Wilson v. Barnett
Court of Appeals of Maryland
AppejM. from Baltimore city court. This was a petition for freedom filed by the appellee against the appellant, and is the same case which was here on appeal at December term, 1836, vide, 8 Gill and John. 169. At the trial of the cause the appellee gave in evidence the will of Elizabeth Richmond, under which she claimed her freedom; the inventory of the goods and chattels of her estate, amounting to $4,125 52, taken the 13th June, 1832. The defendant for the purpose of…
Read the full summary
AppejM. from Baltimore city court. This was a petition for freedom filed by the appellee against the appellant, and is the same case which was here on appeal at December term, 1836, vide, 8 Gill and John. 169. At the trial of the cause the appellee gave in evidence the will of Elizabeth Richmond, under which she claimed her freedom; the inventory of the goods and chattels of her estate, amounting to $4,125 52, taken the 13th June, 1832. The defendant for the purpose of showing the insufficiency of the personal estate of the'testatrix, for the payment of her debts, independent of her negroes,…
1Opinion of the CourtDorsey, Judge
We see nothing to disapprove of in the decision of the city court in the appellant’s Jw-si and second bills of exceptions. The inventory of the personal estate of the testatrix having shewn to the jury, that the appellant was in possession at *163the date thereof of sundry negroes, men, women and girls, the property of said estate, in the absence of all proof of their having been out of his possession, coupled with the presumption deducible from the order of the Orphans’ court, of Queen Anne’s county, that these negroes were still in his possession, the court very properly authorized the jury to…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Reynolds v. JulietCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1859