 but 
 was well possessed of her faculties when seen by Mr. 
 Caldwell. All her statements are based on conversations 
 had in Missouri with her husband, Wiliam Egbert 
 Vaughan, son of Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan, his 
 brother, John Jiles Vaughan, his sister, Mildred 
 Vaughan Whitfield, and her husband, David H. Whitfield, 
 and his brother, James Whitfield, but these she sets down 
 with a great wealth of detail. 
 
 She narrates that her husband came to Missouri at 
 the close of the Civil War and there she met and married 
 him; that he used to talk most entertainingly to his fam- 
 ily of his childhood days and war experiences, saying 
 that he was born June 22, 1845, near Hillsboro, in Orange 
 County, N. C., that his parents were James G. Vaughan 
 and Mary Duke Vaughan, and that his mother had a 
 brother William, another brother Washington, another 
 brother or two and a sister ‘‘by the name of Malinda 
 (nicknamed Lannie) who as he called her—his old maid 
 Aunt’’. 
 
 One of the most striking passages in this affidavit is 
 that, already quoted, which recited her husband’s account 
 of his playing with the children of William J. Duke, 
 whose names she recalled he said were Willis, Kirk and 
 Frances. 
 
 Another striking paragraph of the affidavit is the fol- 
 lowing as to Aunt Lannie: 
 
57 
 
 ‘‘He told us of his visits to his Aunt Malinda 
 or Lannie as he often called her, who was an old 
 maid who possessed a large farm or lived on a 
 large farm which she promised at some time to 
 turn over to him (William Egbert Vaughan) if he 
 would not go to war but stay with her and help 
 run this farm. On account of Aunt Malinda or 
 Lannie being rather strict, and he called her 
 ‘cranky’, and the further fact that she was always 
 trying to teach him table manners, making him 
 sit up at the table in a straight and correct manner 
 and use his knife and fork, he chose to go to war, 
 which he did and served through three years. He 
 often told me and his children in years afterward 
 that he could never forget his Aunt Malinda or 
 Lannie; he often told his children of this when 
 telling them of North Carolina. He was always 
 wondering what had become of her and regretting 
 that he had not treated her very nice.’’ 
 
 And the affiant affirms in conclusion that these con- 
 versations were long and intimate and 
 
 ‘‘showed beyond question that my husband’s 
 mother was Mary Duke Vaughan and that she was 
 a sister of William or Billie Duke and Washing- 
 ton Duke, also that she was a sister of Malinda or 
 Lannie Duke who was an old maid, and also that 
 there were other brothers and sisters of the Dukes 
 above mentioned’’. 
 
 When seen by Mr. Caldwell, however, Mrs. Susan 
 Hlizabeth Vaughan gave a second affidavit, hereinafter 
 noticed, which very materially affected her statements 
 in this first affidavit. 
 
 (4) Affidavits from those not interested. These con- 
 sist of those by 
 
 (a) Mrs. Adeline Wright Morton, niece of Mrs. Rosa 
 Blackwell, who lived near when the Vaughans rented 
 from Mrs. Blackwell and played with the Vaughan chil- 
 dren. She says she had seen Miss Malinda Duke at the 
 
58 
 
 Vaughans, heard her say Mrs. Vaughan was her sister 
 and the Vaughan children call her aunt; that Kirk Duke, 
 son of William J. Duke, would spend weeks at a time 
 with the Vaughans; has heard the Vaughan children 
 often speak of their Uncle Wash Duke who lived in Dur- 
 ham and thought she had heard Mrs. Vaughan say her 
 father’s name was Taylor Duke. 
 
 When seen by Mr. Caldwell, however, Mrs. Morton 
 gave a second affidavit, which is hereinafter noticed fur- 
 ther, in which she said she knew Mrs. Vaughan’s sister 
 Lannie, had heard Mrs. Vaughan speak of a sister named 
 Odee whom the affiant never saw, had seen William Duke 
 but never Washington Duke at the Vaughan’s, had seen 
 Kirk Duke there often and thinks he called the Vaughans 
 ‘‘Uncle Jim and Aunt Polly’’ and that 
 
 “‘T won’t be positive but I think Mrs. Vaughan 
 spoke of her father as named Sawny Duke. I told 
 Mr. Graham I did not know the name of Mrs. 
 Vaughan’s father. He suggested the name of 
 Taylor Duke to me and I told him it was some- 
 thing like that, or seemed like that, but I could not 
 be sure about it. I cannot be sure if it was Sawny 
 or Taylor for I don’t recollect. I don’t recollect 
 the name of the mother at all.’’ 
 
 (b) The four Cookes, namely: J. H., W. A., Victoria 
 and Margaret Cooke. They first gave affidavits as fol- 
 lows: By James H. Cooke, that he ‘‘was personally ac- 
 quainted with Mrs. Mary Duke Vaughan, that she was 
 the sister of the late Washington Duke’’; by W. A. 
 Cooke, that he had seen Washington Duke at Mrs. 
 Vaughan’s, had heard him refer to her as ‘‘his sister 
 Mary’’, had heard Mrs. Vaughan say ‘‘that Washington 
 Duke of Durham was her brother’’ and had heard his 
 father and Ruffin Holmes say that Mrs. Vaughan was 
 the sister of Washington Duke of Durham; by Victoria 
 and Margaret Cooke, that as girls they lived near the 
 Vaughans, had been in their home often and heard Mrs. 
 
59 
 
 Vaughan say she was a sister of Washington Duke and 
 ‘‘knows the fact that Washington Duke came to see Mrs. 
 Polly Duke Vaughan who said she was his sister.’’ 
 
 But when seen by Mr. Caldwell, J. H. Cooke gave an 
 affidavit saying he never heard the Vaughans or Wash- 
 ington Duke at any time say they were related, never saw 
 William Duke, or Washington Duke, except once in Dur- 
 ham and never heard anyone say that Washington Duke 
 was at Mrs. Vaughan’s funeral. And Victoria and Mar- 
 garet Cooke gave affidavits in which Victoria said sbe 
 never had been at the home of Mrs. Vaughan and Mar- 
 garet said she had been there only once ‘‘at recess from 
 school when I went with some girls to get some apples’’; 
 and in which both concurred in saying, 
 
 ‘‘T do not know that Washington Duke ever 
 visited Mrs. Polly Vaughan; I never knew Wash- 
 ington Duke and never heard him say that Polly 
 Duke Vaughan was his sister. I never heard Mrs. 
 Vaughan say that Washington Duke was her 
 brother. Any statements to the contrary in my 
 affidavit of March 23rd, 1927, are not correct.’’ 
 
 (c) Misses Lucy and Susan Ball (82 and 80 years 
 old) who lived near the farm of Mrs. Rosa Blackwell and 
 played with the Vaughan children say that Mrs. Vaughan 
 said William J. Duke was her brother and that they had 
 seen Miss Malinda Duke at Mrs. Vaughan’s and think 
 Mrs. Vaughan said she was her sister. 
 
 Miss Lucy Ball when seen by Mr. Caldwell said that 
 she and her sister Susan had talked to Mr. Graham but 
 neither had told him they were at the Vaughan’s often, or 
 had seen Malinda Duke there or heard Mrs. Vaughan 
 say the Billie Duke who married Joanna Blackwell was 
 her brother. ‘‘I never said anything of that kind to Mr. 
 Graham. * * * Anything in an affidavit signed by me on 
 April 16th 1927 contrary to what I now say is not true. 
 I told Mr. Graham I had never heard Mrs. Vaughan say 
 anything about her folks or the Dukes either. * * * I 
 
60 
 
 told them I could not read or write and would have to 
 make my mark. They did not read to me from my affi- 
 davit of April 16th, 1927, the things I have now in this 
 affidavit denied stating to Mr. Graham and if they had 
 I would have contradicted them.”’ 
 
 (d) Hugh Luther Jones (70 years old in 1927) says 
 he was well acquainted ‘‘with James Vaughan who mar- 
 ried Polly, the sister of William J. Duke and Washington 
 Duke’’ when he lived on land of Mrs. Rosa Blackwell, had 
 seen Washington Duke at James Vaughan’s house during 
 a quarterly meeting at Wesley’s Chapel near there, had 
 heard Mrs. Vaughan say that Washington and William 
 J. Duke were her brothers and had helped to dig James 
 Vaughan’s grave one Sunday morning in December 1872; 
 that ‘‘Mrs. Vaughan never told me what her name was 
 but she was always called Polly Vaughan’’. 
 
 Mr. Jones when seen by Mr. Caldwell said that the 
 affidavit he signed for Mr. Graham was not read by or 
 to him and he now finds it incorrect; that he had seen 
 Washington Duke at Wesley’s Chapel but has no recol- 
 lection of seeing either Billie Duke or Washington Duke » 
 at James Vaughan’s house and never told Mr. Graham 
 he had seen them there; that he never heard or told Mr. 
 Graham he had heard Mrs. Vaughan say that Billie Duke 
 or Washington Duke were her brothers; that he did not 
 state to Mr. Graham that Polly Vaughan who married 
 James Vaughan was a sister of William J. Duke and 
 Washington Duke; and that he had known and talked to 
 Washington Duke and he never heard him say that Polly 
 Vaughan was his, sister. 
 
 (e) L. D. Levister, born in 1846, is a nephew of Mrs. 
 Rosa Blackwell and lived near Pope’s Chapel. He re- 
 members to have seen ‘‘Washington Duke and William 
 J. Duke, his brother, at the conference and Washington 
 Duke spent his time between James Vaughan and Mrs. 
 Rosa Blackwell’’; had also seen one of Washington 
 
61 
 
 Duke’s sisters visiting at Jim Vaughan’s and Mrs. Rosa 
 Blackwell’s too, but I do not now recall her name’’; 
 William J. Duke was at the burial of Mrs. Vaughan, he 
 thinks Washington Duke was too and had heard Wash- 
 ington Duke eall her sister. 
 
 Mr. Levister when seen by Mr. Caldwell confirmed his 
 affidavit saying he referred to the period from 1853 to 
 1859 when he was from 8 to 14 years old. And he added 
 that he recalled seeing Washington Duke in Franklinton 
 about 1869 or 1870 with ‘‘two mighty fine black horses 
 and a colored driver dressed in fine clothes’’. But both 
 Mr. B. N. Duke, the son of Washington Duke, and Mr. 
 W. W. Fuller, the intimate personal counsel of the Dukes, 
 say, as the then recent ending of the Civil War confirms, 
 that Washington possessed no such means at that time. 
 
 (f) Robert Long, a colored man, 80 years old, says 
 he remembers that one of Mrs. Vaughan’s brothers mar- 
 ried Joanna Blackwell, has seen another brother and sis- 
 ter at her house whose names he does not remember, and 
 saw one of Mrs. Vaughan’s brothers ‘‘I think he was 
 Washington Duke’’ at the conference at Wesley’s Chapel 
 and has heard Mrs. Vaughan say he was her brother. 
 
 When seen by Mr. Caldwell, Robert Long gave an- 
 other affidavit, hereinafter quoted, in which he said Mrs. 
 Vaughan’s sisters were Mrs. Harris and Lannie who was 
 unmarried; and that they spoke of their father as Sawny 
 Duke. 
 
 (g) Geneva Walters says that she had heard Mrs. 
 Mildred Vaughan Whitfield speak of Washington Duke 
 of Durham as her uncle. 
 
 (h) Ella Bobbitt, a nurse in the Vaughan family, says 
 she always ‘‘knowed Mrs. Mary Duke Vaughan to be 
 ealled Mrs. Polly’’. 
 
 (i) A. E. Bobbitt says that Brodie L. Duke, son of 
 Washington Duke, many years ago drove up to his house 
 in the night time, saying that he was on his way to 
 the ‘‘funeral of his kinsman William Kirkland Duke’’ 
 
62 
 
 and asked to stay all night, which was accorded, and 
 while there he asked if affiant was acquainted with his 
 aunt, Mrs. Polly Vaughan, wife of James Vaughan, and 
 went on to talk about his aunt and her family. Bobbitt 
 made the same statement to Mr. Caldwell. 
 
 (j) Joe H. Shields, born in 1843, near Hillsboro, says 
 he knew Taylor Duke’s family, William, Robert, Wash- 
 ington, Polly and Malinda; that Malinda did not marry 
 but Polly married James Vaughan; that he knew because 
 he had ‘‘seen them at Washington Duke’s house lots of 
 times. I went to school with two of Polly’s boys, James 
 and John’’ and had heard Mrs. Vaughan ‘‘call Wash- 
 ington Duke brother’’ and was ‘‘sure that the Polly that 
 married James Vaughan was Taylor Duke’s daughter’’. 
 
 Mr. Caldwell tried for several days to get Mr. Shields 
 to make a statement for the Executors. He flatly refused, 
 saying: ‘‘I will not make any statement for you. I have 
 already made an affidavit for Bob Whitfield and I will 
 not make one for you. * * * JT heard her call him 
 ‘Brother Wash.’ and that is all there is to it. They 
 ought to know who their relatives are. Jim Lyon knows 
 all about it and I’m not going to make another statement 
 and get all mixed up.’’ 
 
 (k) J. C. Blackley says he lived for a while near the 
 Vaughans at Franklinton and has heard Mrs. Vaughan 
 say on many occasions that Washington Duke of Dur- 
 ham was her brother; that he lived in Durham in 1895-6 
 and 
 
 ‘‘that he knew Mr. Washington Duke and frequently 
 met him on the street of Durham and Mr. Duke 
 would stop him and ask him if he had been down to 
 Franklinton lately and seen anything of his sister 
 Mrs. Vaughan and her family; he would not only 
 make the general inquiry but would name over Mrs. 
 Vaughan’s children, showing that he was well- 
 acquainted with them and ask particularly how each 
 was getting along; he would name over Lucy, the 
 oldest daughter who married Mr. Byron late in life; 
 
63 
 
 and Hdna and Sudie who married Kearney’s and 
 John Jiles, and Joe and Tom Vaughan. He would 
 also mention William who went out West shortly 
 after the war between the States and never returned 
 and would ask if I ever heard anything from him; 
 he seemed to be well acquainted with the names of 
 every one of Mrs. Vaughan’s children and spoke of 
 her as his sister.’’ 
 
 But on its face this affidavit is erroneous because it 
 represents Washington Duke as inquiring on the streets 
 of Durham in 1895-6 about an alleged sister who died 
 in 1880. The affidavit of J. J. Thaxton, tax collector, 
 shows 1896 was the year Blackley lived in Durham. And 
 Blackley was convicted in the Superior Court of Wake 
 County in 1904 of embezzlement, sentenced to five years’ 
 hard labor on the roads of that County and on appeal 
 this was affirmed. 
 
 F. Affidavits and statements which deny and queries which 
 arise in opposition to the Vaughan claim. 
 
 Under this category come: 
 
 (1) As respects Mr. Washington Duke, the denial by 
 Mr. B. N. Duke in his letter to Mr. Sands, already quoted. 
 In this letter he says that from his earliest recollection 
 he never heard of a Vaughan, Whitfield or Kearney visit- 
 ing his father; that his father never mentioned them, 
 though he talked frequently of his brothers and sisters; 
 that he was 24 years old when Mrs. Vaughan died but 
 recalls no circumstance as to it, which is strange if she 
 had been his father’s sister; that his father in his life- 
 time made quite a liberal distribution to his nieces and 
 nephews in and around Durham and even in Tennessee 
 and Missouri and a further distribution in his will, but 
 did not include any Vaughan, Kearney or Whitfield, as 
 Mr. Duke says he personally knows because he attended 
 to it. 
 
64 
 
 Mrs. Mary Washington Lyon Stagg makes an aff- 
 davit that she is 48 years old and the daughter of R. HE. 
 Lyon and Mary Elizabeth Duke Lyon who was the only 
 daughter of Washington Duke; that her husband was 
 James EKdward Stagg who was the son of Francis As- 
 bury Stagg, who in turn was the son of Mary (Polly) 
 Duke, the daughter of Taylor Duke; that when about 
 nine or ten years old she, with her parents and brothers, 
 went to live with her grandfather, Washington Duke; 
 that she recalls hearing him talk of his relatives, inelud- 
 ing ‘‘his sister Polly whose real name was Mary who 
 married James Stagg’’, but she never heard him speak 
 ‘of a sister Mary or Polly who married James Vaughan 
 or say that he had any sister who married a Vaughan; 
 and no Vaughan visited him. 
 
 Mrs. Florence Roney Rowland makes affidavit that 
 she is a niece of Washington Duke and lived in his home 
 from November, 1893, to January, 1903, and that Mary 
 Washington Lyon, his grand-daughter, who afterward 
 married Stagg, lived there at the same time; that she 
 heard family matters and relatives discussed, but never 
 heard any Vaughan mentioned as a relative and no 
 Vaughans ever visited the home. 
 
 Mrs. Roxanna Frances Farrell makes affidavit that 
 she was born June 20, 1837, and now lives in Durham; 
 that after the end of the Civil War she and her husband 
 lived on Washington Duke’s farm and the families 
 ‘‘visited back and forth a good deal’’; that she became 
 well acquainted with Washington Duke and his imme- 
 diate family, especially his daughter Mary who married 
 R. EH. Lyon and ‘‘knew Washington Duke’s sister Ma- 
 linda Duke, an old maid, her mind was not clear, I think 
 she died at old man Washington Duke’s after they moved 
 to town’’; but that she never heard any mention of any 
 Vaughan or of ‘‘a Polly or Mary Duke who is said to 
 have married James Vaughan.”’ 
 
65 
 
 Dr. Robert Lee Flowers, of Duke University, makes 
 affidavit that he knew Mr. Washington Duke very well 
 indeed from 1891 to his death, being frequently at his 
 home, and never heard him speak of any person by the 
 name of Vaughan. 
 
 And these denials find support in the assertion by 
 the Vaughan claimants of an estrangement which they 
 say existed between the Vaughans and Washington 
 Duke’s family from a time prior to James Vaughan’s 
 death in 1872. It has now been quite fully expressed in 
 the affidavit of Mr. Robert H. Whitfield as follows: 
 
 ‘“Several years after father’s death Uncle Tom 
 Vaughan came and lived with mother and me for 
 about five (5) years. He talked to me considerably 
 about the family. Uncle Tom told me that his father, 
 James Vaughan, and Washington Duke had some © 
 misunderstanding about politics; also that when 
 James Vaughan was shot that he, Tom Vaughan, 
 had heard that Uncle Wash Duke had said Bragg 
 had done a good thing, or words to that effect, and 
 that left a hard feeling in Uncle Tom against Uncle 
 Wash. All the family felt the same way.’’ 
 
 (2) As respects Malinda Duke, the daughter of Tay- 
 lor Duke, the fact that she was not called Lannie and 
 lived in her later years and died at the home of Mr. Wash- 
 ington Duke. Under date of January 21, 1926, Mr. 
 George Brown Vaughan, a grandson of Mary (Polly) 
 Duke Vaughan, wrote Mr. B. N. Duke, asking: 
 
 ‘‘May I ask you a few questions regarding your 
 Aunts Mary and Malinda Duke. Was Malinda called 
 Lannie? Was Mary called Polly? We have heard 
 our parents say and old friend of grandmother’s 
 that is living now say she knew Aunt Malinda to 
 visit my Grandmother often.’’ 
 
 To this Mr. Duke replied on January 25, 1926, that his 
 Aunt Mary Duke had married James Stagg and was 
 called Polly and 
 
66 
 
 ‘‘T never heard my Aunt Malinda called Lannie. 
 From the time of my first recollection after the Civil 
 War Aunt Malinda lived most of her time with my 
 father until her death. When she was not at my 
 father’s home she was with my Uncle William J. 
 Duke. She was absolutely without means of any 
 kind and lived on the bounty of my father and Uncle. 
 She never married.’’ 
 
 See also the affidavits of James EK. Lyon, Mrs. Rox- 
 anna Frances Farrell, Mrs. Martha Adeline Proctor, Miss 
 Mary EH. Green, Mrs. Frances Helen Cates and William J. 
 Laycock. 
 
 (3) As respects Mr. William J. Duke, the denial of 
 Mr. James HE. Lyon, who has made an affidavit that he 
 was born in 1845 and raised near William J. Duke’s 
 home, served in the Civil War with three of his sons, 
 married his daughter Frances and been intimate with 
 the family all his life; that he knew Mrs. Dicey Jones 
 Duke, widow of Taylor Duke, who lived with William 
 J. Duke from her husband’s death until her death in 
 1860, knew well Joanna Blackwell Duke, the second wife 
 of William J. Duke, also Mary Duke Stagg whom he 
 ealled Aunt Polly, Amelia Duke who married James 
 Riggs, Miss Malinda Duke who ‘‘never was married and 
 lived for a number of years before her death with Mr. 
 Washington Duke and died at his home in Durham 
 County’’, Washington Duke and Robert Duke, sisters 
 and brothers of William J. Duke, and had never heard 
 ‘‘any member of the Duke family speak of Polly or Mary 
 Duke who married James Vaughan’’. He continues: 
 
 ‘‘T have some recollection of reading at the 
 time about a Vaughan being killed by a Bragg but 
 I never heard it discussed in the family of William 
 J. Duke. 
 
 ‘‘T remember taking William J. Duke to Frank- 
 linton, N. C. about the year 1876 to see his son, 
 Kirkland Duke. He never said anything to me 
 
67 
 
 about having a sister in Franklin County nor 
 about a Polly or Mary Vaughan. I never heard 
 any member of the Duke family speak of a Polly 
 or Mary Duke who married a Vaughan. 
 
 ‘‘T am positive that Mr. William J. Duke never 
 attended the funeral of Mrs. Mary Duke Vaughan 
 at Franklinton in 1880. After my marriage in 
 1872 he seldom went away from home and then 
 only to the immediate neighborhood and to a 
 church which was probably six (6) miles away.’’ 
 
 Mrs. Sallie Holloway Garrard, the granddaughter of 
 William J. Duke, was born September 6, 1851, and lived 
 in his house for the 16 years from her mother’s death 
 until three years before her marriage in 1872. She said, 
 and affirmed in an affidavit, that she remembered her 
 greatgrandmother Dicey Jones Duke who ‘‘lived her last 
 years with my grandfather William J. Duke and died at 
 his home’’; knew ‘‘Aunt Polly Duke who married James 
 Stagg’’ and visited her often; also, ‘‘Uncle Wash’’, 
 ‘Uncle Bob’’ and ‘‘Aunt Malinda’’ and Ann Blackwell 
 Duke, the second wife of Wiliam J. Duke whom she 
 ealled ‘‘grandmother’’ but was her step-grandmother. 
 She does not remember any member of the Duke family 
 speaking of or being visited by a Mary or Polly Vaughan. 
 She continues: 
 
 “‘T recall going a number of times to Granville 
 County, N. C., now Franklin County, N. C., with 
 my said grandfather and my step-grandmother 
 Ann Blackwell Duke to see her mother Rosa 
 Blackwell, staying with her from two or three days 
 to a week at a time. I never remember going to 
 see anybody by the name of Vaughan at Frank- 
 linton which then I think was in Granville County 
 as we used to speak of going to Granville when 
 we went to see ‘Granny’ Rosa as we used to eall 
 her. 
 
 ‘There was an old Methodist preacher in this 
 neighborhood whom we all called ‘Uncle Gray’ and 
 he and my said grandfather were good friends. 
 
68 
 
 ‘Uncle Gray’ often stayed at my said grand- 
 father’s home, sometimes bringing his second wife 
 (he was married twice) to my grandfather’s and 
 spending several days at a time. My said grand- 
 father was much interested in religious meetings 
 and took part in prayer and talking at the meet- 
 ings. I have heard ‘Uncle Gray’ tease my grand- 
 father and say he was the one who caused him to 
 meet his second wife, Ann Blackwell. J know that 
 ‘Uncle Gray’ and my grandfather used to go off 
 to hold religious meetings together in different 
 parts of the country. 
 
 ‘‘When my grandfather took me to Franklin- 
 ton he never took me to see anybody by the name 
 of Vaughan." * 
 
 “‘T have heard grandfather William J. Duke 
 speak of his brothers ‘Wash’, ‘Kirk’, ‘John’, 
 ‘Brodie’ and ‘Bob’ and of his sisters ‘Polly’ (who 
 married Stagg), Malinda, Amelia and Reany and 
 never heard him speak of any other brother or 
 sister.’’ 
 
 Mrs. Frances Helen Cates makes affidavit that her 
 maiden name was Laycock and that she married Dr. 
 Charles Cates; that she was born March 11, 1855, about 
 four miles from the William J. Duke place, when about 
 twelve moved to a place about a mile from the William 
 J. Duke place; knew that family well and had gone to 
 school with some of the children; that she knew Miss 
 Malinda Duke, ‘‘I remember her mind was affected’’, 
 also Amelia Duke, and had heard them speak of Polly 
 Duke Stagg; that she had never heard mention of a sis- 
 ter who married a Vaughan and ‘‘T am sure Washington 
 Duke and William J. Duke did not have two sisters both 
 named Polly or Mary’’. 
 
 Mr. William J. Laycock makes affidavit that he was 
 born May 10, 1857, and corroborates his sister, Mrs. 
 Cates, as to living near and being intimate with the 
 family of William J. Duke; that he worked about a year 
 in a factory his father built for Washington Duke and 
 
69 
 
 while doing so boarded at Washington Duke’s home and 
 slept with his son Ben Duke; that he ‘‘personally knew 
 Miss Malinda Duke, her mind was off, she never mar- 
 ried, she died I think at Washington Duke’s home’’; also 
 the ‘‘sister Mary (called Polly) who married Jim 
 Stage’’; and other members of the family whom he men- 
 tioned; that he had often heard the Dukes talk of their 
 relatives but had ‘‘never heard Washington Duke or 
 William Duke say that any sister of theirs ever married 
 a man by the name of Vaughan’’ and ‘‘I am satisfied 
 Washington Duke never had but one sister named Mary 
 or Polly and she married Jim Stagg’’; that he knows 
 Joe Shields, who lives in Durham, but never saw him 
 at any time at Washington Duke’s or William J. Duke’s. 
 
 Mrs. Mary E. Green makes an affidavit that she was 
 born about three miles from where William J. Duke 
 lived, knew him and Washington Duke and ealled one 
 “‘Uncle Billy’’ and the other ‘‘Uncle Wash’’; also knew 
 their sister Malinda, whom she ealled ‘‘Miss Linda’’ and 
 their sister Mary (called Polly) and her husband James 
 Stagg whom she called ‘‘Aunt Polly’’ and ‘‘Uncle 
 Stagg’’, and their children and had helped to nurse their 
 daughter Mary; that she was no relation to any of them 
 and had never heard any talk or mention by any of them 
 of a Polly or Mary Duke who married a Vaughan, nor 
 had she ever heard of a Tyree or Sawny Duke. 
 
 Mrs. Martha Adaline Proctor makes affidavit that 
 she was born August 3, 1844, in Person County, but when 
 she married came to live on a plantation lying between 
 the home of William J. Duke and Polly Duke Stage; 
 that she knew these families intimately; that she ‘‘knew 
 Miss Malinda Duke, her health was not very good and 
 her mind was somewhat affected, but still she was able 
 to get around. I think she died at the home of Mr. 
 Washington Duke’’; that she knew Mrs. Ann Blackwell 
 Duke and Mr. Washington Duke; that she was not re- 
 lated herself to the Duke family but had often heard them 
 
70 
 
 talk of their relatives; that she never heard any mention 
 of a Vaughan or of a Mary or Polly Duke who married 
 a Vaughan, and ‘‘I am very confident that Mrs. Polly 
 (Mary) Duke Stagg never had any sister named Polly 
 or Mary’’; and that she knows Joe Shields, who lives in 
 Durham, but never saw him at any time at Washington 
 Duke’s or William J. Duke’s. 
 
 Mrs. Susan L. Dowd, who was born April 9, 1848, 
 lived 6 miles from William J. Duke’s, attended same 
 church he did, visited frequently at his home and that of 
 Washington Duke, and that of Mrs. Mary (Polly) Stagg, 
 all of whom she knew well; says she never heard ‘‘any of 
 the Dukes mention anything about any Vaughan”’ and is 
 sure ‘‘Mary (Polly) Duke who married James Stagg did 
 not have a sister named Mary or Polly who married a 
 James Vaughan”’. 
 
 Mrs. Jessie Lyon Dickson, a sister of James HK. Lyon, 
 makes an affidavit to the same general effect. 
 
 (4) The affidavits submitted by the Vaughan claim- 
 ants fail to make any mention of Mrs. Dicey Jones Duke 
 who lived in the family of Wiliam J. Duke for some 
 years after the death of her husband until her own death, 
 April 22, 1860. And it seems strange that nothing 
 should be stated as to her, or visits of Mrs. Vaughan to 
 her alleged mother noted. This was especially true of 
 the affidavit of Mrs. Susan Elizabeth Vaughan because 
 it relates in such detail what her husband had told as to 
 playing with the children of William J. Duke. 
 
 (5) The Census Records for 1850 showed one Tyree 
 Duke, aged 78, as a member of the family of Polly Duke 
 Vaughan, thus indicating a natural presumption that he 
 was her father, and the Vaughan affidavits gave no in- 
 formation whatever as to him. 
 
 (6) And the Executors are familiar with the South- 
 ern custom of adults, especially those of the Methodist 
 
71 
 
 Church (as were the Dukes and Vaughans) addressing 
 each other as ‘‘Brother’’ and ‘‘Sister’’, as well as of the 
 young addressing their elders as ‘‘ Aunt’’ and ‘‘Uncle’’, 
 where there was no relationship. (See postscript to Mr. 
 Graham’s letter of August 16, 1927.) 
 
 G. Affidavits and statements indicating Tyree (Sawney) 
 Duke to be the father of Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan. 
 
 This situation determined the Executors to investi- 
 gate the Vaughan claim for themselves. For this pur- 
 pose they selected Mr. Charles Caldwell, an experienced 
 lawyer, in whose ability and integrity, as well as care 
 and industry, they have the utmost confidence. 
 
 Mr. Caldwell first saw Mrs. Susan Elizabeth Vaughan. 
 He reports that he found her family away but that she 
 seemed in good health and willing to talk and he was 
 very much impressed with her sincerity and excellent 
 memory. Among other things he asked her if she re- 
 called that her husband had said anything about his 
 grandparents and she thereupon made statements which 
 he deemed important. He had them put in affidavit form 
 and read to her by the same notary who took her first 
 affidavit and she found them correct and made oath ac- 
 cordingly. 
 
 In this second affidavit Mrs. Susan Elizabeth Vaughan 
 says: 
 
 ‘**T also recall his (my husband) saying to me that 
 one of his grandfathers lived when an old man at his 
 mother’s (Mary Duke Vaughan) home; that his eye- 
 sight was poor and that he (Wiliam Egbert Vau- 
 ghan) when a young child did in fun sometimes put 
 a chicken bone that had no chicken on it in his grand- 
 father’s mouth and have him bite on it and fool him. 
 His grandfather would say to him, perhaps, when 
 you are old your grandchildren will treat you the 
 same way. 
 
72 
 
 ‘‘T have no recollection of my husband speaking 
 -of his grandmother, the wife of his grandfather, who 
 
 lived in his old age at the home of his mothers (Mary 
 Duke Vaughan). I think he stated that he had never 
 seen this grandmother, but of this I am not sure. 
 
 “T think this grandfather must have died about 
 the time of the Civil War, while my husband was 
 away at war, as my husband did not tell, so far as I 
 can recall, of anything in connection with this grand- 
 father after he, my husband, went to war. 
 
 “T have recollection of my husband in speaking 
 of one of his grandfathers, but which one I don’t re- 
 member, but saying he was very fond of fine horses. 
 
 ‘‘T have no recollection of ever hearing my hus- 
 band mention the name of Thomas Duke as one of 
 his uncles. I never have heard him mention the name 
 of Tyre Duke.’’ 
 
 One importance of this information was well ex- 
 pressed by Judge Graham when he said in his letter of 
 July 5, 1927, to Mr. H. L. Vaughan: 
 
 ‘“‘This statement is unfortunate in that Taylor 
 Duke died before 1850, and in the Census of 1850 
 Tyre Duke is enumerated as seventy-eight years old 
 and a member of James Vaughan’s family. As Mrs. 
 Vaughan was named Polly Duke, and this old man 
 living in her family, nothing else appearing, it would 
 be presumed that he was the father of Mrs. Polly 
 Duke Vaughan. But just here we have the certificate 
 of Andrew Jones to save the situation.”’ 
 
 Of almost equal importance is its showing that Wil- 
 liam Egbert Vaughan said almost nothing as to his grand- 
 mothers, though Mrs. Dicey Jones Duke was living at 
 William J. Duke’s with whose family he was then on such 
 intimate terms. 
 
 Mr. E. L. Vaughan wrote Mr. Mapes on July Ist 
 and 13th, 1927, rather complaining of Mr. Caldwell’s 
 seeing his mother, explaining that recent sorrow had 
 dulled her memory and that Tyre Duke ‘‘was always 
 
73 
 
 spoken of by our father as the old uncle of his mother’’ 
 who was called Sawny or Tawny and that 
 
 ‘‘Mather always told us, and I know he talked many 
 times of his grandfathers and he stated that his 
 mother’s father died when he was a very small boy 
 and that he remembered nothing of him. He never 
 even mentioned his name and I doubt if he knew his 
 name.’’ 
 
 However, Mr. Vaughan’s letter also said: 
 
 “<This old man who for a short time lived with 
 our grandmother and grandmother was not the 
 father of either our grandfather or grandmother. 
 He was an Uncle of our grandmother. We never 
 heard his name mentioned. Father always called 
 him ‘Uncle Sawny’ who was his mother’s old uncle. 
 He was blind and my father and his brothers and 
 sisters played many tricks on this old blind man, 
 such as giving him chicken bones to eat without meat, 
 which the children had already eaten off the bones. 
 Then again the children used to put hot coals of fire 
 close to this old Uncle of their mother—that is place 
 these coals of fire close to his feet and burn him.’’ 
 
 It will be seen, therefore, that Mr. Vaughan confirms 
 the recollection of his mother in minor respects and 
 differs from her only in the essential relationship of 
 this old man Tyre (Sawny) Duke. 
 
 Mr. Caldwell then went to North Carolina and there 
 came across Tillett Harris, living near Stem, N. C. He 
 found him what seemed a most important witness and 
 asked him to come to Durham where a stenographer could 
 take down his statements. This Harris later did and 
 gave both an affidavit and sworn interrogatories. 
 
 Summarized, Tillett Harris says in his several state- 
 ments : | 
 
 That he was born July 26, 1845, the son of Tommie 
 Harris and Odee Duke Harris; that he had three brothers, 
 namely, Charlie, who married ‘‘Mr. Kenny Roberts’ 
 
74 
 
 daughter Frances’’, both now dead, but their children, 
 Johnnie, Dorris, Walter and Tommie, live in or near 
 Durham; Andrew, who married the daughter of Hinton 
 Mangum, both now dead and all their children except 
 Tommie who lives down below Raleigh; William (Bill), 
 who married Nannie Haley, but they and their two 
 children are now dead; that he had one sister, Bettie, 
 who married William Wilkins, both now dead, but left 
 four children, Ira, Charlie, Floyd and Sis; 
 
 That his mother was the daughter of Sawny Duke, 
 who lived on Mountain. Creek, ‘‘t’other side Bahama, 
 Orange County’’; that she had one brother, Jesse, and 
 two sisters, Mary (called Polly), and Malinda, known as 
 Lannie; that Jesse Duke had two children, Hal and 
 Noey (Noah) who lived in Granville County; that Lannie 
 never married, kept house for a while for Benton Ray 
 and died at his place; that Polly married James Vaughan 
 and lived at Franklinton, where Vaughan was shot by 
 Bragg; that he remembers Polly had two sons, John and 
 William (Bill) and two of her daughters were Lucy and 
 Mildred; 
 
 That when the 17 year old fellows were called out he 
 went into Broadfoot’s Regiment, 70th North Carolina 
 Company D, called Junior Reserves, and with him was 
 William Vaughan, son of Polly Duke Vaughan, but after 
 going from Raleigh to Weldon he left this Regiment and 
 entered the Regular Army in July 1864, Company D, 
 Highth Carolina Regiment, Old General Holt’s (Hoke’s) 
 Division, and went to Petersburg where he was wounded 
 in the leg during a charge in September 1864, and cap- 
 tured and taken prisoner to Point Lookout, Md., where 
 he remained until discharged in July 1865; that he re- 
 members seeing his Aunt Polly Vaughan at Franklinton 
 when he and Bill passed through as soldiers from Raleigh 
 to Weldon; 
 
75 
 
 That he has seen his mother and her sisters Polly and 
 Malinda together and heard them say that Sawny Duke 
 was their father, but he had never seen Sawny Duke; 
 
 That he did not have an uncle named Washington 
 Duke or William Duke; that he remembers no uncle ex- 
 cept Jesse Duke. 
 
 The following are excerpts from his sworn interroga- 
 tories given Mr. Caldwell: 
 
 ‘“Q@. What was the real name of your aunt whom 
 you called Lannie? A. We called her Lannie but | 
 recollect that Malinda was her right name. Q. Did 
 she marry? A. No sir, never married. * * * 
 Q. Where did she live? A. Up thar in Orange 
 County. @. Whom did she live with? A. With a 
 man named Benton Ray. He didn’t have no wife 
 and she went thar and kept house for him as long as 
 she lived.’’ 
 
 ‘*Q. Did you ever visit Jim Vaughan and Polly 
 Duke? A. Yes, I went down to their house. Q. Did 
 Polly Duke Vaughan and her husband Jim Vaughan 
 ever visit your mother? A. Yes sir. They would 
 come thar where my Mammy and Daddy lived—they 
 came several times. Q. You say they came several 
 times to see your mother and your father? A. Yes. 
 Aunt Polly and my Mammy was sisters and they 
 would come to see one another. Aunt Polly came to 
 see Mammy several times. @. Did your Aunt Ma- 
 linda come too? A. Yes sir. Q. Have you ever seen 
 all three of the sisters together, that is, your mother 
 and Aunt Polly and Aunt Malinda—all there to- 
 gether at your mother’s house? A. Yes.’’ 
 
 ‘*Q. When was the last time that you saw your 
 Aunt Polly Duke Vaughan and where did you see 
 her? A. Well, I saw her at Franklin Depot the last 
 time I ever see her. Q. Will you state just what were 
 the circumstances at Franklin Depot when you saw 
 your Aunt? A. I was in the army with Aunt Polly’s 
 son Billie. He was in the army with me and we was 
 going from Raleigh to Weldon by train. Bill 
 Vaughan wrote his mother and she met him at the 
 train at Franklin Depot. Q. Who was there besides 
 his mother? A. His daddy was along.”’ 
 
76 
 
 ‘*@. Do you remember anything about how Jim 
 Vaughan met his death? A. Yes. Q. What was it? 
 A. He got shot. Q. Who shot him? A. I cain’t tell 
 you that—I don’t know. Q. Do you remember that 
 he was shot by some man? A. Yes, sir—they said 
 he was. Q. Do you remember whether they said it 
 was by a man named Bragg? A. Yes, I believe that 
 is what ’twas. That is my best recollection that his 
 name was Bragg. Q. Did Polly Duke live after her 
 husband had died? A. Yes, sir. Q. She is dead now, 
 is She? A. Oh, yes. She lived on a right good while, 
 but she is dead now.’’ 
 
 “Q. Did Jim Vaughan’s wife Polly Duke 
 Vaughan have a brother named Washington? A. No 
 sir. Q. You did not have an uncle named Washing- 
 ton Duke? A. No sir. Q. Did your aunt have a 
 brother named William Duke? A. No sir, she had 
 one named Jesse Duke—he was my uncle.’’ 
 
 ‘‘Q. How do you know that your mother and 
 your Aunt Polly and your Aunt Lannie were daugh- 
 ters of Sawny Duke? A. Well, that is what they 
 said. They always called him daddy. That is all 
 I know about it. Q. You have heard them say that. 
 A. Yes, sir. Q. Your Aunt Polly called him Daddy. 
 A. Yes sir. Q. And you have heard your Aunt Lan- 
 nie say it? A. Yes sir. Q. Did you ever know your 
 grandfather Sawny Duke? A. I hearn talk of him a 
 heap but I never seed him. Q. Do you know where 
 he lived? A. Up thar on Mountain Creek, the t’other 
 side of Bahama, Orange County.’’ 
 
 The statements by Tillett Harris were brought at 
 once to the attention of some of the Vaughan claimants 
 who took it up with Messrs. A. W. Graham & Son of 
 Oxford, N. C. It then transpired that some two months 
 before the Messrs. Graham had talked with Tillett Har- 
 ris but had not taken his statement or mentioned it to 
 the estate, although he had said Polly Duke Vaughan 
 was his aunt, because he talked in what they regarded 
 as a ‘‘vague and indefinite way’’ saying there may have 
 been a brother named Kirkland Duke and others (Gra- 
 ham’s letter of August 16, 1927). 
 
th 
 
 Shortly thereafter Mr. Graham and Mr. R. H. Whit- . 
 field went to see Harris with a stenographer and ques- 
 tioned him in detail; and he gave answers entirely con- 
 firmatory of his statements to Mr. Caldwell. Thus he 
 said: 
 
 ‘“(). You told me once I believe your mother was 
 Miss Ody Duke. A. Yes. Q. who was her father? 
 A. Sawn Duke. Q. Did they call him Sawny some- 
 times? A. Yes, that is what his name was. * * 
 
 Q. How many brothers and sisters did your mother 
 
 have? A. Only two besides herself. @. Who were 
 
 they? A. Laney and Polly Duke. Q. Did she have 
 any brothers? A. One brother I believe. Q. Whom 
 
 did Laney Duke marry? A. Nobody. Polly Duke 
 
 married a Vaughan. Q. What Vaughan? A. Jim 
 
 Vaughan.”’ 
 
 ““(). Did you ever hear of Kirk Duke? A. No. 
 Old man Jesse Duke was my Mammy’s brother. Q. 
 Jesse had a son named Noah? A. Yes. Q. What 
 was his other son named? A. Hal. * * * Q. Ever 
 know anything about Washington Duke? A. I never 
 have seen him. I’ve heard talk of him. Q. You know 
 nothing about Wiliam? A.No. Q. How many other 
 brothers did your mother have besides Jesse Duke? 
 A. That was the only one I think. Q. Four in the 
 family. A. Yes.’’ 
 
 ‘“(). Which Regiment were you in? A. When the 
 seventeen-year old fellows were called out, Broad- 
 foot’s Regiment, 70th North Carolina, Company D. 
 Q. Called Junior Reserves? A. Yes. Q. When did 
 you join? A. I went out in May in ’64. Q. Where 
 did you enlist at? A. Raleigh. Q. Which way did 
 vou go from here to Raleigh? A. I went down here 
 at Franklinton Depot and took the train. Q. You see 
 your folks? A. Yes, I saw Aunt Polly and all them 
 boys. Bill went out when I did. * * * Q. You 
 were in the company with Bill. A. Yes, I show was. 
 Q. When did you last see Bill? A. I have not seen 
 him since the war ended. I left the regiment where 
 I first joined and went to the regular army and left 
 them at Weldon and went from Weldon to Peters- 
 burg when I come eighteen years old.’’ 
 
78 
 
 ‘*@. Did you ever hear of Renie Duke? A. No. 
 I knowed. Laney Duke. Q. Who was that? A. My 
 Mammy’s sister. Q. Did she ever marry? <A. No. 
 * * * Q. Where did she live? A. Benton Ray’s.”’ 
 
 ‘‘@. Sawney Duke had three girls? A. Yes. , 
 Your mother and Laney? A. And Polly. Q. And 
 one boy? A. Yes, that is right, named Jesse. Q. 
 Old man Noah Duke is your first cousin. A. Yes. 
 Q. He married Anne Duke. A. Yes. Q. Who is she? 
 A. Some of them Dukes up there about the Thorp 
 Settlement. * * * Q. Didn’t a Polly Duke marry 
 a Stagg, James Stagg, and one married Moses 
 Leathers? A. That’s a set of Dukes I don’t know 
 anything about.’’ 
 
 ‘‘Q. You have seen Vaughan? A. Yes. Q. How 
 was it he did not go to the war? A. He was too old. 
 (). How many of his boys went? A. Two, one named 
 John about the first of the war and Bill went when I 
 dud??? 
 
 Thereafter, Mr. George G. Allen received a letter 
 mailed from Oxford, but dated Stem, N. C., July 28, 1927, 
 signed by Tillett Harris before a Notary, which stated 
 that after thinking and worrying over the matter Harris 
 had concluded he had made a mistake in his previous 
 statements and that Polly Vaughan was his cousin, and 
 not his aunt. The only explanation the letter gave for 
 this change was that Harris felt he had made a mistake 
 in saying in his previous statements that James Vaughan 
 and his wife had gone to Franklinton upon their mar- 
 riage. This change was so strange and important, and 
 the reason given for it so unsatisfactory, in view of the 
 previous statements made by Harris in detail both to 
 Mr. Caldwell and Mr. Graham, none of which details the 
 letter retracted, that the Executors asked Mr. Caldwell 
 again to see Harris and get a full explanation so that the 
 real facts might be certainly known. 
 
 Pursuant to this, Mr. Caldwell went to see Harris 
 again, and on August 16, 1927, when Harris told him, and 
 gave him an affidavit and sworn interrogatories stating: 
 
79 
 
 That about a week after Mr. Graham and Mr. Whitfield 
 had been to see Harris, Whitfield had come back alone to 
 see Harris and told him that if he would sign a letter stat- 
 ing that Polly Vaughan was his cousin instead of his aunt 
 they would get $25,000 apiece, and that neither of them 
 would get anything if he didn’t; that thereby Whitfield 
 induced Harris to accompany him the next day to Oxford 
 (going and returning by a route that avoided Stem) and 
 sign the letter which Mr. Allen had received; that Harris 
 had already repented of writing the letter because it was 
 wrong and had spoken to Mr. Lee Goss about it, notwith- 
 standing Whitfield had told him two or three times not 
 to mention the letter to anybody, and asked Mr. Goss to 
 write Caldwell correcting it. In the affidavit and sworn 
 interrogatories Harris frankly confesses the wrong, says 
 he is sorry for it, confirms his previous statements to 
 Caldwell and Graham, and declares that in truth Polly 
 Vaughan was his aunt and not his cousin. 
 
 In addition, Caldwell took the affidavit of Mr. Goss. 
 It confirms that Whitfield came to see Harris and that 
 next day Harris went with Whitfield to Oxford; also that 
 Harris had told Goss that ‘‘Bob Whitfield had fooled him 
 into signing a letter saying that his Aunt Polly Vaughan 
 was not his aunt but his cousin and that he was sorry he 
 done it’’, and wanted him to write Caldwell about it. 
 And this affidavit further states that Whitfield came into 
 the neighborhood again by himself and later Whitfield 
 and Graham came together, and Graham asked Goss who 
 had been to see Harris besides Graham, Graham’s father 
 and Caldwell, whereupon Goss told Graham of Harris 
 having gone with Whitfield to Oxford and signing the let- 
 ter there and that Graham had disclaimed all knowledge 
 of the letter. Mr. Graham has since repeated this dis- 
 claimer in his letter to the Executors of August 16, 1927. 
 
 Investigation was continued in the light of the state- 
 ments by Mrs. Susan Elizabeth Vaughan and Tillett 
 Harris and with the following results. 
 
80 
 
 With respect to the Bettie Harris who married Wil- 
 lam Wilkins, her son, Charles D. Wilkins, gave Mr. 
 Caldwell an affidavit and also sworn interrogatories in 
 which he fully corroborates Tillett Harris, stating that 
 his mother told him that she was born in 1842 and mar- 
 ried in 1867 and was the daughter of Thomas Harris and 
 Ota Duke, who were married February 28, 1836, and that 
 Ota Duke was the daughter of Tyre Duke and Elizabeth 
 Rhew who were married March 9, 1813, that his brothers 
 and sisters were Ira, Floyd and Dora, called Sis, and 
 thus continues: 
 
 **Q. Do you recall your mother stating whether 
 or not her mother, Ota Duke Harris, had any sisters? 
 A. Yes sir. Q. Do you recall any of the names of 
 Ota Duke Harris’ sisters? A. Yes sir. One sister 
 that I recall was Delaney Duke, who was unmarried 
 —an old maid. @. What was the name by which you 
 ordinarily heard your mother refer to her Aunt 
 ‘Delaney’? A. Aunt Laney. Q. Do you recall your 
 mother ever referring to any other sister Ota Duke 
 Harris had? A. Yes. She referred to one that mar- 
 ried Vaughan who lived in Franklin County. Q. Do 
 you recall any incident in connection with your 
 grandmother’s sister who married Vaughan? A. 
 Nothing except my mother speaking of her visit to 
 her Aunt Mrs. Vaughan during the Civil War when 
 she went down to Franklinton to see her brother who 
 was going to the army and would pass through 
 Franklinton, and she spent the night with her aunt, 
 Mrs. Vaughan.”’ 
 
 ‘“‘Q. Who was it, as you remember, that your 
 mother was going to see at Franklinton? A. Tillett 
 Harris. Q. Do you recall Tillett Harris? A. Yes. 
 Q. What relation is Tillett Harris to you? A. My 
 uncle; mother’s brother. Q. Do you recall whether 
 or not your mother had any uncle by the name of 
 Jesse Duke? A. I don’t remember. 
 
 ‘*(). What talk do you recall having heard your 
 mother have, if any, in reference to Tyree Duke? A. 
 Nothing except that he was her grandfather. Q. 
 What do you remember hearing your mother say in 
 
81 
 
 reference to Tyree Duke’s wife, Elizabeth Rhew? 
 A. That she was named for her grandmother is all I 
 particularly recall. Q. By that you mean that she 
 was named Hlizabeth after her grandmother, Eliza- 
 beth Rhew, who married Tyree Duke? A. Yes sir. 
 Q. Did I understand you to say that your mother was 
 named Elizabeth Harris but generally known as 
 ‘Betty’ Harris? A. Yes.’’ 
 
 ““Q. Do you recall anything that your mother 
 stated as to where her Aunt Laney died? A. Yes 
 sir. She died in the old Bethel section at the Ray 
 place. Q. State county. A. At that time Orange 
 County. Q. Now what county? A. Durham. Q. 
 And you say she was never married? A. No. Q. 
 So you remember your mother speaking of her 
 mother, Ota, and her Aunt, Delaney or Laney, and 
 her Aunt, Mrs. Vaughan, who lived at Franklinton? 
 A. Yes.’’ 
 
 **Q. Did she say what relation Washington Duke 
 was to her mother? A. First cousin. Q. Did she tell 
 you the name of Washington Duke’s father? A. Yes 
 sir. Q. What was that name? A. Taylor Duke. Q. 
 What was the name of the father of your grand- 
 mother, Ota Duke, as told to you by your mother? 
 A. Tyre Duke. Q. Do you have any recollection of 
 your mother stating to you what the relation was 
 between Taylor Duke and Tyre Duke? A. Yes. Q. 
 What? A. Brothers, and that Tvre Duke was older 
 than Taylor Duke. Q. Do you recall anything of the 
 occasion or circumstances which led to your mother 
 telling you of the relationship between Taylor Duke 
 and Tyre Duke—how it came about that she talked 
 to you about it? A. It was from an inquiry of my 
 own asking the relations of Washington Duke and 
 my mother and she made the statement. @. What 
 occasioned you to make that inquiry of your mother? 
 A. Due to seeing Washington Duke in Durham from 
 frequent trips there naturally led me to the inquiry 
 of relationship. ”’ 
 
 “*Q. Do you recall any people by the name of 
 Whitfield? A. Yes, sir. @. Where do they live now? 
 A. Creedmore, Granville County, North Carolina. 
 (). How did you become acquainted with them? A. 
 
82 
 
 During the baseball season I played baseball on what 
 was known as the Lion Baseball Team from Gran- 
 ville County and the Whitfield boys were playing on 
 the Franklinton team and it was during these games 
 I met the Whitfield boys. Q. Did your mother say 
 anything to you about the Whitfield boys? A. Yes 
 sir. Q. What did she say? A. She told me that one 
 of the daughters of her Aunt Vaughan had married 
 a Whitfield, and these boys were kin to me. Q. Do 
 you recall the name of those Whitfield boys? A. Yes 
 sir. @. What were their names? A. John and Bob. 
 (). Have you any idea whose children they were? A. 
 No sir.’’ 
 
 ‘‘Q. Have you ever had any talk with your uncle, 
 Charles Harris, relative to the relationship of the 
 family? A. Yes. Q. Where were you when you had 
 those talks? A. In his home and in his store. Q. 
 What place? A. West Durham, North Carolina. Q. 
 When? A. 1898. Q. What were you doing there? 
 A. Working in the store for him. Q. What is your 
 recollection of what your uncle, Charles Harris, told 
 you about any of your ancestors? A. During the 
 conversation about our ancestors he told me the re- 
 lationship of Grandmother Ota Duke Harris and 
 Washington Duke were first cousins, and that 
 Taylor Duke and Tyre Duke were brothers. Q. Did 
 he say where he got that information? A. No, he did 
 not. @. Was Ota Duke Harris his mother? A. Yes. 
 Q. Did he know Washington Duke? A. Yes. Q. You 
 have seen him with Washington Duke? A. No. Q. 
 But both of them lived in Durham at the same time? 
 A. Yes. Q. Did he, your uncle Charles Harris, ever 
 state what relationship Tyre Duke was to him? A. 
 Yes. Q. What? A. Grandfather.’’ 
 
 And also the affidavit of Mrs. Dora EH. Parham, the 
 daughter of Bettie Harris Wilkins, called Sis, which 
 says: 
 
 ‘““My grandmother—that is, my mother’s mother 
 
 —was Odee (Otie) Duke. I have heard my mother 
 
 speak of her mother, Otie (Odee) Duke and my 
 erandmother’s sister Polly Duke and my grand- 
 mother’s brother Jesse Duke and my grandmother’s 
 
83 
 
 sister Lanie Duke. Tillett Harris is my uncle. He 
 is my mother’s brother and the only one of my 
 mother’s brothers living. My uncles were Charles 
 Harris and Andrew Harris, Bill Harris and Tillett 
 Harris and but one girl, Bettie Harris. She was my 
 mother. I have some recollection of hearing my 
 mother say that her grandfather was Sawny Duke; 
 also that Polly Duke married Jim Vaughan.’’ 
 
 With respect to Andrew Harris, one of the brothers 
 of Tillett Harris, we have the affidavit of Mrs. La Sene 
 Harris, which fully corroborates the statements of Tillett 
 Harris. She says that she is 76 years old, lives in Dur- 
 ham and was the second wife of Andrew Harris, who 
 was the son of Tommie Harris and Ottie Duke Harris; 
 that she recalls her husband speaking of his Aunt Polly 
 Duke but does not recall him mentioning the name of 
 Vaughan. She continues: 
 
 ‘‘My husband was married twice; his first wife 
 was Kate Mangum. She died. They have one living 
 child, Thomas Harris, near Apex in Wake County, 
 N. C. I am his second wife. He died about eight 
 years ago. JI remember seeing his father Tommie 
 Harris, but I never saw his mother, Ottie Harris.”’ 
 
 From disinterested parties a great many affidavits 
 have been accumulated, confirming in many ways the 
 statements of Tillett Harris as to the parentage and 
 brothers and sisters of his mother, as well as with respect 
 to his own parentage and brothers and sister. They are: 
 
 Edward P. Roberts, who makes an affidavit saying: 
 
 ‘‘T have known Tillett Harris all my life. I will 
 be seventy-five (75) years old January 31, 1928. I 
 knew his father Tommie Harris very well and re- 
 member a table and wooden safe that Tommie Harris 
 made for me and they are still in my family. I knew 
 well Tillett Harris’ mother Otie Harris and have 
 been in her house many a time. They lived about 
 two miles from where I lived.”’ 
 
84 
 
 ‘“‘T remember ‘Aunt Otie’, as I used to call Til- 
 lett’s mother, had two sisters, one old ‘Aunt Lannie’ 
 and the other ‘Aunt Polly’. Aunt Lannie was a 
 single woman and Aunt Polly had married a man 
 by the name of Vaughan. I have seen them at 
 Tommie Harris’ home. Remember hearing that 
 Aunt Polly’s husband was shot and killed at Frank- 
 linton.’’ 
 
 ‘<1 knew all the Harris boys: Charlie, Bill, An- 
 drew, Tillett and Bettie who married a Wilkins. 
 Charlie Harris married Frances Roberts who was 
 a double first cousin of mine.’’ 
 
 Ernest B. Cozart, 64 years old, who makes an affi- 
 davit in which he says: 
 
 “‘T know Tillett Harris and have known him ever 
 since I was about seven years old. * * * J have 
 kept in touch with Tillett Harris more or less all my 
 life. At one time he worked for my grandfather, 
 William H. Jones. He also worked for me off and 
 on for eight or ten years or more. * * * I knew his 
 brother Charlie Harris who lived near me. I also 
 knew his father, Thomas (Tommie) Harris, and 
 knew Otie Duke Harris, the mother of Tillett Harris 
 and wife of Thomas (Tommie) Harris.’’ 
 
 ‘‘T have heard the Harris boys speak of their 
 erandfather ‘Sawny Duke’ but I never knew him. I 
 have also heard the Harris boys speak of their moth- 
 er’s sister, Polly Duke, who they said married a 
 Vaughan. I don’t remember having seen Polly 
 Duke Vaughan but have often heard them speak of 
 their Aunt Polly Duke Vaughan and have been hear- 
 ing them speak of her ever since I was a small boy.’’ 
 
 ‘‘T and the Harris boys often used to talk about 
 the old people and our kin folks; and about the times 
 that Tillett worked for my grandfather and about 
 the fights the boys had.’’ 
 
 Mrs. Adeline Wright Morton, who had already given 
 an affidavit showing she lived near the Vaughans during 
 the period when they rented from Mrs. Rosa Blackwell, 
 gave Mr. Caldwell an affidavit correcting her former affi- 
 davit in some particulars, and saying: 
 
85 
 
 ‘‘T remember James Vaughan and his wife Polly 
 Vaughan and I knew their children and lived close 
 to where they lived. I knew her sister Lannie who 
 visited Mrs. Vaughan. Lannie was an old maid. 
 She lived in Orange County I think. I have heard 
 Mrs. Vaughan speak of her sister Odee but I never 
 saw her. I won’t be positive but I think Mrs. 
 Vaughan spoke of her father as named Sawny Duke. 
 
 *~* T cannot be sure if it was Sawny or Taylor, 
 for I don’t recollect. I don’t recollect the name of 
 the mother at all.’’ 
 
 Mrs. Susie Lee, widow of John Lee, was born on Feb- 
 ruary 4th 1845, in old Orange County, and makes an affi- 
 davit saying that she and her husband lived at the Ray 
 Place four years after 1887 and that 
 
 ‘“While at the Ray Place I became acquainted, as 
 I recall it, with Tillett Harris and his brother Bill ° 
 Harris, who lived near me. Hach of them lived in 
 separate houses. They worked on farms and Bill 
 Harris stayed some at Moore’s Mill which was a 
 corn and grist and flour mill. They were both grown 
 men when I first knew them. J remember hearing 
 them speak of their mother as Otie (Odee) Harris. 
 I have heard them speak of their father Tommie 
 Harris. I did not know their mother or father. I 
 remember hearing Tillett Harris and my old man 
 talking about Tillett Harris’ Aunt Polly Vaughan. 
 il also” heard Tillett Harris talking about his Aunt 
 Lannie, an old maid.’’ 
 
 James Norman Tilley, 71 years old, in his affidavit 
 says: 
 
 ‘‘T knew Thomas (Tom) Harris and his wife, Otie 
 
 Duke Harris and their sons Charlie, Andrew, Wil- 
 
 liam and Tillett and Bettie, their daughter. I knew 
 
 Lannie Duke, the sister of Otie Duke Harris. She 
 
 was an old maid. I saw her at Tom Harris’ house. 
 
 I did not know any Polly Duke who is said to have 
 
 married a Vaughan and I did not know any Jesse 
 Duke so far as I can now recall.”’ 
 
86 
 John Suitt, 67 years old, makes affidavit that: 
 
 ‘‘My father, Sam Suitt, came to this section of 
 country about 1875 and brought me with him. I be- 
 came acquainted with Tillett Harris and his brother 
 Bill Harris. Bill Harris and I worked together at 
 different places. I knew Bill Harris very well. I 
 have seen his brother Charlie but did not know him 
 much.’’ 
 
 ‘‘T have heard Bill Harris speak of his mother 
 Otie Harris. I have heard him speak about his 
 unele Jesse. My best recollection is that I have 
 heard Billy Harris speak about having an Aunt Polly 
 Vaughan, but I don’t recall it distinctly ; it may come 
 back to me if I study over it. I have heard him speak 
 of his grandfather Sawny Duke. I knew Bill Harris 
 for more than twenty-five (25) years.’’ 
 
 Robert Long, a colored man 80 years old, in his affi- 
 davit says: 
 
 ‘‘T knew Mrs. Rosa Blackwell and her daughter 
 Anna mighty well. I remember her (Anna’s) mar- 
 riage and got some of the good things to eat at the 
 wedding. She married a man by the name of Duke.”’ 
 
 ‘‘T remember Mr. Jim Vaughan and his wife Mrs. 
 Mary Vaughan very well. They lived on the Rosa 
 Blackwell place. I have eaten many a biscuit at her 
 place.’’ 
 
 ‘‘T have seen Mrs. Mary Vaughan’s sisters when 
 they visited her. One was a Mrs. Harris; also an 
 unmarried sister called Lannie. I have heard them 
 talk about their father Sawny Duke.’’ 
 
 ‘‘T saw Jim Vaughan at the time he was shot. I 
 was close by and saw him fall on his face. Bragg 
 shot him.”’ 
 
 Alvis Kinchen Unstead, born June 30th 1839 on the 
 banks of Flat River, near Bahama, knew William J. 
 Duke, his brother Washington, his sister Miss Reany, but 
 not their father or mother; knew the children of Wash- 
 ington and Mrs. Lyon the daughter of William; remem- 
 bers men older than he, named Sampson, William, Wylie 
 
87 
 
 and Thom Vaughan, who lived in the Bahama neighbor- 
 hood; also knew John, Bush Bill, Nash and Noah Duke 
 who were grown men when he was a boy, but does not 
 recall name Tyree Duke. He continues: 
 
 **T knew an old Methodist preacher whom we all 
 called ‘Uncle Gray’ and have heard him preach many 
 atime. He and William Duke were good friends and 
 William Duke would pray and sing and shout and 
 help ‘Uncle Gray’ in his meetings.”’ 
 
 ‘‘T knew Tillett Harris when I was a boy. He 
 was a boy then too. He has always borne a good 
 reputation so far as I know. I knew his father, 
 Thomas (Tommie) Harris and his mother, Otee Har- 
 ris. Thomas (Tommie) Harris ran a mill owned by 
 Marcus Harris. The mil] was on Flat River. I knew 
 that Tillett Harris’ sister, Bettie Harris, married 
 William Wilkins. I myself have married twice and 
 both times married daughters of the mill-owner, 
 Marcus Harris; they were half-sisters.’’ 
 
 **T did not know ‘Sawny’ Duke personally, but 
 have heard the folks living back sixty (60) years or 
 more ago talk about him. I knew where they said 
 he lived. It was near what is now Bahama near 
 Flat River, and there is a deep hole in Flat River 
 near where ‘Sawny’ Duke lived called ‘Sawny Duke 
 hole’, and I have fished in it many a time. Dry Creek 
 emptied into Flat River right near where ‘Sawny’ 
 Duke lived—that is near where I was told he lived— 
 I don’t recall ever seeing him.”’ 
 
 Additional affidavits as to the descendants of Jesse 
 Duke are: 
 
 Mrs. Mary A. Stem, 84 on August 12, 1927, and had 
 lived at Stem most of her life, who says: 
 
 “‘T knew Jesse Duke who lived at Shoo-fly near 
 Stem, about a mile from Stem. He was an old man 
 when I first knew him. He had two boys, Hal and 
 Noey (Noah). Hall and Noey at different times 
 worked on the farm and lived with my Aunts Eliza- 
 beth and Rachel Green. Hall had two children, 
 Mary and Murphy. Noey had a son named Alex.’’ 
 
88 
 
 ‘‘T have heard the name Sawny Duke but never 
 knew him.”’ 
 
 ‘‘The only Dukes now living in this neighbor- 
 hood are Alex Duke and Mrs. Will Haskins and 
 there is a George Duke near Tar River Station, 
 Granville County, who is Noey Duke’s son.”’ 
 
 Mrs. Mary Laney Haskins says she is 47, daughter of 
 Murphy Duke of Elberon, Warren Co., N. C., and that 
 
 ‘‘My grandfather was Hal Duke and his father 
 was Jesse Duke. I don’t know the name of Jesse 
 Duke’s father. I don’t know if Jesse Duke had any 
 brothers or sisters.’’ 
 
 And W. Alex Duke says that 
 
 ‘‘My father was Buck Duke and his father was 
 Noey Duke and his father was Jesse Duke. I have 
 no Bible records. I have seen my grandfather, Noey 
 Duke. My father has told me my great grandfather 
 was Jesse Duke. I also remember my uncle Hal 
 Duke who was grandfather’s brother. They are all 
 dead.’’ 
 
 Additional affidavits as to Laney Duke are 
 
 A. N. Blalock, 70 years old, who says that he married 
 Sallie Ray, daughter of Benton Ray, and that 
 
 ‘‘T knew very well Aunt Lanie Duke who kept 
 house for Benton Ray for a number of years. My 
 recollection is that Aunt Lannie Duke died at the 
 Benton Ray place. She was a single woman—an old 
 maid. I was no relation to her; but called her aunt 
 because she was old and I was a young man.’’ 
 
 Mrs. Ella Hill, the daughter of A. N. Blalock and 
 Sallie Ray, who makes affidavit that her mother, who is 
 now dead, said: 
 
 ‘‘Old Miss Lanie Duke stayed at the home of my 
 grandfather Benton Ray, at the Ray Place, not far 
 from what is now Bahama, and kept house for him 
 for several years.’’ 
 
89 
 
 William J. Laycock, from whose affidavit we have 
 already quoted showing that he was born in 1857 near 
 the William J. Duke place, was intimately acquainted 
 with his family and personally knew his sister Miss Ma- 
 linda Duke, further said: 
 
 ‘‘T knew Miss Sallie Ray, the daughter of Benton 
 Ray. She married Andrew Blalock. J have heard 
 her say that a woman whom she called Aunt Lanie 
 Duke lived with her father, Benton Ray, at the Ray 
 place. I know this Lanie Duke was not a sister of 
 Washington or William J. Duke. 
 
 «The Malinda Duke who was the sister of Wash- 
 ington Duke was an entirely different person from 
 the Lanie Duke who lived on the Benton Ray Place.’’ 
 
 James E. Lyon, the son-in-law of Wiliam J. Duke, 
 who knew personally both the Malinda Dukes, says: 
 
 ““T have heard Sawny Duke spoken of but I never 
 kneny dain? * 
 
 ‘‘T knew real well Benton Ray and knew Bie nily 
 Miss Lanie Duke who lived in the same house with 
 Benton Ray on the Ray place in old Orange County, 
 but I don’t recall ever having talked with Miss Lanie 
 Duke about any of her relatives.’’ * * 
 
 “‘T have frequently talked with Miss Malinda 
 Duke, sister of Washington Duke and William J. 
 Duke. I had known her a number of years before 
 she died and have never heard her say that she had 
 visited or even knew Polly or Mary Duke who had 
 married a Vaughan. Miss Malinda Duke, the sister 
 of Washington Duke, was never married and lived 
 for a number of years before her death with Mr. 
 Washington Duke and died at his home in Durham 
 County.’’ 
 
 ‘“T never heard any member of the Duke family 
 speak of a Polly or Mary Duke who married a 
 Vaughan.”’ 
 
 And Mrs. Susan L. Dowd, who likewise knew both 
 Malinda Dukes, makes affidavit: 
 
90 
 
 ‘‘T knew Benton Ray who lived at the Ray Place 
 about two miles from my home; his wife died and 
 left three children, and an old maid by the name of 
 Lanie Duke, whom I personally knew, kept house for 
 him. She was not a sister of Washington Duke. She 
 was a different person from Miss Malinda Duke, who 
 was called ‘Linda’ and who was a sister of Washing- 
 ton Duke. The old Ray Place was near Little River 
 and near Lipscomb’s Mill, and about a mile from the 
 Roxboro Road. 
 
 ‘‘Benton Ray bought a new place which was 
 about four miles from the old Ray Place. The sec- 
 ond place was the place where he lived when his wife 
 died, and where ‘Lanie’ Duke kept house for him.’’ 
 
 H. What the records show as to the Harris statement. 
 
 Coming to the records, there has been found in the 
 Historical Commission the lcense issued August 27, 
 1867, by Geo. Laws, Clerk of the County Court at Hills- 
 boro, for the marriage of ‘‘Wm. Harris son of Thos. 
 Harris and Otty Harris and Nancy Evans daughter of 
 Gidian Haily and Betsy Haily’’ on which there is an en- 
 dorsement that they were married September 1, 1867, by 
 ‘<Joseph Woods, J. P.’’ 
 
 The War Records show: That there enlisted at Ra- 
 leigh on May 21st, 1864, ‘‘W. Vaughan’’ in Company A 
 and ‘‘M. Harris’’ and ‘‘Williiam Vaughan’’ in Company 
 D, both of 70th Regiment North Carolina State Troops, 
 Infantry, Junior Reserves, Lt. Col. C. W. Broadfoot; 
 that the First Battalion (Broadfoot) and Sixth (Clark) 
 were organized into the First Regiment of Reserves 
 (Seventieth North Carolina Regiment) at Weldon July 
 4, 1864; that ‘‘M. Harris’’ was enrolled July 27th 1864, 
 in the Highth Regiment N. C. Troops, Company D; and 
 that the Highth Regiment participated in an assault on 
 Fort Harrison at Petersburg, Va., September 30, 1864, 
 and was almost annihilated, 174 men and officers going 
 out and only 25 returning, ‘‘the others were killed, 
 
ot 
 
 wounded and captured’’. See Moore’s Roster, Vol. L, 
 p. 273, and Vol. IV., pp. 398-421; also ‘‘North Carolina 
 Regiments 1861-65’’ by Walter Clark, Vol. IV., pp. 3, 4, 
 407. 
 
 In addition, ‘‘The War of the Rebellion’’, Series IIL, 
 Vol. VIIL., p. 998, shows release of all prisoners from 
 Point Lookout by July 5th 1865. We also have the pen- 
 sion application of ‘‘M. T. Harris’’ made July 20, 1908, 
 stating that he is 63 years old, resides at Stem, enlisted 
 in ‘‘Co. B. 70 Reg. N. C. State Troops’’ in May 1864 and 
 was wounded in the right leg at Fort Harrison about 
 September 30, 1864. Proper identification is attached to 
 this application. And we have verified that on it pen- 
 sions have since been paid to the Tillett Harris in ques- 
 tion; also that Tillett Harris enlisted as M. Harris, his 
 first name being Marcom and that by which his daddy 
 called him (see sworn interrogatories of Harris dated 
 August 16, 1927). 
 
 John Oakley, of Timberlake, Person County, N. C., 
 who was 81 September 8th 1927, says he knew Tillett 
 Harris, Andrew Harris, Charlie Harris and Bill Harris 
 and that: 
 
 ‘«TMllett Harris was in the war with me. So was 
 Bill Vaughan. We were all three in the same com- 
 pany. We enlisted in May 1864 when the Junior 
 Reserves were called out. We enlisted at Raleigh 
 and went by train to Weldon, N. C. At Weldon we 
 separated into different companies.’’ 
 
 The Census Records are erroneously claimed by the 
 Vaughans to contradict the statements of Harris. Thus 
 Mr. E. L. Vaughan, writing on August 12th 1927, nar- 
 rates the Census Records for the years 1840, 1850, 1860 
 and 1870, of various persons named Harris, says that he 
 had found the record of Thomas Harris only for 1840 
 and 1850, and declares that ‘‘all other efforts to find 
 anyone by the name of Thomas Harris, Tillett Harris or 
 
92 
 
 any Harris by any other first name failed in its entirety 
 as there is no record other than given above’’. In this 
 narration he says the records show the family of Thomas 
 Harris to be for 1840 Thomas Harris between 30 and 40, 
 with a wife between 20 and 30 and one boy and one girl 
 under 5, and for 1850 Thomas Harris 40, Otey Harris 36, 
 Charles Harris 10, Betsey Harris 12, Andrew Harris 8, 
 Marcom Harris 6 and William Harris 4. And from this 
 he concludes ‘‘There is no Tillett Harris listed in this 
 family any place’’. Mr. Graham makes a similar asser- 
 tion in his letter of August 16, 1927. But both are based 
 on inadequate information, for the Executors have found 
 that the Census Records for 1860 give this family as liv- 
 ing at Tally Ho in Ledge of Rock District, Granville 
 County, near Jesse Duke, and consisting of Thomas Har- 
 ris 51, Oty Harris 48, Elizabeth Harris 20, Andrew Har- 
 ris 18, Tillet Harris 15 and Will Harris 13. This seems 
 full confirmation by the Census Records of the previous 
 ascertainment, as above noted, that Marcom and Tillett 
 Harris are the same person and had the parents, brothers 
 and sister as stated by Tillett Harris. 
 
 The records likewise indicate confirmation of the 
 statements of Harris about Jesse Duke. Thus we have 
 the bond for his marriage to Nancy Roberts dated No- 
 vember 1, 1817, with Joseph A. Woods, witness and Shad- 
 rach Roberts security. We also have the Census Records 
 for him beginning with 1820 and running consecutively 
 through 1860. The record for 1850 shows the family in 
 Napp of Reeds District, Granville County, and to be 
 Jesse Duke 44, Nancy Duke 38, Noah Duke 20 and Sivilla 
 Duke (f) 30. The record for 1860 shows him near 
 Thomas Harris at Tally Ho, in Ledge of Rock District, 
 Granville County (the two returns having been taken 
 consecutively by the same person on the same day) and 
 the family to be Jesse Duke 65 and Livly Duke (f) 60, 
 thus indicating the death of Nancy and Marriage of Noah 
 since 1850, and that the Census for 1850 erred in its 
 
93 
 
 statement of his age and that of his wife. And this is 
 confirmed by the Census for 1860 showing in Granville 
 County Noah Duke and Ann Duke with no children and 
 the same two for the same County in 1870 with four chil- 
 dren, the eldest being George, 8 years old, which concurs 
 with affidavits already quoted. 
 
 The Census Records of Jesse Duke prior to 1850 con- 
 firm this mistake as to the ages of himself and his wife 
 by showing their ages to be both between 40 and 50 in 
 1840, both between 30 and 40 in 1830 and for 1820 hers 
 to be between 16 and 26 and his between 26 and 45, thus 
 placing his birth prior to 1800 as did the age 65 given in 
 the Census for 1860. These Census Records also indicate 
 that Sivilla and Livly Duke were not daughters of Jesse 
 Duke for they show only two female children, one under 
 5 in 1830 and one between 5 and 10 in 1840. And these 
 Census Records further show a son over 15 in 1840 who 
 was therefore older than Noah and could have been mar- 
 ried and out of the family in 1850 and the Hal whom Til- 
 lett Harris and others quoted have said was the other 
 son. And this is confirmed by the Census showing in 
 Granville County for 1850 Hal Duke 25, Mahaly Duke 20. 
 and Mary 1, in 1860 Hal 30, Mahala 33, Mary 10 and Mur- 
 phy 7, and in 1870 Hal 50, Mahalie 45, Mary 21 and Mur- 
 phy 17, which completely concurs with the affidavits as 
 to Hal’s children by Mrs. Stem, previously quoted. 
 
 The Census Records show Benton Ray’s family to 
 be in 1860 Benton Ray 44, Laney Duke 74, John Ray 9, 
 Sallie Ray 8 and James Ray 6, and in 1870 Benton Ray 
 55, John Ray 18, Sally Ray 17, James Ray 14 and Julia 
 Duke (Domestic S.) 17, which accords with affidavits 
 previously quoted as to his family. It thus also tends to 
 confirm the statement of Harris that Laney Duke kept 
 house for Benton Ray, and died at his place. However, 
 the age of 74, if correct, would show her not to be the 
 daughter of, because only 14 years younger than, Tyre 
 
94 
 
 Duke whose age is given as 78 in the Census of 1850. 
 But reliance cannot be placed on such figures, as we have 
 just seen in the case of Jesse Duke and his wife and Hal 
 Duke and his wife; and the Census gives the age of Mrs. 
 Vaughan, whogmarried in 1835, as 25 in 1850 and 40 in 
 1860. So it is entirely possible that 74 is a mistake for a 
 lower figure, say 47 or 54, which would agree with the 
 statement of Tillett Harris that she lived to around fifty 
 or more and accord with her keeping house for a widower 
 aged 44 with three children under 10. 
 
 The records show a Tyree Duke but no Sawney Duke, 
 while Harris speaks only of a Sawney Duke and dis- 
 claims any knowledge of a Tyree Duke. But this diserep- 
 ancy seems explained by the showing that Sawney was 
 the nickname by which Tyree Duke was commonly known. 
 Thus the Census for 1850 shows Tyree Duke aged 78 a 
 member of the Vaughan family. Yet Mr. E. L. Vaughan 
 writes (Letters of July 1 and 13, 1927) that his father (a 
 son of Mrs. Vaughan) referred to this old man as 
 ‘“‘Uncle Sawney’’ and never mentioned the name 
 ‘““Tyree’’. Mr. R. H. Whitfield says in his affidavit that 
 he had heard his ‘‘Uncle Tom Vaughan (another son of 
 Mrs. Vaughan) speak of Tyre Duke. He said Tyre Duke 
 stayed at his mother’s home a good deal. Tom called him 
 ‘Uncle Tyre.’ Tom called him ‘Tyry’ as well as I can 
 remember.’’ And Mr. Graham, Counsel for the Vaughan 
 claimants, writes (letter of August 16, 1927) : ‘‘In all our 
 searches we have been unable to find any traces of Saw- 
 ney Duke, and Mr. Vaughan informs us that the Census 
 Records at Washington do not disclose his name. An 
 old man named Oakley, who is now living in Person 
 County, told us that ‘Sawney’ was the nickname of ‘Tyre’ 
 Duke and it seems to me that someone else gave us the 
 same information.’’ 
 
 The records show the existence of this Tyree Duke 
 consistently from prior to 1800 to his inclusion in the 
 
95 
 
 family of James Vaughan in 1850 at 78 which would put 
 his birth around 1772. Besides the Census Records to 
 be noted later we have the tax lists showing him the 
 owner of land from 1789 to 1801. And we have his deed 
 of this land to James Leathers, Trustee, in 1820 and sale 
 by the Trustee to Samuel Garborough in 1832. The 
 Orange County Court Minutes show his appointment as 
 a hand in February 1799 along with Taylor, Robert and 
 Hardiman Duke, to work the ‘‘road from Rocky Branch 
 to Bennehans”’ and in November 1811 to work the ‘‘road 
 from Mountain Creek to Hunter’s Ford on Flat River’’. 
 They also show the suits of William P. Mangum vs. 
 Tyree Duke in February 1812, Tyree Duke vs. Duke & 
 Horton in August 1817 and Wm. Cain Admr. vs. Thomas 
 Rhew and Tyree Duke in May 1818. And we have the 
 bond for Tyree Duke’s marriage to Elizabeth Rhew dated 
 March 9th 1813 with J. Taylor witness and William War- 
 ren security. 
 
 The Census Records of Tyree Duke indicate a prior 
 marriage of which Jesse Duke was probably the issue. 
 For they show Tyree Duke to be between 26 and 45 in 
 both 1800 and 1810 with a wife of the same age and to 
 have 2 males and 3 females under 10 in 1800, while in 
 1810 he had 1 male under 10 and 1 between 16 and 26 and 
 none over 26 either in 1810 or in 1820, whereas we know 
 Jesse Duke married in 1817 and appeared as head of a 
 family in 1820 with his age between 26 and 45. 
 
 The Census Records for Tyree Duke for 1830 show 
 as members of his family 2 females between 15 and 20 
 and 1 female between 10 and 15, in addition to other older 
 females, one of whom was his wife whose age is given as 
 between 50 and 60. So there is clearly indicated three 
 daughters of Tyree Duke and Elizabeth Rhew who would 
 have been of marriageable age in 1835. This is frankly 
 admitted by Judge Graham and caused him to say that 
 ‘‘the Polly Duke who married Samuel Doherty or 
 
96 
 
 Dorothy on July 30th 1835 must have been the daughter 
 of Tyree Duke who married Elizabeth Rhew March 9, 
 1813’’ (letter of July 1, 1927). 
 
 But Judge Graham presents no data to support this 
 suggestion. And it stands as a mere supposition, con- 
 trary to the natural inferences from what the record 
 shows really occurred, which further investigation would 
 probably explain by showing the Polly Duke who mar- 
 ried Samuel Doherty or Dorothy to be the daughter of 
 the John Duke who married Elizabeth Duke in June 1812, 
 or of the Hiram Duke who married Curry Forknor in 
 December 1815, or of the John Duke who married Lydia 
 Lewis in April 1817, just as the letter shows Judge Gra- 
 ham had found the Polly Duke who married Moses 
 Leathers in 1820 to be the daughter of William Duke. 
 
 For, knowing that Polly and Odee Duke had married 
 and appeared in their respective families in the Census 
 for 1840, we would expect the Census of Tyree Duke for 
 1840 probably to show only himself and wife and the un- 
 married Laney Duke, if Polly and Odee were his daugh- 
 ters; and we find his Census for 1840 shows 1 male be- 
 tween 60 and 70 (himself), 1 female between 70 and 80 
 (his wife), 1 male between 5 and 10 (a grandchild, doubt- 
 less) and 1 female between 30 and 40, who might well be 
 the unmarried Laney Duke. Likewise, not finding any 
 Census Record for him in 1850 would indicate that if he 
 were still alive the family had been broken up by the 
 death of his wife and he had gone to live with one of his 
 own children rather than with any of Taylor Duke’s; 
 and we find him for 1850 in the family of Mary (Polly) 
 Duke Vaughan. 
 
 Conclusion as to the Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan Claim. 
 
 Under the circumstances the Executors, after a most 
 thorough investigation, review and consideration, have 
 become convinced that Mary (Polly) Duke Vaughan was 
 
97 
 
 not a daughter of Taylor Duke and so, acting as such 
 Executors, they ascertain, determine and declare that 
 she was not a sister of Washington Duke and that her 
 descendants are not entitled to participate in the dis- 
 tribution to be made under the terms of Item VI of the 
 Last Will and Testament of James B. Duke, deceased. 
 
 In Witness Wuerecor the Executors of the Estate of 
 James B. Duke, deceased, as such, have hereunto sub- 
 scribed their names this 5th day of October, 1927. 
 
 Nanauine H. Duke 
 GrorcE G. ALLEN 
 Wituiam R. PERKINS 
 As Executors of the Estate of 
 James B. Duke, deceased. 
 
98 
 
 (uo.10d [) 
 ‘eA ‘oytaayiAM ‘Tp xog 
 ‘uosi9yeg (H AW) ‘O A ‘SA 
 (uoni0od [) 
 ‘) ‘N ‘Otoqsuse14 
 
 “OAV JAPA 00EZ (paseacaq ) 
 uosioyed CH eS) ‘d ‘f ‘SAW AemoyoH (Cf Ae) “H WA ‘SII 
 “NaaCTIHOGN Var) “NAUCTIHOGNVuUr “Naud TIHD 
 
 410 SINVONSOSAT 
 
 ‘aNd NOLONIHSVM AO UAHLOUE ‘AMNG ‘f WVITIIM AO ATINVA 
 
 “SZ8T “UI6Z [dy us0q ‘ayn jeqoy 
 
 (s}uepusosap ON) €Z8I ‘YIZZ Jequisjdag u10q ‘ayndg “q 10190q 
 ‘OZ8T “UIST Jequiessq us0q ‘Oynq uojsuryse \\ 
 
 ‘SI8T ‘PUZZ Yse U10Eg ‘ong “L uyof 
 
 (pelizeut 1349 N ) "SI8T “UJET Yore, us0q ‘oynd epulew 
 (s}uepuedsap ON ) ‘ZI8I ‘Y39 eunf UI0q ‘nd “A puepiny 
 “6081 “WI8 YoseyT usoq ‘ayn eyeuy 
 
 (s}yuepusdsap ON) ‘ZO81 ‘“Ui0Z Jequiss9q utoq ‘aynq Auroy 
 ‘GO8I ‘Puzz Jsnsny usoq ‘ond Arey 
 
 ‘COST “UIST A[nf us0q ‘yng “[ wenyM 
 
 :919M UdIp[IyO say} 
 
 pue ‘TOQgI ‘pI isnsny pojep st puod aseriszew ssoym ‘souof AvdIq pue syn JojAvy, a1am 9yNG Uo SUIYSeAA JO SjuoIed oY T 
 ‘paseaoep ‘oynd “g sowie jo 
 
 J9YJeF VY} ‘OyN uopBurysep FO S1oj}sIs pue SJoy}OIq VY} JO UdIp]IyOpuLss Jo sjuepusosep pue UdAP|IyOpueIs ‘ustp{Iys yons 
 
 zi 
 
 ‘GdHId AMNG ‘d SHNVE NAHM AVG AHL ‘CZ6T ‘Ol WAAOLOO NO 
 GaLSIXd NAYCTIHOGNVUD AO SINVGNHOSAC GNV NAUCTIHOGNVED ‘NANGIIHO HONS Sv 
 ‘daSVHONC ‘AMNG ‘d SAWVE AO UAHLOW AHL “AMNG AANOY VITIGLUV AO ANV ‘GCasSvaoOaa 
 ‘AMNG ‘A SHUNVE AO UAHLVA AHL ‘AMNdG NOLONIHSVM WO SUMLSIS GNV SUMHLOUA AHL AO 
 NONGTIHOGNVUD FO SLNVONAOSHC GNV NAYCTHOGNVED ‘NANGIIHO AHL ONIMOHS 
 
 OW a Oe Os 
 
99 
 
 (paseacaq) 
 AVMOTOLT HOLL 
 
 (uons0d ¢/T) 
 ‘D'S “AND exeT 
 ‘AEMOJ[OFT [JPY SOWL(y~ 
 (uorsod ¢/T) 
 ‘D °S ‘AUD axeT 
 ‘AEMOTOH, Pq 4x 
 (uon10d ¢/T) 
 ‘D'S ‘AUD OxeT 
 ‘ACMOJOH, STEEL ax 
 (uow10d ¢/T) 
 "D'S “AND e4eT 
 ‘KEMOT[OF] IUIIL[A) x™ 
 (uoHsod ¢/T 
 ‘) ‘N ‘O10gxoy 
 ‘Kado (192eH) “M ‘Lf SI 
 
 (paseaoaq7 ) 
 ‘AREMO][OF] “OC uosT 
 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘D “(N ‘weying 
 “say weyyiey 9007 
 ‘AEMOTJOH “N WEILL 
 (uonjs0d [) 
 ‘DO ‘N “weying 
 ‘KeMpeoig ZIT 
 ‘surydoy, (HH esoy) “Vv ‘f SIIN 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘2 (N ‘weying 
 “aay AUT, 3sey 07 
 ‘pleM (CH PuueN) “H “UY SIN 
 
 (paseaseq ) 
 SIOYIIA BANC YeICSy 
 
 (paseaaqy ) 
 aNd SuUTEM x 
 
 (paseacaq ) 
 ‘aynqd uyot “Id« 
 
100 
 
 (uonji0od %&%) 
 BA ‘OAOMIAM ‘Zp XOE 
 ‘“osie}eg IIeY WOqlHax 
 (uonj10d %&%) 
 eA ‘OAeyAM ‘Zp XO 
 ‘UOSIoeq IULINV] 4% 
 
 (uonsod g/T) 
 ‘eg ‘sinqgsiiiey 
 “43S JoH°d 128 
 ‘uosioyeg OSNET 103A xx 
 (uon10d &%) 
 eA ‘oqAauAM 
 ‘uosia}eq OSI1A O09T 
 (uonjsi0d %) 
 ‘oyepy ‘apeosed 
 sso, CW AIS) “1D SAN 
 (uon10d &%) 
 ‘oyepy ‘epeosed 
 ‘uosioyeg Wey UIMpy 
 (uoniod &%) 
 ‘eA ‘PySeNd 
 ‘9p Jomeid 
 ‘yysS Cd ed) ‘NW “M ‘SIN 
 (uoniod &%) 
 ‘eg ‘sinqsiiieyy 
 “IS TYP 12S 
 peaoy (qd 21D) ff “M SIN 
 (pesess9q ) 
 If ‘Aemoj[oH ‘O Uo0eTs 
 *NFACTIHOGN Va) 
 40 SENVONGOSAq 
 
 (uorji0d [) 
 ON ‘weying 
 ‘siasoyq ("J euuy) “M “I ‘SAIN 
 
 (paseaseq ) 
 uosiayeg (eusi0T) ‘O A SIN 
 
 *‘NdYATIHOGNVU) 
 
 "(panuywo9)—V¥ ZINGHHOS 
 
 (pasea09q ) 
 uoky (‘q euegq) “A ‘f ‘SIN 
 
 ‘N@UITIHD 
 
101 
 
 (uors0d 7) 
 ‘uud Ty, ‘O[[IASUMOIg 
 ; 40 FO 
 YWSPIDOW (MPA) “AD ‘StIN 
 (uonsod 7) 
 SBXIT, ‘UOPSUIT[A AA 
 yn uds[y sowel 
 (uorj10d [) 
 
 Sexo], ‘U0}dUTTIO AA (paseacacy ) 
 OxNd weiy[IAA j10qoy exNG usppenoypy somes 
 (uolj.10d [) 
 ON ‘weysing 
 
 ‘AJISIOAIUL) axNC ‘EE XOg 
 ‘uosduioy,, uoA] eYyIog ‘s1yy 
 (uonsz0d 7) 
 ‘O(N ‘O][Aurse y 
 Bpeq (7 AIP) “A ‘SA 
 (uoniod [) 
 ‘ON ‘weying is9\\ 
 4S PAUL 818 
 ‘sprempy ("J PudIOT) “YY “AA “SAP 
 (uorj10d 7) 
 ‘O(N ‘sour 
 “WIR yy 210UI} IG 
 WL CT SI) “a 'S “S314 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ON ‘weying 
 “IS weyyeW 60F 
 TAPE CT B0y) *D “A tN 
 (paseasaq7) 
 ‘uosdwioy fT, UoAT] oIssog, “SIT, 
 
 (pasevacaq ) 
 uOAT “Cd WOON 
 (uons0d 7) 
 ‘DO “N ‘Osoqs[tH ‘Tt “a 
 ‘UOAT SUWO].T WEITTIM 
 
102 
 
 (uors0d_9/T) 
 ‘sexo y, ‘UO}SUITII A 
 
 ‘uoyieg uosyy ydey 
 (uonsod 9/T) 
 ‘SEXO, ‘U0}SUITIO 
 ‘uoyleg exNC [Jemox essof 
 
 (uonsod 9/T) 
 ‘sexay “Ysny 
 ‘uapmog “d ‘W ONV “SIINE 
 (peseaseq ) 
 uoyleg sInoyT sowe/, 
 
 (uoni0d_9/T) 
 ‘SeXOT, ‘UOVSUTTJOM 
 ‘uoyleg uelTy uyof 
 (uonsod 9/T) 
 *‘SeXO], ‘UO}SUTTIO\\ 
 ‘uo}Ieg YUpessyy “WA 
 
 “NYC TIHOGN Var) 
 410 SINVONSOSAT 
 
 ( peseaaq ) 
 uoyleg ayes ‘sry 
 (posesoaq ) 
 and Wei M+ 
 (paseesaq ) 
 ayn ee We 
 (pesess9q ) 
 aNd APRN MNV 
 ( pasessaq 9 
 ‘ond WIMP 
 (paseesaq ) 
 ayn “S Sey 
 (poseaseq ) 
 ‘oynd “JT ydesof, 
 (pasea09q ) 
 ‘Qynq uoysulysep AOIOT > 
 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘uudT, ‘o[[[ASUMOIG 
 ‘aynq uospn{ Asareyy 
 ‘NdUCTIHOONVU) 
 
 *(panuyuog)—V WINGAHOS 
 
 ‘NFUCTIHD 
 
103 
 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘ye ‘oosiouei iy ues 
 “4S Yplsepery LZ9 
 
 ‘peiuoy (‘VY BSSe1L) ‘DO *( ‘SI 
 
 (uonsod 9/T 40 Z/T) 
 *"SeXO], “UOJSUTTJOM 
 
 ‘UOJIV IL PMSSIL x 
 (uon4od 9/T 50 Z/T) 
 ‘Sexo T, ‘UO}SUTTIO A 
 UoVIeg 997] SSH 
 
 (paseasac ) 
 ‘uoyIeg 997] 149q 0A 
 
 (pesess9q) 
 uOSUInIY “d [PYoeyY “SIL 
 (uonsod [) 
 
 ‘ojOD, ‘JeAuNq 
 ‘Kempeoig yMoS 7ZpZ 
 1g “MW 93.1094) 
 (uoy10d [) 
 "e]YOQ ‘esoour}}eYy) 
 “ ono 
 1g ‘gq somef 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘ON ‘weyindg 
 we Gi wl Ul 
 ‘preiiey “Y{ 2{TeS “S41 
 (poseaseq ) 
 and “M PFIPS* 
 (poseao9(7 ) 
 and ‘W PPNx 
 (paseaaq ) 
 sso “Gd AIT “SIN 
 (pasess0q ) 
 and “f WeiitM«* 
 (uoyi0d [) 
 ON Wen ‘T no 
 ‘and “YI euen’'T Sst 
 (uonsod [) 
 2 Ne estar Teer 
 ‘PUPOOM (91s0f) “Cd “W SAN 
 
 (pesesseq) 
 sg (‘q eueny) ‘H ‘{ SAW 
 
 (pesessaq ) 
 AeMOPOH, (PUMP) “A “WM “SIA 
 
 (peseaoaq ) 
 ayn puepyary Wem 
 
104 
 
 (uoyjsod ¢/T) 
 [ep ‘owed TH 
 ‘V 91 xOg “O ‘d 
 mD “A 49A015) 
 (uonsod ¢/T) 
 “‘sulw0k My ‘Jadsed) 
 “3S 436 “M 819 
 ‘nD “H uyof 
 (uonsod ¢/1) 
 "qoN ‘stuueATT 
 ‘garewiaqd “D IWATA “SII 
 
 *NGUCTIHOGN VU) 
 40 SINVAN@OSaq 
 
 (peseasaq ) 
 Vig “J SewoyL. 
 
 (pesessoq) 
 
 dig ‘WW UeIOM 
 (pasesoaq ) 
 
 aig  AMeyy 
 (paseoseq ) 
 
 useIn s011g “[ YeleSy 
 
 ” (peseasaq ) 
 atIg “W 44°99 * 
 
 (pese209q ) 
 amy Cd Ate) “A “OD STN 
 (uons0d T[) 
 “eyyO ‘AWD ewoYyePyO 
 ‘3S Wel “A OTT 
 ‘smIg “M uyof 
 (uoyji0d [) 
 ‘e]YO ‘esoour}jey) 
 ; enlace ek 
 uinqyseM “d ela “WW “St 
 (uoniod [) 
 ‘OW ‘SsingsHed 
 ‘wie, AyunoD uo} 
 ‘Hg “W WeRHIMs 
 ‘NdUCTIHOGNVa) 
 
 *(panuyuog)—V ATNGHHOS 
 
 “NAUCIIHD 
 
105 
 
 (pasea9q) 
 B3vjS “WT somes, 
 (uonji0od %) 
 ‘DO ‘N ‘weying 
 ‘uosjouIIN CM Ase) “[ 'S ‘SI 
 (uoni0od %) 
 ‘O(N “weying 
 Aouysey] (yioqeziay) “IW “Lf SAW 
 
 (paseaseq) 
 B3e1SG ‘WY sowmel 
 
 (uoij10d [) 
 
 ‘) 'N ‘WeyeS-uo}sUL AA 
 “IS Wb “M ZIT 
 ‘B8eIS “T WeNTM 
 
 (paseasaq ) 
 BBLS AIP» 
 
 (paseaoaq ) 
 3321S YeIeS, 
 
 (paseacact ) 
 3381S Ozusl0T, 
 
 (paseasaqq ) 
 YywIG s8e1g uesns, 
 
 (paseasaq ) 
 83035 WEL Ms 
 
 (paseao9q ) 
 B3R1S “Y slurry 
 
 ‘AMONG NOLONIHSVM JO UALSIS ‘OOVLS ANNG AUVW AO ATINVA 
 
106 
 
 (uorji0d [) 
 
 9 'N ‘weying (peseasaq ) 
 qWepuaL “AM Pl3S St sss 9a ~OzZUuOTy 
 
 (uonsod %) 
 
 ‘O(N ‘weying 
 
 ‘so3ry “yy uyof 
 (uoniod %) 
 
 OQ N ‘weying (poseesaq ) 
 ‘ssl °O ossef SB3Iy “yy somes 
 (peseaceq ) 
 JouIOF “Y somes, 
 (peseas9q) 
 
 Jausoy{ “d IPPVx 
 (uoni0od %) 
 ‘D (N ‘weyind 
 Soqssiry ‘H euuef ‘si 
 (uoji0od %) 
 ON ‘weying 
 ‘JQUIOF{ VISSoT 
 (uoni0od %) 
 ‘) N ‘weysing 
 ‘JOUIOF, sUUe LT 
 (uoni0od %) 
 ‘ -N ‘weysng (paseasoq ) 
 JUIOP, NYY 1eqGoy souloyy (Yyeuueaes) “gq ‘[ ‘SII 
 (uorji0d [) 
 ‘D ‘N ‘weying 
 azo (BIOLA) “DO “UA ‘SIN 
 (uonsod [) 
 
 OQ 'N ‘weyging (uoniod [) 
 ‘7 aynoy 9) 'N ‘weying 
 ‘sss “J efxopngy ‘SSSI PlOUIY SOUT x44 
 *NUUCTIHOGN Var) *NUYCTIHOGN Va ‘NdUCTIHD 
 
 a0 SINVONGISaq 
 ‘AMONG NOLONIHSVM HO WALSIS ‘SOOIM ANNG VITANV AO ATINVHA 
 ‘(panuyuog)—V¥ ATOGHHOS 
 
107 
 
 (uorj10d 7) 
 TED ‘AID woso.y 
 ‘ond “WV eporg 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘uuayT ‘poomzy 
 ‘QYNC sousivjy sewmoyy 
 (uoj10d 7) 
 ‘uua TT ‘styduioypy 
 ‘a0e[q Yydosof TOT 
 ‘yoaT e100; Aon] ‘sayy 
 (uorj410d [) 
 ‘uusy ‘siydwmoyy 
 ‘QnusAVy UOXe.y /RET 
 ‘uojduioy a100j, Zouy “SIP 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘uua Ty, ‘stydwoyy 
 ‘nUudAY YIVIg CPZ 
 ‘s19s0y (IN BYlog) ‘gq “A ‘SIN 
 (uorj10d T[) 
 ‘uu T ‘IIZUDSIPT 
 FYysIIM I00WW [OUI “SIP 
 (uo1j10d 7) 
 yry ‘o10qsouo[ 
 ‘2S ANT ZOT 
 QIOOJW JopMoig piaeq 
 
 (uons0d T) 
 ‘uuay, ‘uopsununy;yT 
 ‘Q100W suesny uyof 
 
 (uonsod T[) 
 ‘uudy, ‘Uopsununyzy 
 ‘9 ‘d ‘4d ‘a 
 ‘QIOOJ YACUISIGY WITT AA 
 (uonsod T[) 
 ‘uUud [, ‘SIZUDSPOTT 
 ‘SeuIOy, “WW 2I9N “SI 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘uuay, ‘uopsurjunyy 
 ‘st9Au0D “WF IAP ‘SIT 
 
 (peseacaq ) 
 exng "vy somes 
 
 (uons0d [) 
 ‘uuay, ‘Ay uordunf 
 ‘a100W (9d) “LW ‘f “S1Neee 
 
 ‘ANd NOLONIHSVM AO YAHLOU ‘ANNG YOTAVL NHOf AO ATINVA 
 
108 
 
 (pasessaq) 
 uosuyof (a1x907) einey Arey ‘SIP, 
 (uonj10d [) 
 ‘D ‘N ‘weying 
 ‘ON “I NIT ssi 
 (uons0d T) 
 ‘O ‘Weuuruly 
 “IAW [@1}U99 97Z 
 ‘omnd “L uyof 
 (uonst0d [) 
 ‘LON TAjueyoroyy 
 “JAY U0SUIXOT (09 
 ‘Iaisuy ‘d uyof 
 . (uoni0d 7) 
 ‘ey “Binqsisjag 4S 
 “N PAY PUOIES | 8797 
 Josuy “Y ausinoqey 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘DN ‘weying 
 ‘Toisuy seuof jenuies 
 (uonji0d 7) 
 ‘OD (N ‘Ueapisqy 
 ‘anid Cd apne) “vy “MA ‘SI 
 (uonsod [) 
 ON ‘weying 3soM\ 
 ‘Pleysenes (e011eD) “DH ‘SIN 
 
 (uons0d T[) (uonst0d [) 
 ‘eA ‘puomyony ‘DN ‘weying 
 “aay oudejioquieyy ¢oge ‘peoy ueueyong og] 
 ‘seyoIS (Cd 29Ul) “W “a ‘SI ‘rersuy (Cd ePprq) ‘OD ‘f ‘SIN 
 (pasessaq) 
 exNG 20f, 
 (paseasaq) 
 eyxNnG 3991095, 
 “NUUCTIHDGNVU) ‘NdYCTIHDGNVayy ‘NaUdTIHD 
 
 40 SINVONGOSaAqg 
 
 ‘(panwiju0og)—V AINGUHOS 
 
109 
 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘e]O ‘sas[nurjo 
 ‘89 xO “O ‘d 
 ‘souiryy ‘AA sowel 
 
 (uonsod 7) 
 AND “AON “OAV WET 085 
 “oy ysnap ssiduy 0/D 
 ‘urmpred (SM PPI) “1 “M ‘SAIN 
 (uo10d [) 
 "e[yT ‘sopqesy) [e410 
 “aay ase 918 
 Suehig (yf WuUeN) “A ‘SAIN 
 (uonsod 1) 
 "2 °“N “WOSTIMA 
 “IS IH 602 
 ‘souieyy ond oof 
 (uon10d 7) 
 9) 'N ‘weyind 
 "3S WH pdeyD “A LOT 
 ‘souivy ‘q jenwes 
 (uorj10d |) 
 "ex ‘AyssoAtU), AOU 
 ‘oe Xd 
 quok\\ Asuopy plaed 
 (uotj10d [) 
 ‘uua LL ‘UPIIA 
 ‘19332) (IW HEM) “AO “SAN 
 
 (uoyi0d T[) 
 ‘epjO ‘9ed[nwWyO 
 qaenyg (pneyy) “V “WA “SAIN 
 
 (uosod T[) 
 ‘uuay, ‘UPITTA 
 quokM (CC euueN) “H “Cd SW 
 
110 
 
 (pesess0q ) 
 ayn 27] SOY 
 (pesees9q ) 
 ang ‘q sewel, 
 (uoni0od [) 
 ")) (N “WloyeSg-u0}sUL 
 “9S Arseqiny “OS 819 
 aNd “M SPUD xx 
 (uoysod [) 
 
 ‘yD N ‘weying 
 ‘suveagq (atuuy ezyq) ‘a ‘{ SIN (uor1j10d [) 
 (uonsod [) ‘)) (N ‘Weyes-uo}sUT A 
 ‘2 °S ‘hemuod ‘T xg "4S Aq “S 819 
 
 ‘ayn “WV Heqo"u 
 
 *“NaYCTIHOGN Va‘) *NaYCTIHOGN Vu) 
 
 40 SLNVONGOSA 
 ‘AMONG NOLONIHSVM JO YAHLONE ‘ANN LXAdOU AO ATINVA 
 
 ‘(panuyuog)—V ATOGHHOS 
 
 ‘aang “v ‘f[ Mompuy 
 “Naud TIH?) 
 
11] 
 
 (pelizeut I9A0yy ) 
 (pelizeut 19A9\7 ) 
 
 (sjuepusosop ON) 
 (sjuepusdsep ON) 
 
 (peltieut 1aAd\7) 
 
 AQuoy [jepusy soury 
 Asuoy suuy 
 
 AQUOY yoqeziyy 
 AouoYy uojMaNy urAyeD 
 AQuoy ‘d Aruspy 
 AQuoyYy sutsayyes 
 Aquoy (ATJOg) Arey 
 AQuOY eIpaIV 
 AQUOY, BIIPAT 
 
 AQuoy “J uyor 
 Aguoy ydasof 
 
 AQuOY “yy urwefusg 
 
 *A9M USIP]TYD Ioy} pue “osurpjory, Arve pue Aduoy uyof sam oynq Aauoy eaJIV JO sjusied ayy 
 
 ayr “AN Asuoy eiyo}1V JO siojsIs puke ssayjo1q ay} Jo UasppYySpuess JO sjuBpuadsep pu 
 
 ‘Tl 
 
 ‘paseacop ‘ayn “gq sowie jo sJ9Y4j0Ur 
 B UdaplIyopueis ‘usipyrys yong 
 
112 
 
 (uorj10d [) 
 
 ‘9. 'N ‘weyein 
 WOH “a wg 
 (uonjs0od [) (uo1j10d [) 
 ‘D (N “weyesd ‘D ‘N ‘weqery 
 GjoH Aeoery “Vv oH (Asey_) Aeupis ‘sip 
 (peseacaq ) 
 
 WSUqIy “S Ae 
 (uonsod [) 
 "CN ‘AqID Aessol 
 “QAY SWtIO}S ST 
 ‘uopspZ CV WHY) “M ‘V “SAIN 
 
 (uolj1od [) (uonsod T[) 
 ") ‘N ‘UaAIOT ") ‘N ‘UaAIOT 
 ‘uosipieH CV 1978H) “dA “U “SAN ysisq¢y (Auuen) ‘d ‘[ ‘St 
 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘uudy, ‘esoour}ey) 
 ‘peoy pjossury OTZT 
 ‘HOH “A udea 
 (pasess0q ) 
 HOH "M Wei Mx 
 (pesees9q ) 
 WOH “W 9!PPeHx 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘BA ‘Sesseueyy 
 
 ‘I2z X°d ‘O ‘d 
 ueyoioyy “H eng ‘S4J 
 (uons0d [) (uonjs0d [) 
 ‘eA ‘uoyIequing ‘eA ‘uoJIeEquing 
 T ‘d “A sf aT ‘ad “WA VY 
 ‘POOM “H [4?IW “SIN ‘OH (erisitA) “Wf ‘StI 
 ‘NAY TIHIGN Var) *NdACTIHOGN VU) ‘NaYdTIHD 
 
 10 SINVONHOSaCT 
 
 ‘MAG ‘UM VIIALUV AO UAHLOUA ‘AANOUW A NINV{NAd AO ATINVA 
 
 ‘(panuyuog)—V AINGHHOS 
 
118 
 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘D ‘N ‘WH pedey 
 : SRG ace [etal 
 “key (10T) “H “M ‘SAN 
 * (uori0od T) 
 ‘. 'N ‘uoysulping 
 Oz xog cali “a VY 
 ‘Kau0Y “Y epAID 
 (aon10d [) 
 ‘O UN ‘HeSHUM 
 : ‘7€ XOG ‘O ‘d 
 ajsuy (e1sseg) \L “MM ‘SIN 
 (uor10d T) 
 eX) ‘PURITY 
 ‘SUIP[INg Jo[puey ETT 
 ‘SITEM “YL perued 
 
 (pesesoaq ) 
 HOH AoAUIL» 
 (paseasaq ) 
 WOH “AH 2HPNx 
 (uo1j10d [) 
 ‘) “N ‘O1oqspior 
 ‘jeqidsop{ 9381S 
 4joH Avuoy ueeq 
 (uorjiod [) 
 ‘) 'N ‘uojsulping 
 “3S peoig 029 
 
 ‘an3eay (seoueiy) qq gq ‘SI 
 
 (paseasaq ) 
 : Aauoy “FH AetseyD 
 
 (paseacaq ) 
 SHIEM (seouesg) “M “f “Sa 
 
 (paseazaq ) 
 AQUOY I2]Vx 
 
 (paseasaq ) 
 AQuoy urmelusg,y 
 
 (peseacaq ) 
 AZUOY UYyoOf,y 
 
 (paseasaq ) 
 AsuoY suljore), 
 
 (paseasaq ) 
 Asuoy “WW jaueds 
 
114 
 
 (uolj10d [) 
 ‘9 ‘N ‘u0}Sur Ing 
 TRUS “D TW SII °/D 
 ‘AQUOY P21PTE A kx 
 
 *NFACTIHOGN VAL) 
 40 SINVONGOSIG 
 
 (uo1j10d [) 
 
 ‘DO °N ‘UOSTIAA 
 “IS YStN “M 902 
 ‘Kouoy AqnyYy SSsijy 
 
 (uonst0d [) 
 
 ‘D (N ‘WOsTI A 
 “IS YSEN “M 902 
 Weg (PPT) “A “I SIN 
 
 (poseacaq ) 
 AQUOY *D 340q19F7 
 
 (paseaaq ) 
 AQuUOY ulmefusg, 
 
 “NdYCTIHIGN Va 
 
 ‘(panuyuog)—V ATOGHHOS 
 
 (pasesacaq ) 
 AQuOY “4 snynf 
 
 ‘NIUCTIHD 
 
115 
 
 (uonj10d %) 
 DN AceuS 
 ‘4g IaARIG IW OZ 
 ‘SIARC, “M ATUL x 
 (uoys0od %) 
 ‘ON ‘AqieUS 
 "IS AALIGIN OZ 
 me i el 
 
 (peseasaqq ) 
 sued (eq) “A “MM ‘SHIN 
 (uorj10d T[) 
 BA “AIOJION 
 YS ITE ISOM STE 
 ‘souof (@11@S) “AM ‘M ‘SAIN 
 (uo1j10d 7) 
 ‘ON ‘Julog Ys!H 
 ‘et oynoy 
 ‘Kaqurys (ePPO) “IW “f ‘S4IN 
 (uo1j10d [) 
 ‘) ‘N ‘Weyes-uojsur 
 “aay viIpeoy £69 
 VoH “DS sewoyy 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘SEXO T ‘Ope4sealy 
 ‘Kquoy “yy sowie ( 
 (uon10d T[) 
 ‘SEXO T, ‘OPRAvATYV 
 ‘ueounqd (aJ9N) xouy, “SAY, 
 (uoj10d T[) 
 ‘Sexo T, ‘OpeIvATY 
 ‘Kouoy elOT Sst 
 (uoisod [) 
 ‘sexay, ‘o10qsyoe( 
 ‘Kauoy “L uyol 
 (uonsod T) 
 ‘sexoy, ‘o}uay 9[e} 
 ‘fauoy, “YT ~pHeya 
 
 (paseasaq ) 
 WOH CU Ay) “AH “SIN 
 
 (paseasaq ) 
 AQuoy “JT wuozyusOY TL 
 
 ‘AMNG ‘A VITALUV JO UAHLOUA ‘AANOU “L NHOf AO ATINVA 
 
116 
 
 (paseaceq ) 
 staAeq 98H x 
 
 (uoniod %) 
 
 ‘OD 'N ‘Aqiey4S 
 "4G JeAPIG I OIZ 
 ‘SIAeq ‘“{ 2SOIJUO], x» 
 
 (uoji0od %) 
 
 ON ‘AqreqS 
 “4G dakeIgoW OZ 
 ‘Stared “M A2]UPIS 44 
 40 SINVONGOSAq 
 ‘NAACTIHOGN Va) 
 
 (uons0d [) 
 ON ‘eHOTFeYD 
 “Od $240}S JEZIQ peHuQ 0/D 
 JOH ‘D >*PIN 
 
 *“NUUCTIHOGNVUD 
 
 ‘(panuyjuop)—V AINGHHOS 
 
 “N@UCTIH) 
 
117 
 
 (uonjiod 7%) 
 ‘ON ‘uo}sulIng ‘Z 9yn0y 
 ‘UOSTIM “V ydey 0/9). 
 UOSTIM “V SHO x 
 (uoj10d %) 
 ‘) "N ‘uo SuTIng ‘Z 2jnN0y 
 ‘uosM “WV Ydiey 0/5 
 ‘UOSTEM, “VW F°U1B Mixx 
 
 (uonsod 1). 
 
 ‘ (N ‘weyein 
 ‘y6c XOd “O ‘d 
 ‘stas0yq (OC uyol 
 (uon1t0d [) 
 
 ‘ N ‘uoysurping 
 429195 uesoT, 
 ‘slodOY D) UO}XeIg 
 
 (peseacaq ) 
 UOSTIM “AY PUIIIOD “SIL 
 (uorj10d T[) 
 ON Use 
 ‘Q]]IAUO “5D UO}MON 
 (uonji0d [) 
 "92'S “MerOyD 
 ‘Q]]IAUOW seT uyoL 
 (uorji0d [) 
 *) (N ‘U0 }suTINng 
 “4S oueqeyy 
 ‘ayAuoy “T Aoy 
 
 (uorj10d [) 
 NAN ‘U0, 3uljAng 
 “4S aueqey “N T0r 
 ‘uosliiey “q eWTY SSI, 
 (peseaoeq ) 
 Jaqieg A0e’Ty 
 (uoni0d [) 
 ‘) 'N ‘uo}surping 
 ‘St dA a 
 ‘raqieg pel “f 
 
 (pasess9q ) 
 sias0y (eurieyiea) “DO “N “SIN 
 
 (uon1od [) 
 ‘) (N ‘uo}surpIng 
 ‘Goa a 
 ‘ayauoy "T PHIeD 
 (peseaseq ) 
 uostiiey “J Jeqes]x 
 (pesea0eq ) 
 gyAuoy “gq uo}xXeI_, 
 (uoniod [) 
 ‘) N ‘uo}suTng 
 “yS eueqeW “N 10 
 ‘uosliiey) vieqieg “S1IN xxx 
 
 (uonsod T[) 
 ‘) (N ‘uo}suTTINg 
 ‘St ‘ad ‘da “a 
 ‘raqieg (esopueA) “WW ‘CSW 
 
 ‘AMNG AWNOU VITALUV AO UALSIS ‘ATIIANOA “A ANIMAHLVI AO ATINVA 
 
118 
 
 *N@YCTIHOUN Vu) 
 40 SINVONaOSAq, 
 
 (uoj10d [) 
 ‘[izeig ‘ojneg oes 
 ‘EZI ‘epepseqry] ep eny 
 ‘eyo0y ep “TI ‘G AIPIN ‘SIN 
 (uons0d T[) 
 ‘[izeig ‘ojneq ors 
 ‘EZ ‘opepsoqry ep eny 
 ‘aT yng AesaM 
 (uo1j10d [) 
 ‘DN “YRHOW 
 ‘Q]PIAUOLT “AY PUOUALY +5 
 (uojs0d [) 
 ‘DO N ‘YeHoW 
 ‘OTAUOT “MA UOTE Hx 
 (uoniod [) 
 ‘D “N ‘YeHoW 
 ‘oyAuoy “@ opneyy 
 (uons0d {) 
 OlIvJUD ‘MOIETY 
 + T ‘d WT YY 
 ‘apAUo “YONG 
 (uoniod 7) 
 1 NSS eS 
 ‘xoD (epssq) “a “V “SHIN 
 (peseaseq ) 
 sias0y ‘D Aste 
 
 (pesessaqq ) 
 s1as0Y SOUIY > 
 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘DN ‘weyetn 
 ol Ceara 
 ‘I9ISqaM “YW sSseq “S41 
 ‘NGUCTIHOGN VU) 
 
 ‘(panuyuog)—V¥ AITINGHHOS 
 
 (uons0od [{) 
 ‘[izeig ‘ojneg oes 
 ‘EZI “Opeprzcqry ep eny 
 ‘soy (ome) “ad “M ‘SIN 
 
 (uonsiod [) 
 ‘DN “YPIIOW 
 ‘oAuoT [ey 
 
 “NaYdTIH) 
 
119 
 
 (uons0od T[) 
 ON “Usieer 
 ‘102 X°€ 'O ‘d 
 ‘OUAUOT “Mex 
 
 (uorj10d {[) 
 
 ‘) 'N ‘osnan 
 ‘a[]iAuo,y AOD 
 
 (uonj10d [) 
 ‘DO 'N ‘ysroyey 
 “day urlsog ‘Ss (Ir 
 ‘O[[AUOYT 1oJJOOJOZ 
 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘|Ize1g ‘ojneg ors 
 ‘EZI ‘opepsssqry ap eny 
 “af ‘99'T “q WRIT 
 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘[Izeig ‘ojneq org 
 ‘EZ ‘Opepsoqry ap eny 
 aq “vy sony 
 
 (paseaseqq ) 
 ‘ayfAuog “y uyof 
 
120 
 
 (uorjiod [) 
 ‘D 'N ‘al[}Auosqiy 
 ‘QINOY JES _ (pasesc9q ) 
 ‘Io[XO1T, (apes) Asp ‘sayy ; AauUOY “N uyol 
 (uonj10d 7[) 
 ‘ssey, ‘uojsog “3S JUOUIDIT ¢7 
 ‘sayegq “JT uyof 0/D 
 ‘POOM “WW YdSOf ye. 
 (uoni0od [) 
 ‘D (N ‘2][fAuosqiy 
 ‘PoomM “Y euIny 
 (pesessaq ) 
 POOMA dUlIOYyIeD eUINy 
 (peseacecz ) 
 PpoomM “H sowefy 
 (uorji0od [) 
 O ‘d Susiyew eysT 
 ‘soxAON (Sousy) “7 ‘C ‘SIN 
 (uoys0d I) 
 ON ‘weyein 
 59H lecane Age “VY ‘SIT 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘DON ‘Sueyesn 
 ‘uosdwoyy, (e249) “V “D ‘SIN 
 (uo1j10d [) 
 ‘) 'N ‘weyein 
 ‘Q100WW (8Aq) “9D ‘f ‘SII 
 (uoniod T[) 
 ‘) “N ‘Otoqsuset5 
 “JSG UOJSUIYSEM “M 8IP (paseasaq ) 
 ‘saysnoy (1X0) “HM ‘SIN Poom (238M) “VY “M ‘SAI 
 ‘NGUCTIHOGNVU ‘NUYCTIHOGN VU) ‘NaNCTIHD 
 410 SENVONGOSa 
 
 ‘ 
 
 ‘AMIN A VITALUV AO YAHLOU ‘AANOU ‘D AUNAH AO ATINVA 
 
 "“(panunyuog)—Vyv WINGdAHOS 
 
121 
 
 (uor10d T[) 
 ‘) 'N ‘uoysurping 
 y291}S FOL 
 ‘JOD (eBowWO) “A “A SI 
 (uo1410d 7) 
 ‘) (N ‘Uo}surlpang 
 ‘92 XO” 'O ‘d 
 ‘QyiAuo (awey) “TY ‘SAIL 
 (uoi10d T[) 
 9) 'N ‘uoysurping 
 ‘Z 94NoYy 
 ‘AAI: “Y sewmoyy, 
 (peseas0q ) 
 AQUOY AJUOIG A1LI 
 
 (paseasa(7 ) 
 ADUOY [ILIT » 
 
 (uon10d [) 
 ‘DN ‘uno A902 
 ‘192 XOG ‘O ‘d 
 ‘AWUOY “FY oqoy “Ad 
 
 (pasease(7 ) 
 AQUOY BIT CIO), 
 
 (pesva09¢q7 ) 
 ADQUOY “GY IUULTAT 
 
 (paseacoq ) 
 Aquoy “D PION « 
 
 (paseasacq ) 
 Auoy “A Wei Mx 
 
 (peseasaqq ) 
 Aauoy Aruozy uyoly, 
 
 (paseacaq ) 
 AuOY Moipuy uyoly 
 
 (uoys0d 1) 
 
 ‘D ‘N_ ‘I[fAuosqiy 
 
 ‘yp xog ‘Z ‘d ‘A ‘a 
 ‘ssmyy Aouoy ALT ‘SIT 
 
 (uonsod |) 
 ON ‘uo}surying 
 ‘92 X0G 'O ‘d 
 ‘AOI (AIeW) “DA ‘SIN 
 
 (paseacaq ) 
 Aduoy, ulwelusg 
 
 (uonjs0d |) 
 ‘yly ‘uspoqwy 
 ‘Kquoy “YL WRITE, 
 
122 
 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘) “N ‘uosze AA 
 oe Fae OE 
 ‘KQUOY “WY Wey SSipy 
 (uonsod [) 
 ‘) ‘"N ‘wosze A 
 he ote 
 ‘SQuoYy “AA JenwoeyT 
 (uorj10d [) 
 *) ‘N ‘otoqsuse44y 
 “say poompurlg cog 
 ‘AQuoy “JW uyot 
 (uon10d [) 
 ‘DN uege 
 EUS EER 
 ‘Kauoy “gq AsueTT 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘DO 'N SueqN 
 AGHAGE xe 
 ‘saeypas (eruuryy) “A “f “StI 
 (uons0d 7) 
 ) ‘N ‘u0}suring 
 “1S Ure ‘ON 
 : ‘Koy “H essay 
 (uonsod T[) 
 ‘DN 2]40g 
 TPePPEM (12211) “H ‘a ‘SAIN 
 (pesea9q ) 
 uepiof Asxpiq Asieqy 
 (pesess9(7) 
 AIC “DQ suyols 
 (peseesa( ) 
 AIC PAT sowmely 
 (uonsod 7) 
 ‘) N ‘u0}sulping 
 ‘9c XOd 'O ‘d 
 ‘HOH AeyI1q Aqny ‘SI 
 ‘NGC TIHOGN Var) ‘NdUCTIHOGN Va) 
 40 SLNVONGOSaq 
 
 *(panuyuog)—q ATOAHHOS 
 
 (uorj10d [) 
 ‘D) 'N ‘wosye AA 
 Gea a 
 ‘fQuOWY uUoseyy, sowel 
 
 ‘NaYCTIHD 
 
123 
 
 ‘AANG 
 
 (uorsod 7) 
 ‘SSIP ‘O[[LAUo0.15) 
 “3S svjdog ‘N IIS 
 ‘\yleq ulaAyey uog 
 (uons0d T) 
 “SSI ‘OT[IAuo—a4) 
 “4S: teidog ‘N TIS 
 ‘ALO (jIqqog) ulysegq ‘sayy 
 
 (uotj.aod 7) 
 SSI “Weezy 
 ‘yaeq Aouoy smopivypy 
 
 (uonsod 7) 
 
 ‘D ‘N ‘Spry vou 
 ‘O[PAN]{ Joresiv py 
 
 (uorns10d 7) 
 ‘DN ‘uoysureuyt 
 “IS PlE “N $0P 
 ‘Q[panyy “] seoursyy 
 (uor40d T[) 
 ") ‘N ‘O10qsuaa.sry) 
 “OD SSdID 2 [[e00y ‘ourqayy 0/5 
 ‘a[panyy Aouoyy ‘g 
 (uors0d [) 
 ‘DN ‘uleyind 3s9\\ 
 ‘OI€ XOG *O ‘d 
 
 ‘AOE ATCT [ION Te 
 
 (uon10d [) 
 ‘YON ‘weyind s9\A 
 ‘OIE XOG ‘O ‘d 
 
 ‘KOPEC UATE UYOL 
 
 (uoys0d [) . 
 ON ‘weyind is9\M\ 
 ‘ore XOg ‘O ‘d 
 
 ‘AapreCT AQUOY YIN 4x 
 ‘ad VITALUV JO YAHLOUA ‘AANOU ‘N NIATVD JO 
 
 (peseoo9c7 ) 
 ADUOY "A "M PVs 
 
 (uo1j10d [) 
 “SSI, ‘OJ [IAUD0I6F) 
 , “3S Jejdog ‘N ITS 
 yg (RT) “WV ‘OD ‘SIN 
 
 (uon4od T[) 
 _ ON ‘Spry vor 
 ‘PANE, (eppay) “Tf ‘ssw 
 
 (uorj10d T[) 
 OO 'N ‘ureying 1s9\\ 
 ‘Ole XO ‘OC ‘d 
 ‘oped (eg) D “[ Ss 
 
 ATINVA 
 
124 
 
 *SY}YSIO OJUL PoprlAIp uolsod T 
 SY}XIS OJUL PeprlAIp uorjiod [ 
 SuIJy OJU! Papralp uoHsod | 
 SY}INOF OUI PoprAIp suorjs0od Z 
 Sp4iy} O}UL poprlaIp uonsod T 
 SOATeY OJUI PaplArp suonsod ¢ 
 
 suoijiod ajoym ¢—suoljsod ZT wesppyopies8 JO sjuepusdsep Of 
 
 suoiiod Z¢T UdsIp[Iopueis OT 
 
 suoysod ¢7 udIp[Iyo OF 
 
 ‘woHJod 19d QyO'9Z6'T1$ S[enbe ‘suonsod /oT Oyu! PeptArP “000‘000'¢$ 
 
 ‘suolyjiod /9T ‘[ej0 7, 
 
 ‘winy|AsY 2381S TV t 
 ‘OANC “q somes JO yap JO 93ep “CZGT ‘OT 4940320 BUIS PITT xxx 
 “SOUL 4 
 ‘s}uUBpuddSop BUIATT ON 
 
 (uorj10d [) 
 
 ‘O(N ‘weying 
 ‘PURTMOY YIQezPy BUY 4» 
 : (uorj40d T) 
 
 ‘OJ 'N ‘weying 
 ‘Pur[MOY IdUIIOTT AIL x» 
 
 (uon4t0d T) 
 
 ‘D ‘N “weying 
 ‘puejmMoy Aouoy ArUdTT 
 (uonsod T[) (uojtod {) 
 QJ 'N ‘weyinq © OQ 'N ‘weying 
 ‘PUeLMORy “el WEHILA, ‘pURIMOY CSoueI0[T) “A AN “St 
 (peseasaqq ) 
 AZUOY SUOx 
 ‘NFYCTIHOGNVAD) ‘NAACTIHOGN VU5) ‘NaNdTIHD 
 
 A0 SINVONWOSAT 
 ‘ANMNG AANOW VITALUV AO WAH LOU ‘AANOW TIVGNAM SOWV AO ATINVA 
 ‘(panuyuog)—y ATOAGAHOS “ 
 
125 
 
 SCHEDULE. “B”. 
 
 THOSE WHOSE CLAIMS HAVE BEEN REJECTED. 
 
 Mr. Alfred Douglas Acker, 
 Mr. Claud Hillman Acker, 
 Miss Donnie Acker, 
 
 Mr. Henry A. Acker, 
 
 Mr. James L. Allen, 
 
 Mr. M. J. Allen, 
 
 Mr. W. L. C. Allen, 
 
 Mrs. Mary Duke Anderson, 
 Mr. James G. Armstrong, 
 Mrs. Cora K. Arnold, 
 
 Mrs. Pearl Lambert Ashley, 
 Mrs. Sleety Lambert Ashley, 
 Mrs. Lillian Duke Ayres, 
 
 Mrs. Malinda Duke Baldwin, 
 Mr. oR, Bs Barr, 
 
 Mrs. Mary Jones Beck, 
 
 Mr. Marvin Bedingfield, 
 
 Mr. Oscar Reese Bedingfield, 
 Mr. T. Jackson Bedingfield, 
 Mr. William H. Bedingfield, 
 Mrs. Celia F. Benefield, 
 Mrs. Myrtle D. Bennett, 
 Mrs. Florence Duke Bickel, 
 Mr. Eddie L. R. Bishop, 
 Mrs. I. W. Blevins, 
 
 Mrs. Ida Compton Bookman, 
 Miss Margaret Bowden, 
 Mrs. Jay Bowers, 
 
 Mrs. Sarah Bowers, 
 
 Mrs. Laura Farrar Boyd, 
 Mrs. Matilda K. Boyd, 
 
 Mrs. Alice Duke Bradley, 
 Mrs. Nancy L. Brewer, 
 Mrs. Jennie Duke Brogoitte, 
 Mrs. Eliza Harsh Brooks, 
 Mrs. Eliza Duke Brown, 
 Mrs. Sarah V. Bryden, 
 
 Mrs. Fannie Pace Burgess, 
 Mrs. Minnie Compton Burke, 
 
 A. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 St. Albans, W. Va. 
 
 St. Albans, W. Va. 
 
 St. Albans, W. Va. 
 
 Diana, W. Va. 
 
 5010 Edmund St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 R. F. D. #5, Wake Forest, N. C. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 5307 Gaston Ave., Dallas, Texas. 
 
 B. 
 DeWitt, Iowa. 
 Lansing, N. C. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Buckhannon, W. Va. 
 
 Replete, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 C/o M. H. Blinken, 245 Broadway, N. Y. City. 
 
 Lancaster, Ohio. 
 
 Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 Hamburg, Ohio. 
 
 R. F. D. 9, Lancaster, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 821 Ridge Ave., Pittsburg, Pa. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Okemah, Okla 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Artesia, New Mexico. 
 
 Princeton, N. C. 
 
 5249 Enright Ave., St. Louis, Mo. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Culpepper, Va. 
 
126 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mrs. Effe Duke Bush, 
 Mrs. Jessie Ward Buskirk, 
 Mr. Homer C. Byrom, 
 Mrs. Edna K. Byron, 
 
 Mrs. Ida Campbell, 
 
 Mrs. Rosebud Campbell, 
 Mrs. Ida Taylor Carless, 
 Mrs. Mollie Evans Carroll, 
 Miss Gertie Carron, 
 
 Mr. Minor Carron, 
 
 Mr. Newton Carron 
 
 Mrs. Bettie Jones Chandler, 
 Mrs. Nancy Duke Chandler, 
 Mrs. Iva Yoe Charles, 
 Mrs. Pearl D. Cheek, 
 
 Mr. Jackson Christenson, 
 Mrs. Minnie H. Claiborne, 
 Mr. William E. Clements, 
 Mrs. Pearl C. Cockerill; 
 Mrs. Sallie Harton Collins, 
 Mr. Charles Compton, 
 
 Mr. Charles E. Compton, 
 Mr. Cleveland W. Compton, 
 Mr. Edgar W. Compton, 
 Mr. Fred Compton, 
 
 Mr. George Compton, 
 
 Mr. George Compton, 
 
 Mr. Harry E. Compton, 
 Mr. Harry L. Compton, 
 Mr. Herbert W. Compton, 
 Mr. James B. Compton, 
 Mr. James H. Compton, 
 Mr. John R. Compton, 
 Mrs. Katherine D. Cooper, 
 Mrs. Annie Manuel Coppage, 
 Mrs. Lizzie Howell Cox, 
 Mrs. Delila Jones Craig, 
 Mrs. Evaline C. Craiglow, 
 Mr. James Ellis Crain, 
 Mrs. Nancy J. Crawford, 
 Mrs. Estelle Duke Crites, 
 Mr. Albert E. Crumley, 
 Miss Eva May Crumley, 
 Mr. John Duke Crumley, 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Wellsburg, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Louisburg, N. C. 
 
 C. 
 
 Beaver Creek, N. C. 
 
 Beaver Creek, N. C. 
 
 6720 Ditman St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Roseboro, N. C. 
 
 Leipsic, Ohio. 
 
 Front Royal, Va. 
 
 West Leipsic, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 R. F. D. 4, Chapel Hill, N. C 
 Waverly, Ohio. 
 
 C/o: Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 C/o J. Clyde Ray, Hillsboro, N. C. 
 Buckhannon, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Box 234, Warren, Ind. 
 
 Columbus, Ohio. 
 
 Boston, Va. 
 
 Boston, Va. 
 
 Lancaster, Ohio. 
 
 Hookers, Ohio. 
 
 Lancaster, Ohio. 
 
 Box 22, Sta. B., Columbus, Ohio. 
 Columbus, Ohio. 
 
 Boston, Va. 
 
 3258 North St., Washington, D. C. 
 Lancaster, Ohio. 
 
 Hazel River, Va. 
 
 1621 York Ave., Memphis, Tenns. 
 Washington, Va. 
 
 Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Lancaster, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Cassaday, W. Va. 
 
 2149 N. 8th St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 4012 Wells St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 2235 N. 8th St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
127 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mrs. Lucille McA. Daniel, 
 Mr. Jack G. Daniels, 
 
 Miss Winifred G. Daniels, 
 Mr. William F. Daniels, 
 
 Mrs. Willer May Daughtery, 
 
 Mrs. Ella L. Dearing, 
 Mrs. Minnie Dickert, 
 
 Mrs. Vassie Richards Dixon, 
 
 Mr. Aaron Duke, 
 
 Mr. Abraham L. Duke, 
 Mr. Albert A. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Alexander Duke, 
 Miss Anna Duke, 
 
 Miss Anne Duke, 
 
 Mr. Archie D. Duke, 
 Mr. C. T. Duke, 
 
 Miss Carrie Murray Duke, 
 Mr. Cecil Alexander Duke, 
 Mr. Charles J. Duke, 
 Mr. Charles J. Duke, 
 Mr. Claud Duke, 
 
 Mr. Clifton Duke, 
 
 Mr. Columbia Bell Duke, 
 Mr. Dallas Duke, 
 
 Mr. Earl V. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Edwin Alton Duke, 
 Miss Elizabeth Duke, 
 Miss Elsie Duke, 
 
 Mr. Ernest B. Duke, 
 Miss Esther Duke, 
 
 Miss Ethel Duke, 
 
 Mr. Eugene Duke, 
 
 Mr. Euthel Duke, 
 
 Miss Flake Ann Duke, 
 Mr. G. H. Duke, 
 
 Mr. George Russell Duke, 
 Mr. Gilbert Floyd Duke, 
 Mr. Glenn Duke, 
 
 Miss Grace Duke, 
 
 Mr. Grover Duke, 
 
 Mr. Guy Denman Duke, 
 Mr. Guy F. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Hargus Duke, 
 
 Mr. Harry Duke, 
 
 D. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 C/o Henry A. Teel, Rockford, Ala. 
 2067 E. Monmouth St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Doddridge, Ark. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 R. F. D. 2, Bainbridge, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Abraham L,. Duke, Bainbridge, Ohio. © 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Russell Duke, Sugar Grove, Ohio. 
 Lexington, N. C. 
 
 Uniontown, Pa. 
 
 Jefferson, Texas. 
 
 C/o Abraham L. Duke, Bainbridge, Ohio. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 R. F.-D. 1, Culloden, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Wilson N. C. 
 
 Richwood, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Broadoaks, Clarksburg, W. Va. 
 Mohegin, W. Va. 
 
 318 Hawley St., Marshall, Texas. 
 Hillsboro, Ohio. 
 
 Durham, N. C. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Russell Duke, Sugar Grove, Ohio. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 1621 York Ave., Memphis, Tenn. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Duke, Ohio. 
 
 Hillsboro, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Russell Duke, Sugar Grove, Ohio. 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 1621 York Ave., Memphis, Tenn. 
 Uniontown, Pa. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 R. F. D. 2, Sabina, Ohio. 
 
128 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mr. Harsher Walter Duke, 
 Miss Hattie Duke, 
 
 Mr. Henry A. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Henry Edward Duke, 
 Mr. Henry Martin Duke, 
 Mr. Henry W. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Henry Zebulon Duke, 
 Mr. Homer C. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Homer G. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Howard Duke, 
 
 Miss Ida Duke, 
 
 Mr. J. H. Duke, 
 
 Mr. J. M. Duke, 
 
 Mr. James Addison Duke, 
 Mr. James P. Duke, 
 
 Mr Jasper M. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Jasper Newton Duke, 
 Miss Jeannetta E. Duke, 
 Mr. John Duke, 
 
 Mr. John A. Duke, 
 
 Mr. John William Duke, 
 Mr. Joseph Henry Duke, 
 Mr. Joseph J. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Kinchen A. Duke, 
 Miss Lavora Duke, 
 
 Mr. Limon J. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Lit. W. Duke, 
 
 Miss Louanna V. Duke, 
 Mr. Louis Duke, 
 
 Mr. Louis Edward Duke, - 
 Miss Martha Emma Duke, 
 Mrs. Matilda Elizabeth Duke, 
 Mr. Mevelin S. Duke, 
 Mr. Montcel M. Duke, 
 Miss Nora Mildred Duke, 
 Mr. O. C. Duke, 
 
 Mr. O. G. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Oakley E. Duke, 
 Miss Olive Duke, 
 
 Mr. Robert Duke, 
 
 Mr. Robert E. Duke, 
 Mr. Russell Duke, 
 
 Mr. Russell Duke, 
 
 Miss Sarah Alice Duke, 
 Mr. Sheridan E. Duke, 
 Mr. Sidney L. Duke, 
 
 Portsmouth, Ohio. 
 
 Little Rock, Ark. 
 
 C/o Henry A. Teel, Rockford, Ala. 
 R. F. D. 4, Chapel Hill, N. C. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 522 Royal Court, Charlotte, N. C. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 2273 Rice St., Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 Akron, Ohio. 
 
 R. F. D. 2, Bainbridge, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Route 4, Chapel Hill, N. C. 
 
 Vienna, La. 
 
 Brent, Ala. 
 
 Alexander, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Abraham L. Duke, Bainbridge, Ohio. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Route #2, Franklinton, N. C. 
 
 1621 York Ave., Memphis, Tenn. 
 Norfolk, Va. 
 
 607 S. Duke St., Durham, N. C. 
 604 N. Graham St., Charlotte, N. C.. 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 403 Davis St., Elmira, N. Y. 
 Ruston, La. 
 
 R. F. D. 2, Bainbridge, Ohio. 
 
 Front Royal, Va. 
 
 R. F. D. 2, Bainbridge, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Henry A. Teel, Rockford, Ala. 
 C/o Henry A. Teel, Rockford, Ala. 
 Henderson, N. C. 
 
 Ettrick, Va. 
 
 Columbus, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 404 E. Ash St., Goldsboro, N. C. 
 West Lucasville, Ohio. 
 
 Newton, N. C. 
 
 R. F. D. 4, Chapel Hill, N. C. 
 Newton, W. Va. | 
 
 Sugar Grove, Ohio. 
 
 611 North Ave. 66, Los Angeles, Cal. 
 C/o Henry A. Teel, Rockford, Ala. 
 Hacker Valley, W. Va. 
 
 Route #2, Farmville, N. C. . 
 
129 
 
 SCHEDULE B—( Continued). 
 
 Mr. Theodore M. Duke, 
 Mr. Thomas I. Duke, 
 Mr. Thomas W. Duke, 
 Mr. Ulysses Grant Duke, 
 Mr. W. F. Duke, 
 
 Mr. W. T. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Walter E. Duke, 
 Mr. Walter Louis Duke, 
 Mr. William A. Duke, 
 
 Mr. William Edmund Duke, 
 
 Mr. Wiliam H. Duke, 
 Mr. William Martin Duke, 
 
 Mr. William W. Duke, 
 Mr. Zebulon P. Duke, 
 
 Mr. Junius J. Edwards, 
 Mrs. Lola Jones Edwards, 
 Mr. Nestor N. Edwards, 
 Mr. Omega Z. Edwards, 
 Mrs. Pattie Duke Edwards, 
 Mr. Willis P. Edwards, 
 Mr. C. T. Evans, 
 
 Mr. Clarence Evans, 
 
 Mr. Frank Evans, 
 
 Mr. Hubert Evans, 
 
 Mr. John H. Evans, 
 
 Mr. Ralph Evans, 
 
 Mr. T. E. Evans, 
 
 Mr. Walter F. Evans, 
 
 Mr. Frank Farrar, 
 Mr. John R. Ferree, 
 Miss Mary Ferree, 
 
 Mrs. Frances Compton Fetters, 
 
 Mr. Gaither N. Fitzgerald, 
 Mrs. James C. Fitzgerald, 
 Mr. Roland V. Fitzgerald, 
 
 Miss Thelma M. Fitzgerald, 
 Mrs. Ethel Hodges Fletcher, 
 
 Mr. W. A. Forster, 
 
 . William Nathaniel Duke, 
 . William Thomas Duke, 
 
 Hacker Valley, W. Va. 
 
 Reidsville, N. C. 
 
 128 Newbern Ave., Raleigh, N. C. 
 
 C/o Abraham L. Duke, Bainbridge, Ohio. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 567 N. Rowland St. Henderson, N. C. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Claremore, Okla. 
 
 Chicago, Ill. 
 
 C/o Henry A. Teel, Rockford, Ala. 
 
 611 North Ave. 66, Los Angeles, Cal. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Reidsville, N. C. 
 
 Devereaux St., Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 C/o Abraham L. Duke, Bainbridge, Ohio. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 E. 
 
 Fowler, Cal. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 7 McCurdy Ave., Towson, Md. 
 R. F. D. 6, Louisburg, N. C. 
 Route 2, Henderson, N. C. 
 Franklinton, N. C. 
 
 Mooresville, N. C. 
 
 Mooresville, N. C. 
 
 Mooresville, N. C. 
 
 C/o Young & Long, Durham, N. C 
 Deveraux, Ga. 
 
 C/o Young & Long, Durham, N. C 
 Guilford College, N. C. 
 
 Halifax, N. C. 
 
 F. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Drawer 842, Danville, Va. 
 
 Raleigh, N. C. 
 
 Columbus, Ohio 
 
 Winston-Salem, N. C. 
 
 2121 Vine St., Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 2121 Vine St., Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 2121 Vine St., Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 Teays, W. Va 
 
 R. F. D. 1, Baton Rouge, La. 
 
130 
 
 SCHEDULE B—( Continued). 
 
 Mrs. Annie J. French, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Mary H. French, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. T. Newton Freshwater, Haw River, N. C. 
 Mr. William M. Freshwater, Haw River, N. C. 
 Mrs. Dorah V. Futral, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 G. 
 Mrs. M. A. Gaertner, 695 Queen St., Atlanta, Ga. 
 Mrs. Hattie Duke Gaffield, 318 Hawley St., Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Rosa E. Duke Galpin, Hammonton, N. J. 
 Mr. Floyd G. Garrard, 240 Bellemeade St., Greensboro, N. C. 
 Mr. Vernon L. Garrard, Box 68, National Sanitorium, Tenn. 
 Mrs. Pearl Evans Gibbs, Kannapolis, N. C. 
 Mrs. Mary Duke Gibson, 1621 York Ave., Memphis, Tenn. 
 Mrs. Florella T. Gillan, 2125 N. Park Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Mrs. Maggie M. Gooch, C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Miss Allie M. Goolsby, C/o Everett Bryson, Pittsburgh, Texas. 
 Mr. Alonzo Floy Goolsby, San Benito, Texas. 
 Mr. George G. Goolsby, San Benito, Texas. 
 Mr. Isaiah Goolsby, Gilmer, Texas. 
 Miss Lora A. E. Goolsby, C/o Everett Bryson, Pittsburg, Texas. 
 Mr. Luther Goolsby, Thomas, Texas. 
 Miss Meta Faye Goolsby, C/o Everett Bryson, Pittsburg, Texas. 
 Mr. William A. Goolsby, Pittsburg, Texas. 
 Mrs. Ella Goss, Lansing, N. C. 
 Mrs. Josephine Duke Gray, DeWitt, Iowa. 
 Mrs. Ella Compton Green, Culpepper, Va. 
 Mrs. Grace D. Griggs, Wilkesboro, N. C. 
 Mrs. Mertie Lambert Grimes, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Izetta S. Guisinger, Lancaster, O. 
 18 
 Mrs. H. H. Richards Haines, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Lillie Jones Hale, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Dora Duke Hales, 204 N. Carolina St., Goldsboro, N. C. 
 Mrs. Ethel Duke Hall, 133 Wharton Ave., Birmingham, Ala. 
 Mrs. Lillie M. Hall, 836 Lee St., Danville, Va. 
 Mrs. Viola Hamrick, Forest City, N. C. 
 Mr. Asa L. Hardin, Webster Parish, La. 
 Mr. B. M. Hardin, Cass County, Texas. 
 Mr. Calvin P. Hardin, De Soto Parish, La. 
 Mr. Charles P. Hardin, Trees, La. 
 Mr. Dan M. Hardin, Trees, La. 
 
 Mr. Harvey A. Hardin, Union County, Ark. 
 
131 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mr. Henry N. Hardin, 
 
 Mr. J. B. Hardin, 
 
 Mr. John R. Hardin, 
 
 Mr. R. W. Hardin, 
 
 Mr. W. A. Hardin, 
 
 Mr. William B. Hardin, 
 Mrs. Mildred Duke Harper, 
 Mrs. Beulah B. Harris, 
 Mr. Claud Harsh, 
 
 Miss Mary Harsh, 
 
 Miss Betty Van Harton, 
 Mr. Charles Glenn Harton, 
 Mr. George Robert Harton, 
 Mr. Gordon Duke Harton, 
 Mrs. J. P. Harton, 
 
 Mr. James Cotter Harton, 
 Mr. Julius H. Harton, 
 
 Miss Margaret Rose Harton, 
 Mr. Parry J. Harton, 
 
 Mr. Waverly G. Harton, 
 Mr. William H. Harton, 
 Miss Betty Hawks, 
 
 Miss Kate Hawks, 
 
 Mr. Lucas H. Hawks, 
 
 Mr. W. E. Hawks, 
 
 Mrs. Lina Duke Heath, 
 Mrs. Julia Edwards Hight, 
 Mr. Junius W. Hight, 
 
 Mr. William N. Hight, 
 Mrs. Blanch Pearl Hizer, 
 Mr. J. S. Hodges, 
 
 Mr. T. R. Hodges, 
 
 Mr. W. A. Hodges, 
 
 Mrs. Maud Harsh Hogan, 
 Mrs. Elizabeth Duke Holloway, 
 Mrs. Nancy Duke Holsenback, 
 Mr. James G. Holt, 
 
 Mrs. Daisy Dean Hoops, 
 Mrs. Alice E. Hopkins, 
 Mrs. Mary Farrar Hopper, 
 Mr. Edgar Hornbuckle, 
 Mr. Edward Hornbuckle, 
 Mr. James D. Hornbuckle, 
 Mr. John Henry Hornbuckle, 
 Mr. Thomas A. Hornbuckle, 
 Mr. Wiley H. Howell, 
 
 Caddo Parish, La. 
 
 Cass County, Texas. 
 
 Vivian, La. 
 
 Beaver Creek, N. C. 
 
 R. 4, Box 132, Shreveport, La. 
 
 444 Central Park West, New York City. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 Portsmouth, Ohio. 
 
 Portsmouth, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 Norlina, N. C. 
 C/o Williams 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 
 & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 
 Williamston, N. C. 
 
 Williamston, N. C. 
 
 Williamston, N. C. 
 
 Columbus, Ohio. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 San Francisco, Cal. 
 
 Vienna, La. 
 
 C/o J. Clyde Ray, Hillsboro, N. C. 
 Burlington, N. C. 
 
 403 Davis St., Elmira, N. Y. 
 
 West Durham, N. C. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 R. F. D. 4, Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 Marshall, Texas. 
 
 z 
 
 N. 
 N. 
 303 Waverly Ave., Clarksburg, W. Va. 
 
 A2AAZzAzAz wzawzz 
 mpARaeAaAna aang 
 
132 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mrs. Hattie Jones Hudson, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Louella Manuel Huff, Washington, Va. 
 Mrs. Addie Elizabeth Hunt, C/o Henry A. Teel, Rockford, Ala. 
 ik 
 Mrs. Sarah J. D. Ingram, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Willie Duke Irons, Mount Gilead, Ohio. g 
 J. 
 Mr. Charles W. Jacobs, Reidsville, N. C. 
 Mr. John Samuel Jones, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Thomas Jones, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Thomas B. Jones, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Willie L. Jones, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Horace B. Johnson, Columbia Hotel, Jacksonville, Fla. 
 Mrs. Josephine D. Johnson, Goldsboro, N. C. 
 Mrs. Mary A. B. Johnson, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Thelma Nance Johnson, Reidsville, N. C. 
 K. 
 Mr. Benjamin P. Kearney, Oteen, N. C. 
 Miss Mary Mabel Kearney, R. F. D. 5, Wake Forest, N. C. 
 Mr. Shemuel Kearney, Oteen, N. C. 
 Mr. William F. Kearney, R. F. D. 5, Wake Forest, N. C. 
 Mr. James Kilmore Keatts, 1916 Patterson Park Ave., Baltimore, Md. 
 Mr. Leonard Ashby Keatts, -821 Buckman Ave., Ocean View, Va. 
 Miss Mary Myrtle Keatts, 821 Buckman Ave., Ocean View, Va. 
 Mrs. Ida L. Kent, 3461 W. 129th St., Cleveland, Ohio. 
 Mrs. W. P. Killen, C/o Thomas C. Bowie, Jefferson, N. C. 
 Mrs. Maggie Duke King, 300 Daisy St., Goldsboro, N. C. 
 Mrs. Durene Duke Kirk, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 L. 
 Mr. Charles Lambert, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Grover C. Lambert, C/o Bean & Klett, Lubbock, Texas. 
 Mr. Herbert Lambert, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Joseph Duke Lambert, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Luther Z. Lambert, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Amanda C. Languish, 4012 Wells St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Mrs. Eugenia H. Latta, Route #2, Durham, N. C. 
 Mr. Benjamin W. Laverty, 2835 Coral St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 Mrs. Elizabeth Laverty, 2835 Coral St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
133 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mr. John H. Laverty, 
 
 Mr. Samuel H. Laverty, Jr., 
 Mrs. Ovie Duke Lawless, 
 Mrs. Lula Duke Lawr, 
 
 Mr. William Duke Leamons, 
 Mrs. Florence K. Leonard, 
 Mrs. Lulu Vaughan Lewis, 
 Mrs. Lillie M. Lillard, 
 Mrs. Cora Jacobs Loftis, 
 Mrs. Laura M. Lowe, 
 
 Mrs. Sarah Carron Mack, 
 Mrs. Leila Richards Mackey, 
 Mrs. Clara Compton Mahannah, 
 Mr. Durell Mangum, 
 
 Mrs. Annie Clark Manuel, 
 Mr. Frank H. Manuel, 
 
 Mr. John E. Manuel, 
 
 Miss Nellie Manuel, 
 
 Mr. Thomas H. Manuel, 
 Mrs. Kate E. Massey, 
 
 Mrs. Josephine D. Mathney, 
 Mrs. Susanah E. Matthews, 
 Mr. Charles L. McAdams, 
 Mr. George McAllister, 
 Mrs. Laura McConnell, 
 
 Mr. Alonzo McDowell, 
 
 Mrs. Martha Duke McKissic, 
 Mr. Everett Meadows, 
 
 Mr. Gordon Meadows, 
 
 Mr. Homer Meadows, 
 
 Mr. Hugh Meadows, 
 
 Mr. Irvin A. Meadows, 
 Miss Laura T. Meadows, 
 Miss Lou Vernie Meadows, 
 Mr. Thomas W. Mensing, 
 Mrs. Lula D. Miller, 
 
 Mrs. Margaret C. Milliser, 
 Mrs. Estelle Compton Mills, 
 Mrs. Effie J. Mitchell, 
 
 Mrs. Annie Trollinger Moore, 
 Mrs. Ora Harton Moore, 
 Mr. J. J. Moorehead, 
 
 Mrs. Sallie Moorehead, 
 
 2835 Coral St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 3457 Braddock St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 R. F. D. 1, Box 60, Crockett, Texas. 
 
 1936 Patterson Park Ave., Baltimore, Md. 
 Sulphur, La. 
 
 Washington, Va. 
 
 Nathalie, Va. 
 
 Farmville, Va. 
 
 M. 
 
 Leipsic, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 290 So. 17th St., Columbus, Ohio. 
 Oxford, N. C. 
 
 Washington, Va. 
 
 Washington, Va. 
 
 Washington, Va. 
 
 Washington, Va. 
 
 Washington, Va. 
 
 East Durham, N. C. 
 
 Harrisville, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Henry A. Teel, Rockford, Ala. 
 C/o Long & Young, Durham, N. C. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Jefferson, N. C. 
 
 C/o Everett Bryson, Pittsburg, Texas. 
 Pickens, W. V. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 4307 Vankirk St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Waverly, Ohio. 
 
 Lancaster, Ohio. 
 
 Columbus, Ohio. 
 
 Spartanburg, S. C. 
 
 Route 5, Huntington, W. Va. 
 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Farmville, Va. 
 
 121 Campbell St., Danville, Va. 
 
134 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mrs. Essie Jones Moretti, 
 Mrs. Minnie Duke Morgan, 
 Mrs. Henrietta V. Morris, 
 Mrs. Lillie E. Mosley, 
 
 Mr. Alfred G. Moss, 
 
 Mrs. Lula Evans Murdock, 
 Mrs. Josephine W. Mustard, 
 Mr. Charles G. Mustian, 
 Mrs. Glennie H. Mustian, 
 Mr. Howard M. Mustian, 
 Mr. Robert L. Mustian, 
 Mr. Wallace F. Mustian, 
 Mr. Willie L. Mustian, 
 Mrs. Jennie Paul Mynes, 
 Mrs. Mary Paul Mynes, 
 Mr. Philip S. Mynes, 
 
 Mr. Cecil Shelly Nance, 
 Mr. James Thomas Nance, 
 Miss Jessie R. Nance, 
 
 Mr. John Claud Nance, 
 Mr. William G. R. Nance, 
 Mrs. Bettie M. Nash, 
 Mrs. Chessie Barr Neal, 
 Mrs. Alice Compton Nethers, 
 Mrs. Lula Howell Newell, 
 Mrs. Ama Hardin Nichols, 
 Mrs. Cora Evans Nuttall, 
 
 Mrs. Annie Duke Otwell, 
 Mrs. Fannie Duke Otwell, 
 Mrs. Sarah E. Duke Ozburn, 
 
 Mr. Thomas D. Pace, 
 Mr. William Pace, 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Lucasville, Ohio. 
 
 216 Parrish St., Durham, N. C. 
 Spartanburg, S. C. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mooresville, N. C. 
 
 Duke, Ohio. 
 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, 
 Ridgeway, N. C. 
 
 Henderson, N. C. 
 
 Norlina, N.,C. 
 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 
 St. Albans, W. Va. 
 
 2020 Seventh Ave., Huntington, W. Va. 
 
 P. O. Box 1421, Huntington, W. Va. 
 
 N. 
 
 Reidsville, N. C. 
 Reidsville, N. C. 
 Greensboro, N. C. 
 Reidsville, N. C. 
 Norfolk, Va. 
 Ridgeway, N. C. 
 Jefferson, N. C. 
 Peola Mills, Va 
 R. F. D. 4, Goldsboro, N. C. 
 Caddo Parish, La. 
 Spartanburg, S. C. 
 
 O. 
 
 Vienna, La. 
 Vienna, La. 
 Silver Cliff, Colo. 
 
 Fp. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 24 
 an 
 
 Mrs. Lula Duke Parham, Rocky Mount, N. C. 
 
 Mrs. Lula Pace Parker, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 Mrs. Irene Paschall, C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Mrs. Willie Green Paschall, C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Mrs. Lula Duke Patterson, C/o Everett Bryson, Pittsburg, Texas. 
 
135 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mrs. Ellen Shackleford Paty, Ensley, Jefferson Co., Ala. 
 
 Mr. William A. Paul, 1756 Eighth Ave., Huntington, W. Va. 
 Mrs. Etta Compton Perry, Lancaster, Ohio. 
 Mrs. Ida Compton Peters, Boulder, Colo. 
 Mrs. A. D. Phillips, Fleetwood, N. C. 
 Mrs. Climie Duke Pluckett, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Cammie G. Proctor, 224 Morris St., Durham, N. C. 
 Mrs. Eliza C. Puckett, ; Pittsburg, Texas. 
 Mr. Horace Pullen, Flint Hill, Va. 
 R. 
 Mrs. Ethel Manuel Racer, Washington, Va. 
 Mrs. Mary Duke Ramey, Front Royal, Va. 
 Mr. Charles C. Randleman, Asheboro, N. C. 
 Mr. C. E. Rasberry, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Blanche Ray, Beaver Creek, N. C. 
 Mr. John S. Raynor, 2300 E. Lehigh Ave., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Mrs. Emma Compton Rea, Warren, Ind. 
 Mrs. Emma Duke Reagin, Willardsville, N. C. 
 Mrs. Adeline E. Rhew, West Durham, N. C. 
 Mrs. Ethel Duke Rice, Teays, W. Va. 
 Mr. Cole Richards, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. F. M. Richards, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. R. H. Richards, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. T. J Richards, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. W. N. Richards, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Georgia Duke Rickard, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Sarah K. Roberson, Route 1, Miller, Okla. 
 Mrs. Lena Evans Rogers, Mooresville, N. C. 
 Mr. John Edwin Rose, C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Mr. Louis Langford Rose, C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Mrs. Mary E. Russell, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 S. 
 Mrs. Isabella S. Scott, Titus, Elmore Co., Ala. 
 Mrs. Lucy Taylor Selby, Route 1, White Cloud, Kansas. 
 Mr. John M. Shackelford, Lenorah, Martin Co., Texas. 
 Mrs. Burma G. Shelander, San Benito, Texas. 
 Mrs. Novell F. Shellnutt, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Emma Wells Shrader, 415 McAlister St., Greenville, Miss. 
 Mrs. Mattie Wells Shrader, 368 No. Watkins St., Memphis, Tenn. 
 Mrs. G. T. Richards Smith, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Lee Duke Smith, Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Mrs. Louisa B. Smith, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
136 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 Mrs. Ola Farrar Smith, 
 
 Mrs. Samantha B. Smith, 
 Mrs. Nellie Spears, 
 
 Mrs. Mollie Duke Stainback, 
 Mrs. Lena M. Stamper, 
 
 Mr. Martin S. Starnes, 
 
 Mr. Oscar Starnes, 
 
 Mr. Perry L. Starnes, 
 
 Mr. W. H. Starnes, 
 
 Miss Ada Catherine Stephens, 
 Miss Mary Florence Stephens, 
 Miss Ruth Elizabeth Stephens, 
 Mrs. Georgia B. Strickland, 
 Mrs. S. W. Swain, 
 
 Mrs. Anna F. Taylor, 
 
 Mr. Benjamin W. Taylor, 
 Mrs. Elizabeth A. Taylor, 
 Mr. Harry W. Taylor, 
 
 Mr. Harvey E. Taylor, 
 
 Mrs. Nancy Rose Terrell, 
 Mr. F. O. Terry, 
 
 Mrs. Callie Duke Thomas, 
 Mrs. Harriett L. Thomas, 
 Mrs. Ida B. H. Thomas, 
 Mrs. Sarah Duke Thompson, 
 Mr. John Edward Thornton, 
 Miss Virgie Thorpe, 
 
 Mrs. Alice Ingold Timmons, 
 Mrs. Josephine Duke Toy, 
 Mrs. Bertha A. Nance Trent, 
 Mrs. Elizabeth Wells Tucker, 
 Mrs. Nancy Paul Turley, 
 Mrs. Georgia H. Turnage, 
 Mrs. Emma Pace Turner, 
 Mrs. Sarah E. D. Turner, 
 Mrs. Stella Vaughan Turner, 
 
 Mrs. Sarah Compton Uhl, 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 Beaver Creek, N. C. 
 
 Route 1, Henderson, N. C. 
 
 129 Girard St., Danville, Va. 
 
 C/o M. H. Bliven, 245 Broadway, N. Y. City. 
 C/o M. H. Bliven, 245 Broadway, N. Y. City. 
 Mullens, W. Va. 
 
 C/o M. H. Bliven, 245 Broadway, N. Y. City. 
 505 Grover St., Warrenburg, Mo. 
 
 Sweet Springs, Mo. 
 
 505 Grover St., Warrenburg, Mo. 
 
 Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 Greensboro, N. C. 
 
 ple 
 
 6720 Ditman St. Philadelphia, Pa. 
 6766 _Marsden St., Philadelphia, Pa., 
 St. Albans, W. Va. 
 
 6629 Hegerman St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 4520 Tyson St., Philadelphia, Pa. 
 C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Box 926, El Dorado, Ark. 
 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Red Fork, Okla. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Teays, W. Va. 
 
 Washington, Va. 
 
 732 Sixth St., Huntington, W. Va. 
 Charlotte, N. C. 
 
 Wakefield, Ohio. 
 
 Reidsville, N. C. 
 
 Catchings, Miss. 
 
 1836 Eighth Ave., Huntington, W. Va. 
 Goldsboro, N. C. 
 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 R. R. 2, Leeton, Mo. 
 
 U. 
 
 Lancaster, Ohio. 
 
137 
 
 SCHEDULE B—(Continued). 
 
 V. 
 Miss Edna Lee Vaughan, Box 154 La Monte, Mo. 
 Mr. Edward Lee Vaughan, Box 479, Franklinton, N. C. 
 Mr. Eugene Lee Vaughan, 1107 W. Garfield Blvd., Chicago, III. 
 Mr. George B. Vaughan, R. F. D. 2, Kittrell, N. C. 
 Mr. Joseph William Vaughan, 307 E. Alton St., Independence, Mo. 
 W. 
 Mr. George Wallace, Rarden, Ohio. 
 Mr. Oval Wallace, Rarden, Ohio. 
 Mrs. Alice A. Edwards Ward, 1228 Mordecai Drive, Raleigh, N. C. 
 Mrs. Emma Duke Ward, Wellsburg, W. Va. 
 Mrs. Luda Jones Watson, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mr. Charles F. Weaver, Mason City, Iowa. 
 Mr. Earl Weaver, Los Angeles, Cal. 
 Mr. Edwin Weaver, Norfolk, Neb. 
 Miss Willie May Weaver, Norfolk, Neb. 
 Mr. John A. Westbrook, Haynesville, La. 
 Mr. William J. Westbrook, Gilliam, La. 
 Mrs. Clare H. Westbrooks, R. F. D. 2, Bloomberg, Texas. 
 Mrs. Jessie E. White, C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Mr. George W. Whitfield, Stem, N. C. 
 Mr. James E. Whitfield, 935 Virginia St., Jacksonville, Fla. 
 Mr. John W. Whitfield, Creedmoor, N. C. 
 Mrs. Mary Whitfield, Lakewood Park, Durham, N. C. 
 Mr. Robert H. Whitfield, Creedmoor, N. C. 
 Mrs. Henrietta D. Whitney, Chicago, Ill. 
 
 Mrs. Mary Trolinger Wiley, P. O. Box 865, Charlotte, N. C. 
 Mrs. Fannie Duke Williams, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 Mrs. M. A. Williams, R. F. D., Stony Point, N. C. 
 Mrs. Mattie R. Williams, C/o Williams & Banzet, Warrenton, N. C. 
 Mrs. Ruby D. Williams, Columbus, Ohio. 
 Mr. H. Fenton Williamson, Columbia, S. C. 
 Miss Jessie Mae Williamson, Saxon Teacherage, Spartanburg, S. C. 
 Mrs. Della M. Wilson, 510 Halifax St., Petersburg, Va. 
 Mrs. Elizabeth Carron Wood,  Leipsic, Ohio. 
 Mrs. Essie Farrar Woodall, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 Mrs. Jenetta Hardin Wynn, Caddo Parish, La. 
 Mrs. Mary M. Wyont, Milton, W. Va. 
 
 a 
 Mr. William Lester Yoe, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
 Mr. Daniel Youngblood, C/o Miss E. Duke, Marshall, Texas. 
 
Duke University Libraries 
 
 ATi 
 
 D02605265Q