Individual Page


Family
Marriage: Children:
  1. Alexander Middleton Neil: Birth: ABT 1834 in (West) Virginia. Death: bet. 1880-1900

  2. Nathan W. Neil: Birth: 10 FEB 1837. Death: 2 JAN 1911

  3. Robert Grimes Neil: Birth: ABT 1839. Death: 1921

  4. William Harrison H. Neil: Birth: 1840. Death: 1921


Family
Marriage: Children:
  1. Joseph McNutt Neil: Birth: 2 AUG 1847. Death: 10 DEC 1849

  2. John Frances Vanpelt Neil: Birth: ABT 1850 in Nicholas County, (West) Virginia. Death: 26 APR 1895

  3. Eusebius Neil: Birth: 1850. Death: BEF 1860

  4. Margaret J. Neil: Birth: ABT 1854 in (West) Virginia. Death: Bet. 1920-1930 in West Virginia

  5. Julia Katherine Neil: Birth: 26 MAR 1857 in Nicholas County, (West) Virginia. Death: 17 JAN 1929 in Kanawha County, West Virginia


Notes
a. Note:   1810 U.S. Federal Census [see father's listing]
  1820 U.S. Federal Census [see father's listing]
  1830 U.S. Federal Census [see father's listing]
  1840 U.S. Federal Census Nicholas County, (West) Virginia Unknown Townships Neil, Robert L. 2 males under 5 yo (Nathaniel and Robert) 1 male 5 & under 10 yo (Alexander) 1 male 20 & under 30 yo (unknown) 1 male 30 & under 40 yo (Robert) 1 male 40 & under 50 yo (unknown) 1 female 30 & under 40 yo (1st wife) (in file)
  1850 U.S. Federal Census Nicholas County, (West) Virginia District 43 Lines 2-8 HH #252-252 Neil, Robert 40 M Farmer 2,050 Virginia Neil, Ginnetta 36 F Virginia Neil, Alexander 16 M Farmer Virginia Neil, Nathaniel 13 M Virginia Neil, Robert 11 M Virginia Neil, William 9 M Virginia Neil, Eusebius 3/12 M Virginia (check image)
  1 Jan 1855 He bought several items at the estate sale of Joseph McNutt https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18271-57923-52?cc=1909099&wc=M6DN-5NG:179689901,179689902 https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1-18271-57841-55?cc=1909099&wc=M6DN-5NG:179689901,179689902
  1860 U.S. Federal Census Nicholas County, West Virginia Robert Neil 50 M farmer 6000 400 Virginia Jenetta Neil 47 F wife Virginia Robert G. Neil 21 M School teacher Virginia William H. H. Neil 19 M Laborer Virginia John F. V. Neil 10 M Virginia Margaret J. Neil 7 FVirginia Julia C. Neil 3 F Virginia Martha Legg 5 F Virginia (95 in file)
  1870 U.S. Federal Census Nicholas County, West Virginia Jefferson Township Neil, Robert 61 M white farmer WV Neil, Jennetta 57 F white WV Neil, John V. 20 m white WV Neil, Julia 13 F white WV Legg, Martha 15 F white WV Fugate, Sarah 17 F white WV Sims, Rebecca 16 F mulatto WV Thornton, Emily 7 F mulatto WV
  Note: Rebecca Jane Sims was the granddaughter of Isaac Sims.
  1875 Robert L. Neil received land from Isaac Sims per his will.
  1880 U.S. Federal Census Jefferson, Nicholas, West Virginia Sheet No. 98B Neil, Robert Self M Male W 70 WV Farmer VA VA Neil, Jennette Wife M Female W 66 WV Keeps House VA IRE Neil, Vanfelt Son S Male W 30 WV WV WV Neil, Julia C. Dau S Female W 23 WV WV WV Querrey, Wm. S. Other S Male W 15 WV Farm Laborer VA VA Dorsey, Andrew Nephew S Male W 43 WV VA WV Johnson, Myrta E. Other S Female MU 5 WV Servant VA WV (105-6 in file)
  Note: Myrta E. Johnson is most likely the daughter of Rebecca Jane Sims and her husband David R. Johnson.
  *****
  Robert Lockridge Neill – How his land was divided and court case related to distribution
  This relates to the land that Grandmother Ada Jane Neil had obtained from her father, Robert Grimes Neil. She sold the land and retained the Coal/Oil rights. When she divorced Oliver E. Bennett, he kept some of the land. Per my father, James P. Bennett, the taxes are paid annually to this day for these oil/coal/gas rights. Notes and transcription by Teresa Bennett Whelan, Dec 2008 (Tabwhelan@hotmail.com)
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ https://archive.org/stream/southeasternrep24appegoog#page/n553/mode/2up https://archive.org/stream/southeasternrep24appegoog#page/n555/mode/2up https://archive.org/stream/southeasternrep24appegoog#page/n557/mode/2up
  There is an article about the Robert Lockridge Neil court case in the Southeastern Reporter, Vol. 95, pages 524 – 526 (copyrighted by West Publishing Co, 1918). This is where this information was taken from. The court case is listed under the title Neil vs. Flynn Lumber Co, et al (No. 3337). Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, March 12, 1918. This appeal was bumped to the Supreme Court by the Circuit Court, Nicholas County. C.W. Bell represented Robert Grimes Neil. Here is what the article states:
  Robert Neil died in the year 1888 leaving surviving him Alexander Middleton Neil, Nathan W. Neil, William Henry Harrison Neil, and "Robert Grimes Neil, children by his first wife, and Joseph F. Van Pelt Neil, Julia C. Simms, and Margaret J. Shelton, children of his second wife. At the time of his death, he was the owner of a tract of land in Nicholas county containing about 500 acres, the same being part of a larger tract of about 900 acres devised to him by his father. Shortly after his death, the three children by his last wife entered into an agreement to divide the land amongst themselves, pursuant to which it was divided by commissioners, and a part laid off to each of the three said children.
  Subsequently, and after the death of William F. Van Pelt Neil, it was discovered that an error had been made in partitioning the land among the three children, and to correct this a suit in equity was instituted for the purpose of having a repartition of the land, such a suit being rendered necessary because of the fact that the heirs of Joseph F. Van Pelt Neil were infants and could not make and sign an agreement as to the partition.
  This suit resulting in a division of the land in April 1897, by commissioners appointed by the court.
  After the death of his father, to wit, in the year 1896, Alexander Middleton Neil departed this live leaving surviving him a widow and six children. In the year 1914, the widow and all of the children of Alexander Middleton Neil united in a deed conveying all of their interest in the estate of the said Robert Neil to the plaintiff Robert L. Neil and this suit was thereupon instituted for the purpose of having partition of the tract of land, the title to which was in Robert Neil at the time of his death in 1888.
  Neither Alexander Middleton Neil nor his children were parties of the partition suit in which this land was divided between the three children of the second wife of Robert Neil. In defense to the bill it is insisted that Robert Middleton Neil received in his lifetime and advancement from his father in satisfaction of his prospective interest in the estate.
  Some time prior to the beginning of the Civil War, Alexander Middleton Neil, being the eldest child of his father, Robert Neil was married in Nicholas county. About the same time, his brother Nathan W. Neil was also married. At the time, it is shown that their father, Robert Neil, laid off to each of them a parcel of land from the boundary then owned by him. These tracts of land were contiguous to each other, and contained in the aggregate about 150 acres. It does not appear how much was in each of these tracts. Upon the respective tracts laid out to them, each of the sons constructed a house and moved into the same with his family.
  In the year 1862 the older son moved to the west and lived there until the time of his death in the fall of 1896. However, in the year 1866, he returned to his old home in Nicholas county for the purpose of disposing of the land which had been given to him by his father, but for which he had never received a conveyance.
  While in Nicholas county, he sold this land to his brother Nathan W. Neil for the sum of $400 and at that time, his father conveyed to Nathan W. Neil by one deed a boundary of land which what had theretofore been assigned by him to both of his sons. Pat of the money with which this land was purchased by Nathan W. Neil from his older brother was loaned to him by his father, and the residue, it appears, was subsequently paid when the wife of Alexander Middleton Neil was in Nicholas county for a visit.
  It was not recited in the deed from Robert Neil that the land conveyed thereby to Nathan W. Neil is to be taken as an advancement made to the two sons, Robert Middleton Neil and Nathan W. Neil nor does the deed show, on its face that any of the land therein conveyed was the part assigned to Robert Middleton Neil. This fact, however conclusively appears from the evidence.
  Subsequently Robert Neil conveyed another tract off his holdings to his son Robert Grimes Neil which contained about 45 acres, but upon which there was a mill, and still another tract to his son William Henry Harrison Neil containing a very much larger amount. The deed to William Henry Harrison Neil specifies that it is conveyed in discharge any interest that William Henry Harrison Neil might thereafter have in the estate of the said Robert Neil; and the deed to Robert Grimes Neil, as the same is recorded, has an addenda in the way of a receipt, signed by the said Robert Grimes Neil, that the same is accepted as satisfaction of any interest that might come to him from his father's estate.
  In this way, it is contended that the four older children, being the descendents of Robert Neil and his first wife, were provided for from their fathers estate prior to his death; that these advancements were made to them and were accepted by them in full satisfaction of any interest that they might otherwise thereafter be entitled to as heirs at law of said Robert Neil.
  This was the assumption upon which the three younger children, descendants of the said Robert Neil and his second wife, proceeded when the partitioned the land among themselves. It may be said that it is also shown that a short time before his death, Robert Neil advised his younger children that if they would agree upon the division of the remaining land among them, he would make them deeds therefore. That the four children of Robert Neil by his first wife received advancements from their father’s estate cannot be questioned. And the advancements made to William Henry Harrison Neil and Nathan W. Neil are admitted by them and their heirs to have been in full satisfaction of their prospective interests of their fathers estates.
  Robert Grimes Neil, however, contents that the conveyance received by him was not and advancement at all, but was purely a gift, or a purchase, rather, by him from his father for the recited consideration of $5, as shown by the deed. And the heirs at law, of Andrew Middleton Neil, now content that no advancement was ever made to their father, and that neither he nor they have ever received anything from the estate of their grandfather Robert Neil, their contention being that the land conveyed to Nathan W. Neil was only the share to which he was entitled, and not the share of himself and his brother.
  It is shown without dispute that did assign and set off to his son, Alexander Middleton Neil, before the civil war, a tract of land which is included in the deed to Nathan W. Neil with the land set off to him. It further appears without contradiction that Alexander Middleton Neil constructed a house thereon and lived in this house for a short time after his marriage, and it is shown indisputably, that after he moved to the west that he returned to Nicholas county in 1866 and sold this tract of land to his brother Nathan for the sum of $400.
  These facts clearly appear from the testimony of witnesses G.R. Johnson and John M. Cavendish. It also appears from the testimony of these witnesses that the land thus assigned to Alexander Middleton Neil by his father was included in the conveyance made to Nathan W. Neil and that is was so included to effectuate the same made by Alexander Middleton Neil to his brother Nathan."
  The article goes on to cite other legal cases and precedents ......... It then discusses again what Robert Neil did and what his intentions might have been. It discusses that Alexander Middleton was alive when his father died and made no claim to land at that time which further supported that the land he had been given from his father was his part of the land and mentions this is consistent with Robert Neil taking care of his children while they were living. Here is the decision as it related to the children of Alexander Middleton Neil:
  "we think very satisfactorily that the advancement made to Alexander Middleton Neil was given in full for his prospective interest in his father's estate, and was accepted by him on upon that condition. Such being the case, neither his children or his grantee, can now claim any interest in the land left by their ancestor, Robert Neil. By the acceptance of the advancement by their father on the conditions shown to have existed, they are estopped form asserting any such claims."
  "What we have said in regard to the claim of the heirs of Alexander Middleton Neil applies in full force to the claim now made by Robert Grimes Neil. It was shown that he lived right in the neighborhood, and was fully informed of the partition of this estate by the three younger children at the time it was made more than 20 years ago, that he made no claim to said land, nor to any part thereof at that time, nor at any time prior to the institution of this suit. His conduct in failing to assert his claim with full knowledge of the contention of his half-brother and sisters is entirely inconsistent with the claim he now makes that they land conveyed to him by his father was not an advancement but was in consideration of the nominal sum of $5 expressed in the deed. There is, as stated before, appended to the deed, as it is recorded in the county clerk's office the following stipulation:
  I do hereby agree to take the within described tract, of land as my portion of the estate of my father, Robert Neil. Given under____ hand and seal this third day of August 1870. Robert G. Neil."
  The rest of the article is a recap and not included here.
  This book is hard to find. Locally in Northern Virginia, it is not in the libraries but may exist in either the Georgetown University Law Library or in the George Mason Law Library. I could not find any copies available online for sale of this volume (#95). However, the actual article was available for reading Adobe style online at this web address:. http://books.google.com.
  [Source: http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/13235744/person/-102319950/media/3?pgnum=1&pg=0&pgpl=pid|pgNum; Tabwhelan originally submitted this to Whelan_Bennett_Family_Tree on 3 Dec 2008]


RootsWeb.com is NOT responsible for the content of the GEDCOMs uploaded through the WorldConnect Program. The creator of each GEDCOM is solely responsible for its content.