Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

Strawbridge v. Turner et al. 9 Louisiana Rep. 213, 64 v. Warfield

4

20

66

[ocr errors]

20

196,

St. Romes v. Pore, 10 Martin's La. Rep. 30,
Sturtevant el al. v. Ballard, 9 Johnson's N. Y. Rep. 337,
Sweet v. Colgate,
Swift et al. v. Thomson, 9 Connecticut Rep.63,
Sydnor v. Gee et al. 4 Leighs Va. Rep. 525,
Sylvia et al. v. Covey, 4 Yerger's Ten. Rep. 297,

[blocks in formation]

210,

Thelluson v. Woodford, 1 Bos. and Pul, N. Rep. 357,
Thomas v. Jameson, MSS. Case, U. S. Court, D. C.,

66 v. Soper, 5 Munf. va. Rep. 28,

"v. Thomas's adm'r, 2 Marshall's Ky. Rep. 430,
66 v. White et al. 3 Littell's Ky. 177,
"and wife v. Fanner, 6 Monroe's Ky. 52,

Thompson v. Caldwell, 3 Littell's Ky. Rep. 136,

"v. D. & J. Davenport, 1 Washington's va. Rep. 125, "v. W. & H. Milburn, 13 Martin's La. Rep. 468,

66

v. Patton, 5 Littell's Ky. Rep. 74,

66 v. Tate, 1 Murphy's N. C, Rep. 97,

"v. Wilmot, 1 Bibb's Ky. Rep. 422,

Thrift v. Hannah et al. 2 Leigh's Va. Rep.300,

Timberlake and wife v. Graves, 6 Munf. va. Rep. 174,
Timms v. Potter, 1 Haywood's N. C. Rep. 234,

66

Martin's N. C. Rep. 22,

Timrod v. Sholbred, 1 Bay's S. C. Rep. 324,
Tom, [a negro] Case of, 5 Johnson's N. Y. Rep. 365,
Trahan v. M'Manus et al. 2 Louisiana Rep. 209,

Travis v. Claiborne, 5 Munf Va. Rep. 435,

Tribble v. Oldham, 5 J. J. Mar. Ky. Rep. 139,

Trongot v. Byers, 5 Cowens N. Y. Rep. 480,

447

147. 149

115

61

107

87

60

414

237

60. 61.88.91

71

72

125

124

364

363

364

364

189

193

48

89

433

37

79. 80. 86

174

107. 109

174

123

409

182

189

325.326

23. 24

107. 127

309

55

79

128

5

281.307

61

92

Treudau's Exr. v. Robinette, 4 Martin's La. Rep. 577,
Turner v. Turner's Ex'x., 1 Washington's Va. Rep. 139,-
Twyne, Case of, 3 Cook's Tenn. Rep. 87,

U.

Ulzire et al. v. Poey Farre, 14 Martin's La. Rep. 504,
University &c. et al. v. Cambreling, 6 Yerger's Ten. Rep. 79,
Upshaw v. Upshaw et al, 2 Hen. and Munf. Va. Rep. 381,-
U. States v. Bartow, MSS. Case, U. S. Court D. C.

V.

Valsain et al. v. Cloutier, 3 Louisiana Rep. 170,
Vandervoort v. Col. Ins. Co., 2 Caine's N. Y. Rep. 154,

18

229

57

193

305

175

[blocks in formation]

Vaughan v. Phebe, 1 Martin & Yerger's Ten. Rep. 1,
Verdier v. Leprete, 4 Louisiana Rep. 41,
Victoire v. Dussuau, 4 Martin's La. Rep. 212,
Violette v. H. W. Ball. MSS. Case U. S. Court, D. C.

W.

66

v. Stockett's ad'r., 6 Har. & John's Md. Rep. 435.

Wells, v. Kennerly, 4 M'Cord's S. C. Rep. 123.
v. Lane, 9 Johnson's N. Y. Rep. 144.
Welsh v. Haydens ex'r., 1 Pennsylvania Rep. 57.
White v. Chambers, 2 Bay's S. C. Rep. 70.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Winchendon v. Hatfield, 4 Massachusetts Rep. 123.

Wingis v. Smith, 3 M'Cord's S. C. Rep. 400.

Winney v. Cartright, 3 Marshall's Ky. Rep. 495.

Wise v. Freshley & Veal, 3 M'Cord's S. C. Rep. 547.

Withers v. Smith, 4 Bibb's Ky. Rep. 172.

Witsell v. Earnest & Parker, 1 N. & M'Cord's S. C. Rep. 182.

Wolf v. O'Farrel, S. C. Cons. Ct. Rep. 151.

Woodward's heirs v. Therlkeld, 1 Marshall's Ky. Rep. 10.

Wright v. Gray, 2 Bay's S. C. Rep. 404.

395, 413
89, 91, 164

334

381

225,226

404

87

243

194,224

361

230

2843,29

202

80

202

177

433

201

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

A

PRACTICAL TREATISE

ON

THE LAW OF SLAVERY.

I. DEFINITION AND NATURE OF.*

1.

CLARK V. M'DONALD. June T. 1827. 4 M'Cord's Rep. 223.

There is a

of a slave

slaves be

THE action was brought against the defendant, as a common distinction carrier, to recover the value of a negro woman and her child, who between the liability were passengers on board the defendant's boat from Charleston to of a carrier George Town. The boat came to an anchor at night at one of and a bale the inland creeks between those places, and at the ebb of the of goodstide the boat filled, and the slave and her child were lost. The cap-ing considered as tain used all necessary diligence, and had a pilot on board. The human bejudge charged the jury, that there was no difference in the liability of the defendant, as captain of a steam-boat, for the loss of the slaves, than for the loss of bales of goods. Verdict for plaintiff. Motion for a new trial.

The Court. Johnson, J., held there must be a new trial; that there was a distinction between the liability of the carrier in the transportation of a slave and a bale of goods; that the slave was a human being, and the carrier could not control the operations of her mind, or her physical action. She might will her own destruction, or she might escape. And his honor, after referring to the cases

* The definition of a slave by the Civil Code of Louisiana is thus given: "A slave is one who is in the power of a master to whom he belongs." Civil Code, art. 35. and 173.

ings.

« PreviousContinue »