Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 2
1806 - settled on the eastern bank of the Mississippi River in Indiana Territory (later Illinois Territory), several miles above the French settlement of Cahokia - across the river from St. Louis.4 No doubt in the area when Louis and Clark were returning on their famed expedition. 1807 – operated a ferry and boat landing located on the East bank of the Mississippi just above the mouth of the Missouri. 5 1812 - expanded his enterprising to bridge building 6 by 1820 – relocated to Clarke County, Arkansas Territory 7 1820 – was commissioned as Clarke County magistrate 8 1825 – ran for legislative council in Arkansas and lost by only six votes 9 When a middle aged Eli Langford came to Texas late 1825 or in 1826,10 he was already an accomplished American pioneer. In 1826 Texas was a province of Coahuila y Texas, a state in the country of Mexico, and the Langfords were no doubt lured by the Colonization Law of 24 March 1825. Under this law Anglo settlers from the North were required to become Mexican citizens and adopt the Catholic faith. For a small fee, heads of households could receive up to a league, or 4,428 acres for grazing, and a labor, 177 acres of land for cultivation. 11 Eli was probably accompanied to Texas with his wife; minor children; a daughter-in-law, Eleanor, the widow of Eli’s oldest son Maxfield; and Eleanor’s two young children. 12 Eli and family first settled in Texas on the Attoyac Bayou about twenty-two miles east of Nacodoches.13 The Langfords probably arrived in the area not long after empresario Haydon Edwards arrived in September 1825 with a contract to settle 800 families. Edwards ran into some conflicts with settlers who had already populated the area under previous contracts. Edwards was to honor the original contracts, but nonetheless, a major disagreement arose and there was a major split between the older settlers and many of the new families. The problem got so bad that officials of the Mexican government revoked, or cancelled, Edward’s contract. This action ultimately led to an uprising and revolt by Edwards and many of his followers in the Nacodoches area in 1826 and 1827 which became known as the Fredonian Rebellion. Edwards and his followers declared Texas free and independent. They even sought the support of Native Americans in the area. The Rebellion faltered before the Mexicans troops arrived, and many of the Fredonian followers fled to Louisiana.14 There’s no evidence to suggest the Langfords were involved in any way either for or against the Fredonian bunch, but it is certain that they would have been impacted by those chaotic events in that area.
Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 3
According to best family sources, Maxfield, Eli’s oldest son, died in Arkansas before the Langfords came to Texas.15 Maxfield was the husband of Eleanor 16, and they probably only had two children together. Near the Attoyac Bayou, Eleanor and her young children lived in a rent home near Eli’s home place.17 In the years 1826 and 1827, Eli, was reported to have spent considerable time at the widow’s cabin – perhaps too much. Sometime between the years 1828-1830 Eli was struck with what may be considered one of the worst cases of mid-life crisis ever recorded. He left his wife, Mary, after nearly thirty years of marriage and eight children.18 At least three of their children were still minors and remained with Mary following the separation.19 To seemingly make matters worse, Eli moved into Eleanor’s rent home which was located on Eli and Mary’s land.20 By 1832 Eli completely abandoned Mary and relocated north, with Eleanor and young family, to the Red River country of Texas.21 In the eyes of their new neighbors in the Red River area, Eli and Eleanor most likely appeared to be a married couple. However, it probably wasn’t long before rumor of their relationship began to spread. In addition, both Eli and Eleanor maintained head of household status for tax purposes.22 This distinction was critical for each of them to qualify for a league of land under the colonization law. Although Eli and Eleanor settled south of the Red River, the United States and Mexico both claimed the area. At the same time citizens were trying to obtain land grants from the Mexican government, they also paid taxes as citizens of Miller County Arkansas. Jonesboro (or Jonesborough) located south of the Red, was the county seat.23 In April of 1833 Eli and Eleanor were arrested and charged with adultery by the authorities of Miller County, Arkansas.24 Eleanor’s case went to trial in October 1834, and she was found “not guilty” by a jury of her peers.25 There were two jurors of note who are well remembered in Texas history. One was Benjamin R. Milam (known as old Ben Milam), remembered in history for rallying the Anglo settlers and leading them into San Antonio during the Texas Revolution in what became known as the Siege of Bexar’ (San Antonio). Milam was killed by a sniper during the siege. Milam had come to the Red River area as an agent of empressario Arthur Wavell to colonize the area as a province of Mexico. The other juror of note was Collin McKinney, a close friend of Milam. McKinney, a delegate from the Red River country to Washington on the Brazos, was one of the authors of the Texas Declaration of Independence. Collin county and McKinney, Texas were named in his honor.26 Eli’s case came to trial in April 1835. He too was found “not guilty” by a jury of his peers.27 Mary and children, on the other hand, had remained in the area east of Nacodoches until 1835,28 and one can only image the hardships a middle aged women in her situation must have endured. Mary’s son-in-law Joseph Butler, his wife Juriah and their young family relocated from Clark County, Arkansas to be with Mary in late 1830.29 Perhaps Eli had waited for them to arrive before he and Eleanor relocated to the Red River country. In September 1834 Mary applied for a league, 4,428 acres of land, under the empresario contract of Lorenzo de Zavala.30 Although her land was procured under the Zavala empresario contract of 1829, Zavala had already transferred his interest in the contract in October of 1832 to the Galveston Bay and Texas Land Company.31 Mary’s survey was located “south of the Big Alabama Creek.” Mary’s title to the land wasn’t officially bestowed to her until 8 November 1835, and the following provisions/stipulations were included: “...within one year she must construct fixed and permanent monuments at every angle of the tract, and that she must populate it and cultivate it in conformity with the provisions of the aforesaid law...”32 Mary could not have applied or received title with such stipulations at a worse time. By 8 November 1835, the date Mary’s grant was approved,33 the first shots of the battle for Texas Independence had already been fired a month earlier at the Battle of Gonzales.34 In fact, at that same time, Stephen F. Austin was in the process of establishing a provisional government, and one of their first acts declared Mexican land titles issued after 13 November to be invalid – this was five days after Mary’s land grant was issued.35 The Texians won most of the early battles in the last quarter of 1835, including the conquest of San Antonio – known as the Siege of Bexar.36 However, in early 1836 the fortunes of the Texians turned grim as Santa Anna and his massive army expeditiously marched across the West Texas desert and reclaimed San Antonio at the Battle of the Alamo.37 Shortly after the fall of the Alamo, Colonel James Fannin, who had been holed up at a fort, surrendered to a Mexican force just outside of Goliad. Whereby, they were marched back by the Mexican troops to the fort at Goliad and were held for a short time. As is well documented in Texas history, Santa Anna took “no prisoners” at the Alamo. Perhaps more horrifying is that the captured Texian troops at Goliad were all marched outside of the fort and killed by the Mexican troops.38 As word spread throughout the Texas colonies of the fall of the Alamo, the massacre at Goliad, and Sam Houston’s retreat east, many of the settlers panicked. They more or less loaded all of their household goods that they could pack and began to scramble east toward the Sabine River and the Louisiana border. This panic became known in Texas history as the Runaway Scrape.39 Following the defeat of the Mexicans and capture of Santa Anna at San Jacinto, many of the settlers returned to the Republic but some did not.40 Such was the case with Mary Langford and her helpless young family. She fled with her three minor children to Sabine Parish, Louisiana.41 Thus, she understandably never fulfilled the terms of her land grant in Texas. Mary did return to the state of Texas in 1854 42 and lived the remainder of her life with her son, Asa, and his family in Coryell County where she died in 1862.43 In the process of establishing itself as an independent nation, the legislature of the new Republic established the General Land Office (GLO) in December of 1836. All aspects of public land from supervision and management to distribution were all the responsibility of the Texas GLO.44 The representatives of the Republic of Texas Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 5 legislature also made provisions in the new constitution to protect and honor land grants made to colonists by both the Spanish and Mexican government. The Constitution of 1836 also established the first class headright act. The provisions of this act were as follows: Every head of a household, male or female, living in Texas on March 2, 1836, would receive a league and a labor of land (4,605 acres), while single men at least 17 years old would be given a third of a league (1,476 acres). The act excluded Indians, Blacks, anyone who had left Texas to avoid military service, and anyone who had already received the same amount of land from Mexico. Those who had received a smaller amount from Mexico were entitled to the difference. Grantees were not required to live on the land, as they had been under Mexico. 45 (History of Public Lands – Texas General Land Office) First class headrights of the Republic differed from the previous Spanish and Mexican land grants mainly from the standpoint that the grantee wasn’t required to reside on the property nor were they required to improve the land. In addition, a first class headright grantee was allowed to locate and have land surveyed in any county.46 Local land boards were established in each county of the Republic, and applicants were to apply for a first class headright grant through them. Besides appealing to the local board in person, the only evidence that an applicant had to present as proof of residency and marital status was two witnesses.47 In 1838 both Eli and Eleanor convinced the local land board, comprised of the chief justice, the associate justices, and the clerk of Red River County, that they were each entitled to first class headright certificates as heads of households.48 As a widow with children, Eleanor claimed as the head of family which was allowed under the headright act of 1836. Since Eli had never legally divorced Mary, he claimed for a league and labor of land as the head of Mary’s household.49 It is questionable whether Eli was even aware of Mary’s whereabouts in 1838, and he was most likely unaware that Mary had actually been awarded a valid land grant (though unfulfilled) from Mexico in 1835. Once an applicant received a certificate, he/she was allowed to locate, claim and survey unclaimed public land in the Republic regardless of the county the certificate was issued.50 Shortly after receiving her certificate, Eleanor located and claimed almost 2,000 acres, which was less than half her grant. This land was located about a mile and a half southeast of Clarksville.51 Unfortunately, Eleanor’s original survey was either destroyed or lost in the process of patenting the land and was thus not recorded.52 The lost survey may have contributed to the boundary dispute between Eleanor and John Morton – whose survey abutted Eleanor’s to the west. In March of 1841 John Morton sued Eleanor and Eli over the boundary line.53 Between 1838 and 1840, as local land boards were approving first class headright certificates in counties across the Republic, complaints were being voiced to legislative officials that many certificates were being fraudulently claimed and issued.54 Many citizens argued that the local land boards were easily persuaded to approve claims to Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 6 fraudulent requestors because they were either long time friends or relatives of the applicants. Witnesses were also called into question in the process as they were also friends and relatives. Applicants were accused of lying about the actual date of residency or the date he/she was married. For example, if an adult male moved to Texas in January of 1836 and then got married in May 1836, two months after the 2 March requirement, he was entitled to a first class headright certificate but not as head of household. Thus, he was entitled to only 1/3 of a league or 1,476 acres. However, if he could convince two witnesses that he was married prior to 2 March, then he would be entitled to a full league and a labor or 4,605 acres – a difference of 3,129 acres. As complaints of fraud began to mount, a traveling or investigating land commission was created and authorized by a legislative act in 1840.55 Actually, the commission was divided into two halves – one set was assigned west of the Brazos River and another set east of the Brazos River.56 The traveling boards were required to travel to each land office in the Republic and review all the first class headright certificates issued by the local or county boards. Each certificate issued was to be reviewed and deemed as either a valid or a fraudulent claim. The traveling boards rejected claims on anything from a technicality to outright fraud.57 The traveling review board was most certainly in Red River County reviewing claims during the time of John Morton’s suit against Eli and Eleanor. On Wednesday, 31 March 1841, a jury ruled in favor of Eli and Eleanor and their claim of the division line.58 Determined to stop Eli and Eleanor’s quest for land, the sheriff arrested them the following day, 1 April 1841,59 and they were again charged with adultery.60 This charge was “quashed” or annulled the same day, and they were both immediately released from custody.61 On 10 April 1841, just nine days following the adultery charge, the investigating or traveling board deemed Eleanor’s first class headright claim valid and Eli’s first class headright claim fraudulent, whereby Eli’s certificate was then rejected.62 The only statement recorded in the GLO as to why Eli’s claim was rejected was, “too much land.”63 If a headright claim was deemed fraudulent, and thus the certificate rejected, the responsibility to prove otherwise fell upon the applicant. The only appellant process available to the applicant was to bring suit in the district court where the certificate was rejected.64 Eli wasted no time and filed suit against the Republic of Texas in October 1841 during the Fall term of the Red River District Court. On Thursday, 14 October 1841, a jury found in favor of Eli and the court ruled as follows, “It is therefore ordered and adjudged that the plaintiff have and recover of the Republic his Land as assessed by the jury, and that a certificate (be) issued and that the plaintiff pay the clerk of this court the sum of ten dollars.”65 Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 7 Eli and Eleanor must have breathed a sigh of relief, and with cleared land claims totaling over 9,200 acres, they probably thought they would live happily ever after. The Republic, on the other hand, had other ideas and continued to pursue their argument that Eli was not entitled to a league and labor of land. Armed with new evidence, the case was tried again in the Red River district court in October of 1842. This time the jury found in favor of the Republic, effectively annulling the courts decision the previous year. The new evidence brought to court that led to the reversed decision, was the discovery of Mary’s grant for a league of land in Nacodoches in 1835. Since Eli never divorced Mary, her valid grant over rode any of his claims to an additional league and labor. As a hideous attempt to defend his argument during this trial, Eli tried to reconvey (or give back) to the Republic the land granted to Mary under the Colonization Law of 1825.66 Not satisfied with the new decision, Eli appealed the district court’s decision of October 1842. Since there were no appellate courts in the Republic of Texas, appeals fell directly to the Supreme Court of the Republic.67 Eli’s appeal was decided by the Supreme Court on 25 June 1844. The court ruled against Eli and affirmed the October 1842 district court ruling. The Supreme Court argued that Eli’s “pretensions as the head of Mary Langford’s family (were) unsubstantial.” In reference to Eli’s relationship with Eleanor, the court stated, “no argument arises in favor of the plaintiff from the cohabitation with a woman whom he repudiates as a wife, and even if she were his spouse, his application could not succeed as she has already obtained a league of land from the government.” Furthermore, Eli’s potential argument for a first class headright as a single man, for 1/3 of a league or 1,476 acres, was also addressed by the court. The court read, “(Langford) cannot claim as a single man because though degraded from the dignity and deprived of the rights of the head of the family ... he has not been divorced from the matrimonial bonds.”68 Thus, the Supreme Court ended any and all avenues for Eli’s claim for a first class headright certificate. In the spring of 1843 - about six months following the October 1842 district court decision and over a year before the Supreme Court ruling - Eleanor deeded most all of her land surveyed in Red River County (almost 2,000 acres) to her children, who were all adults and some with families of their own.69 Eli and Eleanor’s lawyer from 1841 to 1844 was Amos Morrill.70 Later Morrill’s friendship and later libel case against Charles DeMorse, known as the “father of Texas journalism”, and the famed owner, publisher and editor of the Clarksville Standard newspaper, were legendary in Northeast Texas.71 Following the Civil War, Morrill, a native of Massachusetts and a staunch opponent of secession, was appointed, by provisional governor E. M. Pease, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court in 1868. Four years later, in 1872, Morrill was appointed, by president U. S. Grant, to be the United States District Court Judge for the Eastern District of Texas.72 Not long after the Supreme Court ruling, Eli and Eleanor moved a little south near Jefferson, Texas (note, Jefferson was then in Cass County – Marion was created out of Cass later).73 Eli was recorded in numerous land transactions in both Red River and Cass Counties throughout the 1840s. By 1848, Eli was back in the bridge building business as Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 8 he raised money and obtained a contract to build a bridge across the Big Cypress Bayou, near Jefferson, “at the site of (his) present ferry” which was located on the south side of the river. The terms of the contract called for Eli to complete the bridge within one year. In return Eli was to receive tolls for persons crossing the bridge for ten years from the date of the contract.74 Eli must have been blessed with good health and longevity, because in 1848 he would have between 68 and 71 years old – a very old man then. No records have been discovered to determine whether Eli ever completed the bridge. However, years later, according to a deposition given by his son Asa, sometime around the year 1850 Eli “disappeared” on the Big Cypress Bayou near Jefferson and was presumed dead. Sometime either before or in 1852 Eleanor relocated west, with her children and their families, to the frontier town of Greenville, Texas in Hunt County.75 While there she transferred or sold the remaining, approximately 2,600 acres, of unclaimed land against her first class headright certificate to her son-in-law James A. Burnett in 1853.76 Eleanor was a charter member of the First Baptist Church in Greenville which was organized in 1858.77 Eleanor died in Hunt County in either late 1866 or early 1867.78 Many of Eleanor Langford’s descendants remain in the Greenville area to this day. Some old letters and a few land records of these early Langfords of Texas were handed down by one branch of the Langford family. The records became known as the Langford Papers and were published in Margaret Horne’s account of the History of Hunt County. One document of note printed in Horne’s work, that prior to this research appeared inconspicuous, was a receipt which reads, Recd. 9 January 1846 of Eli and Elianor (sic) Langford five dollars payment in full of all accounts, dues and demands of every nature and description. Amos Merrill (sic Morrill) 79 Eli’s first class headright certificate became an issue again in the mid 1870s. In September 1874 Eli’s son, Asa, was approached by a lawyer, in association with a land agent from Austin, who convinced Asa that his father had been granted a valid firstclass headright certificate by the 1841 fall term district court of Red River County. Furthermore, Asa, then in his mid fifties and a resident in the Texas hill country, was led (or mislead) to believe that his father died without ever securing any land from a valid claim. Asa gave the lawyer power of attorney to obtain “the lost certificate” from the GLO, locate, survey and patent land accordingly. In return Asa and his siblings, legal heirs to Eli’s estate, agreed to split half of any land patented with the lawyer and the land agent.80 What the lawyer failed to inform Asa was that the 1841 district court decision was annulled by the October 1842 district court decision – which was upheld by the Supreme Court of the Republic. This omission wasn’t caught by the GLO either as they issued a duplicate certificate to the lawyer.81 Ultimately, a league and labor of land was secured and patented to Asa and his siblings in the Texas Panhandle, in what is now Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 9 Hartley County. By agreement half the land was deeded to the lawyer and the land agent.82 By 1894, Asa, through both procurement and gifts from his siblings, owned and paid taxes on one half of the original grant. 83 The other half was then owned by Eliza Kempner, the matriarch of the Kempner family of Galveston 84 whose family later owned Imperial Sugar and Sugarland, Texas.85 However, by the mid 1890s the state had finally discovered the error of issuing the duplicate certificate in 1874 and sought to re-claim the land patented from it. In 1901 the state sued Eliza Kempner, Asa Langford, Eli Lankford (not to be confused with old Eli) and Levi Lankford in the District Court of Travis County. The state alleged that on 1 January 1895 “the defendants with force and arms entered upon said premises and ejected plaintiff (the state) there from, and with like force and arms keeps possession thereof...”. The state won the lawsuit. However, the decision was appealed but the lower court’s ruling was upheld by the Court of Civil Appeals of the Third Supreme Judicial District on 7 March 1904 - thereby again settling the issue of Eli Langford’s first class headright certificate.86 Although the 1901/1902 Travis County case basically ended the legal battle over Eli Langford’s right to a first class headright certificate, it did raise additional questions and issues that lead to yet further litigation. Who were Eli and Levi Lankford – note the spelling with a “k”? What was their relationship to Asa and why were they named defendants in the Travis County suit? Eli and Levi, brothers, were probably named as defendants initially because of the many similarities between their family and that of Asa Langford. First, the name Langford had been spelled interchangeably with Lankford in both original land records and old court documents for old Eli, Mary and Eleanor. Second, Eli and Levi Lankford had been residents of Coryell County, Texas87 Asa, then a resident of nearby Mills County,88 had been a pioneer settler and long time resident of Coryell County.89 Third, Eli and Levi’s mother was also named Mary and she resided with her two sons in Coryell County which is eerily similar to Asa’s long term residence in Coryell County with his mother, Mary. In the early part of the Travis County case, Eli and Levi Lankford stated that they were the only surviving descendants of Eli Lankford (or Langford) who was granted a first class headright certificate. Furthermore, they argued that because their father, Eli, died in September 1865, that Eliza Kempner and Asa Langford could not be the rightful owners of the land, and that possession and title should be transferred to them. On the other hand, Asa’s testimony in this case about how he obtained the land was consistent with all the land records available. When asked under oath about his relationship to Eli and Levi Lankford, Asa stated that he knew of them and that he believed they were third or fourth cousins. After receiving and reviewing Asa’s written testimony, Eli and Levi amended their original statement and “disclaim(ed)” the land being sued for in Hartley County and requested to be dismissed as defendants in the case. Nonetheless, they maintained “that the original certificate (for a league and labor of land) was burned in the house of these defendants (Eli and Levi Lankford) and (that) of their mother Mary Lankford in August 1876 and these Defendants do not believe this mother ever disposed of said original certificate.”90 Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 10 Whether old Eli was actually the father of Eli and Levi Lankford, or whether this was just an attempt to get land, requires additional research. In any event, the relationships between these families were the source of yet another lawsuit in 1904. This suit involved 300 acres of land old Eli had owned in Red River County in the 1840s. This suit was brought by many of the living descendants of Eli and Mary Edens Langford, including Eleanor’s descendants. The defendants were presumably the current land owners of the 300 acres in question. Prior to a court ruling the parties agreed to a settlement, and the plaintiffs, the many descendants of Eli and Mary, received judgment of 150 acres of the 300 acres in question. Asa Langford, a plaintiff and material witness, was 83 years old when this case was settled.91 Eli Langford may be remembered as an early ferryboat operator, bridge builder and pioneer settler in America. A man who headed west on the heels of Lewis and Clark and pushed the boundaries of the western frontier. On the other hand, Eli may also be remembered as a man who abandoned one family for another. A man in frontier Texas whose zealous quest for love and land laid the foundation for lawsuits that took place over many years. Although not as famous as a few of his Texas counterparts, Eli Langford is one of the countless many who helped create and define the stereotypes of early Texans. Sources 1. “Asa Langford Family, 1820-1906”, Alice Langford Rush. 2. Case number 17688, The State of Texas vs Eliza Kempner et al. District Court of Travis County, 3. “Asa Langford Family, 1820-1906”, Alice Langford Rush. 4. Ibid. 5. Executive Journal, Indiana Territory 1800-1816, p. 48. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, Greenville, Texas. 6. “Asa Langford Family, 1820-1906”, Alice Langford Rush 7. Ibid. 8. Ibid. 9. Ibid 10. “Asa Langford Family, 1820-1906”, Alice Langford Rush , and Republic of Texas Supreme Court Ruling, Eli Langford vs Republic of Texas, p. 100 and 300-332, Texas State Library and Archives Commission. 11. Gone to Texas – A History of the Lone Star State, Randolph B. Campbell, Oxford University Press, p. 107 12. Case number 17688, The State of Texas vs. Eliza Kempner, et al, in Travis County. Also, C. A. Langford et al vs Sallie F. Rainey et al., Asa Langford’s deposition. Also, Texas State Library and Archives Commission, Republic of Texas Supreme Court Ruling, Eli Langford vs Republic of Texas, p. 100 and 300-332. 13. Republic of Texas Supreme Court Ruling, Eli Langford vs Republic of Texas, p. 100 and 300-332, Texas State Library and Archives Commission, Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 11 14. Gone to Texas – A History of the Lone Star State, Randolph B. Campbell, Oxford University Press, p.108-110 15. Information provided by Alice Rush and supported by Asa’s deposition in the case of C.A. Langford et al vs Sallie Rainy et al. 16. Deposition of Asa Langford in case of C. A. Langford et al vs Sallie F. Rainey et al. Note – Asa clearly states in this deposition that Eleanor had been the wife of Maxfield and was his widowed sister-in-law. 17. Deposition of Asa Langford in case of C. A. Langford et al vs Sallie F. Rainey et al. 18. Ibid. 19. The First Census of Texas – 1829-1836, by Marion Day Mullins, 1976, p. 35. 20. Deposition of Asa Langford in case of C. A. Langford et al vs Sallie F. Rainey et al. 21. Eli Langford vs The Republic of Texas, October 1842, supported by the Supreme Court of the Republic decision in June 1844, Asa Langford’s deposition in the case of C. A. Langford et al vs Sallie F. Rainey et al. in Red River County 22. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, 1840 Census of Republic of Texas, p. 148 23. Handbook of Texas online: “Miller County, Arkansas” 24. Miller County, Ark., The United States vs Eli and Ellender Lankford – Adultery, April term1833 25. The United States vs Eli and Ellender Lankford – Adultery, October term 1834 26. Handbook of Texas on-line, see “Milam, Benjamin Rush”, “McKinney, Collin”, “Collin County” and “McKinney, TX”. 27. Miller County, Ark., The United States vs Eli and Ellender Lankford – Adultery, April Term 1835 28. Travis County, Texas District Clerk’s office, case number 17688, The State of Texas vs. Eliza Kempner et al. 29. Information provided by J. D. Owen and supported by 1830 census for Clark Co., Arksanas, Texas GenWeb Project (online), “The Residents of Texas”, reference the Census Report of Sabine 1835, and the 1850 census for Sabine Parish, Louisianna, see Juriah Butler. 30. Travis County, Texas District Clerk’s office, case number 17688, The State of Texas vs. Eliza Kempner et al. 31. Handbook of Texas on-line, see “Zavala, Lorenzo De” 32. Travis County, Texas District Clerk’s office, case number 17688, The State of Texas vs. Eliza Kempner et al. 33. Ibid. 34. Gone to Texas – A History of the Lone Star State, Randolph B. Campbell, Oxford University Press, p.130. 35. Texas General Land Office website, “History of Texas Public Lands”, “The Republic of Texas”, see http://www.glo.state.tx.us/archives/history/republic_texas.html. 36. Gone to Texas – A History of the Lone Star State, Randolph B. Campbell, Oxford University Press, pps. 133-141. 37. Gone to Texas – A History of the Lone Star State, Randolph B. Campbell, Oxford University Press, pps. 141-147. 38. Gone to Texas – A History of the Lone Star State, Randolph B. Campbell, Oxford University Press, pps. 150-151 39. Handbook of Texas online, See “Runaway Scrape”. Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 12 40. Ibid. 41. Travis County, Texas District Clerk’s office, case number 17688, The State of Texas vs. Eliza Kempner et al. 42. Ibid. 43. Deposition of Asa Langford in case of C. A. Langford et al vs Sallie F. Rainey et al. 44. Texas General Land Office website, “History of Texas Public Lands”, “The Republic of Texas”, see http://www.glo.state.tx.us/archives/history/republic_texas.html. 45. Texas General Land Office website, “History of Texas Public Lands”, “The Republic of Texas”, see http://www.glo.state.tx.us/archives/history/republic_texas.html. 46. Ibid. 47. Ibid. 48. Texas General Land Office, Eleanor Langford, certificate no. 338; Eli Langford certificate no. 330. Also see, Northern Standard, 27 Aug. 1842, microfilm at Paris Junior College, Paris, Texas. 49. Texas State Library and Archives Commission, Republic of Texas Supreme Court Ruling, Eli Langford vs Republic of Texas, p. 100 and 300-332 50. Texas General Land Office website, “History of Texas Public Lands”, “The Republic of Texas”, see http://www.glo.state.tx.us/archives/history/republic_texas.html. 51. Texas General Land Office, Red-1-442, First Class Headright, Elenor Langford, Field notes, abstact #508. 52. Texas General Land Office, Red-1-442, First Class Headright, Elenor Langford, Field notes, abstract #508. 53. Red River District Court notes, Minute Book B, p. 171, John Morton vs Elenor and Eli Langford, 31 March 1841. 54. Texas General Land Office, Conversation with TGLO representative. 55. Texas General Land Office, Conversation with TGLO representative. 56. First Settlers of Red River County, Texas by Gifford White, 1985 and reprinted in 1995, p. 34. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, Greenville, Texas. 57. Texas General Land Office, Conversation with TGLO representative. 58. Red River District Court notes, 31 March 1841, John Morton vs Elenor and Eli Langford. 59. Texas State Archives, Republic Claims, Claim of Edward West, type PD, Claim # 1059. 60. Red River District Court, 1 April 1841, Case No. 33, The Republic of Texas vs Eli and Ellenor Langford, Adultery. 61. Ibid. 62. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, Greenville, Texas, Red River Co., Texas Deed Abstracts to 19 Feb. 1846, Vol I, p. 110 63. Texas General Land Office, conversation with representative. 64. First Settlers of Red River County, Texas by Gifford White, 1985 and reprinted in 1995, p. 34. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, Greenville, Texas. 65. Red River District Court, Case number 329, page, 270, Eli Langford vs Republic of Texas, 14 Oct 1841, Petition for League and Labor of Land 66. Red River District Court, Eli Langford vs Republic of Texas, October 1842 67. Texas State Library and Archives Commission, Republic of Texas Supreme Court Ruling, Eli Langford vs Republic of Texas, p. 100 and 300-332 Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 13 68. Ibid. 69. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, Greenville, Texas. Red River County, Texas Deed Abstracts, Volume I, Republic of Texas and State of Couhuila and Texas, abstracted by Joyce Martin Murray, 1986, pps. 80-81. 70. W. Walworth Harrision Public Library, Greenville, Texas. History of Hunt County, by Maraget Horne, p. 324. 71. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library. Red River Dust by Eugene Bowers and Evelyn Oppenheimer, 1968, Chapter 14: “The Mighty Morrill”, pps. 88-96. 72. Handbook of Texas online, see “Morrill, Amos”. 73. C. A. Langford, Et al vs Sallie Rainey, et al., Asa Langford’s deposition 74. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, Greenville, Texas. Reference R 929.2 Spencer, Descendants of William Spencer of Montgomery Co. NC., Henry Rigby, 1977, p. 150. 75. Hunt County, Texas Clerk’s office, Hunt County Deed Book, Vol. A, reference Charles P. Langford and James A. Burnett transactions. 76. Texas General Land Office, Archives and Records Division, abstract number 566, reference duplicate certificate no. 795/895, Eleanor Langford transferred 7 Nov. 1853 to James A. Burnett. 77. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, Greenville, Texas, microfilm - Hunt County News, Fri. 11 Nov 1921, 1:3, First Baptist Church Greenville, Texas (History). 78. Hunt County Probate – Book K, pps. 453-454. 79. W. Walworth Harrison Public Library, Greenville, Tx., History of Hunt County by Margaret Horne, p. 324. 80. Travis County, Texas District Clerk’s office, case number 17688, The State of Texas vs. Eliza Kempner et al. 81. Ibid. 82. Ibid. 83. Ibid. 84. Ibid. 85. Handbook of Texas online. Reference, “Kempner, Harris” and “Imperial Sugar”. 86. Travis County, Texas District Clerk’s office, case number 17688, The State of Texas vs. Eliza Kempner et al. 87. Ibid. 88. Ibid. 89. Handbook of Texas online, See “Evant, Texas” 90. Travis County, Texas District Clerk’s office, case number 17688, The State of Texas vs. Eliza Kempner et al. 91. Red River District Court Notes, C. A. Langford et al vs Sallie F. Rainey et al. Notes A) According to a representative with the Texas General Land Office (TGLO), some of Marc Coker, 6 September 2004 14 the original records for Eli Langford’s firstclass headright certificate (reference Red River, first class, cert. no. 330) were too fragile to be copied. Therefore, some of my references above were based on my notes from a telephone conversation with a representative with the TGLO. B) Eleanor Langford was referred to by relatives and friends as Ellen and she sometimes signed documents, Ellen D.Langford. Additionally, Eleanor was spelled (or misspelled) in many records. Langford was also used interchangeably with Lankford. C) I obtained copies of the 19th and early 20th century Red River District Court notes and documents from microfilm available at Paris Junior College in Paris, Texas. D) I inherited Asa Langford’s deposition associated with the case of C. A. Langford vs. Sallie F. Rainey from my grandfather’s research. I believe this record came from Alice Rush whom I believe obtained it from Mills County records. The deposition is consistent with the additional information I obtained about this case from Paris Junior College, reference microfilm of Red River District Court notes.