Muhlenberg County Kentucky
Divorce Records
Fannie Jackson vs. James Jackson
Contributed and transcribed by Charles Tarrants
Download this document in Microsoft Word
Fannie Grundy, the daughter of Abraham Drake Grundy and Nancy Jane Kirtley, was born 11 April 1857 in Muhlenberg County. She was married to James W. Jackson on 25 June 1873 in Robertson Co., Tennessee (Robertson County Tennessee Marriage Book 2 page 276). James W. Jackson was born about 1853 probably in Butler Co., Kentucky. He was the son of James Francis Jackson and Elizabeth Davis who had moved to Butler County about 1850 from Wilson Co., Tennessee. One child, a son, Abraham Francis Jackson (21 July 1874 to 27 August 1910) was the offspring of this marriage.
Their relationship was rocky from the start, especially opposed by the bride's mother, which is why, according to family tradition, the couple ran away to Tennessee to marry. James Jackson abandoned Fannie in February 1875 when, according to family tradition, he was threatened with a shotgun by his mother-in-law.
Fannie S. Jackson filed for divorce in the Muhlenberg Circuit Court on 28 August 1879 and it was granted in April 1880. James Jackson did not contest the action, nor did he appear or respond in anyway. Despite efforts by the court to locate him, he may have never known of the proceedings. Fannie then married William Bruce on 29 September 1881 in Muhlenberg. No children were produced from that union.
Fannie S. died 20 April 1915 in Muhlenberg and is buried in Coleman Cemetery as is her son. The whereabouts of James W. Jackson remain unknown.
Attached are transcriptions of the following documents related to the divorce.
- Petition in Equity of Fannie Jackson against James Jackson
- Deposition of Nancy Jane Kirtley Grundy - mother of Fannie
- Deposition of W.F. Grundy - brother of Fannie
- Deposition of Jacob S. Kittinger - Cousin of Nancy Jane Kirtley
- Report of the Attorney for James Jackson
- Judgment of the Court granting the divorce April 1880
Petition in Equity
28 August 1879
Muhlenberg Circuit Court
Fannie S. Jackson - Plaintiff
Against
James Jackson - Defendant
The plaintiff Fannie S. Jackson states that before her intermarriage with the defendant her name was Fannie S. Grundy. That on the -- day of June 187- she was married to said defendant, that they lived and cohabited together as man and wife until the -- day of February 1875 when the said defendant, her then husband, without faulty on her part abandoned and deserted her and that they have not lived together as man and wife nor in any other way since said abandonment and desertion as aforesaid.
She states that she is a resident of this county and of the state of Kentucky and that she has been a continuous resident of this state for more than one year next before the bring of this suit.
She states that she was an actual resident of this County and state aforesaid at the time of the abandonment by the said defendant and that her cause of action occurred in this state and within five years next after the abandonment and desertion aforesaid.
She states that there was no fault on her part that caused the defendant to abandon and desert her. That she had a residence in this state for one year next before the commencement of this action, that her cause of action occurred in this state and that she resided in this state, and that her cause of divorce existed within five years next before the commencement of this action.
She states that during the time she and the defendant lived together as man and wife there was born unto them a male child who is now about five years of age and named Abram F. Jackson, that she ought to have and should have the care custody and rearing of said child, and that she is a suitable person to do so.
She says, the defendant is a non-resident of this state, and has been absent for about four years, that she is informed and believes that is a resident of the State of Texas (but she has no knowledge or information as to the county or in what part of Texas in which the said deft. may be found or the name of the place wherein a Post Office in Texas nearest to the place where the Deft. resides or may be found, she has no knowledge or information thereof) and that he is not a suitable person to have the care custody and raising of her said Child Abram F. Jackson.
Wherefore she prays Judgment for divorce a vinculo matrimony from her said husband, that she be restored to all the rights and privileges of an unmarried woman, for the custody of her child Abram F. Jackson, for a warning order against the defendant and for all proper general and equitable relief.
(S.P.) Love atty.
Fannie S. Jackson says the statements in the foregoing petition she verily believes to be true [underlined text was drawn through on the original - CT] are true.
Fannie S. Jackson (her signature)
Sworn to before me by Fannie S. Jackson August 28 1879 S.P. Love
Deposition of Nancy J. Grundy
Muhlenberg County, Kentucky - 17 April 1880
The deposition of Nannie J. Grundy taken in the town of Bremen Muhlenberg County at the Office of J.P. Hendricks Police Judge of said town on Saturday April 17th 1880 agreeably to a notice herewith filed to be read as evidence in an action between Fannie Jackson Plaintiff and James Jackson defendant pending in the Muhlenberg Circuit Court.
By Pliffs Atty
1. State your age residence, how long you have known the parties to this action and if any relation what.
Ans. I am 40 years old, live in Muhlenberg County, KY, the plaintiff is my daughter and I knew the defendant James Jackson for about 8 months before he married the plaintiff.
2. When were the parties married.
Ans. They were married in June 1874.
3. When, if you know, did they separate.
Ans. 5 years ago last February.
4. Where were they living at the time they separated.
Ans. In Muhlenberg County, Ky.
5. How long had the plaintiff lived in said County prior to the separation.
Ans. All her life.
6. Where has she lived since, where is she now living and for what time.
Ans. In the same County and is now living in this County she has never lived any where else.
7. How far did you live from them at the time of the separation, and how frequently were you at their house, and how often did you see them whilst they lived together as man and wife.
Ans. In sight, I was never at their house very often after they move to their selves, they did not live very long to theirselves before they separated, they were living at my house before they went to theirselves, I saw them at last 2 or 3 times a week after they moved to theirselves until they separated.
8. What was the treatment of the plaintiff to the defendant so far as you observed and had opportunities to see.
Ans. Her treatment to defendant was at all times so far as I saw or could find out was that of a kind affectionate and obedient wife.
9. Was it any fault of the plaintiff that caused the separation.
Ans. Not that I know of or could see.
10. What caused the separation, state if you know.
Ans. In February 1876 the defendant without any cause on the part of the plaintiff left and abandoned the plaintiff and has never lived with her since.
11. What became of the defendant, if you know, where does he live now, or what information if any have you in regard to this whereabouts.
Ans. He went off and I have not seen him since he left, nor do I know where he now lives, nor have I any information as to where he is.
12. Were any children born to them whilst they lived together as man and wife, if so how many, give their sex and ages.
Ans. One child a boy he is now in his sixth year.
13. Who has had the care control and custody of said child since.
Ans. Its Mother who has been living with me ever since the defendant abandoned her.
14. (no number 14.)
15. State whether or not she the plaintiff is a suitable person to have the care control and custody of the said child and whether or not she would bring him up in moral courses.
Ans. Yes she is capable of raising him of taking care of him bringing him up right.
Nancy J. Grundy (her mark)
Deposition of W.F. Grundy
Muhlenberg County, Kentucky - 17 April 1880
Also the deposition of W.F. Grundy taken at the same time and place and for the purposes mentioned in the Caption
1. What is your age, residence occupation and relation to the plaintiff, how long have you known the Deft. and if you know where he is.
Ans. I am 25 years old, reside in Muhlenberg County, Ky. I am a farmer. I am a brother to the plaintiff. I knew him about 8 months before he married. I don't know where he is, I have not seen him since about March 1875.
2. What was the cause, if you know of the separation.
Ans. The defendant went off left and abandoned the plaintiff about February 1875 without so far as I know any fault on the part of plaintiff and they have never lived together since.
3. What were your opportunities of seeing the treatment of plaintiff to deft.
Ans. They lived at my mothers house from the time they were married in June 1874 until about Christmas of that year when they moved to a place in sight of our house and I was at their house 2 or 3 times a week until he left my sister in February 1875.
4. What was the treatment of the plaintiff toward defendant when you saw them.
Ans. It was at all times when I saw them and so far as I know was kind, affectionate, she was obedient and dutiful as a wife.
5. Where did you believe the plaintiff reside for twelve months prior to [blank] day of April 1879 and for how long.
Ans. She was living in this County at that time and she has lived in this county all her life and has lived no where else
W.F. Grundy
Deposition of Jacob S. Kittinger
Muhlenberg County, Kentucky - 17 April 1880
Also the deposition of Jacob S. Kittinger taken at the same time and place and to be read as evidence in the action mentioned in the caption.
By Plaintiff
1. State your age, residence occupation, if acquainted with the plaintiff and defendant, how long have you known them, where do they live and for how long.
Ans. I am 37, I live in this county, a farmer, I know both the parties, I have known the plaintiff all her life, she now lives in this county and has lived here so far as I know all her life, I do not know where the defendant lives, he left hear in the year 1875, in the summer, and I have not seen him since, I lived in about 1.1 miles from them when they separated in February 1875, and I now live the same distance from the plaintiff.
2. What, if any, information have you in regard to the whereabouts of the Deft., give all the information you have on that point.
Ans. The last I hard of him was from Edward Stuard a neighbor who had returned from the state of Texas who told me that the defendant had stolen a wagon and two mules in Texas and it was supposed had gone with them to the Indian nation this is the last information I have of him
J.S. Kittinger
Report of the Attorney for James Jackson
25 March 1880
Muhlenberg Circuit Court
Fannie S. Jackson - Plaintiff
Against
James Jackson - Defendant
Thos. A. Martin Attorney for the non-resident defendant James Jackson says that he has no information in regard to where the said defendant resides, that after diligent efforts to find out where he resides or the nearest Post Office is kept to his place of residence he has been unable to find out where he is. Consequently he has had no correspondence with said defendant, But he asks the Court to protect his interest in the action.
Thomas A. Martin (his signature) non-resident atty.
Judgment of the Muhlenberg Circuit Court
April 1880
Case #977
Muhlenberg Circuit Court
Fannie S. Jackson - Plaintiff
Against } Judgment in Equity
James Jackson - Defendant
This action was heard upon the petition exhibits proof and the attorney for the non-resident defendant James Jackson filed his report and said defendant having been duly warned, and the court being fully advised in the premises, It is and judged that the plaintiff Fannie S. Jackson be and she is divorced from the bonds of matrimony with the said defendant, and restored to all the rights and privileges of an unmarried woman. It is further adjudged by the Court, that said plaintiff have the care control and custody of the infant child Abram F. Jackson the same mentioned in the petition free from the care control and custody of the said defendant and this action is stricken from the docket.
Updated November 24, 2015