Transcript of Proceedings, , Sangamon Co., IL, ca. 17 July 1852, U.S. v. Joseph Smith III et al. (United States Circuit Court for the District of IL 1852); U.S. District Court for the District of Illinois, Complete Records, 1837–1856, vol. 4, pp. 486–697; handwriting of ; Records of District Courts of the United States, Record Group 21, National Archives at Chicago, Chicago.
state whether said Judgement or any part thereof has been paid or whether the same remains unpaid as stated in said bill of Complaint, or whether were issued on said Judgement as in said bill of Complaint stated.
He admits that said Joseph Smith deceased died as in said bill of complaint stated and that letters of administration on his estate were issued and revoked as in said bill stated and that he is and was at the time of filing said bill of Complaint administrator of said estate as in said bill stated, and says that true it is he has never received any assets of said estate,
That he is informed and believes that all the personal estate and a part of the real estate of said Jo. Smith deceased was disposed of by late admr. of said estate as in said bill stated,
That he was appointed administrator D. B. N. of said estate by the probate Court of Illinois in August 1848, as in said bill stated, that since his appointment as such administrator he has been unable to find any personal estate of the said Jo. Smith deceased unadministered or to obtain from his predecessor as such administrator any part of the estate of the said deceased.
That he is not informed and cannot state whether the other defendants in said judgement against the said Jo. Smith deceased and others and in favor of the complainants. are insolvent or not.
That he is informed and believes that the said and his securities as administrator as aforesaid are insolvent as in said bill stated.
Respondant says that debts against the estate of the said deceased have been proven up and allowed in the probate Court of Illinois to the amount of about thirty thousand dollars among which is the complainants’ claim.
But respondant cannot state whether the claim of the complainant is entitled to payment in preference to the other claims against said estate proven up and allowed against said estate as aforesaid as in said bill of complaint stated or not.
That he is not informed and cannot state whether all the debts of the said deceased of the first and second classes under the Statutes of the State of have been paid or not as in said bill of complaint stated, and says that a claim to the amount of about six thousand dollars of the third class under the Laws of the State of was proven up and allowed by before the probate Court aforesaid before respondant was appointed administrator D. B. N. as aforesaid which remains unpaid as he is informed and believes, which respondant is informed by [p. 624]