Showing posts with label will. Show all posts
Showing posts with label will. Show all posts

17 April 2026

Cooks (7) - MURDER!? John Cook Jr and his wives.

 MURDER? John Cook Jr / Roxanna Lane

As a genealogist you read all sorts of human experiences: the good, the bad and the ugly. But I never expected to find someone indicted and tried for murder.
 
John Cook Jr, the father of John Levi Cook (subject of post #1), reminds me of how little I know his John Levi Cook's childhood.
 
John Cook Jr was born in Winchendon, Mass, on 5 Mar 1805, to Anna Beal and John Cook. 
 Winchendon is close to the New Hampshire state line, as is Ashburnham, MA, the location he settled in. In the 1845 map below, Winchendon is just left of the green area (which is Ashburnham). You see "Rindge" and "New Ipswich" --those towns are in New Hampshire.
In March 1832 he and Roxanna Lane announced intentions to wed. He was 27 years old at the time, she was 39 years old. (Somewhat unusual for an older woman to marry a man more than 10 years younger.)  Because it was not customary to keep your maiden name, Roxanna had never been married. (It's possible either one or both had once been engaged, but no evidence of a marriage). 
 
They were married 3 April 1832. 
 
Roxana's father held much land in Ashburnham--he acquired land from relatives through the years, and eventually was prosperous as a result. (it's quite possible he established businesses on the land).
 
John Cook's and his wife had a baby girl they named Sarah Roxanna Cook on 6 Oct 1833, when Roxanna was 40 years old.
 
1834 - Quite a year. 
Unfortunately the baby's mother, Roxanna, died 24 Feb 1834, before the child was a year old. A few months later, his father-in-law, Benjamin Lane, makes a will. 
---- 
8 Apr 1834  
A summary of Benjamin Lane's will.  
His will provides $100 to his infant granddaughter, Sarah Roxanna, the daughter of the deceased Roxanna, to be paid one year after his decease.  "And it is my will that her father should be appointed her guardian to manage and to take care of her legacy." (that would be John Cook). Other property was divided amongst the sons. All daughters, who were married would have one share. 

There was a yet unmarried daughter, Melinda, "who lives with in my family" to be included in the one share equally divided. Moreover,"The several sums which I have advanced to my said daughter (and may hereafter advance to them) and which are on my books to be deducted from their portions respectively."

Throughout the entire will, Benjamin is clear that his "books" will reflect the amount to be deducted, whether for the Howard children or Melinda. It is a meticulous will--it was so specific it made me wonder about the family relationships. He seemed to have a strong desire that no one be untreated unfairly in money once he had died and no longer had oversight.
 
1834 was not yet over: Before the year was out, John Cook remarries.
 
John Cook Jr was 29 when he married Cynthia Metcalf. Cynthia was 17 when she married John Cook on 12 November 1834. 

Nothing is very unusual here except he marries a woman much older than he, then after her death, his second wife is 12 years younger than he. 
We're not judging, just noting.


As I mentioned, the will of Benjamin Lane had been drawn up in April of that year. He, the father of the deceased Roxanna Lane Cook, died 1 1/2 years after making his will, in Dec 1835.
 
John Cook Jr and wife 2, Cynthia Metcalf have three children:
 1 George W Cook 1836–1855
 2 Martha Jane Cook 1840–1910
 3*John Levi Cook 1841–1910 (*ancestor)
 
But Cynthia, his 2nd wife, dies in 1844, when the youngest is only 3 years old. They were married for 10 years.


So far their life has been sad, but now it gets strange. In 1846, John Cook is charged with murdering his 1st wife, Roxanna Lane. I could not find the details. Apparently he was tried in Worcester (the county seat). 

1848 was a bad, bad year for John Cook Jr

On February 21-25, 1834, in Ashburnham, Worcester County, John Cook Jr. was accused of mixing and administering poison (white arsenic) to his wife, Roxanna Cook, ultimately resulting in her death on February 25, 1834.

The case was brought before the Court of Common Pleas in Worcester, with the indictment returned by the Grand Jury in September. Proceeding/court trial continuing into October and December 1848.

In October and December 1848, John Cook the younger stood trial in Worcester County after being indicted for murdering his wife by poison. He was found not guilty by a jury on December 7, 1848, leading to his discharge.

Dates

  • February 21–25, 1834 (events involving John and Roxanna Cook)
  • September 1848 (Grand Jury indictment, Court of Common Pleas)
  • October and December 1848 (jury trial held and judgment/proceedings)

Names and Relationships

  • John Cook Jr., husband of Roxanna Cook (accused)
  • Roxanna [Lane] Cook, wife of John Cook Jr. (deceased)

Names and Relationships

  • John Cook Jr (called, “the younger” defendant in the trial)
  • Benjamin F. Thomas (assigned counsel for John Cook)
  • Milton Whitney (assigned counsel for John Cook)
  • John W. Lincoln (Sheriff)
  • Isaac Davenport (jury foreman)
  • Other jurors: Edward Aldrich, Gilman Day, Asa E. Edmunds, Joseph M. Green, Asa Kilburn, Asa Marcan, Samuel Patrick, Henry B. Pratt, Jesse Spaulding, Alvah A. Stone, Isaac N. Stone (jurors in the trial)

Text of court documents (original docs below text)

Page 1

Commonwealth . vs Cook October , 1848, by adjournment , December , 1848 .

The Jurors for the Commonwealth aforesaid , on their oath present That John Cook the younger of Winchendon in the County of Worcester, yeoman, contriving and intending one Roxanna Cook wife of said John Cook , with person feloniously willfully and of his malice aforethought to kill and murder , on the twenty first day of February in the year of our Lord one thousand Eight hundred and thirty four and on divers days and times between that day and the twenty fifth day of the same of February , willfully , feloniously and of his malice aforethought did mix and mingle a large quantity of deadly poison, to wit, White Arsenic in certain food and drink which had during the time aforesaid, at divers days and times been prepared for the use of the said Roxanna Cook to be eaten and drunk, by her, the said Rosanna Cook, he the said John Cook then and there well knowing that the said food and drink, with which he the said John Cook did so my and mingle the said deadly poison as aforesaid was then and there prepared for the use of the said Roxanna Cook with intent to be administered to and taken by her for her eating and drinking the same, and he the said John Cook then and there well knowing that the said White Arsenic so as a?id by him mixed and mingled in said food and drink to be a deadly poison, and the said food and drink, with which said deadly poison was so mixed and mingled as aforesaid, afterwards to wit on said twenty first day of February, and on said divers days and times were delivered to said Roxanna Cook and taken by her to be eaten and drank by her, and she the said Roxanna Cook not knowing the said poison to be mixed and mingled with said food and drink, did afterwards to wit, on said twenty first day of February and on said divers days and times , there eat, drink and swallow down several large quantities of said deadly poison so mixed and mingled as aforesaid with said food and drink, and the said John Cook that he might the more certainly and speedily destroy the life of the said Roxanna Cook on the twenty third day of said February , with force and arms at Ashburnham aforesaid October, 1848 , by adjournment , December, 1848, did, knowingly, willfully, feloniously and of his malice aforethought did mix and mingle a large quantity of deadly poison, to wit White Arsenic , with certain sling, he the said John Cook then and there well knowing the said White Arsenic to be a deadly poison, and afterwards to wit , on said twenty third day of said February at said Ashburnham the said person so mixed and mingled as aforesaid with the ring aforesaid feloniously willfully and of his malice aforethought, the said John Cook did give and administer to the said Rosanna Cook to take drink and swallow down , and the said Roxanna Cook not knowing the person aforesaid in the sting aforesaid to have been mixed and mingled as aforesaid afterwards , to wit , on said twenty third day of February aforesaid , at said Ashburnham , the said poison so as aforesaid mixed and mingled , by the procurement, and persuasion of said John Cook did take drink and swallow down, and the said Roxanna Cook of the poison aforesaid and by the operation thereof, on said twenty third day of February aforesaid at said Ashburnham , became and was sick and greatly distempered in her body, of which said sickness and distemper of body occasioned by the eating drinking and swallowing down into the body of her the said Roxanna Cook of the person aforesaid so as aforesaid mixed and mingled with the food drink and sling aforesaid she the said Roxanna Cook from the said several days and times on which she had so eaten drank and swallowed down the person as aforesaid until the twenty fifth day of February aforesaid did then and there languish and languishing did live and on said twenty fifth day of February aforesaid at Ashburnham aforesaid , she the said Roxanna Cook of the poison aforesaid so eaten drunk and swallowed down as aforesaid and of the sickness and distemper aforesaid , thereby occasioned, did die . And so the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say that the said John Cook , he the said Rosanna Cook in manner and form , and by the means aforesaid, then and there feloniously willfully and of his malice aforethought, did kill and murder, against the peace of said Commonwealth and contrary to the form of the State in such case made and provided. This Indictment was returned by the Grand Jury into the Court of Common Pleas, at a term thereof holden at Worcester within and for the said County of Worcester on the fourth Monday in September last.

PAGE 2

1848, by adjournment, December 1848

The Court , that , as soon as might be , the above named John Cook the younger , should be served with a copy of the aforesaid Indictment, with the order thereon , by the Sheriff of said County or his Deputy , and that in manner aforesaid , the said John Cook the your or should be notified that the said Indictment would be entered at the Term of the Supreme Judicial Court, next to be holden at Worcester , within and for the County of Worcester , on the first Tuesday of October then next, then and there to be heard and determined as the law directs . And it appearing to the Court here that the said Indictment charged the said John Cook the younger with a crime punishable with death.

It was ordered by the Court there, that the said Indictment, together with the several orders of that Court, made thereon , should be transmitted to the Supreme Judicial Court , next to be holden at Worcester , within and for the County of Worcester , on the first Tuesday of October , then next , there to be entered and proceeded upon according to law. And the Court there further ordered, that the said John Cook the younger , who was then in the custody of the Sheriff of said County , in our jail at Worcester , in said County , should be held in confinement in our said Jail, until he should be delivered therefrom by due course of law .

This Indictment was accordingly transmitted to this Court, and entered in the same Court for this County at October Term, 1848 when the said John Cook the younger , came before the Court , under the custody of the Sheriff of said County , and was set to the Bar and arraigned upon said Indictment, and having been enquired of how he would acquit himself thereof, the same said that thereof he was not guilty, and thereof for trial put himself upon the Country , and at the request of the said John Cook the younger, Benjamin F. Thomas and Milton Whitney , Esquires , were assigned by the Court , as counsel for the said Cook . and thereupon the said John Cook the younger, was remanded to the Jail in said County , from whence he was taken , and on motion of the said Cook the trial of this Indictment was postponed to the fifth day of December 1848 , to which day this Court was adjourned and afterwards , on said fifth day of December this Court was further adjourned to the seventh day of the same December and now in this present adjourned Term , to wit on the seventh day of December 1848 .

The time assigned for the trial of the said John Cook , the younger , before the Court here , again comes the said John Cook the younger , under the custody of the Sheriff of said County , and is placed at the Bar , and the said Thomas and Whitney October , 1848 , by adjournment , December , 1848 . assigned by the Court as Counsel for the said Cook , also appear a Jury is thereupon empannelled to try said Indictment , to wit ; Isaac Davenport , who is appointed Foreman by the Court and Feblows , namely , Edward Aldrich , Gilman Day , Asa E. Edmunds , Joseph M. Green , Asa Kilburn , Asa Marcan , Samuel Patrick Henry B. Pratt Jesse Spaulding , Alvah A. Stone , & Isaac N. Stone who being sworn to speak the truth of and concerning the premises , after hearing all matters and things , in relation to the same , return their verdict therein , and upon their oath say , that the said John Cook the younger, is not guilty ;

It is therefore ordered by the Court that the said John Cook the younger, be discharged of said Indictment and permitted to go so thereof discharged, without delay. Ordered , that the sum of One Hundred Twelve dollars and Forty Six cents , be paid out of the County Treasury , to John W. Lincoln for attendance as sheriff of himself and deputies at October last and this adjournment and disbursements , as by the account on file , examined and allowed. (END)


He was acquitted but she had been dead for 15 years by the time he was acquitted.
 A newspaper clipping adds unsubstantiated details:
Apparently the first wife's sister, Melinda (who had been unmarried at the time) was "the dreaming witness" who believed John Cook poisoned Roxanna.
It does not specify which sister contradicted her in "material points." But the jury did not deliberate long. 
 (One has to wonder what would lead Melinda to make an accusation to lead to an arrest at this time, so long after her death?)  
Original Court Record 1/2 (Worcester County, MA)

.
Court Record with Verdict highlighted 2/2 (Source: FamilySearch. org)

 

14 April 2026

Cooks (4) James Cook- Lydia Fiske

 James Cook  - Lydia Fiske
 

James Cook, was son of Stephen Cook Jr and Hannah Fuller. He was born in Watertown Mass on 3 Mar 1714 and died in Newton Mass. His father left him a farm in Framingham, and he lived there after his marriage till 1747 when he returned to Newton, MA.

He married in Newton, MA, Lydia Fiske on 24 Nov 1737. 

Lydia was born Jul 1717 in Newton MA and died 9 March 1759 in Newton MA, leaving several young children. (*There are other Fisks and Cooks in Massachusetts and they have to be carefully separated from one another).

The couple had 10 Children (including *Enoch Cook). The first few children were born in Framingham, Ma and the final six in Newton, MA.

 The children of James and Lydia Fiske were: 
1) Jonathan 3 Dec 1738  
2) Lydia 22 Jan 1740 
3) Stephen 24 Jun 1741 
*4) Enoch  B 1744 (see next post)
5) Zebediah Fiske 26 Feb 1746 
6) Elizabeth 6 July 1748 married William Badlam of Sherborn. 
7) Mary 16 Jun 1750 died Nov 1750 
8) Rebecca 18 Jun 1753 married William Flagg 
9) Esther 4 May 1755 
10) James 8 Jan 1758
 

James had his will drawn up in Westborough, Mass in 1774. The will was probate in 1776 Newton Mass in 1776. He died either 1755 or 1776. 

 Mentioned in his will is his wife Mary 
The living children mentioned are: 
1 SONS: Jonathan, Stephen, Enoch, Zebediah Fisk, James 2 DAUGHTERS: Lydia (Bond), Elizabeth, Rebeckah, Esther

3 Mystery children: The bulk of the estate is left to “son and daughter” often shorthand for an son-in-law or daughter-in-law I have not found: Peter and Hannah (possibly a child of a subsequent marriage).

Unsurprisingly, he married at least once (maybe twice) after Lydia died for she left him small children to rear. It is not clear if he had children later, but from reading his will, I suspect either Peter or Hannah was a child of that union.

The probate papers includes an inventory of his estate, in which he mentions his son Enoch Cook--an ancestor and subject of next post.

 

James Cook's Estate Inventory. It names his son Enoch (subject of next post)

Sources 

Historic Homes and Institutions and Genealogical and Personal Memoirs of Worcester County, Massachusetts : With A History of Worcester Society of Antiquity 4; Author: Crane, Ellery Bicknell, 1836-1925,Worcester Historical Museum
 
Probate Records 1648--1924 (Middlesex County, Massachusetts); Author: Massachusetts. Probate Court (Middlesex County) From Ancestry.com

Family Papers: Cook Family History ; Don F Cook sent to Ruth Antilla abt 1980.


29 March 2026

New England - 9 - Where There’s a Will - David Petts leaves Widow in the Lurch - (Cook-associated families)

Widow Phoebe (Stevens) Petts was left a widow without a will 
and with little money. 
*Phoebe Stevens (my husband's 3rd gr grandmother)
Daughter of John Stevens (1779-1840) and Azubah Procter (1776-1840)
B 3 May 1812 Stoddard, New Hampshire
D 3 Apr 1902 Keene, Cheshire, New Hampshire
Her siblings
~~John Stevens (1807–1865)
~~Henry Stevens (1808–?)
~~Azubah Stevens (1808–1852)
~~Ephraim Stevens (1814–1895)
Married *David Towne Petts (his 3rd gr grandfather)
B 25 Nov 1810, Weston, Windsor, VT
D 3 Dec 1856 in Marlow, Cheshire, New Hampshire
Their children:
~Ferdinand Petts (1834–1933)
~Rosina Petts (1835–1861)
~Lyman Gustavus Petts (1836–1927)
~George A Petts (1842–?)
~Myranda Anette Petts (1843–1917)
~*Christiane L Petts (1845–1871) (his 2nd gr grandmother)

Phoebe outlived her husband by 46 years, falling short of living to 90 years old by one month.
A wife in this period was not the automatic heir to her husband's property. The husband owned everything, including his debt.
David T. Petts died intestate (without a will). Consequently, there are a lot of records (from 1856 for at least 2 years) in New Hampshire.
Still, as the widow, Phoebe was entitled to a “dower”-the state gave widows that much. Typically, it was 1/3 of the entire value of the estate (it was handled by the probate judge). Phoebe got slightly-very slightly-more the 1/3.
Phoebe also asked to be  the administratrix—something she had to petition the court to be. Amos Fiske was ‘commissioned’ by the court to appraise and list all belongings of David T Petts.
To settle the estate, Phoebe (as administratrix—or as widow, depending on the document) had to fill out a court document and have it approved.
She got ‘reimbursed’ for travel, but it was out of the estate.
David Petts died in 1856—the estate got bogged down by people wanting their money--and then it seems that the court suspected the family was hiding property. It finally was settled in 1858.
Phoebe auctioned the estate (apart from the ‘dower’ which was hers) and then paid back her husband’s creditors
There are two sets of inventories. One looks like the final ‘official’ inventory (has a seal on it), the other is in long hand. The inventory in long hand lists the value of each item and next to each is also has a list of names. Perhaps the longhand sheet was the worksheet for the public auction.  Several of the bidders were related to her (sons).
No other records indicate that they ran a tavern/inn.
But when you see the inventory you realize they must have. The quantity of food and alcohol, along with bedding for that time period indicates an inn. The unofficial inventory is 9 pages long. The inventory is very large for the time. (If you read on, you’ll see verification.)
I don’t know anything about antebellum New Hampshire estates, but I am guessing Amos Fiske who was commissioned by the court, may have made a profit on reselling the articles he bought at auction.
Inventory:                                                                  - $642.98
S. for Wid. Allow.
[ie the widow’s dower, or 1/3 of David’s property)   $200

          ________

                                             $442.98   
Sold for                $360.08
                                            $82.98 L of S  
If David Towne Petts owed his creditors more than $443.06, then the creditors could not be repaid in full. When you adjust this for inflation, $443=$14,560.
I looked at his creditors (from those who came forward after notices were posted and published), you find he owed more than $2,240.
This, adjusted for inflation, is equivalent to $74,000--when he had the equivalent of $14,560.
Ooops!
His creditors had to accept what the court allowed.  If they were owed $5.24, they were allowed about .59 cents. Most of his creditors were “promissory notes” or IOUs.  But there were about 6 or 7  judgements on David Petts, and some of them very large. 
This tells me that he had borrowed money on time and had not fulfilled his obligation of repayment in a timely manner---and the creditor had to file a judgement in court against him.
 
David Towne Petts died intestate. His estate was INSOLVENT.
16 Dec 1856
(His widow) Phoebe Petts petitioned court to be the administratrix of her husband's estate.
16 Dec 1856
A bond for: Phebe Petts, Amos Pike, and Samuel Buss amount of $1200 to execute estate accdng to the laws of New Hampshire.
6 Jan 1857
Phebe Petts, of estate of David T Petts of Marlow deceased intestate, says she is unwilling to be charged with the goods and chattles belonging to the said estate as appraised. Wherefore she prays that she may have license to sell the same at public auction. "foregoing petition is decreed granted and the license is issued accordingly"
6 Jan 1857
The estate of David Petts was published for 3 consecutive weeks in the Cheshire Republican (newspaper) printed in Keene, Cheshire County (NH) with additional notifications at some publick house in each of the towns of Marlow and Stoddard (for at least 40 days). - Judge of Probate 6 Jan 1857
Jan 1857
Phebe Petts, widow and relict of David T Petts of Marlow. "Prays your honor to make her such an allowance out of the Personal Estate of said deceased, for her present support and comfort, as may be suitable to her condition and degree, and consistent with the situation of the Estate." "Phebe Petts" (response): “January 1857  Upon the above petition, it is...decreed that the said widow be allowed in such article as she may choose, out of the Inventory of the Personal Estate of said deceased, suitable to her condition, at their appraised value, the sum of two hundred dollars, for her present support and comfort. (Judge)
 Jan 1857
Several Pages of the Official Inventory & appraisal Jan 6 1857 done by 3 men
Jan 1857
New Hampshire, Cheshire County, the Judge of Probate for County; To Phebe Petts, Administratrix of the Estate of David T Petts late of Marlow in said county, deceased intestate: You are hereby licensed and ordered to sell at public auction, all the goods and chattels of said deceased, except such part thereof as has been ordered to you for your present support (see petition).
And you are directed to give notice of such sale by posting up advertisements thereof in two or more public places in said Marlow at least 10 days before said sale. If you comply with this order, and act with fidelity and impartiality in said sale, you will be credited with loss, or charged with the gain upon such sale. 6 January 1857 - Judge of Probate 
Jan 1857
Amount of Sales at Auction of the Estate of David T Petts Late of Marlow; Deceased; by Phebe Petts Adminstratrix - Jan 29 1857
 
Auction - inventory
  
Inventory (partial)
Inventory--more!
Appraisal less widow's dower

Sept 1857 Creditors & Heirs at Law of the Estate of David T Petts of Marlow in Cheshire County. ... 1st Tuesday of September [1857]...and ordered that Phebe Petts give notice causing the Citation to be published 3 weeks successively in the Cheshire Republican printed at Keene in said county.

Creditors

 
Judgments
 

Sept 1857 Amos Fiske of Marlow, the commissioner of the Estate of David Petts of Marlow was given a year from 1 Dec 1857, a list of all the claimes which have been received against David Petts' estate. (Signed by the judge on 1 Sept 1857) - fig 1 

Accounting: 1856 
Expense of Administration 
First, Cash paid Out Fees: 
Kimball for Advertising .75 
1857 L. Tenny for services at auction $4
Samul Bress for services as appraiser and clerk $4 
Elisha Bress for services as appraiser $2 
Amos Pike for services as appraiser $2 
1858 
AS Fiske Commissioner for services as a commissioner $8 Kimball for Advertising $4.75 
1857 Paper 2 - Funeral Charges of the deceased 
Dec 5 Paid Daniel Mack for coffin & box / recipt No 1 $8.00 
Dec 5 Paid John Mellen for digging grave & box recipt No 2 $4.00 
  $12.00
Phebe Petts, Administratrix

Second Personal Services of Administratrix
1856 [Date] For attending Probate Court expenses, to take letter      $3.50
     [Date] Expenses with appraisers                                        $2.00
1857 [Date] Attending probate court, expenses, to take license $3.50
     [Date]  Service at the sale                          $2.00
     [Date]Attending Probate Court and expenses                   $3.50
     [Date]Attending Probate Court and expenses                   $3.50
1858 [Date] Attending probate Court and expenses $3.50
     [Date] Attending probate Court and expenses      $3.50
     [Date]  Making administrative account                    .75
      --    Attending Probate Court and expenses          $3.50
1858 ?? attending count from New Ipswich to settlement  $3.50
                                                                                    ----
                                                                                    $61.25
                                                                                    Phebe Petts
Account Papers
Paper A
In trust on personal property
In trust on cash taken at sale
Collected of Amos Pike on note for property $3.64
                                    bought at sale
Collected of Ferdinand Petts on note for property bought at sale $21.52
Collected of Samuel Buss on note for property bought at sale $1.55
Collected of Elisha Buss on note for property bought at sale $1.16
                                                                                                __
                                                                                                $27.87
 
1 March 1858-Estate was discharged...and report made by the Commissioner is accepted. - Judge
 June 15 1858
Their eldest son (who was an adult), Ferdinand Petts, was summoned to appear in court to be examined regarding his father’s estate.
I cannot figure out what the larger point was but assume that the probate court was not satisfied that the discharging the amount owed by David Petts’ estate had been handled legally. 
A horse was quite valuable at that time and the court questioned Ferdinand Petts regarding his possessions in 1856. He was also asked about this stallion.  (Interestingly he brings up the name Amos Fiske, who is the same man who was commissioned by court to do the appraisal on the estate).
Ferdinand’s testimony includes this:
“In May 1856 my father was in need of a horse to use in connection with the tavern & informed me of it & wanted I should help him to one. ?? at the same time the said stallion was a pace horse & one he should like and I told him if he could buy it. So as I --- would? be sure to not lose by it he might buy him for me. He made the trade, took & kept him until Dec 1856. Q Did you experience the horse during the negotiation for the purchase, or have anything to say as to the price or qualities of the horse?”[etc].  
The testimony goes on on property and notes.
Ferdinand is questioned about a "tavern stand" which apparently he bought. The court wishes to know where he got the money from. At this point there is some involvement-or suspected involvement-of Fiske (Amos Fiske who was also the Commissioner for the estate). 

At one point in time, the deceased, David Petts, needed money and so borrowed it from his son. And so on.
There many questions, all about money and property which go on for pages, and some of which are hard to understand due to the handwriting of the note-taker. 
There are 35 questions, but many of them are compound questions, requiring more than one answer.
Ferdinand was finally done with his testimony on July 20, 1858. 
 
page 1 of Ferdinand's court testimony
 21 September 1858
Whereas the Commissioner presented all claims allowed the sum is $2539 dollars and 39 cents; and whereas the settlement of your account, except the widow's dower, having been sold and the proceeds accounted for. There appears to be a balance of $312.96.
The creditors were notified accordingly, and you are directed to distribute the balance of 312.96 to aforesaid creditors by paying to each of them the proportion to each of their claim respectively annexed. --Judge