Is it true that Kate Batts and John Bell had a property line dispute that resulted in her putting a “curse” on him?
No. John Bell had a well-documented dispute with Benjamin Batts over the sale of a slave. Benjamin and Kate Batts were not closely related. Many people err in “assuming” that Benjamin was Kate’s husband or child, and that she concocted an “entity” to go after John Bell in retaliation. The details of the slave dispute between John Bell and Benjamin Batts can be found in the minutes of the Red River Baptist Church. Additionally, real census records covering several decades indicate that Kate and Fred Batts NEVER owned slaves. They couldn’t afford them; estate records attest to this. It is clear why some people mistakenly thought the dispute was with Kate Batts–1) they were assuming things, and 2) they were not paying attention to detail. Where did the idea of it being a LAND deal come from? Same answer–assuming things and not paying enough attention to detail–but from a different dispute involving John Bell. John Bell had a little-known land dispute with Josiah Fort, another prominent
Related Questions
- Is it true that John Bell and Kate Batts were "involved," and had a falling-out that resulted in him killing her and her coming back from "the other side" to haunt him?
- Is it true that Kate Batts and John Bell had a property line dispute that resulted in her putting a "curse" on him?
- Can the Board Resolve a Property Line Dispute?
