Warren v. Brooks
New York Supreme Court
Assumpsit on the statute, (sess. 40, ch. 137, s. 7,) for money paid for the defendant’s use, in the support and maintenance of a negro man named Christian Holland, ° > who had become a charge to the town of Bethelem. ' The cause was tried at the Albany circuit, 1826, before ¡DuER, C. Judge. ’ ° At the trial, the following facts were in evidence: On the. 22d.ofi June, 1816, Gerrit P. Van Wie, by bill of sale, sold and’ assigned the negro to Isaac Benniston; who on the same…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on the statute, (sess. 40, ch. 137, s. 7,) for money paid for the defendant’s use, in the support and maintenance of a negro man named Christian Holland, ° > who had become a charge to the town of Bethelem. ' The cause was tried at the Albany circuit, 1826, before ¡DuER, C. Judge. ’ ° At the trial, the following facts were in evidence: On the. 22d.ofi June, 1816, Gerrit P. Van Wie, by bill of sale, sold and’ assigned the negro to Isaac Benniston; who on the same day executed á writing, by which he covenanted, that-itL'case the slave would s'éryp. him faithfully, he would manumit him…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per Woodworth, J.
The first question that arises is, whether Christian was the slave of Brooks at the time of manumission. He certainly was, unless the stipulation made by Denniston, to manumit in six years and an half, changed that relation. The agreement was conditional. If the terms had been performed, the slave might have enforced a compliance. Until performance, the rights of *220the parties remained precisely as they were before the con- ‘ , J , ditional agreement was made. The slave never has performed; and consequently the arrangement became inop©native. I admit that the defendant’s…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Voorhis v. Whipple & HawesNew York Supreme Court · 1810