|
|
Valentine "Wall" Hatfield [A1347]
b.1834 ca - Logan Co., VA
d.1890 18 Feb - Kentucky State Penitentiary, Lexington?, KY
----- Parents -----
Ephriam "Big Eaf" Hatfield [A1345]
Nancy Vance [A1346]
----- Siblings -----
Valentine "Wall" Hatfield [A1347]
Martha Matilda Hatfield [A1487]
Elizabeth "Betty" Hatfield [A1501]
William Anderson "Devil Anse" Hatfield, Captain [A1524]
Ellison Hatfield [A1316][A1641]
Elias "Good Lias" Hatfield [A1715]
Emma Hatfield [A1729]
Bridget "Biddie" Hatfield [A1768]
Smith Hatfield [A1773]
Patterson Hatfield [A1782]
----- Marriages -----
m01. - + Sally Mahon (2 Children)
m02. 1853 29 Aug - Pike Co, Ky + Nancy Jane Maynard (11 Children)
----- Children -----
Amanda Hatfield [A1349]
Samuel B "Sam" Hatfield [A1350]
Valentine David? Hatfield, Jr [A1352]
Ephriam D "Eph" Hatfield [A1353]
Nancy Hatfield [A1368]
Sarah Ann Hatfield [A1373]
Victoria "Vicey" Hatfield [A1378]
Mary Hatfield [A1390]
Sampson "Sampy" Hatfield [A1392]
Ellison L Hatfield [A1256][A1453]
Laura B Hatfield [A1467]
Smith E "Dobbin" Hatfield [A1469]
Allen Hatfield [A1471]
Portion of letter from Valentine (in jail) to his wife, Jane Maynard
(thanks to Roger Mayhorn 3 Feb 2013)
Pikeville Ky. April 4th, 1888
Dear wife I take the pleasure of dropping you a few lines to let you know
that we are all not well but I think the most of us is better than we
have been. Jane I have wrote several times to you and Eph, and sent for
someone to come over and I can't get a word from nobody so I hope this
will reach your hand and find you and our children and friends all well.
Write back to me every chance. We have a trial for bond on the 10th of
April and I want you to tell Eph and Richard Blankenship --- go work and
to get the witness that Ephraim wrote to me about and Jake Ferrell and
Jake Blankenship and Mount Murphy and Dan Christian and all other good
men that knows us and Ralph Steele to come here then and help us to get
bond for if we have to stay here till August I don't think half of us can
live in this place. Jane tell them all to be good to our children. Jane I
never swore an oath since I have ben in jail nor played a card since I
started to Louisville...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/hatfieldmmcoy/permalink/317466258330918/
----------------------------------
name: Val Hatfield
event: Census
event date: 1850
event place: Logan county, part of, Logan, Virginia, United States
gender: Male
age: 16
marital status:
race (original):
race (standardized): White
birthplace: Virginia
estimated birth year: 1834
dwelling house number: 383
family number: 383
line number: 34
nara publication number: M432
nara roll number: 956
film number: 444946
digital folder number: 004206378
image number: 00296
Household Gender Age Birthplace
Ephraim Hatfield M 39 Virginia
Nancy Hatfield F 37 Virginia
Val Hatfield M 16 Virginia
Elizabeth Hatfield F 14 Virginia
Alderson Hatfield M 11 Virginia
Ellison Hatfield M 7 Virginia
Elias Hatfield M 5 Virginia
Emma Hatfield F 2 Virginia
Bridget Hatfield F 0 Virginia
Citing this Record
"United States Census, 1850," index and images, FamilySearch
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/M8DC-1BZ : accessed 03 Feb 2013),
Val Hatfield in household of Ephraim Hatfield, Logan county, part of,
Logan, Virginia, United States; citing dwelling 383, family 383, NARA
microfilm publication M432, roll 956.
----------------------------------------
groom's name: Valentine Hatfield
groom's birth date: 1834
groom's birthplace: Va.
groom's age: 19
bride's name: Jane Mainard
bride's birth date: 1837
bride's birthplace: Pike County, Ky.
bride's age: 16
marriage date: 29 Aug 1853
marriage place: Pike, Kentucky
groom's father's name:
groom's mother's name:
bride's father's name:
bride's mother's name:
groom's race:
groom's marital status:
groom's previous wife's name:
bride's race:
bride's marital status:
bride's previous husband's name:
indexing project (batch) number: M01330-3
system origin: Kentucky-EASy
source film number: 1943483
reference number: pg231b
Citing this Record
"Kentucky, Marriages, 1785-1979," index, FamilySearch
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/FWBM-WQ5 : accessed 03 Feb 2013),
Valentine Hatfield and Jane Mainard, 29 Aug 1853; citing reference
pg231b, FHL microfilm 1943483.
----------------------------------------
Name: Valentine Hatfield
Event Type:
Event Year:
Event Place: Logan, VA
Minor Civil Division: [Blank]
Age (Expanded): 26 years
Birth Year (Estimated):
Birthplace:
Gender:
Page: 94
Household ID:
Affiliate Publication Number: M653
GS Film number: 805358
Digital Folder Number: 4297387
Image Number: 00302
Name: Jane Hatfield Age (Expanded): 23 years
Name: David Hatfield Age (Expanded): 6 years
Name: Ephraim Hatfield Age (Expanded): 4 years
Name: Nancy Hatfield Age (Expanded): 2 years
Name: Sarah Ann Hatfield Age (Expanded): 0 years
"United States Census, 1860," index, FamilySearch
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/M41D-X8H : accessed 01 Jul 2013),
Sarah Ann Hatfield, 1860
----------------------------------------
Name: Valentine Hatfield
Estimated Birth Year: 1834
Gender: Male
Age in 1870: 36y
Color (white, black, mulatto, chinese, Indian): White
Birthplace: Virginia
Home in 1870: West Virginia, United States
Household Gender Age Birthplace
Valentine Hatfield M 36y Virginia
Jane Hatfield F 33y Kentucky
Ephraim Hatfield M 14y Virginia
Nancy Hatfield F 12y Virginia
Sarah A Hatfield F 10y Virginia
Vicy Hatfield F 8y Virginia
Mary Hatfield F 6y West Virginia
Samson Hatfield M 2y West Virginia
Ellison Hatfield M 1m West Virginia
Source Citation
"United States Census, 1870," index and images, FamilySearch
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/MZ4G-819 : accessed 03 Aug 2012),
Valentine Hatfield in household of Valentine Hatfield, West Virginia,
United States; citing p. 7, family 58, NARA microfilm publication M593,
FHL microfilm 553190.
----------------------------------------
Name: Valentine Hatfield
Residence: Magnolia, Logan, West Virginia
Birthdate: 1832
Birthplace: Virginia, United States
Relationship to Head: Self
Spouse's Name: Jane Hatfield
Spouse's Birthplace: Kentucky, United States
Father's Name:
Father's Birthplace: Virginia, United States
Mother's Name:
Mother's Birthplace: Virginia, United States
Race or Color (Expanded): White
Ethnicity (Standardized): American
Gender: Male
Martial Status: Married
Age (Expanded): 48 years
Occupation: Farmer
NARA Film Number: T9-1406
Page: 299
Page Character: B
Entry Number: 161
Film number: 1255406
Household Gender Age Birthplace
SELF Valentine Hatfield M 48 Virginia, United States
WIFE Jane Hatfield F 46 Kentucky, United States
DAU Mary Hatfield F 14 West Virginia, United States
SON Sampson Hatfield M 10 West Virginia, United States
SON Elison Hatfield M 9 West Virginia, United States
DAU Laura Hatfield F 8 West Virginia, United States
SON Allen Hatfield M 5 West Virginia, United States
SON Smith Hatfield M 3 West Virginia, United States
Source Citation
"United States Census, 1880," index, FamilySearch
(https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/M6RY-HW6 : accessed 03 Aug 2012),
Valentine Hatfield, Magnolia, Logan, West Virginia; citing sheet 299B,
family 0, NARA microfilm publication T9-1406.
-----------------------------------------------
According to the Kentucky State Penitentiary prison ledger reproduced on
page 23 of Volume 16, No. 1, Spring/Summer 2000 of HERITAGE OF MINGO
Valentine Hatfield was a white, male serving a life sentence for murder
sent from Pike Co., August court term. He was received at the
penitentiary January 2, 1890, committal number 73, age 56, height 6 feet,
weight 162 lbs., fair complexion, color of eyes, yellow; color of hair,
dark; education, com; nativity, WVA; occupation, farmer; previous habits.
INT; social relations, M, Sunday School; No. Description, Book 2, page
17, former conviction, none; how and when discharged, died Feb. 13, 1890.
Brenda Ferrell Sampsel
https://www.facebook.com/groups/hatfieldmmcoy/permalink/508355405908668/?c
omment_id=513655572045318&offset=0&total_comments=31
---------------------------------------------------
HATFIELD v COMMONWEALTH
MAYHORN v. COMMONWEALTH
(Filed Nov. 9, 1889-Not to be reported.)
1. Criminal law-Competent to prove acts done in another State--Under an
indictment for a crime committed in this State it is competent to prove
acts done in another State for the purpose of showing the criminal intent.
2. Jurisdiction where defendant was in another State when crime was
committed--Where a crime is committed in this State one who puts into
operation
the force or power that caused the wrong is punishable in this State. al-
though at the time of the commission of the offense he was in another
State.
3. Aiders and abettors--One who aids and abets in the commission of a
murder is as guilty as he who actually does the killing.
4. Evidence-Declaration of co-conspirators--Under a joint indictment
against several defendants for murder, charging a conspiracy, their decla-
rations while in charge of the persons killed. after the latter had been
taken
from the officers of the law, were competent against each defendant in so
far as such declarations referred to the purpose the defendants had com-
bined to accomplish.
W. M. Connolly. A. J. Auxier, R. M. Ferrell and P. A. & J.S.
Cline for appellants.
S. G. Klnnesr and P. W. Hardin for appellee.
Appeal from Pike Circuit Court.
Opinion of the court by Judge Pryor.
The appellants, Valentine Hatfield. and Doc. Mayhorn and Plyant
Mayhorn, were indicted, tried and convicted in the Pike Circuit Court
for the murder of one Tolbert McCoy. The verdict and judgment
fixed their punishment at confinement in the State prison during
life, from which they have appealed to this court.
The two Mayhorns were tried together, and a separate trial had
for the accused, Valentine Hatfield,
As the facts of both records apply to the one charge of murder,
and the legal questions in many respects are identical, we will con-
sider the case as If there had been no separate trial.
At the August election, in the year 1882, a personal difficulty orig-
inated between three of the McCoy boys and one Ellison Hatfield,
the brother of the appellant, Valentine Hatfield, in which Hatfield
was stabbed or cut with a knife, and died in a short time from the
effects of the wound. What caused this trouble between these par-
ties is not disclosed by the record, nor was it proper for the court be-
low, in the trial of these appellants, to have made such an inquiry.
After the fight had terminated between the McCoys and Hatfield,
the McCoys were at once arrested by one who is termed "a Special
constable", and named Floyd Hatfield, and placed in the custody of
Tolbert Hatfield and Joseph Hatfield, two justices of the peace of
Pike county. These officers of the law in connection with the con-
stable, all of them related to the man killed, thought it proper to
carry the prisoners, the three McCoy boys, to the county seat to be
tried. and had the precaution to have with them a guard to protect
their prisoners against any attack that might be made upon them
by the Hatfields, who had remained behind. They had not pro-
ceeded many miles in the direction of Pikeville before they were
overtaken by Valentine Hatfield, one of the accused, Elias Hatfield
and others, who, according to their own statement, wanted the law
enforced, but. as a matter of public convenience, thought the officers
of the law should try them In the magisterial district where the
fight took place. The accused, Valentine Hatfield, was also an of-
ficer of the law (a justice of the peace), but lived in the State of West
Virginia, a short distance from the Kentucky border. The officers
of the law, having these boys in charge, seem to have had but little
hesitation in surrendering their jurisdiction to the Virginia justice
of the peace, who, in conjunction with a posse of armed men, re-
turned with their unfortunate young prisoners, that they might
have their trial, as the defense new contends, in the civil district
bordering on and near the Virginia line. These parties had not gone
far on their return before they were joined near the mouth of a
branch, by a man called Ans Hatfield and his squad of men, and
among them the two Mayhorns (appellants). who are the son-in-
laws of the other appellant, Valentine Hatfield.
This squad of men were armed with guns when they met these
Kentucky justices, who had been divested of their jurisdiction by
the Virginia justice, and, after proceeding to the residence of Jerry
Hatfield, the party obtained a rope and tied the three boys together,
and in this condition carried them to the Rev. Anderson Hatfield.
where the party was entertained at dinner. While at the home of
the Rev. Hatfield, Ans. Hatfield stepped forth and directed "all of
Hatfield's friends to form a line," and, from the testimony, although
there is some conflict in the statements, these appellants all went
into line, and, if doubt exists in this particular, that they were all
present is a conceded fact.
The prisoners were then taken across the river, or the line bound-
ing the two States. and confined in a school-house on the Virginia
side. There they were guarded by armed men, the defendants be-
ing among the number, who, now on the stand as witnesses, Pro-
test against any criminal intent on their part, and avowing their
purpose to protect these boys from injury by others. They kept
them confined in this room until they heard of the death of Ellison
Hatfield, who, it was said, had been stabbed by the youngest of the
McCoy boys, and then the clamor for human blood began. Tolbert
McCoy was twenty-one years old, Pharmer, nineteen, and Randall,
fifteen.
In the meantime they permitted the mother of the boys to visit
them, and this old lady seeing that human law was powerless to
save her boys, on beaded knees implored the interposition of
Divine Providence for the protection of her offspring from the bru-
tal resolves of these merciless men; and the appellant, Valentine
Hatfield, in mocking of her fervent appeals, required her, using the
language of the witness, "to make less noise and leave."
After learning of the death of Hatfield they took these boys from
the school-house to the Kentucky side of the river, the two appel-
lants, the Mayhorns, being along with the armed force, and when
reaching the spot where they were to carry into execution their
murderous intent, they surrounded their victims for the purpose. as
they proclaimed, of having "a shooting match" and, cocking their
guns, blew the top of the smaller boy's head off, shot Tolbert some
fifteen times and Pharmer eleven times, and then made the night
hideous by hooting, as the owl, in contempt, doubtless, of the law,
and those who administer it. The appellant, Valentine Hatfield,
was not actually present when this wholesale murder was commit-
ted, but with his gun on the opposite side of the river, some two or
three hundred yards distant, ready and near enough to give aid and
assistance should an attempt be made to rescue the prisoners, and
to administer an oath to each one of his forces, on their return from
the murder of this little boy, that they would never reveal the
action of any one connected with the brutal act. The oath was ad-
ministered. and, doubtless, the greater portion of the band proved
- faithful to their chosen leader.
The indictment in this case charges a conspiracy on the part of
these appellants and many others (who are indicted with them) to
commit this crime, and those not guilty of the actual shooting as
being present, aiding and abetting in the commission of the offense.
It is argued that what transpired, with reference to this offense, or
the custody of these boys on the Virginia side of the line, is incom-
petent, because it constituted an offense against the laws of that
State and not that of Kentucky; and that the accused, Valentine
Hatfield. being on the Virginia side of the boundary line, could not,
in contemplation of law, have aided and abetted a murder in Ken-
tucky so as to bring him within the jurisdiction of the Kentucky
courts. Again, that he was not near enough to the parties on the
9th of August, when the wrong was perpetrated, to have aided and
abetted in its commission, an , therefore, cannot be convicted as a
principal; and lastly, there is not only a want of evidence connect-
ing him with the actual offense, but a want of evidence showing any
criminal intent.
It is not pretended that the courts of our State can enforce its laws
beyond the State boundary, but it is well settled that when one puts
into operation the force or power that causes the injury, he is re-
sponsible where the wrong is perpetrated, although he may not be
actually present. If either of the appellants had stood on the Vir-
ginia side and shot the deceased on the Kentucky side, the offense
would have been against the laws of Kentucky. 1 Bishop's Crim.
Law, 111. Such legal questions, however, do not arise in this
case. The appellants, or those living in the State of Virginia, came
to this State and took from its jurisdiction the deceased, who was
charged with violating the law of the State, and under the pretense
of having them tried in a district convenient to the witnesses sum-
moned, or who would likely be summoned for prosecution took them
from the custody of the officers of the law and transported them to
the Virginia side of the line where they were held as prisoners until
the result of the stabbing of Ellison Hatfield could be ascertained,
and the latter dying from his wounds, the boys were brought back
to Kentucky and murdered on the night of the 9th of August, l882,
by a band of men under the leadership of Valentine Hatfleld, who,
from the inception of this reckless violation of law to its conclusion.
could, at any time, have stayed the hand of the murderers and
saved the lives of these young men. From the time the officers of
the law in Kentucky made to him, as the record shows, a willing
surrender of their bodies, he, as the presiding judge of this murder-
ous clan, follows them to the bunk of Loy river, on the night of
the 9th, and there, with gun in hand, awaits their coming from the
scene of murder, that he may, in the darkness of night, administer
to each and all of them an oath never to reveal the names of those
guilty of this heinous crime.
He was as much u principal in the murder as the man who fired
the gun that took the life of the fourteen year old boy. These appel�
lants had combined to do an unlawful act in conjunction with others.
and that was to punish the deceased for his assault on Ellison Hat-
field. and to take his life if Hatfield died from the wounds received.
Their declarations while in charge of these prisoners, after they had
been taken from the law officers, was competent against each one
when spoken in reference to the purpose they had combined to ac�
complish. The instructions in this case embraced the whole law.
The one for murder is in the usual form, and so in regard to those
present aiding and abetting in the act done. The case, so far as the
appellants, the Mayhorns, are concerned, depends solely upon the
testimony establishing their guilt. We forbear to discuss it further,
and have recited the facts as detailed by the witnesses for the State,
sustained in many instances by the testimony for the defense, show-
ing that they were present during: the entire period that these young
men were in the custody of this lawless gang. While each one of
the accused has testified as to his innocence of any purpose even to
commit crime, and have been to some extent corroborated by others
who were their friends and associates, it is sufficient to any that. the
jury trying each case, after hearing all the testimony, had no reason-
able doubt as to their guilt, and after in careful reading of the record
it would be difficult, in our opinion, for any rational mind to reach
a different conclusion.
The history of crime. whether committed in this State or out of
it. Will present no state of facts more clearly establishing guilt than
is found in this record, applied to either or all the parties convicted,
and to find a more cruel and inhuman murder we must leave our
civilization and resort to the annals of savage life. It is needless,
however, to comment on the enormity of the crime or the helpless
condition of the young victims of this murderous band. The law
has been enforced in these cases and, in its administration. the ap-
pellants can truly say the jury, in inflicting the punishment by im-
prisonment for 1ife "has tempered justice with mercy."
The judgment of conviction, as to each one of the appellants, is
affirmed.
"Kentucky Law Reported" Volume XI, July 1, 1889 to June 15, 1890,
Frankfort, KY., Geo. A. Lewis, Book and Job Printer, 1890.
http://books.google.com/books?id=rnMsAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA469&dq=valentine+hatfie
ld+prison&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QytMUvbkEobkyQGCroGQDQ&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ
Thomas Dotson replies:
"While court records are among the best evidence for historical research,
they are not perfect. In Wall Hatfield's case, the Kentucky Court of
Appeals decisions states NINE times that the state across Tug River from
Blackberry Creek was Virginia-not West Virginia. The Supreme Court, in
Mahon v Justice did, as you say, refer to Tolbert and Joseph as "Justices
of the Peace." That is not correct, as anyone familiar with the area
knows. Justice of the Peace was an elected office, the main function of
which was judicial. There were only seven in the entire county."
"Preacher Anse Hatfield held that office for District 7, which included
Blackberry, at the time in question. He was not running for another term,
and Tom Stafford was elected to replace him at that fateful election. For
there to be two Justices of the Peace there on Blackberry, at least one
of them would have come from at least as far away as Pikeville. No JP
would be that far from home on Election Day.
Tolbert and Joseph Hatfield were deputy sheriffs, while Floyd was
constable. The Court was in error in calling them 'Justices of the
Peace.' The constable was elected from the same district as the justice
of the peace."
https://www.facebook.com/groups/hatfieldmmcoy/permalink/512844318793110/?c
omment_id=514728995271309&offset=0&total_comments=28
--------------------------------------
Frankfort KY Prison Cemetery, 38�12'11.02"N 84�52'5.14"W (38.20306
-84.86810)
---------------------------------------
|
|
