Kirkpatrick v. . Rogers
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Cause removed by consent from the Court of Equity of Mecklenburg County, at the Spring Term 1848. Anna Boyce, by her last will and testament, devised as follows ; “Item the 2d.
Read the full summary
Cause removed by consent from the Court of Equity of Mecklenburg County, at the Spring Term 1848. Anna Boyce, by her last will and testament, devised as follows ; “Item the 2d. I will and bequeath to my nephew, Hugh Kirkpatrick, my negroes, Mose and Nelly, and also to him my Glass plantation, the proceeds of which are logo to ihe support of Mose and Nelly, during their lives, and, at their death it is to become said Hugh Kirkpatrick’s, for his trouble in taking care of said negroes. I also allow the said Mose ahorse called Buck, and a cow and calf, also a plough and harness to work the Glass…
1Opinion of the CourtNash, J.
We are of the opinion, that the bequest, contained in the 2nd item, is not void, but, that, under it, the plaintiff takes the Glass plantation, as a present devise in fee, charged with the maintenance of the two old negroes Mose and Nelly, who are also given to him — and that the provision “the proceeds of which are to go to their support,” if not void, is merely directory. By the laws of this State, provision is made, whereby owners of slaves are compelled to furnish every slave, who has become superannuated and unable to work, with the usual allowance of clothing, food and lodging. Rev,…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by6 opinions
- Burton v. . CahillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Love v. . LoveSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Wooten v. . OutlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Sullivan v. . ParkerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Cunningham v. . CunninghamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1801
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.