Palmer v. . Faucett
Supreme Court of North Carolina
From Orange. Detinue foe a slave, tried on the last Spring Circuit, before his honor Judge Martin. After the Plaintiff had made out his case, the Defendant proved, that upon his marriage with a daughter of the Plaintiff, in the year 1821, the slave in question had been put into his possession by the Plaintiff — that this possession continued until the year 1825, when the Plaintiff received the slave again, and hired him out for a part of the years 1825 and 1826. After which…
Read the full summary
From Orange. Detinue foe a slave, tried on the last Spring Circuit, before his honor Judge Martin. After the Plaintiff had made out his case, the Defendant proved, that upon his marriage with a daughter of the Plaintiff, in the year 1821, the slave in question had been put into his possession by the Plaintiff — that this possession continued until the year 1825, when the Plaintiff received the slave again, and hired him out for a part of the years 1825 and 1826. After which the slave was again permitted to go into the possession of the Defendant. There was proof that the Plaintiff sent to the…
1Opinion of the Court
Hall, Judge.
The act of 1784, (Rev. ch. £25, sec. 7,) from its preamble and the adjudications upon it, was passed principally for the protection of creditors and purchasers. The preamble is as follows: “Whereas many persons have been injured by secret deeds of gift to children and others, and for want of formal bills of sale for slaves, and a law for perpetuating such gifts ami sales.” It then provides for the registration of such deeds, and that they shall be attested by one, credible wituess.at least. Tiie construction put upon the act, that it was made for the benefit of creditors and…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Knight v. . ThomasSuperior Court of North Carolina · 1796
- Cotten v. . PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1816
- Of Lynch v. AsheSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1821
- Rhodes v. . HolmesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1822