St. Louis CIRCUIT COURT RECORDS for Freedom Suits (1814-1856) Contained in Microfilm Roles C2597 through C25805.

(note that these records are for the Circuit Court, not the Probate Court, or the Court of Common Pleas, where additional proceedings may have been taking place.)

Microfilm Roll C25797 Begins.

o The first case in the spreadsheet is from 1814, and so not covered by our daybook. (William Tarleton v. Jacob Horine)

o Jennings Beckwith v. Samuel Donner [Winny’s owners], 2-10-1818, p.136- Pleas filed Note: This case is not in the plaintiff outcomes spreadsheets. It does not appear to be a

freedom suit but a dispute between Winny's owners over damages from her contested detention by one of them.

o Jennings Beckwith v. Samuel Donner, 2-21-1818, p.178- Continued.o Jack, a black man v. Barnabas Harris: 6-9-1818, p.196

“The petition of Jack a black man now presented by J. Barton, Esquire, praying that he may be permitted to institute a suit against Barnabas Harris for the recovery of his freedom and that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person. Thereupon the court permit the said Jack to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be instituted in the name of the said Jack, against the said Barnabas Harris and assign Joshua Barton, Esquire, counsel for the said petitioner. And it is ordered by the court that the defendant permit the petitioner to have a reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of the court or be subject to any severity because of his application for freedom.”

o Arch, a black man v. Barnabas Harris: 6-9-1818, p.196 “The petition of Arch a black man now presented by J. Barton Esquire, humbly prays that

the said Arch may be permitted to institute a suit in this court against Barnabas Harris for the recovery of his freedom and that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person. There upon the court permit the said Arch to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be instituted in the name of said Arch, against the said Barnabas Harris and assign Joshua Barton Esquire counsel for the said Petitioner. And it is ordered by the court that the Defendant permit the petitioner to have a reasonable liberty of attending his said counsel and the Court when occasion may require it and that the petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of the court or be subject to any severity because of his application for freedom.”

Note: we don't have any further records on this case, maybe he never filed his plea.o Samuel Donner v. Jennings Beckwith, p.238- Continuedo Barnabas Harris v. Jack, a black man, 10-16-1818, p.264—Plea filed.o Jack, a black man v. Barnabas Harris: 10-19-1818, p.270

On Motion of Mr. Walsh, attorney for defendant, it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any judge or justice of the peace of the State of Kentucky to take the depositions of witnesses on the part of the defendant.

o Jennings Beckwith v. Samuel Donner, 10-22-1818, p.278

1

“Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by thereon submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the property in the mulatto woman named Winny in the declaration mentioned was and is in here the said plaintiff as in his Declaration he hath alleged and the court assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the detention of the said mulatto woman to one cent therefore it is considered that the said Samuel Donner recover against the said Jennings Beckwith his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in his behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.”

o Jack, a black man v. Benjamin Harris: issue joined, 10-31-1818, p.299o Jack, a black man v. Barnabas Harris: continued, 10-31-1818, p.300o Jack, a black man v. Barnabas Harris: 4-17-1819, p.339

“And now at this day comes the said Jack by his attorney aforesaid and gives the court here to understand and be informed that since the last continuance of this cause the said Barnabas Harris died which allegation the attorney for the defendant does not deny but admits the same to be true and thereupon the said Jack by his attorney prays that the suit may be revived and continue against the administration of the estate of the said Barnabas Harris deceased which is granted where upon Frederick Hyatt administrator of the estate of the said Harris by his attorney appears and prays to be admitted as a defendant in this action which is granted.”

o Jack, a black man v. Frederick Hyatt, adm. of Barnabas Harris dec’d: 4-7-1819, p.340 “On motion of the attorney for the defendant it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any judge

or justice of the peace for the County of St. Louis to take the depositions of the witnesses to be read on the trial of the above cause on the part of the defendant”

o Jack, a black man v. Frederick Hyatt, adm. of Barnabas Harris dec’d:4-21-1819 p. 384 “On motion of the attorney for the Defendant leave is given him to withdraw his plea and

thereupon the said Defendant by his attorney files a plea of justification to which the Plaintiff files his application.”

o Milly, a black woman v. Mathias Rose: 4-21-1819, p.384. Rufus Pettibone presents the petition of Milly a black woman praying that she may be

permitted to instituted a suit against Mathias Rose for the recovery of her freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon the court permit the said Milly to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment in the name of the said Milly against the said Mathias Rose and assign Rufus Pettibone for her counsel and it is ordered that the Defendant permit the said petitioner to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of the court or be subject to any severity on account of her application for freedom.

o Jack, a black man v. Frederick Hyatt, adm. of Barnabas Harris dec’d, May 6, 1819, p.413- Continued.

o Samuel Donner v. Jennings Beckwith, 8-21-1819, p.468- In chancery, answer filed and demurrer.

2

o Jack, a black man v. Frederick Hyatt, adm. of Barnabas Harris dec’d: 8-21-1819, 469. Now at this day comes the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid

thereupon who come a jury to wit John L. Russell, John Casto, George Rearick, Daniel Freeman, John Bell, John Smith, Thomas McGuire, Andrew N. Borris, John L. Sutton, Isaac A. Letcher, Joseph McCoy, and Michael Lefrou (?), twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath do say that the said Jack is not and was not at the time of the commencement of his action free and entitled to his freedom therefore it is considered that the said Jack take nothing by his said writ and that the said defendant go thereof without day. Ordered that the judge in this case be expunged.”

o Jack, a black man v. Frederick Hyatt, adm. of Barnabas Harris dec’d: 8-23-1819 p.470- Motion for a new trial and reasons filed.

o Jack, a black man v. Frederick Hyatt, adm. of Barnabas Harris dec’d: 8-24-1819, p. 482 Additional reasons for new trial filed. Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid, and

upon mature deliberation it is considered that the motion for a new trial in this case be overruled and is further considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said writ and the said Defendant go thereof without day.

Record 1 Ends, Record 2 Begins

o Milly v. Mathias Rose, 1-6-1820, p.25- Continuedo Jack, a black man v. Frederick Hyatt, adm. of Barnabas Harris dec’d: 1-7-1820, p.27.

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid, and upon mature deliberation it is considered that the motion for a new trial in this case be overruled and it is further considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said writ and the same defendant go thereof without day.

o Jennings Beckwith v. Samuel Donner: 1-16-1820, p.60. Decree: For as much as it appears to the court that the matter and things alleged in the

complainant’s bill are sufficiently admitted and confessed by the Defendant’s answer thereto, it is therefore considered that the complainant recover against the Defendant, according to the prayer thereof the sum of three hundred dollars with interest thereon from the twenty first day of October one thousand eight hundred and seventeen until the same be paid together with his costs by him about this his bill of complaint expressed.

o Winny, a black woman v. Samuel Donner: 4-12-1820, p.98. James H. Pecks present the petition of Winny a Black woman praying that she may be

permitted to institute a suit against Samuel Donner for the establishing of her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person, thereupon the court permit the said Winny to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be brought in the name of the said Winny against the said Samuel Donner and assign James H. Peck as her counsel and it is ordered by the court that the Defendant permit the said petitioner to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her application for freedom.

3

o Milly v. Mathias Rose: 4-17-1820, p.111. Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid, where

on motion of the said plaintiff by her attorney leave is given her to withdraw her demurrer to the first plea of the said Defendant whereupon all and singular the premises in the second plea of the said Defendant and by the parties aforesaid submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood and mature deliberation being thereupon had for that it appears to the said court that the said second plea and the matters and things therein contained in manner and form as the same are above pleaded and set forth are sufficient in law to bar and preclude her the said Milly from having and maintaining her aforesaid action thereof against him the said Mathias Rose, therefore it is considered that the said Milly take nothing by her said writ and that the said Mathias Rose go thereof without day.

o Winny, a black woman v. Samuel Donner, 8-17-1820, p.205- Pleas filedo Labon, a black man v. Risdon H. Price, 4-10-1821, p.336

Edward Bates Esq. is by the court assigned to the plaintiff as his counsel. o Tempe, a black woman v. Risdon H. Price: 4-10-1821, p.336

Edward Bates Esq. is by the court assigned to the plaintiff as his counsel. And it is ordered by the court that the said Risdon H. Price do permit the said Tempe to

have a reasonable liberty of attending her said counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said Tempe shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court nor be subjected to any severity because of her application for freedom.

o Winny, a black woman v. Samuel Donner: 4-27-1821, p.403 Now at this day comes the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon came a jury to wit John L. Russell, George H.C. Melody, John Brady, Joseph Porter, Thomas McKay, Joseph N. Pendleton, Thomas Shendley, David B. Hill, George Blanchard, Obediah Reynolds, Joseph White, and Elisha L. Beebe twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath do say that the said Defendant is guilty of the said trespasses above laid to his charge and every part thereof in manner and form as the said Winny hath above thereof complained against him and they assess the damage to the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the premises to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Winny recover against the said Samuel Donner her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Winny be liberated from the said Samuel Donner and all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Winny, a black woman v. Samuel Donner, 5-2-1821, p.414- Bill of exceptions filedo Tempe, a black woman v. Risdon H. Price, May 7, 1821, p.429

On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ruled that the said defendant enter into a recognizance I the sum of $500 tomorrow conditioned according to an order heretofore entered in this cause or that the sheriff do hire out said Tempe as the Law directs.

o Tempe, a black woman v. Risdon H. Price: 5-4-1821, p.443 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon come a jury to wit John Shackford, Caleb Cox, Joseph White, Francis Creely, Elexis Edwards, Andrew Elliott, Andre N. Borris, Joseph Laveal, William

4

Bobb, Amos Ward, John P. B. Gratiot, and Thomas McKnight twelve good and lawful men duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath do say that the said Defendant is guilty of the said Trespasses above laid to his charge and every part thereof in manner and form as the said Tempe hath above thereof complained against him, and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the premises to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Tempe recover against the said Risdon H. Price her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended an that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Tempe be liberated from the said Risdon H. Price and all persons claiming by from or under him.

o Labon, a black man v. Risdon H. Price: 5-14-1821, p.443. The motion heretofore entered for a new trial in the case after mature deliberation is by

the court overruled. Therefore it is considered that the said Labon recover against the said Risdon H. price his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Labon be liberated from the said Risdon H. Price and all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Winny, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt: continued, 5-22-1821, p.469o Sarah, a free girl v. Michael Hatton, 5-22-1821, p.469- continuedo Lydia, a free girl v. John Butler, 5-22-1821, p.469- continuedo Nancy, a free girl v. Isaac Voteau, 5-22-1821, p.469- continuedo Jerry, a free man v. Charles Hatton, 5-22-1821, p.469- continuedo Daniel v. Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt, 5-22-1821, p.469- continuedo Jenny, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides, 5-22-1821, p.469- continuedo Malinda, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides, 5-22-1821, p.469 continuedo Lewis (aka Louis), a free boy v. Phebe Whitesides, 5-22-1821, p.469 continuedo Hannah, a free girl v Phebe Whitesides, 5-22-1821, p.469 continuedo Marie, a mulatto girl who sues by Margarritte a free black woman her next friend v.

Auguste P. Chouteau, 5-23-1821, p.470 “Now at this day comes the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon came a jury to wit Joseph James, Alexander Ferguson, Paul M. Gratiol, George Wallace, William K. Rule, Thomas Hauly, John Jenkins, Asa Wilgis, David B. Hill, Andre N. Borris, Samuel Mount, and John Rankin twelve good and lawful men duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue that the said Marie at the time when and was and still is a free person and not the slave of the said Defendant in manner and form as the said Defendant hath in his said plea alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the premises to the sum of one cents. Therefore it is considered there the said Marie who sues by Margarritte her next friend recover against the said Auguste P. Chouteau her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered there the said Marie be liberated from the said Auguste P. Chouteau and all persons claiming by from or under him.

5

o Marie, a mulatto girl v. Auguste P. Chouteau: 5-23-1821, p.470 The Defendant by his attorney moves the court for a new trial in this case and files his

reasons therefore and after mature deliberation it is by the court overruled. The court excuses James P. Spencer from a fine imposed on him for his default as a juror.

o Ann, a negro woman v. Nanes (?) adm., 5-23-1821, p.470- Death of plaintiff suggested and suit dies.

Record 2 Ends (followed by rules and index), Record 3 Begins

o Winny, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Sarah, a free girl v. Michael Hatton, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Lydia, a free girl v. John Butler, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Jenny, a free girl v. Robert Musick, 9-5-1821, p. 22- continuedo Nancy, a free girl v. Isaac Voteau, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Jerry, a free man v. Charles Hatton, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Daniel, a free man v. John Whitesides:, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Malinda, a free woman v. Phebe Whitesides, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Lewis (aka Louis), a free boy v. Phebe Whitesides, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Hanna, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides, 9-5-1821, p.22- continuedo Pelagie, a woman of colour, by her next friend v. Francis Valois: 10-1-1821, p.44.

James H. Peck presents the petition of Pelagie a woman of colour praying that she may be permitted to institute a suit against Francis Valois for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon the court permit the said Pelagie to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be brought in the name of said Pelagie against the said Francis Valois and assign James H. Peck as her counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said Defendant permit the said petitioner to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of the court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her application for freedom.”

o Pelagie, a woman of colour, by her next friend v. Francis Valois: 10-9-1821, p.53. On motion of the petitioner by her attorney it is ruled that the said Francis Valois show

cause why he should not be brought before the court now in session and enter into a recognizance with sufficient security conditioned that the said petitioner shall have reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and that he the said Francis shall not remove her out of the jurisdiction of the court or treat her with severity in consequence of her application for freedom.

o Pelagie, a woman of colour, by her next friend v. Francis Valois: 10-15-1821, p.58. Francois Valois as principal and Francis Robidoux as security acknowledges to be

indebted to the State of Missouri in the sum of six hundred dollars to be levied upon their respective goods and chattels lands and tenements conditioned that the said Francis Valois shall not remove a certain mulatto woman Pelagie who is applying for her freedom out of the jurisdiction of this court or treat her with any severity on account of her said application and he shall allow her a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the

6

court then the recognizance shall be void otherwise to remain in full force and virtue. o Anastasia, a woman of colour and her three children Louisa, Isaac, and Mary Ann v.

Philip Millandon: 10-16-1821. p.59 “Edward Bates Esq. presents the petition of Anastasia, a woman of colour, praying that

she may be permitted to institute a suit against Philip Millandon for establishing her rights and the rights of her three children to freedom that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon the court permit the said Anastasia to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be brought in the name of the said Anastasia against the said Philip Millandon and Edward Bates her counsel and the court do order that the said Defendant permit the said petitioner to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner should not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application.” ■ Note: No further records on this case.

o Ann, a woman of color v. Henry Hight adm., 10-18-1821, p.65 The death of the said plaintiff suggested and suit revived in the name of George, a free

black man, administrator of said Ann. o Winny, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt: 2-12-1822, p.77.

“Now at this day comes the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid whereupon come a jury to wit: Daniel Slough, George W. Loathesbury, James Noble, Francis Cowerley?, Elexis Edwards, Samuel Willi, Baptiste Bouis, John L. Sutton, John Moore, James Ramsey, John Simonds, Sr., and Pascal Cerre twelve good and lawful men who being duly declared and sworn were and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say that at the time when so in the declaration mentioned the said plaintiff was not the slave of the said Phebe as she has above in her said plea alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one hundred and sixty seven dollars and fifty cents. Therefore it is considered that the said Winny recover against the said Phebe Whitesides alias Prewitt her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Winny be liberated from the said Phebe Whitesides alias Prewitt and all persons claiming by from or under her whereupon the said Defendant prays an appeal to the Supreme Court and the said plaintiff dispenses with and released the said Defendant from entering into any recognizance or giving any security in the said appeal upon which the appeal is granted and the record and proceedings ordered to be certified up accordingly.”

o Daniel, a free boy/man v. John Whitesides: 2-12-1822, p.78 “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court to which being seen and heard by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the said time when in the said plea mentioned he was not the slave of the said Defendant in manner and form as the said Defendant has in his said plea alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one hundred and seventy dollars. Therefore it is considered that

7

the said Daniel recover against the said John Whitesides his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Daniel be liberated from the said John Whitesides and from all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Jerry, a free man v. Charles Hatton: 2-12-1822, p.79. “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court to which being seen and heard by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the said time when in the said plea mentioned he was and is not the slave of the said Charles in manner and form as the said Charles has in his said plea alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one hundred and seventy dollars. Therefore it is considered that the said Jerry recover against the said Charles Hatton his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Jerry be liberated from the said Charles Hatton and from all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Lewis (aka Louis), a free boy v. Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt: 2-12-1822, p.79 “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the said time when in the said plea mentioned he was and is not the slave of the said Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt in manner and form as in her said plea alleged and they assess the damage the said Louis by him sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Louis recover against the said Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in his behalf expended and that he have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Louis be liberated from the said Phebe and all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Jenny, a free girl v. Robert Musick: 2-12-1822, p.79. Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the said time when in the said plea mentioned she was and is not the slave of the said Robert Musick in manner and form as in his said plea alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of eighty five dollars. Therefore it is considered that the said Jenny recover against the said Robert Musick her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Jenny be liberated from the said Robert Musick and all persons claiming by from or under him.

o Nancy, a free girl v. Isaac Voteau: 2-12-1822, p.79.

8

“Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court to which being seen and heard by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the said time when so in the said plea mentioned she was not the slave of the said Isaac in manner and form as the said he has in his said plea alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Nancy recover against the said Isaac Voteau her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Nancy be liberated from the said Isaac Voteau and from all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Lydia, a free girl v. John Butler: 2-12-1822, p.79 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court to which being seen and heard by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the said time when in the said plea mentioned she was not the slave of the said John in manner and form as the said Defendant he has above in his said plea alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Lydia recover against the said John Butler her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Lydia be liberated from the said John Butler and from all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Hannah, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt: 2-12-1822, p.80. “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood as the court do find to the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the time whence she was not the slave of the said Phebe as she has above in her said plea alleged and they assess the damages of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Hannah recover against the said Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Hannah be liberated from the said Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt and all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Sarah, a free girl v. Michael Hatton: 2-12-1822, p.80. “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the county which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood as the court do find to the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the time when so in the declaration mentioned the said Sarah was not the slave of the said Michael as she has above in his said plea alleged and they assess the damages of

9

the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Sarah recover against the said Michael Hatton her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Sarah be liberated from the said Michael Hatton and all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Malinda, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt: 2-12-1822, p.80. Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the county which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood as the court do find to the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid that at the time when in the declaration mentioned the said Malinda was not the slave of the said Phebe as she has above in her said plea alleged and they assess the damages of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Malinda recover against the said Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and it is further considered that the said Malinda be liberated from the said Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt and all persons claiming by from or under him.”

o Winny, a free girl v. Phebe Whitesides alias Pruitt: bill of exceptions filed, 2-15-1822, p.84

o Pelagie by her next friend v. John (aka Jean) P. Cabanne: 2-25-1822, p.97. “James H. Peck presents the petition of the said Pelagie praying that she may be

permitted to institute a suit against the said John P. Cabanne for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon the court permit the said Pelagie to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be brought in the name of the said Pelagie against the said John P. Cabanne and assign James H. Peck as her counsel.”

o Jeffrie (by his next friend Rachael Camp) v. Joseph Robidoux: 6-14-1822, p.137. “Robert Wash presents the petition of Jeffrie praying that he may be permitted to institute

a suit against Joseph Robidoux for establishing his right to freedom and that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person. Thereupon the court permit the said Jeffrie to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be brought in the name of the said Jeffrie by his next friend Rachael Camp against the said Joseph Robidoux and is ordered by the court that the said Defendant permit the said Jeffrie to have a reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his application for freedom.”

o Pelagie by her next friend v. John (aka Jean) P. Cabanne: plea filed, 6-18-1822, p.142o Susan, a black woman v. Henry Hight: 6-18-1822, p.154

Now at this day comes the said Defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her said suit with effect. Therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ and

10

that the said Defendant go thereof without day.o Pelagie by her next friend v. John (aka Jean) P. Cabanne, 10-30-1822, p.197- continuedo Pelagie v. Francois Valois, 6-5-1823, p.219

Now at this day comes the said Defendant by his attorney aforesaid and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not nor doth she prosecute her said writ with effect therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ and that the said Defendant go thereof without day.

o Pelagie v. John (aka Jean) P. Cabanne: 6-11-1823, p.226 Now at this day comes the said Defendant by his attorney aforesaid and the said plaintiff

although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor doth she prosecute her said writ with effect therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ and that the said Defendant go thereof without day.

o Nelly and Malinda v. Robert Wilburn, 6-11-1823, p.227 Henry S. Geyer presents the petition of the said Nelly and Malinda praying that they may

be permitted to institute suit against the said Robert Wilburn for establishing their right to freedom and that they may be permitted to sue as poor persons thereupon the court permit the said Nelly and Malinda to sue as aforesaid and direct that Robert Wilburn in the name of said Nelly and Malinda by their next friend Beriah Cleland and assign Henry S. Geyer as counsel for said Nelly and Malinda and it is ordered by the court that the said Defendant permit the said Pls. to have a reasonable liberty of attending their counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioners shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of their said application for freedom.

o Malinda and Nelly v. Robert Wilburn: 6-11-1823, p.227 ½ It appearing to the satisfaction of the court that the order aforesaid made in behalf of the

said petitioners is about to be violated by the said Robert Wilburn it is ordered that a writ of habeas corpus do issue to bring the said petitioners before this court wherefore the said Robert appears here in court and in obedience to the said writ brings into court here the said petitioners and the said Robert refuses to enter into a recognizance with the County of St. Louis to take possession of said petitioners and proceed to hire them out to the highest bidder and take bond with security for the payment of the hire and redelivery of the petitioners to the Sheriff. And the court do further order and direct that the person so hiring the petitioners do enter into a recognizance with sufficient security conditioned that the petitioners shall have a reasonable liberty of attending their counsel and the court when occasion may require it.

o Seely v. William Soublette, June 15, 1823, p.235 Arthur Magenis presents the petition of Seely, a woman of color, paying that she may be

permitted to institute a suit against William Soublette for establishing her rights to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person, thereupon the Court permit the said Seely to sue as a as aforesaid and directs an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be commenced against the said William Soublette in the name of the said Seely by her next friend Arthur Magenis and appoint Arthur Magenis as counsel for said Seely and t is ordered by the court that the said defendant permit the said plaintiff to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the Court when occasion may require and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the

11

jurisdiction of this Court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her application for freedom.

o George v. William Soublette, 6-20-1823, p.239 Mr. Cozens presents the petition of George a man of colour praying that he may be

permitted to institute a suit against William Soublette for establishing his right to freedom and that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person, there upon the court permit the said George to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be instituted against the said William Soublette in the name of the said George by his next friend Horatio Cozens and assign Horatio Cozens as counsel for the George and it is ordered by the court that the said defendant permit the said petitioner to have a reasonable time of attending the court and his counsel when occasion may require it and that said petitioner shall not be removed out of the jurisdiction of this courts or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his application for freedom.■ Note: no further result in this case.

o Jeffrie v. Joseph Robidoux, 6-24-1823, p.244- Replication filedo Jeffrie v. Francis Robidoux, 10-7-1823, p.265

On motion of Defendant’s attorney, leave is given him to amend his pleadings.o Malinda v. Robert Wilburn, 10-13-1823, p.274- Plea filedo Nelly v. Robert Wilburn, p.10-13-1823, p.274- Plea filedo Malinda and Nelly v. Robert Wilburn: 11-6-1823, p.302

On motion of Mr. Geyer it is ordered that the Sheriff of St. Louis county take possession of said petitioners and proceed to hire them out to the highest bidder and take bond and the court do further order and direct that the person so hiring the petitioners do enter into a recognizance with sufficient security conditioned that the said petitioners shall have a reasonable liberty of attending their counsel and the court when occasion may require it.

o Malinda v. Robert Wilburn:, 11-6-1823, p.305- continuedo Nelly v. Robert Wilburn, 11-6-1823, p.305- continuedo Jeffrie by his next friend Rachael Camp v. Joseph Robidoux, 2-4-1824, p.319- Pleas filed

Roll C25797 Ends, Roll C25798 Begins

*Jeffrie by his next friend Rachael Camp v. Joseph Robidoux, June 10, 1824, p.342 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come Jury to wit: Hugh Richards, John Magoon, George H. C. Melody, John Hoffa, John Andrews, Paul M. Gestiore?, Robinson Kelly, Hugh Richards, John Moore, Francis M. Johnson, James C. Bart, Alpers Skinner, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say that the said Jeffrie is the slave of the said Joseph Robidoux without this that the said Jeffrie at the time of the commencement of the said suit was a free person. Therefor it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said writ and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Malinda by her next friend Beriah C. Lealand v. Robert Wilburn, 6/22/1824, Pg. 360 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon come a jury to wit: Meziah, Blip, Amos, J. Bruce, Joseph White, William H.

12

Pococke, Daniel Miller, James Conklin, Daniel R. Davis, Hubert Guion, Asher Cook, James Glenn, John Romine, John Kinkaid, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try this issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say that at the time of the commencement of this suit the said Malinda was the slave of the said Wilburn without this that the said Malinda at the time of the commencement of the said suit was a free person. Therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Nelly by her next friend Beriah Cleland v. Robert Wilburn, 6/22/1824, Pg. 361 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon come a jury to wit: Meziah, Blip, Amos, J. Bruce, Joseph White, William H. Pococke, Daniel Miller, James Conklin, Daniel R. Davis, Hubert Guion, Asher Cook, James Glenn, John Romine, John Kinkaid twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try this issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say that at the time of the commencement of this suit the said Nelly was the slave of the said Wilburn without this that the said Nelly at the time of the commencement of the said suit was a free person. Therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Court in Vacation ??? Leah v. Arthur Mitchel, “In vacation” July 2, 1833 (I’m confused. The records here start jumping dates with entries “in vacation.” Perhaps the court used the blank pages at the end of Record 3 for skipped records or something...), p.427 Now at this day come the said Leah in her own proper person and says she will not

further prosecute her said action against the said Arthur Mitchel but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued.

Record 3 Ends, Record 4 Begins

Polly a woman of Colour v. William Radcliff, October 5, 1824, p.5 George T. Strother presents the petition of Polly a woman of colour praying that she may

be permitted to institute a suit against William Radcliff for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person whereupon the court permit the said Polly to sue as aforeseaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be brought in the name of the said Polly against the said William Radcliff and assign George T Strother as her counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said defendant permit the said petitioner to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her application for freedom.■ Note: No further record in document; check microfilm

Lethy Fenwith v. Samuel Abbott, April 1, 1825 Pg. 92 “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said suit against the said defendant, but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit, and that the said defendant go thereof without delay and it is further considered that the said Samuel Abbott recover against the said Lethy Fenwick his costs and charges by him

13

about his defense in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.” Winny a free woman of colour and her infant children v. Rufus Pettibone and others,

May 9th, 1825 Pg. 144 Isaac C McGirk and Edward Bates present the petition of Winny praying that she may be

permitted to institute suit against Rufus Pettibone, Charles B Hatton, Owne Wingfield, Isaac Voteau, John Butler, John Whiteset, Mitchell Hatton, and Michael Sanford legal representatives of John Whiteset, deceased, John Whitset and Lucinda Whitset, heirs of Thomas Whitset decd and legal representatives of John Whitset deceased for establishing her right and the right of her infant children Malinda, Harry, and Lorinda to their freedom and that they may be permitted to sue as poor persons Thereupon the court permit the said Winny to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said defendants in the name of the said Winny and Malinda, Harry, and Lorinda their next friend and assign Isaac C McGirk and Edward Bates as their counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said defendants permit the said plaintiffs to have a reasonable liberty of attending their counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioners shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of their said application for freedom and it is further ordered that the Sheriff serve a copy of this order on the said defendants.

Jenny a free woman of colour and Winnetta her infant child v. Ephraim Musick and others, May 9, 1825 Pg. 144 Isaac C McGirk and Edward Bates present the petition of Jenny praying that she may be

permitted to institute suit against Ephraim Musick Charles B Hatton Owne Wingfield Isaac Voteau John Butler John Whitset Mitchell Patton and Michael Sanford legal representatives of John Whitset deceased John Whitset and Lucinda Whitset heirs of Thomas Whitset deceased and legal representatives of John Whitset deceased for establishing her right and the right of her infant child to freedom and that they may be permitted to sue as poor persons thereupon the court permit the said Jenny to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said defendants in the name of the said Jenny and Winnetta by their next friend and assign Isaac C McGirk and Edward Bates as their counsel and it is ordered by the court that the Sheriff hire out the said Jenny and her child to the highest bidder until the November Term of this Court and then from term to term until the final disposition of the suit and that he take hand with security for the payment of the hire and that the hire shall have the said Jenny and her child forthcoming when and where the court shall ward and that she be allowed a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require and that they shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court.”

Winny a free woman of colour and her infant children v. Rufus Pettibone and others, May 16, 1825 Pg. 159 It is ordered by the Court that the Sheriff hire out the said Winny and her children to the

highest bidder until the November Term of this Court and then from term to term until the final disposition of this suit and that he take bond with security for the payer out of the hire and that the hirer shall have the said Winny and her children when and where the Court shall award and that she be allowed a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the Court when occasion may require and that they sall not be taken or removed out

14

of the jurisdiction of this Court. Celeste and her children & grandchildren v. Lefrenier J. Chauvin, adm. of H.

Chevalier, dec., May 17, 1825, p.466 Isaac C McGirk presents here to the Court the petition of Celeste for herself and her

children and grandchildren namely Sophia, Antoine, Paul, Auguste praying that she may be permitted to institute suit against Lessenier J. Chauvin Administrator of Helen Chevalier deceased and against all or any of the legal representatives of the said Helen Chevalier for establishing her right and the rights of her said children and grandchildren to freedom and that they may be permitted to sue as poor persons. Thereupon the Court permit the said petitioner to sue as aforesaid and assign Isaac C McGirk, Hamilton R. Gamble, and Robert P. Farris as their counsel and direct that an action of assault and battery be commenced against the said defendants in the name of said petitioners by their next friend and it is ordered by the Court that the said defendants permit the said plaintiffs to have a reasonable liberty of attending their counsel and the Court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioners shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of their said application for freedom.

Baptiste, Michel, Antoine, Mary, Carmelitte, Margueritte, Francois v. Pierre Chouteau, Aug 4, 1825 p.199- Pleas filed.

Edward v. Lessenier Chauvin & others, Aug 5, 1825, p.199- Plea filed William, Antoine, Celeste, Auguste, Paul, Sophia v. Lefreneir Chauvin, adm., Aug 5,

1825, p.200- Plea filed. Lorinda, Winny, Malinda, Harry v. Rufus Pettibone & others, Aug 8, 1825, p.212

The death of the said Rufus Pettibone suggested and serrefacias?? awarded. Baptiste v. Pierre Chouteau, Aug 20, 1825, p.231- Demurrer to plea filed. Michel, Margueritte, Carmetite v. Pierre Chouteau- Aug 22, 1825, p.235- Demurrer to

plea filed Judy a free woman of colour & Josias her infant child v. Ephraim Town, Aug 22, 1824,

p236-37 Horatio Cozens Esquire presents here to the Court the petition of Judy praying that she

may be permitted to institute suit against Ephraim Town for establishing her right and the right of her infant child to freedom and that they may be permitted to sue as poor persons. Thereupon the Court permit the said petitioners to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the aid defendant in the name of the said Judy and Josias and assign Horatio cozens as their counsel. And it is ordered by the Court that the said defendants permit the said plaintiffs to have a reasonable liberty of attending their counsel and the Court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioners shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this Court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of their said application for freedom.

Winnetta v. John Dutton and Elizabeth Dutton and Isaac Voteau, August 22, 1825, p.237 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendants although

solemnly called come not but make default nor have they pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against them wherefore the said plaintiffs ought to recover against the said defendants. Therefore, it is considered that the said Winnetta be liberated from the said John

15

Butler and Elizabeth Butler his wife and Isaac Voteau and all persons claiming by from or under them. And it is further considered that the said Winnetta recover against the said John Butler and Elizabeth Butler his wife and Isaac Voteau her costs and charges by her about her suit in the behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.”

Harry v. Isaac Voteau, August 22, 1825 Pg. 237 Now at this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and the said defendant although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid of him the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against him wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendant. Therefore it is considered that the said Harry be liberated from the said Isaac Voteau and all persons claiming by from or under him and it is further considered that the said Harry recover against the said Isaac Voteau his costs and charges by him about his suit in the behalf Expended and that he have thereof Execution.”

Malinda v. John Dutton and Elizabeth Dutton and Isaac Voteau, August 22, 1825 Pg. 237 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendants although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor have they pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against her wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendants. Therefore it is considered that the said Malinda be liberated from the said John Butler and Elizabeth Butler his wife and Isaac Voteau and all persons claiming by from or under them against it is further considered that the said Malinda recover against the said John Butler and Elizabeth Butler his wife and Isaac Voteau her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.”

Jenny v. John Butler and Elizabeth Butler and Isaac Voteau, , August 22, 1825 Pg. 238 Now and this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney and the said defendant although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor have they pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against them wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendants. Therefore it is considered that the said Jenny be liberated from the said John Butler and Elizabeth his wife and Isaac Voteau and all persons claiming by from or under them. And it is further considered that the said Jenny recover against the said John Butler and Elizabeth Butler and Isaac Voteau her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.”

Winny v. John Butler and Elizabeth Butler and Isaac Voteau, August 22, 1825 Pg. 238 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendants although

solemnly called come not but make default nor have they pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendants. Therefore it is considered that the said Winny be liberated from the said John Butler and Elizabeth Butler his wife, and Isaac Voteau and all persons claiming by from or under them; and it is further considered that the said Winny recover against the said John Butler and Elizabeth Butler his wife, and Isaac Voteau her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended, and that she have thereof execution.

Lorinda v. John Butler and Elizabeth Butler and Isaac Voteau, August 22, 1825 Pg. 238 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendants although

solemnly called comes not but make default nor have they pleaded to the action aforesaid

16

of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against them wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendants. Therefore it is considered that the said Lorinda by liberated from the said John Butler and Elizabeth Butler his wife and Isaac Voteau and all persons claiming by from or under them. And it is further considered that the said Lorinda recover against the said John Butler and Elizabeth Butler his wife and Isaac Voteau her costs and charges by her about her wit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.

Jenny v. E. Musick & others, Aug 22, 1825, p.239- Replication filed. Winnetta v. E. Musick & others, Aug 22, 1825, p.239- Replication filed. Francois, Antoine, Mary, Michel v. Pierre Chouteau p.239

Demurrer to plea filed and a motion of the attorney for the said defendant lave is given him to plea the general issue.

Marguerrite, Carmalite v. Pierre Chouteau, Aug 22, 1825, p.240 On motion of the attorney for the said defendant leave is given him to plea the general

issue. Mary v. Pierre Chouteau, Aug 22, 1825, p.240

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid whereupon all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the Court here fully understood and mature deliberation being thereupon had for that it appears to the Court that the said plea of the said Pierre Choutau and the matters therein contained in manner and form as they same are above pleaded and set forth are not sufficient in law to bar or preclude her the said Mary from having and maintaining her aforesaid action thereof against him the said Pierre Chouteau and that she the said Mary is not bound by the law of the land to answer the same.

Michel v. Pierre Choteau, August 22, 1825, Pg. 240 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid

whereupon all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood and mature deliberation being thereupon had for that it appears to the court that the said plea of the said defendant and the matter therein contained in manner and form as the same are therein stated and set forth are not good or sufficient in law to bar or preclude the said plaintiff from having and maintaining his aforesaid action thereof against the said defendant and that the said plaintiff is not bound by the law of the law to answer the same.”

Marguerite v. Pierre Choteau, August 22, 1825, Pg. 240 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid

whereupon all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood and mature deliberation being thereupon has for that it appears to the court that the said plea of the said defendants and the matters and things therein contained in manner and form as the same ones therein stated and set forth are not good and sufficient in law to bar or preclude the said plaintiff from having and maintaining her aforesaid action thereof against he said defendant and that the…”

Carmelite v. Pierre Choteau, August 22, 1825, Pg. 241 same.

Baptiste v. Pierre Choteau, August 22, 1825, Pg. 241 same.

17

Antoine v. Pierre Choteau, August 22, 1825, Pg. 241 same.

Lorinda, Winny, Malinda, & Harry v. Rufus Pettibone & others, Nov 29, 1825, Pg. 254 The death of the said Rufus Pettibone suggested and serre facias awarded against

Levi Pettibone administrator of the said deceased. Israel a black man v. William Rector, December 1, 1825, p.257

George F. Strother presents the petition of Israel praying that he may be permitted to institute suit against William Rector to establish his right to freedom and that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person. Thereupon the court permit the said Israel to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said William Rector in the name of the said Israel and assign George F. Strother as his counsel. And it is ordered by the court that the said defendant permit the said plaintiff to have a reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said plaintiff shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom.

Celeste, Sophia, Paul, Auguste, William, Edward v. Helene Chevalier, Dec 2, 1825, p.260 The Death of Charles Tayon one of the said defendants suggested whereupon Lepremier

Chauvin Executor of the said Charles Tayon appears and suit revived against him as Executor as aforesaid.

Dorinda v. Adington Philps and John Simonds, December 3, 1825, Pg. 264 Horatio Cozens presents the petition of Dorinda praying that she may be permitted to

institute suit against Adington Philps and John Simonds to establish her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person. Thereupon the court permit the said Dorinda to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said Adington Philps and John Simonds in the name of the said Dorinda and assign Horatio Cozens as her counsel. It is ordered by the court that the said defendants permit the said plaintiff to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said plaintiff shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of the court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application for freedom.

Antoine v. Pierre Chouteau, Dec 9. 1825, p.273 On motion of the attorney for the said defendant it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

Judge or Justice of the Peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the ttial of the abo e cause on the part of the said defendant.

Paul v. L. Chauvin, Dec 12, 1825, p.275- Special pleas filed. Dorinda v. John Simonds, March 27, 1826 Page 307

By consent of parties it is ordered by the court that the sheriff hire out the said Dorinda until the next term of this court and then from term to term until the final disposition of this suit and that he take bond in the sum of five hundred dollars with security for the payment of the hire and that the hirer shall have the said Dorinda forthcoming when and where the court shall direct and that she be allowed a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that she shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court.”

Dorinda v. John Simonds, March 28, 1826 Page 307- Plea filed. Lorinda, Winny, Malinda, Harry v. Rufus Pettibone & others, March 31, 1826, p.315

18

Levi Pettibone adminstrator of the suit Rufus Pettibone appears and suit ordered to be revived in the name of the said Levi Pettibone adminstrator as aforesaid.

Dorinda v. John Simonds, Apirl 1st, 1826 Pg. 316 On motion of the attorney for the said defendant it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

judge or justice of the peace of the state of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the trial of the above cause on the part of the said defendant.

Jenny, Winnetta v. E. Musick, April 11, 1826, p.325- Replication filed. Winny, Malinda, Harry v. R. Pettibone, April 12, 1826, p.325 - Plea filed. Malinda v. Levi Pettibone, April 17, 1826 Pg. 330-31

By consent of counsel it is ordered that the said Levi Pettibone be permitted to keep said Malinda in his possession until the termination of this suit on condition that the said Malinda be returned to the possession of her mother in St. Louis County immediately.

Cartiche alias Catherine, Julie, Joseph and Helen v. Pierre Choteau, May 15th, 1826 Pg. 349 Isaac C McGirk Esqr. Presents to the court the petition of Cartiche alias Catherine, Julie,

Joseph and Helen persons praying that they may be permitted to institute suit against Pierre Choteau to establish their right to freedom and that they may be permitted to sue as poor persons and the court being of opinion that the petition aforesaid contains sufficient matter to authorize the commencement of suits doth order that the said petitioners be permitted to sue as poor persons to establish their freedom and assign Isaac C. McGirk and Hamilton R. Gamble as counsel for said petitioners. And the court therefore then order that said petitioners have occasion establishing of according their counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioners shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court nor be subjected to any severity because of their application for freedom.”

The court being satisfied that the above petitioners have or are about to be subjected to severity because of their application for freedom, doth order that a writ of habeas corpus issue returnable before this court on Friday next at 11 o’clock am requiring the jailor of St. Louis County Pierre Choteau Sr. Bernard Pratte and Alexis Amchin to bring into court the bodies of the said Cartiche, Julie, Joseph, and Helen together with the cause of their caption and detentions.

Israel a boy of colour v. William Rector, May 19, 1826 Pg. 350 Now as this day comes the said plaintiff by Mr. Strother his attorney and suggests here to

the court that since the commencement of this suit all the right and title of said Rector in and to said Israel has been divested by a sale made by the sheriff upon execution against said William Rector, and that Isaac A Letcher became the purchaser of said Israel at said sale which allegation is not denied and thereupon the said Isaac A. Setcher appears by his attorney and enters his appearance as a defendant in the action aforesaid. The court doth thereupon order that the said Setcher permit the said Israel to have reason at the liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that he shall not be removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his application for freedom.

Cartiche, Helen and Julie persons of color v. Pierre Choteau, May 25, 1826 Pg. 357 The plaintiffs in this case being before the court in the possession of the sheriff the court

doth order and decree that the said Cartiche, Helen and Julie be hired out by the said

19

sheriff to the highest bidder from term to term until the termination of these suits and that the said sheriff take from the person or persons hiring the said persons of color a bond in the sum of five hundred dollars for each one, conditioned that they and each of them shall have reasonable liberty of attending their counsel and the court when occasion may require and that they shall not be removed out of the jurisdiction of the court or suffer any severity of treatment on account of their application for freedom.

Israel a boy of colour v. Isaac A. Letcher impleaded with William Rector, July 22, 1826, Pg. 369- Plea filed

Israel a boy of colour v. Isaac A. Letcher impleaded with William Rector, July 26, 1826, Pg. 369- Amended declaration filed and former plea withdrawn

Mary v. Pierre Choteau Pg. 369 July 26, 1826: On motion of Mr. Spalding attorney for the defendant it is ordered that a dedimus issue to

any judge or justice of the peace of the state of Illinois authorizing them to take deposition to be read in evidence in this case on behalf of the defendant.

Betsy v. Philip Rocheblave, July 26, 1826, p.370 Goerge F. Strother presents here to the Court the petition of Betsy praying that she may

be permitted to institute suit against Philip Rocheblave for establishing her right to her freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person. Thereupon the Court permit the said Betsy to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said defendant in the name of the said Betsy by her next friend and assign George F. Strother as her counsel, and it is ordered by the Court that the said defendant permit the said plaintiff to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the Court when occasion may require it, and that the said plaintiff shall not be taken or removed our of the Jurisdiction of the Court and that the said plaintiff shall not be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application for freedom.

Joseph v. Pierre Choteau, July 27, 1826, Pg. 372- Pleas filed Helen v. Pierre Choteau, July 27, 1826, Pg. 372 - Pleas filed Catherine v. Pierre Choteau, July 27, 1826, Pg. 372 - Pleas filed Julie v. Pierre Choteau, July 27, 1826 Pg. 372 - Pleas filed Israel v. I.A. Letcher Impeaded, July 27th, 1826, Pg. 374: Plea to amend declaration filed Joseph Jefferson a coloured man v. William McCutchen and James McKnight, 8/2/26,

p.382 Joseph Charless Junior presents here to the court the petition of Joseph Jefferson a

coloured man praying that he may be permitted to institute suit against William McCutchen and James McKnight for establishing his right to his freedom and that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person. Thereupon the court permits the said Joseph to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said defendants in the name of the said Joseph Jefferson by his next friend and assign Joseph Charless Junior as his counsel, and it is ordered by the court that the said defendants permit the said plaintiff to have a reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it, and that the said plaintiff shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court and that the said plaintiff shall not be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom.”

Jenny v. Ephraim Musick, 21 August, 1826 Pg. 389: Continued on affidavit of defendant

20

and at his costs. Winnetta v. Ephraim Musick, 21 August, 1826, Pg. 389: Continued on affidavit of

defendant and at his costs. Lorinda, Winny, Malinda, Harry v. Admin of R. Pettibone, Aug 23, 1826, p.392-

Continued Paul, Antoine, Edward, William, Auguste, Sophia, and Celeste v. Helen Chevalier, Adm.

& others, Aug 23, 1826, p.392- Continued Mary, Michel, Marguerite, Carmelite, Baptiste, Antoine, and Francois v. Pierre

Chouteau Senior, Aug 23, 1826, p.392-3- Continued. Israel v. Isaac A. Letcher Impleaded with William Rector, 8/24/26, p.394

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that on the second day of February in the year 1826 the said Isaac became the purchaser of the said Israel as a slave the property of the said William Rector at sheriffs sale in the county and city of St. Louis, which said sheriffs sale was made by the sheriff of said county, under and by virtue of a writ of execution issued from the clerks office of the circuit court of the county of St. Louis against the said Rector, and thereby obtained and purchased all the right, title and interest and claim which said Rector had in and to said Israel as a slave and that said Isaac took possession of the said Israel as a slave in accordance to the said sale, and has kept and detained the said Israel as his slave from the time said sale was made up to the present day, and the court doth find that the said Israel is a free man, as he hath in his said declaration alleged but stays and remain with the said Letcher as a slave of his own accord and consent without any constraint or compulsion of him the said Letcher. Therefore it is considered by the court that the said Isaac A. Letcher is not guilty of the said several trespasses in the above declaration alleged against him and it is further considered that the said Israel be liberated from the said Isaac A. Letcher and all persons claiming through or under him.

Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau, Sept 9, 1826, p.406- The motion for a new trial in this case continued.

John Merry v. Clayton Tiffin and Menard November 27, 1826, Pg. 408- Plea filed Winny v. Adm of Rufus Pettibone, Nov. 29, 1826, p.413- Additional plea filed. Betsy v. Philip Rocheblave Nov. 29, 1826, p.413

The plaintiff in this case having obtained an order at the last term of this Court permitting her to sue in forma pauperis for the recovery of her freedom and having failed to institute any proceeding theron, on motion of the said defendant by his attorney ordered that the Rule entered against him at the last term be discharged. (FINAL)

Lorinda and Malinda v. Adm of Rufus Pettibone & others, Nov. 29, 1826, p.413- Plea filed

Winny v. Levi Pettibone Administrator of Rufus Pettibone and Michael Sanford and Wife, 30 November, 1826 Page 416 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit, Daniel Hough, Joseph Sutton, Samuel Stebbins, Lucien Dumain, James Reed, James Loper, Arthur Fleming, James J. Purdy, David E. Cuyler, Abraham B. Dewitt, Isaac Sparks and John B. Bellond twelve good and

21

lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues wherein joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendants are guilty of said trespasses, imprisonment and wrongs in manner and form as is alleged against them is said declaration, and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid. The jurors aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do find that the said Winny was not he slave of the said Charles B. Hatton, Owen Wingfield, Isaac Voteau, John Butler, John Whitset, Michael Hatton, Michael Sanford, John Whitset Jr. and Lucinda Whitset to wit at the county aforesaid and that the said trespasses and detention were not committed on said Winny as such slave. Therefore and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass and detention aforesaid to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Winny be liberated and entirely let free from the said Levi Pettibone administrator as aforesaid Michael Sanford and Thurza his wife and all persons claiming from through or under him her or them, and it is further considered that the said Winny recover against the said defendants her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.”

Malinda v. Levi Pettibone Administrator of Rufus Pettibone and Michael Sanford and Wife, 30 November, 1826 p.417 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit Daniel Hough, Joseph Sutton, Samuel Stebbins, Lucion Dumain, James Reed, James Loper, Arthur Fleming, James J. Purdy, David E. Cuyler, Abraham B. Dewitt, Isaac Sparks and John B. Bellond, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendants are guilty of said trespasses and false imprisonment and wrongs in manner and form as in said declaration set forth, and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the jurors aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do find that the said defendants are guilty of said grievances trespasses and wrongs in manner and form as laid to their charge in said declaration and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass and detention aforesaid to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Malinda be liberated and entirely set free from the said Levi Pettibone administrator as aforesaid Michael Sanford and Thursa his wife and all persons claiming from through or under him her or them and it is further considered that the said Malinda recover against the said defendants her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.”

Harry v. Levi Pettibone Administrator of Rufus Pettibone and Michael Sanford and Wife, 30 November, 1826 Page 417 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit Daniel Hough, Joseph Sutton, Samuel Stebbins, Lucien Dumain, James Reed, James Loper, Arthur Fleming, James J. Purdy, David E. Cuyler, Abraham B. Dewitt, Isaac Sparks and John B. Bellond, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do find that the said

22

defendants are guilty of the trespasses, imprisonments and wrongs in manner and form as in said declaration alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespass and detention aforesaid to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Harry be liberated and entirely set free from the said Levi Pettibone Administrator as aforesaid, Michael Sanford and his wife and all persons claiming from through or under him her or them, and it is further considered that the said Harry recover against the said defendants his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.”

Lorinda v. Levi Pettibone Administrator of Rufus Pettibone, Michael Sanford and Wife, Page 417, 30th November, 1826 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

therefore also come a jury to wit, Daniel Hough, Joseph Sutton, Samuel Stebbins, Lucian Dumain, James Reed, James Loper, Arthur Fleming, James J. Purdy, David E. Cuyler, Abraham B. Dewitt, Isaac Sparks and John B. Bellond, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say that the said defendants are guilty of said several trespasses and grievances and wrongs as above laid to their charge and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass and detention aforesaid to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Lorinda be liberated and entirely set free from the said Levi Pettibone Administrator as aforesaid Michael Sanford and his wife and all persons claiming from through or under him her or them and it is further considered that the said Lorinda recover against the said defendants her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.”

Jenny v. Ephraim Musick, 30 November, 1826, p.418 “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: Daniel Hough, Joseph Sutton, Samuel Stebbins, Lucien Dumain, James Reed, James Loper, Arthur Fleming, James J. Purdy, David E. Cuyler, Abraham B. Dewitt, Isaac Sparks and John B. Bellond twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do find that the said Jenny was not and is not the slave of him the said Ephraim Musick in manner and form as the said Ephraim in his said plea hath alleged and they assess the Damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass and detention aforesaid to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Jenny be liberated and entirely set free from the said Ephraim Musick and all persons claiming from through or under him, and it is further considered that he said Jenny recover against the said Defendant her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.”

Winnetta v. Ephraim Musick, 30 November, 1826, p.418 “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: Daniel Hough, Joseph Sutton, Samuel Stebbins, Lucien Dumain, James Reed, James Loper, Arthur Fleming, James J. Purdy, David E. Cuyler, Abraham B. Dewit, Isaac Sparks and John B. Bellond twelve good and

23

lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do find that she the said Winnetta was not and is not the slave of him the said Ephraim in manner and form as the said Ephraim in his said plea hath alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass and detention aforesaid to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Winnetta be liberated and entirely set free from the said Ephraim Musick and all persons claiming from through or under him, and it is further considered that the said Winnetta recover against the said defendant her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.”

Jenny v. Robert Musick, December 5, 1826, p.434 The alias Leire facias issued in this case having been returned executed. It is ordered by

the court that the said judgment be revived and that the said Jenny have her execution against the said Robert Musick according to the force from and effect of the former recovery

On motion of Mr. Geyer it is ordered by the court that the money which has been received by the sheriff for the hire of the said Jenny be by him paid over to her.

Jerry v. Charles Hatton, December 5, 1826, p.434 Two Leire facias issues in this case having been returned not executed on motion of the

attorney for the said plaintiff it is ordered by the court that the judgement in this case be revived and that the said Jerry have his execution against the said Charles Hatton according to the force form and effect of the former recovery.

Celeste v. Adm of Helen Chevalier & others, Dec 11, 1826, p.439 Ordered that a special venire facias issue returnable on Wednesday next commanding the

Sheriff to summon Eighteen good and lawful men to attend on Wednesday next at ten ov’clock in the morning to serve as jurors.

Marguirite v. Pierre Choteau Senior, 11 December 1826 Pg. 440 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit, Thomas Estes, Jacob Hawken, Hezekiah C. Simmons, William Higgins, James C. Sutton, Michael Reily, Thomas B. Stevens, Witson A. Bell, William G. McCulloch, Caleb Jones, John J. Douberman, and Phinehas Bartlett twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is guilty of the said several trespasses in manner and form as the said Marguerite hath above thereof complained against him and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the jury aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say that she the said Marguirite was not at the time of the committing of the said several trespasses by him the said Pierre in her said declaration set forth, nor is she now a slave as the said Pierre in his said plea hath above alleged but that she the said Marguerite was at the time of the committing of the said several trespasses by the said Pierre in her said declaration above set forth and is now a free person by and according to the usages customs and laws of the land and ought not to be held and detained as a slave in the possession and service of the said Pierre, nor of any other person by or under whom the said Pierre may claim and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the said trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of six and a fourth

24

cents. The said defendant by his attorney moves the court for a new trial in this case and files

his reasons therefore. Jerry v. Charles Hatton December 12, 1826, Pg. 440

On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney, leave is given to take out execution in this case directed to the county of Howard.

Dorinda v. John Simonds Junior, 14, December 1826 Pg. 451 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and the said

defendant suggests here to the court that he is wrongfully made a defendant in this case and that he doth not claim or hold said Dorinda as his slave but as the slave of one Avington Phelps and prays to be discharged as such defendant and thereupon the said Avington Phelps by Mr. Geyer his attorney appears and prays to be admitted as defendant in the action aforesaid. It is thereupon ordered that the said John Simonds Junior be released and discharged as defendant in the action aforesaid and that the said Avington Phelps be made defendant in his stead and he enters his appearance accordingly and it is further ordered that the said Dorinda have reasonable liberty to attend her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that she be not removed out of the jurisdiction of the court nor subjected to any severity of treatment on account of her said suit for freedom and the court assign Hamilton R. Gamble as counsel for said Dorinda and the cause continued.

Celeste v. Lefreniere Chauvin, Adm of Helen Chevalier, Charles Tayon, Pierre Chouteau Sr., August Chouteau, Jr., Pierre Chouteau Jr., Leguest Chouteau, Bartholomew Berthold, and Pelagie Berthold, Joseph Tayon, Francis Tayon, and Terrace Valle, Dec 21, 1826, p. 461 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: Chicksberry Redman, Benjamin Lawhead, Elsy H. Roe, Josiah Miles, William Thomas, James Wingfield, Adam Martin, Jr., David Martin, Jr., John J. Brown, Micheal Castello, John Marshall, and James Berry twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid and the said plaintiff by her attorneys say she will not further prosecute her said action against the said Charles Tayon, Pierre Chouteau, Sr., Auguste Chouteau, Jr., Pierre Chouteau, Jr., Leguest Chouteau, Bartholomew Berthold, and Pelagie Berthold, Joseph Tayon, Francis Tayon, and Terrace Valle but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued. Therefore it is considered that the said Celeste take nothing by her said writ against the said Charles Tayon, Pierre Chouteau, Sr., Auguste Chouteau, Jr., Pierre Chouteau, Jr., Leguest Chouteau, Bartholomew Berthold, and Pelagie Berthold, Joseph Tayon, Francis Tayon, and Terrace Valle and that they the said Charles Tayon, Pierre Chouteau, Sr., Auguste Chouteau, Jr., Pierre Chouteau, Jr., Leguest Chouteau, Bartholomew Berthold, and Pelagie Berthold, Joseph Tayon, Francis Tayon, and Terrace Valle go therof without day and that the Jurors aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid as to the issue within joined between the said Celeste and Lefreniere Chauvin Administrator of Helen Chevalier deceased do say that the said Lefreniere Chauvin Administrator of Helen Chevalier deceased is guilty of the Trespasses, Imprisonment, and wrongs in manner and form as in said declaration alleged and they assess the Damage of the ssaid Plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the Trespass and detention aforesaid to the sum of six and one fourth cents,

25

whereupon the said Defendant by his attorney moves the Court for a new trial and files his reason therefor.

Marguerite v. Pierre Choteau,; January 12th, 1827, Pg. 474 On motion of the attorney for the defendant it is ordered by the court that the verdict of

this case be set aside and a new trial granted on condition of the payment of the costs of this term.

Carmelite v. Pierre Choteau January 12th, 1827, Pg. 474 The attorney for the plaintiff moves the court to enter up judgment in this case which

motion is continued. Marguerite v. Pierre Choteau Senior, 26th March 1827, Pg. 487:

Ordered that a special venire facias issue returnable on Monday next commanding the sheriff to summon eighteen good and lawful men to attend on Monday next at nine o’clock in the morning to serve as jurors.

Francois LaGrange alias Isidore v. Pierre Chouteau, Jr., December 5, 1826 Pg. 487 On motion of the petitioner by his counsel suggesting htat he is about to be restrained

from reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the Court and that hs is about to be subjected to sevity of treatmen on account of his application for freedom, thereupon it is ruled that the said defendant shew cause on Saturday next why her shoud not be required to enter into a Recognizance conditioned that said petitioner shall at all times during the pendency of this suit have reasonable liberty of attending his counsel, ans shall not be removed out of the Jurisdiction of this Court or subject ot any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom.

Dorinda v. Avington Phelps, 3 April 1827 Pg. 500 Now at this day come the said Dorinda by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said action against the said Avington Phelps but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Dorinda take nothing by her said writ and that the said Avington Phelps go thereof without day.

John Merry v. Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard, Tuesday 3rd April 1827 Pg. 512 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: Phinehas Bartlett, William M. Fugate, Beriah Cleland, William R. Grimsley, Richard Dunbury, Joseph White, David Lowry, John Knight, Joseph Rudisell, John Coons, Benjamin Young and Zachariah Wilson twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say that the said Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard are not guilty in manner and form as the said John Merry hath thereof above alleged against them, therefore it is considered that the said John Merry take nothing by his said suit and that the said Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard go thereof without day.

Marguerite v. Pierre Choteau Senior, April 17, 1827; Pg. 514 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: John Lay, James Walton, Abraham Link, Thomas M. Clark, George Little, Robert Quarles Junior, James L. Douglass, Joseph Walton, Benjamin Terny, Mark Sappington, Tyre Wells and James Keepers twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say that the said Pierre Choteau Sr. is not guilty of the said several trespasses or any of them in manner and

26

form as the said Marguerite hath above thereof complained against him. Therefore it is considered that the said Marguerite take nothing by her said writ and that the said Pierre Choteau Senior go thereof without day.

John Merry v. Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard, 17th April 1827; Pg. 514 John Merry files his affidavit in this case and prays on appeal to the Supreme Court

which is granted and the said plaintiff is not to be held to give security for costs and the record and proceedings as ordered to be certified up accordingly.

Marguerite v. Pierre Choteau Tuesday 17 April 1827; Pg. 515- Bill of Exceptions filed Marguerite v. Pierre Choteau Senior, Monday May 7th 1827 Pg. 528

Marguerite by Isaac C. McGirk her agent and attorney files her affidavit in this case and prays an appeal to the Supreme Court which is granted and the record and proceedings ordered to be certified up accordingly.

John Merry v. Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard, May 7th, 1827 Pg. 528- Bill of Exceptions filed

Joseph Jefferson a colored man v. William MCutcher and James M. Knight, May 8, 1827, p.537 Now at this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and say he will no longer

prosecute his said suit but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Joseph Jefferson take nothing by his said writ and that the said defendants go thereof without day. (FINAL)

Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau Sr., May 8, 1827, p.537 The attorney for the plaintiff moves the Court tho enter up Judgemnt I this ase which

motion is by the Court continued Celeste v. Legrenierf Chauvin Adm of Helen Chevalier, May 8, 1827, p.537

The motion of the defendant for a new trial in this case is by the court continued. William, David Shipman, Harry Dick, and Milley v. Stephen Smith, June 5, 127, p. 539

On application of the attorney for the defendant it is ruled that a Dedimus issue to any Judge or Justice of the peace of the State of Kentucky to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the trial of the above cause on the part of the said Defendant, Arch Gamble, Clerk.

Record 4 Ends (followed by index), Record 5 Begins

Aspasia v. Frarncis Chouteau, July 23, 1827, p.2- Plea filed. David Shipman & Harry Dick v. Stephen Smith, July 27, 1827, p.16 – Plea filed. William v. Stephen Smith, July 27, 1827, p.17 – Plea filed Milley v. Stephen Smith, July 28, 1827, p.24 – Plea filed John Merry v. Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard, August 10, 1827, Page 45

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and thereupon also come a jury to wit: Alexander Moore, John Shade, John H. Baldwin, Elliott Lee, Joseph A. Wherry, Thomas English, William Thomas, Xavier Dugal, Peter Alexander, Enoch Steen, Ephraim Town and David B. Hill twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say that the said defendants are guilty in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against

27

them and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespass and detention of the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said John Merry be liberated and entirely set free from the said Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard and all persons claiming from through or under them and it is further considered that the said John Merry recover against the said Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jury assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.”

Milly v. Stephen Smith, August 11, 1827, Page 47 On motion of the attorney for the said defendant it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

judge or justice of the peace of the state of Kentucky to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence in the trial of the above cause on the part of the said defendant.”

Harry Dick v. Stephen Smith, August 11, 1827, Page 50 On motion of the attorney of the said defendant, it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

judge or justice of the peace of the state of Kentucky to take the deposition of witnesses to be read in evidence in the trial of the above cause on the part of the said defendant.

William v. Stephen Smith, August 11, 1827, Page 50 “On motion of the attorney of the said defendant, it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

judge or justice of the peace of the state of Kentucky to take the deposition of witnesses to be read in evidence in the trial of the above cause on the part of the said defendant.”

David Shipman v. Stephen Smith, August 11, 1827, Page 50 “On motion of the attorney of the said defendant it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

judge or justice of the peace of the state of Kentucky to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence in the trial of the above cause on the part of the said defendant.”

Milly v. Stephen Smith, August 11, 1827, Page 50 “On motion of the attorney of the said plaintiff it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

judge or justice of the peace of the state of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence in the trial of the above cause on the part of the said plaintiff.”

John Merry v. Clayton Tiffin and Louis Menard, Sept 21, 1827, Pg. 57 Bill of exceptions filed.

Carmelite v. Pierre Choteau Senior, September 21, 1827, Pg. 60 The motion of the plaintiff to enter judgment in this case is by the court continued.

Celeste v. Lefreniere Chauvin Adm. of Helen Chevalier, September 21, 1827, Pg. 60 The motion of the defendant for a new trial in this case is by the court continued.

Virginia, Elizabeth, Mary, Victore v. A. Landreville Impreaded, Nov 29, 1827, p.68- Plea filed

Francois LaGrange alias Isadore v. Pierre Chouteau Sr., December 7, 1827, p. 83 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit Samuel Willett, David Lowry, Beriah Cleland, William H. Pococke, Joseph Sutton, John Whitehill, Thomas Andrews, Sylvanus Parmely, Thornton Grimsley, George H.C. Melody, James Reed and Arthur Parks twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said Peter Choteau junior is not guilty of the trespass and imprisonment in the declaration mentioned in the manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him therefore it is considered that the said Francois Lagrange alias

28

Isadore take nothing by his said writ and that the said Peter Choteau Junior go thereof without day.

Milly, Harry Dick, Willam, & David Shipman v. Stephen Smith, Dec 10, 1827, p.85- Continued on Motion of Plaintiff

Aspasia v. Frarncis Chouteau, Dec 10, 1827, p.86 Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although

solemnly called comes not but makes default therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said write and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Molly by L.A. Benoist her next friend v. John Bivens, December 11, 1827, p.88 Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said action against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Molly take nothing by her said writ and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Mary, Elizabeth, Victoire & Virginia v. A. Landreville imp, Dec 17, 1827, p.92 On motion of plaintiffs’ attorney, leave is given her to amend her declaration.

Mary, Elizabeth, Victoire & Virginia v. A. Landreville imp, Dec 18, 1827, p.93 Amended declaration filed.

Theotiste alias Aspasia v. Frarncis Chouteau, July 23, 1827, p.93- Plea filed Francois LaGrange alias Isadore v. Peter Choteau Junior, 20 Dec 1827, Pg. 98

“The plaintiff by his attorney moves the court to grant him a new trial in this case which motion on mature deliberation is by the court overruled thereupon the said attorney prays the court to grant him an appeal to the Supreme Court of this state which is granted accordingly…Bill of Exceptions filed.”

Carmelite v. Pierre Choteau Senior, 15 January 1828, p;102 The motion made by the plaintiff to enter up judgment on the verdict heretofore given by

the jury is by the court continued.” Celeste v. L. Chauvin Admin. of H. Chevalier, 15 January 1828, Page 103

The motion of the defendant for a new trial in this case is by the court continued. Peter v. James Walton, Mar 25, 1828, p.107- Plea filed. Milly v. Stephen Smith, 31st March 1828, Pg. 115

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and thereupon also come a jury to wit: John Smith, Jacob Cooper, Robert C. Pilkinton, Harlow Spencer, Thomas B. Stephens, Theodore L. Magill, John J. Clark, Antoine Dumay, Jonah Park, Francis Flandrin, William Maddox and Hugh Richards twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said defendant is not guilty in manner and form as the plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him. Therefore it is considered that the said Milly take nothing by her said writ and that the said Stephen Smith go thereof without day—and the said plaintiff prays an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Harry Dick v. Stephen Smith, 31st March 1828 Pg. 115 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said

29

defendant is not guilty in manner and forma s the plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him therefore it is considered that the said Harry Dick take nothing by his said writ and that the said Stephen Smith go thereof without day—and the parties to this and the two succeeding suits to wit William and David Shipman agree to abide the decision of Milly against the said Stephen Smith provided she prosecuted her appeal at the next term of the Supreme Court. These three cases to be set aside if the judgments be reversed.

William v. Stephen Smith, 31 March 1828 Pg. 115 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said Stephen Smith is not guilty in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him therefore it is considered that the said William take nothing by his said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

David Shipman v. Stephen Smith, 31st March 1828 Pg. 115-16 “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is not guilty in manner and form as the plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him. Therefore it is considered that the said David Shipman take nothing by his said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day.”

Milly v. Stephen Smith, April 1, 1828, Page 117 The plaintiff by her attorney files her affidavit and Bill of Exceptions thereupon it is

ordered by the court that the said appeal be granted and the record and proceedings are ordered to be certified up accordingly.

John Singleton v. Alexander Scott Impleaded, April 2, 1828, p.118 Amended declaration filed by leave of court.

Elizabeth, Virginia, & Victoire v. Francis Menard & A. Landreville, April 3, 1828, p.121 Alias summons awarded against Francis Menard and case continued. John Singleton v. Alexander Scott, April 3, 1828, p.121

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and thereupon also come a jury to wit; John L. Sutton, Joseph C. Laveille, Charles Collins, John H. Baldwin, Alfred Skinner, Edmund T. Christy, Edward L. Hempstead, Adam Martin Jr., Caleb Jones, Luke Risley, Edward Charless and Gabriel Paul twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say that the said Alexander Scott is guilty of the trespasses and imprisonment in the declaration mentioned in manner and form as the plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and they assess the damages of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespass and imprisonment aforesaid to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said John Singleton be entirely liberated and set free from the said Alexander Scott and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said John Singleton recover against the said defendant his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Jury assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this

30

behalf expended and that he have thereof execution. Milly v. Stephen Smith, April 3, 1828, Page 122

On motion of the attorney for the defendant and by consent of parties it is ordered by the court that the sheriff of this county advertise the said Milly and her children now in jail with her for hire to the highest bidder giving at least ten days notice of the time and place of said hiring and that he take bond from the person hiring said Milly and children on the penalty of three hundred dollars and wish such security as the sheriff shall approve conditioned according to law and for their return when it shall be required by the court.”

Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau Sr: 30th April 1828 Page 142 “The motion made by the plaintiff to enter up Judgement on the verdict heretofore given

by the jury in this case is by the court continued.” Celeste v. L. Chauvin Admin. of H. Chevalier, 30th April 1828, Pg. 143

The motion of the defendant for a new trial in this case is by the court continued. Stephen Smith v. David Shipman, November 26th, 1828, Pg. 152

The defendant by his attorney crave order of the writing obligatory in the declaration mentioned.

Stephen Smith v. David Shipman, November 28, 1828, Pg. 155- Plea filed. Dolly v. John Young, November 28, 1828, Pg. 155- Plea filed. Matilda v. Marie L. Rocheblave Impleaded, November 29, 1828, Pg. 157- Plea filed. Virginia, Victoire, Elizabeth, & Mary v. A. Landreville imp, Dec 2, 1828, p.166 –

Replication filed. Winny a free woman of colour and her infant children v. Rufus Pettibone and others, 29

November 1828, Pg. 159 (could not find in record, out of order?) It is ordered by the court that the sheriff hire out the said Winny and her children to the

highest bidder within the November term of this court and them from term to term until the final disposition of this suit and that he take bond with security for the payment of the hire and that the hirer shall have the said Winny and her children when and where the court shall award and that she be allowed a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require and that they shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court.”

Mary v. Andre Landreville impleaded, December 2nd, 1828 Pg. 169 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: Charles R. Hall, Isaac A. Letcher, David Sheppard, Benjamin Walker, John Kelly, Augustus Kerr, William Smith, George Knox, Harlow Spencer, Alexander Moore, George Wherr and Samuel Hawkins twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say as to the first issue within joined that the said defendant is not guilty of the said trespasses assaults and batterys and imprisonment and detention as above laid to his charge or any part thereof in manner and form as the said Mary hath above thereof complained against him and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the jurors aforesaid upon their oath aforesaid do say that the said Landreville at the said times in the said declaration mentioned and before the said several times did not claim to have and hold the said Mary as a slave and doth not will claim the said Mary as a slave therefore it is considered that the said Mary take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

31

Elizabeth v. Andre Landreville impleaded, December 2, 1828, Pg. 169 “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said suit against the said Andre Landreville but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day and on motion the court award an alias summons against Francis Menard.

Victoire v. Andre Landreville impleaded, December 2, 1828, Pg. 169; Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said suit against the said Andre Landreville but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Victoire take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day—and on motion the court award an alias summons against Francis Menard.

Virginia v. Landreville impleaded, December 2, 1828, Pg. 169 Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said suit against the said Andre Landreville but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued, therefore it is considered that the said Virginia take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day—and on motion the court award an alias summons against Francis Menard.

Theotiste alias Cartiche v. Pierre Choteau Sr., December 2, 1828, Pg 170 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: Charles R. Hall, Isaac A. Letcher, David Shepperd, Benjamin Walker, John Kelly, Augustus Kerry, William Smith, George Knox, Harlow Spencer, George W. Kerr, Alexander Moore and Samuel Hawkin twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid whereupon for reasons as well moving the court as the parties aforesaid Charles R. Hall one of the jurors aforesaid is withdrawn from the panel of the jury and the residue of the jurors are discharged from rendering a verdict.

*Aspasia v. Francois Chouteau & Peter Menard, Dec 6, 1828, p.176 Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said action against the said Francois Chouteau but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Aspasia take nothing by her said suit against the said Francois Chouteau and that he go thereof without day and the said Peter Menard by his attorney appears and files his plea and neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the Court which being seen and heard and by the Court here fully understood the Court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is guilty of the trespass assault and battery above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass assault and battery aforesaid to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered that the said Aspasia be liberated and entirely set free from the said Peter Menard and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Aspasia recover against the said Peter Menard her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Court assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution and the said defendant by his attorney tenders his bill of exceptions which is

32

signed and sealed and ordered to be made part of the Record. Antoine v. Lefreniere J. Chauvin Administrator of Helen Chevalier deceased, December

8, 1828, Page 178-79 The plaintiff by his attorney presents to the court his petition verified by the affidavit of

the said plaintiff stating that he fears that he will not receive a fair trial in the said court in which said suit is now pending on account that he believes the judge thereof is prejudiced against the claim of your petitioner to freedom so that he cannot and does not expect a fair and impartial trial of said cause in said court. It is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of Saint Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the circuit court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof.

Paul v. Lefreniere J. Chauvin Administrator of Helen Chevalier deceased, December 8th, 1828, Page 179 The plaintiff by his attorney presents to the court his petition verified by the affidavit of

the said plaintiff stating that he fears that he will not receive a fair trial in the said court in which said suit is now pending on account that he believes the judge thereof is prejudiced against the claim of your petitioner to freedom so that he cannot and does not expect a fair and impartial trial of said cause in said court. It is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of Saint Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the circuit court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof.

Sophie for self and children Edward and William v. Lefrenier J. Chauvin Administrator of Helen Chevalier deceased, December 8th, 1828 Pg. 179 The plaintiff by his attorney presents to the court his petition verified by the affidavit of

the said plaintiff stating that he fears that he will not receive a fair trial in the said court in which said suit is now pending on account that he believes the judge thereof is prejudiced against the claim of your petitioner to freedom so that he cannot and does not expect a fair and impartial trial of said cause in said court. It is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of Saint Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the circuit court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof.

Antoine v. Pierre Chouteau Senior, December 8th, 1828 Pg. 179 The plaintiff presents to the court his petition verified by affidavit praying for a change

of venue in this case it is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of St. Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the circuit court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof.

Cartiche v. Pierre Chouteau Senior, Dec 8, 1828, Pg. 179

33

“The plaintiff presents to the court his petition verified by affidavit praying for a change of venue in this case it is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of St. Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the circuit court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof.”

Francois v. Pierre Chouteau Senior, Dec 8, 1828, Pg. 179 “The plaintiff presents to the court his petition verified by affidavit praying for a change

of venue in this case it is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of St. Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the circuit court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof.”

Helen v. Peter Chouteau Senior, Dec 8, 1828, Pg. 179-80 The plaintiff presents to the court his petition verified by affidavit praying for a change

of venue in this case it is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of St. Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the circuit court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof.

Julie v. Peter Chouteau Senior, Dec 8, 1828, Pg. 180 The plaintiff presents to the court his petition verified by affidavit praying for a change

of venue in this case it is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of St. Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the circuit court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof.

Theotiste v. Peter Chouteau Sr., Dec 9, 1828, Pg. 180-81 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: Wilson Farris, John J. Clark, Edward Charless, George Robertson, John L. Sutton, William Piggott, Beriah Cleland, Thomas Wilbanks, William Skinner, Benjamin Young, John W. Paulding and James McKinney twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said Peter Choteau is not guilty of the said trespasses above laid to his charge or any part thereof in manner and form as the said Theotiste alias Cartiche hath above thereof complained against him, therefore it is considered that the said Theotiste alias Cartiche take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Baptiste & Michel v. Pierre Chouteau Senior, Dec 9, 1828, p.181 The plaintiff by his attorney presents to the court his petition verified by affidavit praying

for a change of venue in this case it is therefore ordered by the court that the venue be

34

changed to the country of St. Charles in the second Judicial circuit of this State and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the Record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming a part of the Record to the clerk of the Circuit Court for the Country of St. Charles at the next term thereof.

Peter v. James Walton, Dec 10, 1828, Pg 183 “Now at the day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he prosecuted his suit with effect therefore it is considered that the said Peter take nothing by his said suit and that the said James Walton go thereof without day.”

Peter v. James Walton, December 15th, 1828, Page 190 The plaintiff by his attorney moves the court to set aside the judgment of nonsuit entered

in this case and files his reasons therefore. Matilda v. Philip and M.L. Rocheblave, December 17th, 1828, Pg. 190:

Alias summons awarded against Philip Rocheblave. William v. Stephen Smith, Dec 19, 1828, Pg. 196

By consent of parties it is ordered by the court that the judgment heretofore rendered in this case be set aside and that the cause be put upon the docket for trial.

Harry Dick v. Stephen Smith Dec 19, 1828, Pg. 196 By consent of parties it is ordered by the court that the judgment heretofore rendered in

this case be set aside and that the cause be put upon the docket for trial. David Shipman v. Stephen Smith Dec 19, 1828, Pg. 196

By consent of parties it is ordered by the court that the judgment heretofore rendered in this case be set aside and that the cause be put upon the docket for trial.

Theotiste alias Cartiche v. Pierre Chouteau Sr., 23 December 1828; Pg. 199 “The plaintiff by her attorney prays an appeal to the Supreme Court and files her affidavit

and bill of exceptions thereupon it is ordered by the court that the said appeal be granted and the record and proceedings are ordered to be certified up accordingly.”

Aspasia v. Peter Menard, 23rd December 1828; Pg. 199 On motion of the attorney for the plaintiff it is ordered by the court that the sheriff of the

county of St. Louis do pay over to the said plaintiff the money arising from the hire of her the said Aspasia since the order heretofore made by this court directing her to be hired out.

Peter v. James Walton, 23rd December 1828; Pg. 199 The motion of the plaintiff to set aside the judgment of nonsuit entered in this case is

upon mature deliberation by the court overruled. Celeste v. L. Chauvin admin of H Chevalier, Jan 26, 1829, p.238

The motion of the defendant for a new trial in this case is by the Court continued. Stephen Smith v. David Shipman, Mar 31, 1829, p.256-57

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said writing obligatory in said declaration mentioned is the deed of the said plaintiff and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the court do find that said defendant did not pay the said man of money at the said time when as in and by said plea

35

is alleged and as to the third plea of the said defendant by him thirdly avows pleaded the court do find that the said plaintiff did not implead him the said defendant in a plea of debt upon the same identical writing obligatory in the said declaration mentioned in the circuit court of Tazwell county in the State of Illinois being a court of record not were such proceedings therein had in the said court in that plea that on the tenth day of April in the year Eighteen hundred and twenty eight as that the said Smith by the consideration and judgment of the same court recovered in the said plea against eh said defendant the sum of five hundred and seven dollars ninety three and a half cents his debt as also the sum of one hundred and twenty five dollars twenty eight cents damages for the detention thereof and his costs and charges by him about his suit in that behalf suspended no is the defendant convict thereof by the record and proceedings thereof remaining of record in said circuit court in Illinois. Therefore it is considered that the said Stephen Smith recover against the said David Shipman his said debt of five hundred seven dollars ninety three and a half cents ($507.93) and also the sum of one hundred and twenty nine dollars forty three cents for his damages by him sustained by reason of the detention of said debt together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Stephen Smith v. David Shipman, April 1, 1829, p.259 By consent of parties it is ordered that the judgment entered in this case be set aside and

case continued. George Relf v. Thompson H. Ficklin, April 3, 1829, Pg. 264

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find that the said defendant is guilty of the trespasses in the declaration mentioned in manner and form as the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespasses in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered that the said George Relf be liberated and entirely set free from the said Thompson H. Ficklin and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said George Relf recover against the said Thompson H. Ficklin his damages aforesaid in forma foresaid by the court assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Matilda v. Marie L. Rocheblave, April 9, p.269- Continued. Milly v. Stephen Smith, 13 April 1829; Pg. 274-278

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the 3court and the court sitting as a jury doth find that on the seventeenth day of October in the year 1826 one David Shipman then being a resident of the State of Kentucky and owning as his slave a possessing said Milly the plaintiff executed the following instrument of the sum of one dollar to him in hand paid the receipt of which he doth hereby acknowledge hath granted bargained and sold and by these presents doh convey unto the said Stephen Smith and his heirs forever a tract of land in Shelby County on Fuisses Creek containing twenty six acres and upon which said Shipman’s Grist and Sawmill now stands also a negro man named Moses about 30 years of age, one woman named Milly 25 or 6 years old, one child called David, about 18 months, Harry about 16 years, Bill about 12 or 13 years old, Sarah about 27 years old, Elias about 15 years old,

36

six head of horses, one yoke of oxen & cart, ten head of cattle, thirty head of sheep, thirty head of hogs. Beds and furniture, household and kitchen furniture of every kind faming utensils & one clock. To have and to hold the said land, slaves & chattels with their future increase to him the said Stephen Smith and his heirs forever, and the said David shipman covenants that he will warrant the title thereof to the said Smith and his heirs against the claim of all persons whomsoever rendered however subject to the following conditions that is to say that whereas the above named David Shipman is indebted to the Commonwealth’s bank in about the sum of eight hundred dollars for which the said Stephen Smith is bound as security and the said Shipman is also indebted to the heirs of William Cooper in about the sum of six hundred dollars for which the said Stephen is bound as security in a replevin bond, also indebted to Elijah Warner in the sum of about one hundred and twenty dollars, an execution in the name of Helm for about two hundred and forty dollars for which sums said Stephen is also bound as security and is also indebted to the said Stephen in his own right in about the sum of two hundred & seven dollars due by note now the lands, slaves & chattels aforesaid with their future increase are hereby declared to be given in mortgage to secure, save, and indemnify and pay the said Stephen Smith as security and in his own right in the several sums of money herein before enumerated and mentioned and it is hereby expressly understood and agreed upon between the parties that said David Shipman ma and is hereby permitted to retain and keep the possession of said land, slaves, and other chattels with their future increase and to have the use thereof subject however to the lien hereby created and should said Shipman or the said Smith at an time hereafter be able to effect a sale of the land, slaves, or any part thereof at their fair value and apply the proceeds thereof to the payment of the liabilities and claims herein enumerated or to the discharge of Judgement in favour of the Farmers and Mechanics Bank of Shebyville against said Shipman, that in such case said Shipman and Smith will consent to said sale and make title to the property so sold, in which title said Smith will release the lion hereby created. Witness the hands & seals of the parties the date aforesaid David Shipman (seal) Stephen Smith (seal) Shelby County court office set. This mortgage was acknowledged before me in my office on the 17th day of October 1826 by David Shipman & Stephen Smith parties therero by their act & deed and thereupon the same was truly recorded. Att Ia. S. Whitaker. CH Shelby County Court.”- and the Court in its capacity aforesaid further says that soon after the execution of the said instrument called a mortgage, said David Shipman who was then greatly embarrassed in his pecuniary circumstances took the said Milly with several other of his slaves and secretly with intent to withdraw himself and property from said Smith and other creditors ran away with them to the State of Indiana and then, in Jefferson County in said State of Indiana, executed duly the deed of emancipation herein set out and acknowledged that same before Justice of the Peace in the same state, the said Milly being present at this execution of said deed of emancipation which said deed of emancipation includes said Milly as one of the persons therein named as set free, and is in the words and figures following to wit:

“The State of Indiana, Jefferson Country. Be it remembered that J. David shipman of Gallatin County State of Kentucky for diverse good causes me hereunto moving have and do by these presents emancipate and release from further service to me my heirs or assigns forever my servant man Moses a mullato aged about thirty years also his wife Milly a mullato woman aged about twenty eight years

37

with a small scar on or under her chin also her three children to wit: Ann Maria (aged seven years), Mary Ann (aged 6 years) and David Shipman (aged fifteen months) and these presents will make known that the above named slaves have been good faithful servants to me an dare of good honest and industrious habits. And I now do expressly discharge the said slaves & set them free in the State of Indiana from my heirs & executors and administrators and from all other persons. In testimony whereof I have herunto my hand and seal at Mdison in Indiana this third day of October 1826. David Shipman (seal). Witnesses present: R.C. Tabbott, John Wambleton.”

And said court doth further find that immediately after the execution of said deed of emancipation, the said David Shipman then settled with the intention of residing there permanently hired a farm and stocked the same, and declared that he meant to reside there permanently and has ever since resided there: and that he kept said Milly there with the intention f making the same place her domicile as well as his own: an that she resided with him there from October ro November 1826 till sometime in May in the year (1827) Eighteen hundred and twenty seven at which latter time said Stephen Smith came thither and took said Milly secretly against her consent and the consent of said Shipman and brought her to St. Louis claiming her as his slave and holding her as his slave when and where this suit for freedom was commenced and said court doth further find that after the said deed of emancipation was executed. The said Stephen Smith paid as security for said Shipman, to the Sheriff who had executions against him therefor, the claim of Levin Cooper and the claim of Polly Rice mentioned in the said instrument of mortgage above set forth amounting to the sum of six hundred thirty two dollars fifty four cents, and that said executions issued after said Shipman had carried said Milly into the State of Indiana as aforesaid, and said court doth further find that said Stephen Smith never had possession of said Milly til the month of May in the year Eighteen hundred and twenty seven aforesaid, when he went to Illinois and seized and carried her away as aforesaid, and that he claims her as a slave under said deed of mortgage and in no other way, and that said Shipman had always had possession of her during a period of several year til said last mentioned time, and the said court doth further find that the aforesaid deed executed between said Smith and Shipman called a mortgage was so executed in Shelby County in the State of Kentucky, in which state both shipman and Smith resided, and the said Milly was held as a slave by said Shipman at the time of the execution thereof which said mortgage was acknowledged before an recorded by the clerk of the county court of said county of Shelby on the day of the execution thereof, and said court moreover finds that the following statute was passed by the legislature of the State of Kentucky and went into operation in said State on the Eighth day of February in the year one thousand seven hundred ninety eight viz:

SEC 28. All negro, mulatto, or Indian slaves, in all courts of Judicators and other places within this commonwealth shall be held taken and adjudged to be real estate and shall descend to the heirs and widows of persons departing this life as lands are directed to descend in and by an act of the general assembly entitled “an act directing the course of descents”- SEC 29. Provided that all such slaves shall be liable to the payment of debts, and may be taken by execution for that end, as other chattels or personal estate may be. SEC 30. Provided also, that no such slave shall be liable to be escheated by reason of the decease of the proprietor for

38

the same without lawful heirs, but all such slaves shall in that case be accounted and go as chattels and other estates personal. SEC 31. No person selling of alienating any such slave otherwise than by gift, marriage, settlement, deed of trust, or mortgage shall be obliged to cause such sale or alienation ..... such person or person to whom the same shall be so sold or bequeathed in the same manner as if such slave or salves were a chattel and no remainder of any slave or slaves shall or may be limited by any deed or last will and testament in writing of any person whatsoever, otherwise than the remainder of a chattel personal by the rules of the common law can or may be limited, except in the manner hereinafter mentioned and directed. SEC 34. Where any slave or slaves have been or shall be conveyed or bequeathed, or have or shall descent to any feme covert, the absolute right, property and interest of such slave or slaves, is hereby vested and shall accrue to and be vested in the husband of such feme covert; and where any feme sole is or shall be possessed of any slave or slaves, as of her own proper slave or slaves, the same shall accrue to and be absolutely vested in the husband of such feme when she shall marry. SEC 35. Any infant above the age of 18 years by his or her last will and testament in writing may dispose of and bequeath the absolute right, properly and interest of any slave or slaves whereof he or she shall be possessed. SEC 36. No slave or slaves whatsoever shall be forfeited except in such cases where the lands and tenement of the person incurring the forfeiture is, should, or might be forfeited. SEC 37. No executor or administrator hath or shall have any power to sell or dispose of any slave or slavesof his testator or intestate, except for the paying and satisfying the ust debts of such testator or intestate and then only where there is not sufficient of the peronsal estate of such testator or intestate to satisfy and pa such debts; and in that case it shall and may be lawful for the executor or administrator to sell and dispose of such slave or slaves as shall be sufficient to raise so much money as the personal estate falls short of the payment of the debts. SEC 38. It shall and may be lawful for any person or persons whatsoever by deed executed in his, her, or their life times, or by his, her, or their last will and testament wherein any lands or tenements shall hereafter be settled, conveyed or devised for life or lives to settle, convey or devise any salve or slaves, and in such deed of last will to declare that such slave or slaves, and their increase so long as any of them shall be living, shall descent, pass and go as part of the freehold, to such person or persons to whom such lands and tenements shall be so conveyed or devised and to whom the same shall from time to time descend and come; and such declaration shall be food and effectual in law to annex such slave or slaves to the freehold and inheritance of such lands and tenements, and they and their increase so long as any of them shall be living, shall descend, pass, and go in possession, reversion, and remainder, with such lands and tenements; or where any person shall by his deed executed in his lifetime, or by his last will or testament in writing, settle, convey, or devise any land and tenements for life or lives and shall in the same deed or will, settle, convey, or devise any slave or slaves, with the same limitation or limitation with which such lands and tenements shall be so settled, conveyed or devised, such limitation or limitations shall amount to a declaration of the intent of the party selling, conveying, or devising the same should be annexed to such lands and tenements and shall descend pass

39

and go therewith from time to time as aforesaid.” And said court further says that the following statute entitled an “act to prevent frauds and perjuries” was passed by the legislature of Kentucky and went into operation in that State on December fourteenth in the year 1796. Viz:

“SEC 2 Every gift, grant or conveyance of lands, tenements or hereditaments, goods, or chattels or of any rent, common or profit of the same by writing or otherwise, and every bond, suit, judgment or execution had or made and contrived of malice, fraud, convin, collusion or fuile to the intent or purpose to delay, hinder or defraud or deceive those who shall purchase the same lands, tenements or hereditaments, or any rent, profit or commodity out of them, shall be from thereforth deemed and taken only as against the person or persons, hi her or their heirs successors, executors, administrators or assigns, and every of them whose debts, suits, demands, estates and interest, by such guileful and covinous devices and practices aforesaid shall or might be in any wise disturbed, hindered, delayed or defrauded to be clearly and utterly void, any pretence, colour feigned consideration, expressing of use, or any other matter o thing to the contrary not withstanding; and moreover if a conveyance be of goods and chattels, and be not on consideration deemed valuable in law, it shall be taken to be fraudulent within this act, unless the same be by will duly proved and recorded or by deed in writing acknowledged or proved if the same deed includes lands also, in such manner as conveyances of land are by law directed to be acknowledged or proved, or if it be of goods and chattels only, the acknowledged or proved by two witnesses in the office of the court of appeals or district court, or in the court of quarter sessions or county court of the county wherein one of the parties lives within eight months after the execution thereof or unless possession shall really and bona fide remain with the done and in like manner where any loan of goods and chattels shall be pretended to have been make to any person with whom or those claiming under him, possession shall have remained by the space of five years, without demand made and pursued by due process at law, on the part of the pretended lender, or where any reservation or limitation shall pretended to have been made of an use or property by way of condition, reversion, remainder or otherwise, in goods and chattels, the possession whereof shall have remained in another as aforesaid the same shall be taken as to the creditors and purchasers of the persons aforesaid so remaining in possession to be fraudulent within this act, and that the absolute property is in the possession unless such loan, reservation or limitation of use or property were declared by will or deed in writing, proved and recorded as aforesaid. SEC 3. This act shall not extend to any estate or interest in any lands, goods or chattels, or any rents, common or profit, out of the same, which shall be upon good consideration and bona fide lawfully conveyed or assured to any person or person, bodies politic or corporate.”-

And said court further says that in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy six, the convention of the State of Virginia passed the following ordinance to wit:

“VI. And be it further ordained, that the common law of England, all statutes or acts of Parliament madie in aid of the common law prior to the fourth year of ht ereign of King James the first,a dn which are of a general nature, not local ot that kingdom, together with the several acts of the General Assembly of this colony

40

now in force, so far as the same may consist with the several ordinances, declarations, and resolutions fo the general convention shall be the rule of decision, and shall be considered as in full force, until the same shall be altered by the legislative power of this colony.”

And said court says further that in June in the year one thousand eight hundred, the constitution of the State of Kentucky went into operation in which is the following clause viz:

“8. All laws which on the first day of June 1792 were in force in the State of Virginia, and which are of a general nature, and not local to that state, and not repugnant to this constitution, nor to the laws which have been enacted by the legislature of this commonwealth, shall be in force within this state, until they shall be altered or repealed by he general assembly.

And said court say that the Legislature of Kentucky passed the following act which went into force on nineteenth December in the year seventeen hundred ninety six viz: “Section 1. Be it enacted by the general assembly that no estate of inheritance or freehold or for a term of more than five years, in land or tenements shall be conveyed from one to another, unless the conveyance be declared by writing, sealed and delivered, not shall such conveyance be good against a purchaser for a valuable consideration, not having notice therof, or any creditor, unless the same writing be acknowledged by the party or parties who shall have sealed and delivered it or be proved by three witnesses to be his, her or their act in the office of the clerk of the court of appeals of a district court or ina court of quarter session, or county court in the manner prescribed by law, or in the manner hereinafter directed, within eight months after the time of sealing and delivering and be lodged with the clerk of such court to be there recorded.”- Sec 11. Every Estate in lands which shall hereafter be granted, conveyed, or devised to one, although other words heretofore necessary to transfer an estate of inheritance, be not added, shall be deemed a fee-simple if a less estate be not limited by express words or do not appear to have been granted, conveyed or devised by construction or operation of law.- Where an estate hath been or shall be by any conveyance limited in remainder to the son or daughter or to the use of the son or daughter of any person to be begotten, such son o or daughter born after the decease of his or her father, shall take the estate in the same manner as if he or she had been born in the lifetime of the father, although no estate shall have been conveyed to support the contingent remainder after his death. SEC 12. By deed of bargain and sale, or by deeds of lease and release, or by covenant to stand seized to use or deed, operating by way of covenant, to stand seized to use, the possession of the bargainer, releaser, or covenanter, shall be deemed heretofore to have been, and hereafter to be transferred to the bargainee, releasee, or person entitled to the use for the estate or interest which such person, or shall have in the use as perfectly as if such bargainee, release, or person entitled to the use, had been enfeofed with livery of seisin of the land intended to be conveyed by the said deed or covenant.” And said court finds further that the legislature of said State of Kentucky passed the following act which went into operation in Kentucky on the thirteenth day of December in the year Eighteen hundred and twenty viz: SEC 4. No deed of mortgage or deed of trust hereafter made or execture for or upon any real or personal estate, shall be good or valid against any creditor or a purchaser for valuable consideration, without notice thereof, unless such deed shall within sixty days after its execution, upon the acknowledgement of proof thereof by two subscribing witnesses

41

according to the existing laws, be deposited for record in the office of the county court clerk of the county where the estate therein conveyed or the greater part thereof lies.- And the court sitting as aforesaid doth further find that the several acts and clauses of acts and ordinances and constitutional provisions aforesaid went into force at the times respectively in that behalf above stated and continued in force from thence to the present time unless said acts interfere with or are repugnant to each other, and the court sitting to determine the issue in form aforesaid joined not being advised whether according to the law of the land the said issue ought to be found for the plaintiff or the defendant doth say that if upon being sufficiently advised of and concerning the premises the court shall be of opinion that the issue ought to be found for the plaintiff then the court sitting to determine the issue aforesaid doth say the defendant is guilty of the trespasses in the declaration mentioned in manner and form as the plaintiff hath in her declaration alleged and doth asses the damages for the plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the premises at one cent but if the court shall be of opinion upon such advisement that the said issue ought to be found defendant, then the court sitting to try to issue aforesaid doth find the said defendant not guilty of the said trespasses in manner and form as the plaintiff hath complained against him.

Dolly v. Jolin Young, Apr 13, 1829, 279- Continued David Shipman v. Stephen Smith, April 15, 1829, p286-289

see Milly entry Harry Dick v. Stephen Smith p289-293

see Milly entry William v. Stephen Smith 293-297

see Milly entry Mary, Victoire, Elizabeth, & Virginia v. Francis Menard, April 30, 1829, p.301- Alias

summons awarded. Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau Sr., May 9, 1829, p.319

The motion made by the plaintiff to enter up judgment on the verdict heretofore given by the Jury in this case is by the court continued.

Celeste v. L Chauvin, adm of H. Chevalier, May 9, 1829, p.319 The motion of the defendant for a new trial in this cae is by the court continued.

Nicholas v. John W. Honey & John H. Gary, July 29, 1829, p.325- Pleas filed. Peter v. James Walton, August 3, 1829 Pg. 342 – Plea filed. Matilda v. Philip Rocheblave impleaded with Mary Louisa Rocheblave, August 3, 1829

Pg. 342-43 Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said Philip Rocheblave

although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against him wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said Philip Rocheblave and the said plaintiff not requiring a jury to assess her damages but consenting to take nominal damages the court assesses the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered that the said Matilda be liberated and entirely set free from the said Philip Rocheblave and all persons claiming from, through or under him, and it is further considered that the said Matilda recover against the said Philip Rocheblave her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also

42

her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.

Auguste v. H. Chevaliers Adm., Aug 4, 1829, p.344- Continued Celeste v. H. Chevaliers Adm., Aug 4, 1829, p.344- Continued Mary v. Peter Chouteau Sr., Aug 4, 1829, p.344- Continued Michel v. Peter Chouteau Sr., Aug 4, 1829, p.344- Continued Carmelite v. Peter Chouteau Sr., Aug 4, 1829, p.344- Continued Joseph v. Peter Chouteau Sr., Aug 4, 1829, p.344- Continued Stephen Smith v. David Shipman, Aug 10, 1829, p.352- Continued Milly v. Stephen Smith, 11 August, 1829 Pg. 359

Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and the court now being sufficiently advised of and concerning the premises the court do find that the said Stephen Smith is not guilty in manner and form a the plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him therefore it is considered that the said Milly take nothing by her said suit and that the said Stephen Smith go thereof without day.

Matilda v. Philip and Mary Louisa Rocheblave, September 7, 1829 Pg. 393 On motion of Philip Rocheblave by his attorney it is ordered by the court that the

judgment by default entered in his case be set aside. Celeste v. L. Chauvrin Admin. of Chevalier; September 7th, 1829, Pg. 408:

The motion of the defendant for a new trial in this case is by the court continued. Carmelite v. Pierre Choteau Senior, September 7th, 1829 Pg. 408

The motion made by the plaintiff to enter up judgment on the verdict of the jury in this case is by the court continued.

Vincent vs. Jerry otherwise Jerry Duncan, November 24, 1829, Pg. 410-11 Now at this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and says he will not further

proseuge his said action against the said defendant bu t boluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Vincent take nothing by his said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day and it si further considered that the said jerry otherwise called Jerry Duncan recover against the said Vincent his costs and charges by him about his defense in this dehalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Vincent otherwise Vincent Duncan vs. James Duncan, November 25th, 1829, Pg. 411 On motion of the attorney of the said defendant it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

judge or justice of the peace of the state of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the trial of this cause on the part of the said defendant.

On motion of the attorney of the said defendant it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any judge or justice of the peace of the state of Kentucky to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the trial of this cause on the part of the said defendant.

Vincent v. James Duncan, Nov 26, 1829, p.415- Plea filed. Mary, Michel, Carmelite, & Joseph v. Peter Chouteau, Dec 16, 1829, p.441- Continued Harry Dick, David Shipman, &William v. Stephen Smith- Dec 18, 1829, p.445-

Continued. Maria Whiten & Patrick Henry v. Garland Rucker- Dec 19, 1829, p.446- Replications

filed. Dolly a colored woman vs. John Young, December 21st, 1829, Pg. 447

Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although

43

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath the prosecuted the said suit with effect therefore it is considered that the said Dolly take nothing by her said suit and that the said John Young go thereof without day and it is further considered that the said John Young recover against the said Dolly his costs and charges by him about his defence in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Peter vs. James Walton, December 31, 1829 Page 461 Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he prosecuted his said suit with effect therefore it is considered that the said Peter take nothing by his said suit and that the said James Walton go thereof without day.

Peter vs. James Walton, Jan 22, 1830 Page 477- Bill of Exceptions filed. Matilda vs. Philip Rocheblave and Marie Louise Rocheblave, Jan 22, 1830, Page 480-81

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court and the court sitting as a jury doth find that Matilda the plaintiff is a mulatto girl and was born in the Village of Prairie Du Rocher in the late Northwestern Territory now State of Illinois in the family of Mrs. Susan Lacount, alias Lacompt in the year eighteen hundred and seven or eight; that the plaintiffs mother was a negro woman, held in slavery in said village of Prairie DuRocher before and after the thirteenth day of July in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven, and at and after the birth of said Matilda that said Susan Lacount was a French inhabitant of the Village of Prairie Durocher at the time of the conquest of that country by Virginia, and continued to reside in and inhabit said Village of Prairie Durocher until the present time: that said Matilda was claimed and held as a slave by said Susan Lacount (the owner of plaintiffs mother) in said village from the time of her birth till some time in the year eighteen hundred and nineteen or twenty, when said Susan Lacount transferred and delivered the plaintiff to Philip Rocheblave one of the defendants as his salve by way of gift, said Rocheblave being son in law of said Susan Lacount: that said Philip Rocheblave some time in the year 1820 brought said plaintiff with him from said village of Prairie Durocher in Illinois to St. Louis in the state of Missouri where she resided ever since in the service and possession of the defendants as the salve of said Philip, that on the day and before and after the commencement of this suit, as well as at the present time, the said defendants did and still do hold the said plaintiff in the county of St. Louis in slavery and involuntary servitude as a slave of him the said Philip, but whether upon the whole matter so as aforesaid found the said defendants are guilty or not guilty of the premises in manner and form as the plaintiff hath above thereof in her declaration alleged the court aforesaid sitting as a jury unadvised wherefore the facts aforesaid in form aforesaid found are to the court there submitted and if according to the law of the land the said issues so as aforesaid joined shall be with the plaintiff then the same shall be so found and the damages of the plaintiff assessed at one cent, if on the contrary said issues shall be wit the defendant then the finding of the judgment to be entered accordingly, and the court here being sufficiently advised of and concerning the premises the court do find that the said defendants are guilty of the premises in manner and form as the plaintiff hath above thereof complained against them and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespasses in the declaration mentioned to the sum of once cent therefore it is considered that the said Matilda be liberated and entirely set free from

44

the said Philip Rocheblave and Marie Louise Rocheblave and all persons claiming through or under them and it is for the considered fact that the said Matilda recover against the said Philip Rocheblave and Marie Louise Rocheblave her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.

Peter vs. James Walton, 28 January 1830, Pg. 485 The plaintiff by his attorney files his affidavit and prays an appeal to the Supreme Court

thereupon it is ordered by the court that the said appeal be granted and the record and proceedings are ordered to be certified up accordingly.”

Jeffry vs. Joseph Robidoux, 29 January 1830 Pg. 485 On motion of McGeyer his is permitted by the court to appear as the attorney of the said

Jeffry and the said attorney files the affidavit of Rachel Camp. Jeffrie vs. Joseph Robidoux, 1/29/1830, Pg. 487

On motion of McGeyer attorney for the plaintiff it is ruled that said Joseph Robidoux shall show cause at the next term of this court why the judgment entered at the June term of this court in the year one thousand and eight hundred and twenty four against said plaintiff should not be set aside for irregularity.

Celeste v. L. Chauvin, Adm of H. Chevalier, Feb 6, 1830, p.490 The motion of the defendant for a new trial in this case is by the court continued.

Carmelite v Pierre Chouteau Sr., Feb 6, 1830, p.490 The motion of the plaintiff to enter up juedgment on the verdict of the Jury in this case is

by the court continued. Auguste, Celeste v. H. Chevalier, Adm., Mar 29, 1830, p.505- Continued Mary, Michel, Carmelite, Joseph v. P. Chouteau Sr., Mar 29, 1830, p.505- Continued David Shipman, Harry Dick, William v. Stephen Smith Mar 30, 1830, p.507- Continued. Nicholas v. John H. Gray & John W. Henry Apr 1, 1830, p.513- Continued Maria Whiten v. Garland Rucker, Apr 6 1830 p.520

Cause continued on motion of plaintiff’s attorney On motion of the attorney for the said plaintiff it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any

Judge or Justice of the Peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions fo witnesses to be read on the trial of the above cause on the part of the plaintiff.

Patrick Henry v. Garland Rucker, Apr 6 1830 p.520- continued. William vs. Stephen Smith, Page 538; April 19, 1830

“Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and the court now being fully advised of and concerning the premises the court do find that the said defendant is guilty of the trespasses in the declaration mentioned in manner and form as the plaintiff hath in his declaration alleged and they assess the damages of the plaintiff by him sustained by occasion of the premises at one cent therefore it is considered that the said William be liberated and entirely set free from the said Stephen Smith and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said William recover against the said Stephen Smith his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.”

David Shipman vs. Stephen Smith, Page 539;, April 19, 1830 “Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid

and the court now being fully advised of and concerning the premises the court do find

45

that the said defendant is guilty of the trespasses in the declaration mentioned in manner and form as the plaintiff hath in his declaration alleged and they assess the damages of the said plaintiff by him sustained by occasion of the premises to one cent, therefore it is considered that the said David Shipman be liberated and entirely set free from the said Stephen Smith and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said David Shipman recover against the said Stephen Smith his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.”

Milly, Harry Dick, William, and David Shipman, Apirl 20, 1830, Page 541 “who sued in this court to establish their right to freedom having by an order of this court

been committed to the custody of the Sheriff to be hired out during the pendency of said suit, now on motion on behalf of said Sheriff it is ordered that he be discharged from the further custody of said Milly, Harry Dick, William, and David Shipman they having established their right to freedom.

Record 5 Ends, Record 6 Begins

Maria Whiten vs. Garland Rucker, August 11, 1830 Page 41 “Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her said suit with effect therefore it is considered that the said Maria Whiten take nothing by her said suit and that the said Garland Rucker go thereof without day.”

Patrick Henry v. Garland Rucker, August 11, 1830 Page 41 Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he prosecuted his said suit with effect therefore it is considered that the said Patrick Henry take nothing by his said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Vincent vs. James Duncan, August 17, 1830, p. 52 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a jury to wit: John A. Ackley, John F. Hamtramck, John W. Blair, William B. Reed, Austin J. Raines, Henry Massie, John H. Reed, Franklin Ridgely, Charles L. Billon, Christopher Halstead, Bazil Alexander and John B. Bouis, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid, on their oath aforesaid as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid do say that the said James Duncan is not guilty of the wrongs and grievances above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff has above in complaining alleged against him, and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said Vincent at the time of the commencement of his action aforesaid was and still is a slave, therefore it is considered that the said Vincent take nothing by his said suit and that the said James Duncan go thereof without day.”

Vincent vs. James Duncan, August 18, 1830: Pg. 53 The plaintiff by his attorney files his affidavit and prays an appeal to the Supreme Court

of this State. Randal v. Owen Riley, Aug 19, 1830, p.55

George T. Strother presents here to the court the petition of Randal a negro man praying

46

that he may be permitted to institute suit against Owen Riley to establish hi right to freedom ad that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person. Thereupon the court permits the said Randal to sue as aforesaid and directs that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said Owen Riley in the nae of the said Randal and assign George F. Strother esquire as his counsel and it is ordered by the court htat he said Owen Riley the defendant permit the said Randal to have a reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said Randal the plaintiff shall not be taken or revoed out of the Jurisdiction of this court and that he shall not be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom.

Vincent vs. James Duncan, August 20, 1830: Pg. 58 On the affidavit filed by the plaintiffs attorney in this case it is ordered that the appeal be

granted and the record and proceedings are ordered to be certified up accordingly. Jeffrey vs. Joseph Robidoux August 27th, 1830 Pg. 68

On mature deliberation it is considered by the court that the motion of the said Jeffrey set aside the judgment heretofore rendered in this case be overruled.

Vincent vs. James Duncan, August 27th, 1830 Pg. 68- Bill of Exceptions Filed Jeffrey vs. Joseph Robidoux August 31, 1830 Pg. 71- Bill of Exceptions Filed Celeste v. Helen Chevaliers, Adm, Sep 2. 1830, p.76

The motion of the defendant to grant him a new trial in this case is by the court continued.

Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau, Sep 2. 1830, p.76 The motion of the plaintiff to enter up a judgment on the Verdict of the Jury in this case

and of the defendant to grant him a new trial are by the court continued. Vincent vs. James Duncan, , March 29th, 1831 Pg. 80

“It is ordered by the court that the sheriff of the county of Saint Louis take possession of Vincent the petitioner in this case and hire him out to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit and that he take a bond from the person hiring said petitioner in the penalty of five hundred dollars conditioned that the said Vincent shall at all times during the pendency of this suit have reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and that the said petitioner shall not be removed out of the jurisdiction of this court and that he shall not be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom.”

Esther vs. William Wetzell,; , March 30th, 1831 Pg. 83 On motion of Christian F. Kienlen it is ordered by the court that the said Christian F.

Kienlen be admitted codefendant in this case. Peter v. James Walton- April 1, 1831, p.88- Plea filed. Carey v. Genajmin Wilder, April 1, 1831, p.88Plea filed Julie v. Smauel Whinney, april 1 1831, p.90- plea filed Dunky vs. Andrew Hay, Page 92; , April 6th, 1831

“George D. Shaw presents the petition of Dunky a woman of color praying that she may be permitted to institute a suit against Andrew Hay for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon the court permits the said Dunky to sue aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be brought in the name of the said Dunky and assign George D. Shaw and Stephen W. Foreman as her counsel, and it is ordered by the court that the said

47

Andrew Hay permit the said petitioner to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application for freedom.”

Mariquette vs. Samuel McKinney, 7th April 1831 Page 92 “George F. Strother presents the petition of Mariquette a woman of color praying that she

may be permitted to institute suit against Samuel McKinney for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person, thereupon the court permit the said Mariquette to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be brought in the name of the said Mariquette and assign George F. Strother as her counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said Samual McKinney permit the said Mariquette to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application for freedom.”

August, celest v. H. Chevaluers adm, April 11, 1831, p.98- Continued Mary, Michel, Carmelite, Joseph v. Pierre Chouteau Sr., April 11, 1831, p.98- Continued Jane vs. William Dallam, April 15, 1831 Page 110

“ James L. Murray esquire presents to the court the petitioner of Jane a woman of color praying that she may be permitted to institute suit against William Dallam for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person, thereupon the court permit the said Jane to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be brought in the name of the said Jane and assign the said James L. Murray as her counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said William Dallam permit the said Jane to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application for freedom.”

Joe vs. James Duncan, April 18, 1831 Page 114-115 “It is suggested here to the court that since the last continuance of this cause the said Joe

the said plaintiff hath died which suggestion is not denied but admitted to be true and suit abates.”

Ralph v. James & Coleman Duncan, April 19, 1831, p.117 Now at this day come the said plaintiffs by his attorney and says he will not further

prosecute his said suit against the said James Duncan but voluntarily suffers the said action so far as regards the said James Duncan to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Ralph take nothing by his said suit against the james and that he go thereof without day.

Ralph v. Coleman Duncan, April 19, 1831, p.117 It is ordered by the court that Ralph the plaintiff in this case be delivered by the sheriff to

James Duncan or to Coleman Duncan on their or either of them entering into Recognizance with sufficient security in the sum of six hundred dollars conditioned that the said Ralph the petitioner shall at all times during the pendency of this suit have reaonsable liberty of attending his counsel and that the said Raplph shall not be removed out fo the Jurisdition of this court and that he shalt not be subjected to any severity of treatment because of his application for freedom.

48

Esther a free mulatto vs. William Wetzell and Christopher F. Kienlen, April 22, 1831, Pg. 133 The judge of this court being interested in the event of this suit, it is therefore ordered by

the court that the venue be changed to the county of Saint Charles in the second judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers filed in the cause and appertaining to or forming part of the record to the clerk of the said circuit court for the county of Saint Charles at the next term thereof.

Ralph v. Coleman Duncan, April 23, 1831, p.134On motion of the plinaittf by his attorney leave is given him to amend his declaration in this case which is done. Celeste v. Helen Chevaliers, Admin, April 26, 1831, p.143The motion of the defendant to grant him a new trial in this case is by the court continued. Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau, April 26, 1831, p.143Th motion of the plaintiff to enter up a Judgment on the Verdict of the Jury in this case, and of the defendant to grant him a new trial are by the court continued. Mariquette v. Samuel T. McKinney, July 28, 1831, p.150- Pleas filed.

Roll C 25798 Ends, Roll C 25799 Begins

Dunky v. Andrew Hay (1831) 10 August 1831 - plea filed; Pg 166 Ralph v. Coleman Duncan 11 August 1831 – Pg 167

o “On motion of the attorney for the defendant it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or Justice of the Peace of the State of Kentucky to take the depositions of witnesses to be read into evidence on the trial of this cause on the part of the defendant;”

Mariquette v. Samuel McKinney 12 August 1831 – Pg 170o “On motion of the said plaintiff by her attorney leave is given to her to amend her

declaration by making Charles Wahrendorff a defendant which is done and pleas filed;” Anna v. Thomas Higginbotham 15 August 1831 – Pg 174 - 175

o “Gustavus A. Bird presents to the court the petition of Anna a woman of color praying that she may be permitted to institute suit against Thomas Higginbotham to establish her right to Freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon the court permits the said Anna to sue as aforesaid and directs that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said Thomas Higginbotham in the name of said Anna and assign Gustavus A. Bird esquire as her counsel and it is ordered that the said defendant permit the said Anna to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said Anna the plaintiff shall not be taken or removed out of the Jurisdiction of this court and that she shall not be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application for freedom.”

Anna v. Thomas Higginbotham, August 15 1831, p.176o For cause shewn it is ordered by the court that a writ of Habeas Corpus issue to Thomas

Higginbotham commanding him forthwith to bring into court the body of said Anna. Vincent v. James Duncan, 16 August 1831, Pg 176 continued for plaintiff Peter v. James Walton, 19 August 1831, p.185- Continued. Julia v. Samuel McKinney, 19 August 1831, p.185

49

o continued with leave to defendants counsel to except to the depositions filed in this case; Cary v. Benjamin Wilder 19 August 1831 – Pg 186

o Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he prosecuted his said suit with effect therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and tha the said defendant go thereof without day.

Cary v. Benjamin Wilder, 22 August 1831, Pg 189- Bill of exceptions field Jane v. William Dallam, Aug 24, 1831, p.199- Alias summons awarded. Cary v. Benjamin Wilder, 30 August 1831 – Pg 207

o The plaintiff by his attorney moves the court to set aside the Judgment of nonsuit in this case and files his reasons therefore which motion upon mature deliberation is by the court overruled.

Celeste v. Helen Chevaliers Adm, Aug 30, 1831, p.209o The motion of the defendant to grant him a new trial in this case is by the court

continued. Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau Sr., Aug 30, 1831, p.209-10

o The motion of the plaintiff to enter up a Judgment of the Verdict of the Jury in this case, and of the defendant to grant him a new trial are by the court continued.

Vincent v. James Duncan 28 November 1831 – Pg 210o On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that a Venire issue to the sheriff

commanding him to summon eighteen good and lawful men of this county to attend and serve as Jurors on the fifth day of December next at the hour of Ten o'clock in the forenoon of that day.

Anna v. Thomas Higginbotham, 29 November 1831, p.212- Plea filed Anna v. Thomas Higginbotham, 30 November 1831, p.215

o Now on this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further prosecute her said suit against the said defendant but voluntarily suffered the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Anna take nothing by her said suit and that the said Thomas Higginbotham go thereof without day.

Auguste & Celeste v. H. Chevalier’s Adm., Dec 1, 1831, p.221- Continued. Mary, Michel, Carmelite, & Joseph v. Pierre Chouteau, Sr., Dec 1, 1831, p.221

Continued. Louisa v. Sanford Calvert, 1 December 1831, Pg 221- Plea filed Ralph v. Coleman Duncan 3 December 1831 – Pg 233

o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and thereupon also come a Jury to wit John Carman, James H. Farris, John Bingham, Walter H. Dorsett, Harris Downey, Solomon King, Henry Duval, Fielding Phelps, Peter Mullen, William Wash, Isaac Stoner and Benjamin Lacy twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid to say as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is not guilty of the wrongs and trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said Ralph has above in declaring complained against him, and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that at the time of the committing of the said supposed trespasses the said Ralph was and still is a

50

slave, and thereupon the said plaintiff by his attorney aforesaid moves the court to grant him a new trial in this case.

Vina v. Martin Mitchell 20 December 1831, Pg 241-42o George F. Strother presents to the court the petition of Vina a woman of color praying

that she may be permitted to institute suit against Martin Mitchell to establish her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person, thereupon the court permits the said Vina to sue as aforesaid and directs that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be commenced against the said Martin Mitchell in the name of the said Vina and assign George F. Strother esquire as her counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said defendant permit the said Vina to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said Vina the plaintiff shall not be taken or removed out of the Jurisdiction of this court, and the she shall not be subject to any severity or treatment on account of her said application for freedom and the court do further order that the Sheriff of the county of Saint Louis in whose custody the said Vina now is do hire out the said Vina to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit and that he take a bond from the person hiring said petitioner conditioned according to law;”

Louisa v. Sanford Calvert 20 December 1831, Pg 242o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered byt the court that the sheriff of the

county of Saint Louis in whose custody now is do hire out the said Louisa to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit and that he take b ond from the person hiring said petitioner conditioned according to law.

Ralph v. Coleman Duncan 22 December 1831, p.245o Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid

and thereupon on mature deliberation the motion for a new trial in this case is by the court overruled and the said plaintiff files his bill of exceptions and also files his affidavit and prays an appeal to the Supreme Court which is granted and the record and proceedings are ordered to be certified up accordingly

John v. William Campbell (1832) 27 March 1832; Pg 252- Plea filed Auguste & Celeste vs. Helen Chevalier's Admin, March 29, 1832, p.257- continued Mary, Michel, Carmelite, & Joseph vs. Peter Chouteau Senior, March 29, 1832, p.257-

continued Vincent v. James Duncan 10 April 1832 - p.270

o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and thereupon also come a Jury to wit: Samuel Necock, Horatio N. Cross, Michael Rourke, Michael Tesson, Henry B. Berry, Thomas J. Jones, David Coons, Samuel Carlisle, Enoch C. Price, Arthur L. Johnson, Charles Collins and Charles Busseron twelve good and lawful men who bring duly elected tried and sworn will and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say as to the first issue within joined the parties aforesaid that he the said James Duncan is not guilty of the wrongs and grievances above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff in above in complaining alleged against him and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said Vincent at the time of the commencement of his action aforesaid was and still is a slave therefore it is considered that the said Vincent take nothing by his said suit and that the said James Duncan go thereof without day.

51

Thenia alias Sarah v. Green Crowder, April 11, 1832, p.273- Replication filed. Julia v. Samuel McKinney,11 April 1832, p.273 - continued at the instance of the plaintiff Charlotte v. Green Crowder, April 20, 1832, p.284- Plea filed. Peter v. James Walton (1831) 20 April 1832 - p.284

o Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he prosecuted his suit in this behalf with effect therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Charlotte v. Green Crowder, 20 April 1832, p.285- Plea filed Jack v. Charles Collins, 20 April 1832 - p.285

o It is ordered by the court that this suit be dismissed from the docket at the costs to the defendant.

Dunky v. Andrew Hay, 24 April 1832, p.287 – continued Jeffrie v. Joseph Robidoux, 25 April 1832, p.293 – continued Tenor Washington v. Henry Scott Impl. (Emmerson) 27 April 1832, p.299 - Plea filed Vincent v. James Duncan 28 April 1832, p.302 - Bill of Exceptions filed Vincent v. James Duncan 2 May 1832 - p.308

o The plaintiff by his attorney files his affidavit in this case and prays an appeal to the Supreme Court of this state whereupon it is ordered by the court that the appeal be granted and that the accord and proceedings be certified up accordingly.

Mariquette v. Samuel McKinney 3 May 1832 - p.315 continued Louisa v. Sanford Calvert 3 May 1832, p.315 - continued on application for plaintiff Thenia (alias Sarah) v. Green Crowder (1832) 7 May 1832, p.319

o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or Justice of the peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read into evidence on the trial of this case on the part of the plaintiff;

Charlotte v. Green Crowder (1832) 7 May 1832 - p.319-20o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or

Justice of the peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read into evidence on the trial of this cause on the part of the plaintiff.

Ralph v. Coleman Duncan, May 10,1832, p.330o It is ordered by the court that Coleman Duncan be permitted to retain possession of the

said Ralph upon condition that he enter into recognizance with sufficient security in the sum of six hundred dollars, conditioned that the said Ralph the petitioner shall at all times during the pendency of this suit have reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and that he said Ralph shall not be removed out of the Jurisdiction of this court and that he shall not be subjected to any severity of treatment because of this applicaiont for freedom and Isaac A. Letcher and David Lawrence are approved of by the court as securities in the said Recognizance.

Celeste v. Helen Chevalier’s Adm, May 10,1832, p.336The motion of the defendant to grant him a new trial in this case is by the Court continued. Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau, May 10, 1832, p.336The motion of the plaintiff to enter up a Judgment on the Verdict of the Jury in this case, and of the defendant to grant him a new trial are by the court continued. Susan v. Lemon Parker, 24 July 1832, p.337

52

o Stephen W. Foreman represents the petition of Susan a girl of color praying that she may be permitted to institute suite against Lemon Parker for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon the court permit the said Susan to sue as aforesaid and direct an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment to be brought in the name of the said Susan and assign Stephen W. Foreman esq. as her counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said Lemon Parker permit the said petitioner to have reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the Jurisdiction of this court or subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application for freedom.

o Stephen Smith who is personally known to the Judge of this court to be the person whose name is subscribed to a deed of Emancipation as having been executed by him to a certain – Negro man named Doctor, alias Henry, appears here in open court and acknowledges the execution of the said deed from him to said Doctor alias Henry.

Mahala v. Martin Mitchell 24 July 1832, p.338o On motion of the defendant and by consent of parties it is ordered by the court that the

sheriff of this county advertise the said Mahala for hire to the highest bidder giving at least ten days notice of the time and place of said hiring and that he take bond from the person hiring said Mahala in the penalty of Five Hundred dollars and with security as the sheriff shall approve conditioned as required by law and for the return of the said Mahala when required by the court.

Sam, Nathan, & Mary Ann vs. Alex P Field & Elijah Mitchell, July 26, 1832, p. 341- Pleas filed

Michael, Matilda and Anson v. H.G. Mitchell and H.C. Russell, July 26, 1832, p.341- Pleas filed

Jeffrey v. Joseph Robidoux, August 9, 1832, p.367 – continued Louisa v. Sanford Calvert August 9 1832 p.367- continued Tenor Washington v. Henry Scott Impl. (Emmerson) 13 August 1832 - p.373

o Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her suite on this behalf with effect therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

o Nathan Cole v. Alexander P. Field: Plea filed Aug 15, 1832. p. 379 Tenor Washington v. Henry Scott & Johnson 15 August 1832 - p.380

o Arthur L. Magenis presents to the court the petition of Tenor Washington a woman of color praying that she may be permitted to institute suit against Henry Scott for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person, thereupon the court permit the said Tenor Washington to sue as aforesaid and direct that anb action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be brought on the name of the said Tenor Washington and assign the said Arthur L. Magenis as her counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said Henry Scott permit the said Tenor Washington to have a reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the said court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the Jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of her said application.

John v. William Campbell,16 August 1832, p.380 – continued

53

Jack Barton v. William Glasgow 22 August 1832 - p.391o Stephen W. Foreman esq. presents to the court the petition of Jack a man of color

sometimes called Jack Barton praying that he may be permitted to institute suit against William Glasgow and the firm of Glasgow, Ross &c. for establishing his right to Freedom and that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon the court permit the said Jack Barton to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be brought in the name of the said Jack Barton and assign the said Stephen W. Foreman as his counsel and it is ordered by the said cout that the said defendants permit the said Jack Barton to have a reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the Jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom.

o Coleman Duncan use of E. Tracy v. Jonathan Duncan: August 28, 1832, p. 401o Now this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon all and singular the matters aforesaid whereof the parties aforesaid have put themselves upon the Judgment of the court aare by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here full understood and mature deliberation being thereupon had for it appears to the court that the replications of the said Coleman to the said 2nd and 3rd pleas of him said Jonathan and the matters therein contained in manner and form as the same are above pleaded and set forth are sufficient in law for said coleman to have and maintain his aforesaid action thereof against him said Jonathan and that he the said Johnathan is bound by the law of the land to answer the same, wtherefore it is considered that the demurrers of the said devendant to the Replications of the said plaintiff to the second and third pleas of the said defendant be overruled.

o Celeste v. helen Chevalier’s Admin, Aug 28, 1832, p.402

o The motion of the defendant to grant him a new trial in this case is by the court continued.

Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau, Aug 28, 1832, p.402o The motion of the plaintiff to enter up a Judgment of the Verdict of the Jury in this case

and of the defendant to grant him a new trial are by the court continued.o Court adjourned until Court in Course.

Jack Barton v. William Glasgow 29 November 1832, p.413 - Plea filed Leah v. Arthur Mitchell,29 November 1832, p.413- Plea filed Susan v. Lemon Parker 28 March 1833, p. 433

o The defendant by his attorney moves the court to quash the alias writ issued in this case. Jack Barton v. William Glasgow, March 29, 1832, p.441

o On motion of the defendant by his attorney it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or Justice of the peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence on the trial of this cause on the part of the defendant.

o Coleman Duncan use of Tracy v. Jonathan Duncan: p. 441. March 29, 1832o Now at this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and says he will not further

prosecute his said action against the said defencang but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by the said suit and the said defendant go thereof without day and it is further considered that the said

54

Johathan Duncan recover against the said Coleman Duncan (who sued to the use of Edward Tracy and Charles Wahrendorff, his costs and charges by him about this defence in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Dunky v. Andrew Hay, 2 April 1833, p.447o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit, Charles Cabanne, Edward Charless, Wooster Goodyear, Isaac A. Letcher, Merrit Hix, Hiram B. Bascom, Richard Ragsdale, Richard Dowling, Elkanah English, William H. Pococke, John M. McCausland and Samuel Walton twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, whereupon for reasons as well moving the court as the parties aforesaid Charles Cabanne one of the Jurors aforesaid withdrawn from the panel of the Jury and the residue of the Jurors are discharged from rendering a verdict.

Julia v. Samuel McKinney, 2 April 1833, p.448o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit Christian F. Kienlen, Samuel Walton, James McClelland, James Martin, Samuel Willi, George Corwin, John Riggin, Alfred Skinner, James Bailey, John Goodfellow, James Park, and Leon Chenie twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said defendant is not guilty of the said trespass laid to his charge or any part thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him therefore it is considered that the said Julia take nothing by her said suit and that the said Samuel McKinney go thereof without day.

Tenor Washington v. Henry Scott & John Emmerson, 2 April 1833, p.448o Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendants although

solemnly called come not but make default nor have they pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against them wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendants and the said plaintiff not requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by her submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the the court here fully understood the court do find that the said defendants are guilty of the trespass assault and battery in the declaration mentioned in manner and form as she the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against them and the court assess the damage of said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass assault and battery aforesaid at the sume of one cent, therefore it is considered by the court that the said Tenor Washington be liberated and entirely set free from the said Henry Scott and John Emmerson and all persons claiming from through or under them ant it is further considered that the said Tenor Washington recover against the said Henry Scott and John Emmerson her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.

Mary Ann & others v. Alex P. Field & Elijah Mitchell, 2 April 1833, p.449o The plaintiffs by their attorney except to the depositions of Solomon Shook, William

Everett, Daniel Winn & Kitty Everett and file their reasons therefor which exceptions to the depositions aforesaid are by the court sustained.

Jeffrey v. Joseph Robidoux, 3 April 1833, p.452– continued Julia v. Samuel McKinney April 6, 1833, p. 456

55

o “plaintiff by her atty moves the court to grant her a new trial in this case for reasons filed therefore which motion upon mature deliberation is by the court overruled.”

Susan v. Lemon Parker 6 April 1833, p.456o On motion it is ordered by the court that the alias writ issued in this case by quashed and

that the sheriffs return to the original and to the alias writ be set aside and the court award an alias writ in this case.

Julia v. Samuel McKinney, 6 April 1833, p.456o The plaintiff by her attorney moves the court to grant her a new trial in this case for

reasons filed therefor which motion upon mature deliberation is by the court overruled. Sarah v. Samuel Johnson, April 6, 1833 p. 457

o “The Court order and direct that the Sheriff of the county of Saint Louis do hire out the said Sarah from term to term of this court and that he take bond of the person who may hire the said Sarah in the penalty of $500 with such security as the sheriff shall approve conditioned according to law and for the return of the said Sarah when it shall be required by the Court.”

Julia v. Samuel McKinney, April 8, 1833 p. 457o “On the affidavit of the pl’s atty filed by him in this case and on the application of the

said pl by her said atty for an appeal to the supreme court, it is ordered by the court that the appeal shall be granted, and the record and proceedings are ordered to be certified up accordingly.”

Julia v. Samuel McKinney, 8 April 1833, p.457o On the affidavit of the plaintiff's attorney filed by him in this case and on the application

of the said plaintiff by her said attorney for an appeal to the Supreme Court it is ordered by the court that the appeal be granted and the record and proceedings are ordered to be certified up accordingly.

Nathan Cole v. Alex P. Field: April 9, 1833, p. 457o On motion of the pl by his attorney it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any judge or JP of

the state of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence on the trial of this cause on the part of the plaintiff.

Harriet v. Sanuel T. McKinney & Thomas D. James, April 9, 1833, p.459o Harriet, an infant by Julia her mother (a woman of color) presents her petition to the court

praying that a writ of Habeas Corpus issue to Samuel T. Mc Kinney and Thomas d. James commanding them to bring the body of the said Harriet before this court, thereupon it is ordered by the court that a writ of Habeas Corps do issue as prayed for returnable forthwith.

o Gustavus A. Bird esquire presents here to the court the petition of Harriet a girl of color and an infant under the age of twenty one years praying that she may be permitted to institute suit against Samuel T. McKinney and Thomas D. James for establishing her right to freedom and that she may be permitted to sue as a poor person, thereupon the court permit the said Harriet to sue as aforesaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and false imprisonment be brought in the name of the said Harriet and assign the said Gustavus A. Bird as her counsel, and it is ordered by the court that the said Samuel T. McKinney and Thomas D. James permit the said Harriet to have a reasonable liverty of attending her counsel and the court when occasion may require it, and that the said petitioner shall not be taken or removed out of the jurisdiction of this court or be subject

56

to any severity of treatment on account of her said application for freedom. Louisa v. Sanford Calvert, 10 April 1833, p. 460

o It is suggested here to the court that since the commencement of this suit the said plaintiff hath died which suggestion is not denied but admitted to be true and suit abated.

o Sandford Calvert v. Silas S. Duvals: Thursday April 11, 1833 p. 463o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit: George W. Kerr, Miller V. Jones, Theodore Labeaume, John H. Reed, Joseph M. Chadweick, John B. D. Valois, James Park, John H. Baldwin, John P. Riley, Joshua Tucker, Elkanah English and Hiram McKee twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that he the said Silas did not promis and undertake in manner and form as he the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him therefore it is considered that the plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day and it is further considered that the said Silas L. Duval recover against the said Sanford Calvert his costs and charges by him about his defence in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Charlotte v. Green Crowder, 22 April 1833, p. 469o Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said action against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Charlotte take nothing by her said suit and that the said Green Crowder go therefore without day.

John v. William Campbell, 1 May 1833, p.477o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a Jury and all singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that he the said defendant is guilty of the grievances above in said declaration laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespass assault and battery in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered that the said John be liberated and entirely set free from the said William Campbell and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said John recover against the said William Campbell his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Sam & Nathan v. Alexander P. Fields & Elijah Mitchell, May 3, 1833, p.489o It is suggested here to the court that since the commencement of this suit, Sam and

Nathan, the plaintiffs in this case than died which suggestion is not denied but admitted to be true- and suit abates.

o Nelson Pepper v. Alexander P. Field, Impleaded with Charles M. Thurston. May 3, 1833, p. 489 Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he prosecuted his suit in this behalf with effect therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and the said defendant go thereof without day and it is further considerd that the said Alexander P. Field recover against t he said Nelson Pepper his costs and

57

charges by him about his defence in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Mary Ann v. Alexander P. Fields & Elijah Mitchell, May 3, 1833, p.489o The court permit Henry S. Geyer esquire on his application to withdraw from the further

prosecution of this suit as counsel for the plaintiff.o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit: William Dean, Thomas Robinson, Charles Billon, John McCausland, William Vincent, Alexander Lyle, Charles R. Hall, James Wilgus, William Erving, Joseph Klunk, Samuel Dnaiel and Lucien Dumain twelve good and lawful men who being duly elexted tried and sworn well and tuly to try to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said defendant are guilty of the grievances above in said declaration laid to their charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in the declaration mentioned to the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars therefore it is considered that the said Mary Ann be liberated and entirely set free from the said Alexander P. Fields and Elijah Mitchell and all persons claiming from through or under them and it is further considered that the said Mary Ann recover against the said Alexander P. Fields and Elijah Mitchell her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Jury assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.

Vina v. Henry C. Russell and Henry G. Mitchell, 4 May 1833, p.491 - Declaration and plea filed by consent of parties.

May 4, 1833. Harriett a woman of color who was committed to the Jail of the county of Saint Louis by Peter Ferguson a Justice of the peace for the county of St. Louis as a runaway slave being brought before the court as upon habeas corpus, and it appearing to the court that the said harriett has been confined in the Jail of this county for more than a year and that she has been advertised by the sheriff according to law, the court upon examination of the matter do ordr that said Harriet be discharged from custody, and the court allow to John. K. Walker, Esquired Sheriff of the county of St Louis the sum of $160.12 and one half cents for four hundred and forty three days board of said Harriet at thirty seven and one half cents per day for Turnkey fees for cmmittment, seventy five cents for cash paid for clothes for the use of said harriet. Three dollars for cash paid printer for publishing advertisement. Ten dollars amounting in all to the sum of One Hundred and seventy nine dollars eighty severn and one half cents, to be paid by the state of Missouri.

Alexander Felsan who is personally known to the Judge of this court to be the person whose name is subscribed to a deed of emancipation from him to Jenny and her children Eliza and Alexander now here produced to the court personally appears in open court and acknowledges the execution of said deed from him to said Jenny a negro woman aged about 21 years and her two children, Eliza aged about 2 years and Alexander aged about one year.

Anson v. Henry G. Mitchell & Henry C. Russell (1832) 4 May 1833, p.492o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that they the said defendants are guilty of the grievances above in said declaration laid to their charge

58

in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered that the said Anson be liberated and entirely set free from the said Henry G. Mitchell and Henry C. Russell and all persons claiming from, through or under them and it is further considered that the said Anson recover against the said Henry G. Mitchell and Henry C. Russell his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution;”

Michael v. H.G. Mitchell & H.C. Russell 4 May 1833, 492o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that they the said defendants are guilty of the grievances above in said declaration laid to their charge in manner and form as the said plaintiffs hath above alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in his declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefor it is considered that the said Michael be liberated and entirely set free from the said Henry G. Mitchell and Henry C. Russell and all persons claiming from, through or under them and it is further considered that the said Michael recover against the said Henry G. Mitchell and Henry C. Russell his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution;

Matilda v. H.G. Mitchell & H.C. Russell 4 May 1833, p.492o Now this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that they the said defendants are guilty of the grievances above in said declaration laid to their charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above alleged, and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in her declaration mentioned to the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars, therefore is considered that the said Matilda be liberated and entirely set free from the said Henry G. Mitchell and Henry C. Russell and all persons claiming from through or under them and it is further considered that the said Matilda recover against the said Henry G. Mitchell and Henry C. Russell her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have therof execution.

Vina v. Martin Mitchell 4 May 1833, p. 492-93o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that they the said defendants are guilty in manner and form as said plaintiff has above in her declaration alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in her declaration mentioned to the sum of two

59

hundred and fifty dollars therefore it is considered that the said Vina be liberated and entirely set free from the said Henry C. Russell and Henry G. Mitchell and all persons claiming from through or under tem and it is further considered that the said Vina recover against the said Henry C. Russell and Henry G. Mitchell her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution;”

Milley v. Willey R. Williams 6 May 1833, p.494o On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney leave is given him to withdraw his demurrer to

the second plea of said defendant. Nathaniel v. Stephen Ruddle alias Riddle: May 6, 1833 P. 495-96

o Stephen W Foreman esq presents here to the court the petition of Nathaniel a man of color praying that he may be permitted to institute suit against Stephen Ruddle aka Stephen Riddle for establishing his right to freedom and that he may be permitted to sue as a poor person thereupon, the court permit the said Nathaniel to sue as afresaid and direct that an action of assault and battery and falsce imprisonment be brought in the name of said Nathaniel and assign the said Stephen W. Foreman and James S. Mayfield as his counsel and it is ordered by the court that the said Stephen Ruddle alias Riddle permit the said Nathaniel to have a reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and said Nathaniel shall not be taken or removed out tf the jurisdiction of this court or be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom.

o Sanford Calvert v. Silas L. Duval, Saturday May 11, 1833 p. 503. The said plaintiff having within four days after verdict moved the court to grant him a new trial and said motion is by the Court upon mature deliberation overruled.

Celeste v. Helen Chevalier Adm, May 22, 1833, p.510o The motion of the Defendant for a new trial is further continued.

Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau Sr., May 22, 1833, p.510o The motion for judgment by the plaintiff and the motion for a new trial by Defendant

continued.

End Record 6, Begin Record 7

Nathaniel v. Stephen Ruddle, July 23, 1833, p.3- Plea filed. Ralph Gordon v. Robert Duncan 29 July 1833, p.17 - Pleas filed Dunky v. Andrew Hay 9 August 1833, p.31

o On motion of the defendant by his attorney and by consent of parties it is ordered by the court that the Sheriff of the county of Saint Louis do advertise the said Dunky for hire to the highest bidder giving at least ten days notice of the time and place of said hiring and that he take bond from the person hiring said Dunky in the penalty of Three Hundred Dollars and with such security as the Sheriff shall approve conditioned according to law and for her return when it shall be required by the court.

James Wilkinson v. Aaron Young, 10 August 1833, p.35o Now this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and the said defendant although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid of him the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against

60

him wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendant and the said plaintiff not requiring a Jury he submits the matter tot eh court and the court do find that the said defendant is guilty of the trespass in the declaration mentioned as he the said plaintiff hath alleged and the said plaintiff consenting to take nominal damages the court assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespass aforesaid to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered that the said James Wilkinson be liberated and entirely set free from the said Aaron Young and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said James Wilkinson recover against the said Aaron Young his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed and also his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expeneded and that he have thereof execution.

Adolphe Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc, 26 November 1833, p,41 - Pleas filed Harriet v. Samuel T. McKinney & William Walker Impl., 28 November 1833, p.48

o Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further prosecute her said action against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Harriet take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendants go thereof without day.

Auguste & Celeste v. H. Chevalier’s Adm., Dec 9, 1833, p.61- Continued. Michel, Carmelite, & Joseph v. Pierre Chouteau, Sr., Dec 9, 1833, p.61- Continued. Dunky v. Andrew Hay, 9 December 1833, p.62

o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and thereupon also come a Jury to wit, Edmund Leonard, Leonard, Edward F. Musgrove, William Coxe, Benjamin Lawhead, James M. Osborne, Eli L. Clarke, Daniel Finch, Azariah Kennedy, Andrew King, John Cole, Jacov Snively, and William Sutton twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid as to the first issue witin joined do say that the said defendant is guilty of the said trespass and injury in the declaration mentioned in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say tat at the said time the said plaintiff was not a slave but on the contrary thereof she then was and still is a free person as in her said declaration is above supposed and as to the third issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that at the said time she was not held to labor in the State of Illinois under the laws of the state and escaped into Missouri but on the contrary thereof she the said plaintiff then was and still is a free person as in and by her said declaration is above supposed and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the wrongs and injuries in her declaration mentioned to the sum of one dollar, therefore it is considered that the said Dunky be liberated and entirely set free from the said Andrew Hay and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Dunky recover against the said Andrew Hay her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.

Dunky v. Andrew Hay (1831) 12 December 1833, p.66o The defendant by his attorney moves the court to grant him a new trial in this case and

filed his reasons therefor.

61

Jeffrey v. Joseph Robidoux, 16 December 1833, p.68 - continued for the plaintiff. Julia a woman of color v. Samuel McKinney, 28 December 1833, p.87

o On motion of the defendant by his attorney it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or Justice of the Peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read into evidence on the trial of this cause on the part of the defendant.

Harriet v. Samuel T. McKinney 28 December 1833, p.87o On motion of the defendant by his attorney it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or

Justice of the Peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence on the trial of this cause on the part of the defendant.

Mahala v. Martin Mitchell 3 January 1834, p.89o It is suggested here to the court that since the commencement of this suit the said

plaintiff hath died which suggestion is not denied but admitted to be true and suit abated.

Jack Barton v. William Glasgow 3 January 1833, p.90o Now at this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and says he will not further

prosecute his said action against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Jack Barton take nothing by his said suit and that the said William Glasgow go thereof without day.

Julia v. Samuel McKinney, 9 January 1834, p.109 continued by consent. Harriet v. Samuel T. McKinney, 9 January 1834, p.109- continued by consent. Sarah v. Thomas Johnson, Jan 20, 1834, p.130

o It is suggested here to the court that since the commencement of this suit the said plaintiff hath died which suggestion is not denied but admitted to be true- and suit abates.

Ralph v. Coleman Duncan, 21 January 1834, p.135o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit Jon D. Randall, John H. Taylor, James P. Spencer, Richard Lockwood, Samuel Mount, Charles Collins, Arthur L. Johnson, Matthew Kerr, Jon Whitehill, Hugh O'Neil, Jr., Argyle Buchannan, and John Cole twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say as to the first issue witin joined between the parties aforesaid that he the said Coleman Duncan is guilty of the wrongs and trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said Ralph has above in declaring complained against him and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that at the time of the committing of the said trespasses the said Ralph was not and is not a slave and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the premises to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered that the said Ralph will be liberated and entirely set free from the said Coleman Duncan and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Ralph recover against the said Coleman Duncan his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution;”

Celeste v. Helen Chevalier’s Adm, 21 January 1834, p.136The motion of the defendant to grant him a new trial in this case is by the court continued. Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau Sr., 21 January 1834, p.136

o The motion of the plaintiff to enter up a Judgment of the Verdict of the Jury in this case

62

and of the defendant to grant him a new trial are by the court continued. Dunky v. Andrew Hay, 21 January 1834, p.136

o The motion of the defendant for a new trial is by the court continued; Ralph v. Coleman Duncan, Jan 21, 1834, p.138

o The defendant by his attorney moves the court to grant him a new trial in this case for reasons filed therefor which motion is by the court continued.

Nathaniel v. Stephen Ruddle alias Riddle, April 1, 1834, p.156o On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or

Justice of the peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence on the trial of this case on the part of the plaintiff.

Jeffrie v. Joseph Robidoux, 1 April 1834, p.157 – continued. Mariquette v. Samuel McKinney, 1 April 1834, p.157

o Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her said suit with effect therefore it is considered that the said plaintff take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day.

Nathan Cole v. Alexander P. Field, April 4, 1834, p.165 – Continued. Dunky v. Andrew Hay, 5 April 1834, p.166

o Now at this day come again te parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and thereupon upon mature deliberation it is considered by the court that the motion for a New trial in this case be overruled.

Julia v. Samuel McKinney, 10 April 1834, p.170o On motion of the plaintiff it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or Justice of the

Peace of the state of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence on the trial of this case on the part of the plaintiff.

Vincent v. James Duncan, 15 April 1834, p.181o On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that a venire issue tot the Sheriff of

the County of Saint Louis commanding him to summon eighteen good and lawful men of his county that the be and appear at the Court House on the morrow then and there to serve as Jurors.

Ralph v. Coleman Duncan, 16 April 1834, p.182o Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid

and thereupon upon mature deliberation it is considered by the court that the motion of the defendant for a new trial in this case be overruled.

Vincent v. James Duncan, 17 April 1834, p.183o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit Thomas Fogay, John Shade, John W. Gillis, William H. Boyer, Elbridge G. Saunders, Andrew J. Husbands, Calvin Francis, John Cowie, Henry Becket, John Whitehill, Henry Bolles, and Samuel Burke twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid do say that he the said plaintiff (?) is guilty of the wrongs and grievances above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff has above in complaining alleged against him and as to the second issue within joined betwen the parties aforesaid the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the

63

said Vincent at the time of the commencement of his action aforesaid was not and is not a slave and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the premises to the sum of five dollars therefore it is considered that the said Vincent be liberated and entirely set free from teh said James Duncan and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Vincent recover against the said James Duncan his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

Dunky v. Andrew Hay, 19 April 1834, p.186 - Bill of Exceptions filed *Nathaniel alias Nat v. Stephen Ruddell, April 22, 1834, p187-88

o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and thereupon also come a Jury to wit: George Williams, John Irwin, John Darst, Robert Payne, John steamer, William J. Austin, Benjamin F. Saunders, George Wilson, James Woods, Feliz Coonce, William Myers, and Thomas Robinson twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid do say that he the said defendant is not guilty of the said trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and from as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him, therefore it s considered that the said Nathaniel alias Nat take nothing by his said suit and that the said Stephen Ruddel go therof without day.

Ralph alias Ralph Gordon v. Robert Duncan, 30 April 1834, p.201Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and neither of the parties requiring a Jury the cause i submitted to the court to find the facts to be as follows - That in May in the Year 1830 the plaintiff under the statute brought his suit for freedom against Coleman Duncan that by the order of this court the plaintiff was hired out during the pendency of said suit until sometime in April 1831 when on motion of said Coleman Duncan in that suit the court made the order of which the following is a copy...Ralph vs. Coleman Duncan, It is ordered by the court the Ralph the plaintiff in this case be delivered by the Sheriff to James Duncan or to Coleman Duncan on their or either of t hem entering into Recognizance with sufficient security in the sum of six hundred dollars conditioned that the said Ralph the petitioner shall at all times during the pendency of this suit have reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and that the said Ralph shall not be removed out of the Jurisdiction of this court and that he shall not be subjected to any severity of treatment because of his application for freedom - the court finds that said James with said Robert Duncan as his security did in April Eighteen hundred and thirty one enter into a Recognizance agreeably to the order of said court and that thereupon said Sheriff did deliver said Ralph into the possession of said James Duncan and that in april or May Eighteen hundred and thirty one said James delivered said Ralph to said Robert Duncan, the court find that said Robert Duncan kept and detained said Ralph as the slave of said Coleman Duncan until March or April Eighteen Hundred and thirty two and that the services of said Ralph while thus kept were worth the sum of one hundred dollars - the court find that in the spring of Eighteen Hundred and thirty two said Robert Duncan hired out said Ralph to one David Lawrence as the slave of said Coleman Duncan, that said Ralph worked with said Lawrence at seventy five cents per day until his wages amounted to 50 fifty dollars which sum was paid to said Robert Duncan for the hire of said Ralph. The court find that in the suit commenced by said Ralph against said Coleman Duncan as aforesaid Judgment was rendered by said court at the November term thereof in the year 1833 that said Ralph was a free person and that he be liberated from the said

64

Coleman Duncan and all persons claiming by through or under him. These facts in the opinion of the court are not sufficient to enable the plaintiff to have and maintain his suit and from them the court find that the defendant is not guilty in manner and form as the plaintiff has in his declaration alleged. Therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that said defendant go thereof without day and it is further considered that the said Robert Duncan recover against the said Ralph alias Ralph Gordon his costs and charges by him about his defense in the behalf expended and that he have thereof execution. Louise Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc, 30 April 1834, p.202

o Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her said action with effect therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit and that Marie P. Leduc go thereof without day.

Adolphe Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc, 30 April 1834, p.202o Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he prosecuted his said action with effect therefore it is considered that the said Adolphe Vincent who sues by Charles D. St. Vrain his next friend take nothing by his said suit and that the said Marie P. Leduc go thereof without day.

Marcelline Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc, 30 April 1834, p.202o Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her said action with effect therefore it is considered that the said Marcelline Vincent who sues by Charles D. St. Vrain her next friend take nothing by her said suit and that the said Marie P. Leduc go thereof without day;”

Ralph Gordon v. Coleman Duncan, 1 May 1834, p.203o “On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that the said Coleman Duncan be

notified that an action of Assumpsit damages $400 four hundred dollars has been commenced against him by the said Ralph Gordon that a writ of Attachment has issued against his estate and that unless he be and appear at the next July term of this court and plead to the action aforesaid according to law a Judgment will be entered against him and his said estate sold to satisfy the same and it is further ordered that a copy of this order be inserted for four weeks successively in some newspaper published in the City of St. Louis twenty days before the next July term of this court.

Julia v. Samuel McKinney, 2 May 1834, p.206o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit, John Shannon, Austin Burk, Fielding Bell, William R. Grimsley, Christopher Lawton, George Holton, Austin Piggott, Jacob Hawkin, Henry E. Stone, Asa Ricketson, Auguste R. Chouteau and Gibson Cothern twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid say that the said Samuel McKinney is guilty of the said trespass above laid to this charge and every part thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the premises to the sum of one cent, therefore it is considered that the said Julia be liberated and entirely set free from the said Samuel McKinney and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Julia recover against the

65

said Samuel McKinney her damages aforesaid in for aforesaid by the Jury assessed together with their costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.

Ralph v. Coleman Duncan 3 May 1834, p.208o On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that the Sheriff this county do pay

over to said plaintiff the money collected by him for the hire of said Ralph. Nathaniel alias Nat v. Stephen Ruddell, May 3, 1834, p.208

o The plaintiff by his attorney moves the court to grant him a new trial in this case for reason filed therefor which motion upon mature deliberation is by the court overruled.

Ralph Gordon v. Robert Duncan, 5 May 1834, p.210o Now at this day come Gustavus A. Bird in behalf of the said plaintiff and files is affidavit

and prays an appeal to the Supreme Court which is granted and the Record and proceedings are ordered to be certified up accordingly.

Nathaniel alias Nat v. Stephen Ruddell, May 7, 1834, p.214o Now at this day come the attorney for the said plaintiff and filed the affidavit of him the

said plaintiff for an appeal to the Supreme Court which is granted and the Record and proceeding are ordered to be certified up accordingly.

Louise Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc 10 May 1834 p.218o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered by the court that the Judgment of

Nonsuit entered in this case be set aside; Adolphe Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc 10 May 1834, p.218

o On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered by the court that the Judgment of Nonsuit entered in this case be set aside.

Marcelline Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc 10 May 1834 p.218o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered by the court that the Judgment of

Nonsuit entered in this case be set aside. Dunky v. Andrew Hay 10 May 1834 p.218

o Now at this day come the said defendant by his attorney and prays an appeal to the Supreme Court in this case and the plaintiff by her attorney waives the filing of an affidavit and consents that said appeal be granted without affidavit the court doth therefore grant said appeal and order that the Record and proceedings be certified up accordingly.

Celeste v. Helen Chevalier’s Adm., May 10, 1834, p.221o The motion of the defendant to grant him a new tiral in this case is by the Court

continued. Carmelite v. Pierre Chouteau, May 10, 1834, p.221

o The motion of the plaintiff to enter up a Judgment on the Verdict of the Jury in this case and of the defendant to grant him a new trial are by the court continued.

Abraham Dutton v. John Paca, 30 July 1834, p.227 - Pleas filed. Lemmon Dutton v. John Paca, 30 July 1834, p.227 - Pleas filed. Ralph Gordon v. Coleman Duncan, 18 August 1834, p. 236

o Now at this day the said plaintiff by his attorney and says he will not further prosecute his said action against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that the

66

said defendant go without day and it is further considered that the said Coleman Duncan recover against the said Ralph Gordon his costs and charges by him about his defence in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution. NICOLE FINISH 12/09

Nelson v. Matthew Kerr 25 November 1834 – p.243 NICOLE START 8/09o On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ruled that a dedimus issue to any Judge or

Justice of the Peace of the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence on the trial of this cae on the part of the plaintiff;

Nelson v. Matthew Kerr 4 December 1834 – p.275o “Matthew Kerr who is personally known to the Judge of this court to be the person

executing a deed of Emancipation to Nelson is said deed named personally appears here in open court and acknowledges the execution of said deed to the said Nelson;”

o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and says he will not further prosecute his said action against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said Nelson take nothing by his said suit and that the said Matthew Kerr go thereof without day;”

Marguerite v. Pierre Chouteau (1825) 30 December 1834 – p.321 o “The Judge of this court having been of counsel in this case it is ordered by the court that

the Venue be changed to the Count of Saint Charles in the Second Judicial Circuit of this State and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the Record and proceedings in this case together with all papers appertaining to and filed in the cause to the Clerk of the said Circuit Court for the county of St. Charles at the next term thereof;”

Louise Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc (1833) 31 December 1834 – p. 326- o “Now at this day come the parties by their respective attorneys aforesaid and thereupon

also come a Jury to wit Joseph C. Laveille, Asa Wilgus, Francis H. Taylor, Horace P. Woodbridge, William Horine, Anthyme L. Roland, Thomas N. Harris, Conrad Foulk, John G. Shelton, Philip McGovern, John Darst and James Rogers, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid as to the first issue within joined do say that he the said defendant is guilty of the trespass above laid to his charge in manner and for as the said Louise has above complained against him and as to the second issue within joined the jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said Louise is not a slave as he the defendant hath in his second plea alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the trespass in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered by teh court that the said Louise Vincent be liberated and entirely set free from the said Marie P. Leduc and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Louise Vincent recover against the said Marie P. Leduc her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Jury assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution;”

Adolphe Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc 31 December 1834 – p. 326o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit Joseph C. Laveille, Asa Wilgus, Francis H. Taylor, Horace P. Woodbridge, William Horine, Anthyme L. Roland, Thomas N. Harris, Conrad Foulk, John G. Shelton, Philip McGovern (could be M. Govern) John Darst

67

and james Rogers twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try this issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid as to the first issue within joined do say that he the said defendant is guilty of the trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said Adolphe has above in declaring alleged and as to the second issue within joined the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said plaintiff is not a save but is a free person as in the declaration is above alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of the trespasses in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered by the court that the said Adolphe Vincent be liberated and entirely set free from the said Marie P. Leduc and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Adolphe Vincent recover against the said marie P. Leduc his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Jury assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution;”

Marcelline Vincent v. Marie P. Leduc (1833) 31 December 1834 – p.326o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their repective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit, Joseph C. Laveille, Asa Wilgus, Francis H. Taylor, Horace P. Woodbridge, William Horine, Anthye L. Roland, Thomas N. Harris, Corad Foulk, John G. Shelton, Philip M. Govern, John Darst, and James Rogers twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid as tot the first issue within joined do say that the said defendant is guilty of the trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff has above in declaring alleged against him and as to the second issue within joined the jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said plaintiff is not a slave but is a free person as in his declaration is above alleged and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him ssutained by reason of the trespasses in his declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered by the court that the said Marceline Vincent be liberated and entirely set free from the said Marie P. Leduc his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Jury assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution;”

Rachel v. William Walker (1834) 7 January 1835 – p.332o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendant although

solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against him wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendant but because it is unknown to the court what damage the said plaintiff hath sustained by reason of the wrongs and injuries in her declaration mentioned therefore it is commanded to the sheriff of the county of Saint Louis that he summon twelve good and lawful men of his county that the be and appear at the next term of this court then and there to enquire what damage the said plaintiff hath sustained by reason of the premises and the same day is given to the said defendant and it is further considered by the court that the said Rachel be liberated and entirely set free from the said William Walker and all persons claiming from through or under him;”

Jeffrie v. Joseph Robidoux (1822) 18 March 1835 – continued p. Rachel v. William Walker (1834) 27 March 1835 – p. 345

68

o By consent of the parties it is ordered by the court that the Judgment by default entered in this case at the last term of this court be set aside and that the defendant have leave to plead;

Hetty v. Arthur Magenis (1835) 28 March 1835 – p. 346- The defendant appears and moves the court to quash the order permitting the said plaintiff to institute suit in this case which motion is by the court overruled (Plea filed)

Hetty v. Arthur Magenis (1835) (Same day) The Judge of this court being of kin to defendant in this case it is ordered by the court that the venue be changed to the county of Ste. Genevieve in the fourth Judicial Circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court do certify and transmit a full transcript of the record and proceedings in this case together with all papers appertaining to and filed in the cause to the clerk of the said circuit court for the county of Ste. Genevieve at the next term thereof;

Rachel v. William Walker (1834) 28 March 1835 – p.347 Plea filed James Henry v. William Walker (1834) 28 March 1835 - p.347 Plea filed Nathan v. Alex P. Field & Elijah Mitchell 2 April 1835 (case is styled Nathan Cole v.

Alexander P. Field, I didn't find any case in the database named anything close to that but this case) – p.352o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit Joseph Charless, David Coons, Michael S. Cerre, Jared W. Folger, David Lawrence, Eli L. Clark, Henry G. Soulard, Matthew Rippey, Henry Smith, Zeno Mackay, George W. Davis and John Rippey twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue witin joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said Alexander P. Field is guilty of the wrongs and grievances in the declaration of the said Nathan Cole above laid to his charge and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by him sustained by reason of teh wrongs and grievances in his declaration mentioned to the sum of Five hundred dollars therefore it is considered by the court that the said Nathan Cole recover against the said Alexander P. Field his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Jury assessed together with his costs and charges by him about is suit in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution;”

Mary Ann (Julia) v. Robert Duncan 20 April 1835 – p.373o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney aforesaid and the said defendant

although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against him wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendant and the said plaintiff not requiring a Jury to assess her damages all and singular the premises are by ther submitted to the court and the said plaintiff consenting to take nominal damages the court assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in her declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered by the court that the said Mary Ann be liberated and entirely set free from the said Robert Duncan and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Mary Ann Recover against the said Robert Duncan her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution;”

Eliza Tyler v. Nelson Campbell 30 April 1835 – p.379

69

o “The court order and direct that the sheriff of the county of Saint Louis do take possession of the plaintiff in this case and hire her out from time to time during the pendency of this suit and that he take bond of the person hiring said Eliza Tyler in the sum of four hundred dollars conditioned as required by law;”

Mary Ann (Julia) v. Robert Duncan 14 May 1835 – p.396o “By consent of the parties it is ordered by the court that the Judgment by default entered

in this case be set aside and leave is given to the said plaintiff to amend his declaration by striking out the name "Mary Ann" and inserting in lieu thereof the name "Julia";”

Julia v. Robert Duncan- 13 July 1835- p.400- Plea Filed Lewis a man of color v. James Newton impl. - 14 July 1835 – p.401- Plea filed Sally Melvin v. Edmund Melvin- 14 July 1835 - p.401- Plea filed Sally Melvin v. Robert Cohen- 14 July 1835 - p.402- Plea filed Paul Auguste Allard v. Bazil Auguste Allard & Arend Rutgers (1835) 14 July 1835 –

p.403o “The court order and direct that the sheriff of the county of Saint Louis take possession of

the said petitioner and hire him out to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency o this suit and that he take a bond from the person hiring said petitioner in the penalty of Five Hundred dollars conditioned that the said petitioner shall at all times during teh pendency of this suit have reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that said petitioner shall not be removed out of the Jurisdication of this court nor be subect to any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom;”

Sally v. Henry Chouteau 16 July 1835 – p.409- Plea filed Mary Farnham v. Samuel D. Walker (1835) 17 July 1835 – p.410

o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further prosecute her said action against the said defendant therefore it is considered that the said Mary Farnham take nothing by her said writ and that the said Samuel D. Walker go thereof without day;”

Paul Auguste Allard v. Bazil Auguste Allard & Arend Rutgers (1835) 17 July 1835 – p.410o “Now at this day come the said Arend Rutgers and files his disclaimer of all right and

interest in and to the said plaintiff and the said Bazil A. Allard also appears and presents his petition for the removal of this suit for trial into the next United States court for the Missouri District and it appearing on the peitition of the said Allard that he is a citizen of the State of Illinois and that the said Paul A. Allard claims to be a citizen of this State and it further appearing that the matter in dispute exceeds the value of five Hundred dollars exclusive of costs and the said Allard having offered good and sufficient security for his enterin in said United States court on the first day of its next session copy of the process against him in this suit and also for his there appearing and the same being accepted it is therefore ordered that all further proceedings in this cause in this court be stayed and that the same be removed into the next United States court for the Missouri District;”

Julia (Mary Ann) v. Robert Duncan 13 August 1835 – p.436o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

thereupon also come a Jury to wit Silas Drake, Justin C. Lebeau, John Latresse,

70

William Horine, Thomas N. Harris, Thomas W. Thompson, Christopher Sanders, William Boise, Isaiah Sellers, George Morton, James J. Purdy and Joseph S. Simpson twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid on their oath aforesaid as to the first issue do say that he the said defendant is guilty of the said trespasses above laid to his charge and all and every of them an every part thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the Jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid do say that the said plaintiff is not the slave of him the said defendant and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in her declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent, therefore it is considered by the court that the said Julia be liberated and entirely set free from the said Robert Duncan and all persons claiming from through or under him and it is further considered that the said Julia recover against the said Robert Duncan her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the Julia assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in the behalf expended and that she have thereof execution;”

Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 10 November 1835 - Pleas filed p.449 Daniel Wilson v. Robert Cohen 11 November 1835 – p.454

o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by his attorney and says he will not further prosecute his said action against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day;”

Sally Melvin v. Robert Cohen 11 November 1835 – p.454o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her said action against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit and that the said defendant go thereof without day;”

Daniel Wilson a man of color v. Edmund Melvin (1835) (same day) o “On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that a Dedimus issued to any

Judge of Justice of the peace of the state of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence in this case on the part of the plaintiff.”

Sally Melvin v. Edmund Melvin (same day) On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ruled that a Dedimus issue to any Judge or Justice of the peace of the state of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence in this case on the part of the plaintiff;

Lewis a man of color v. James Newton & Jacob Cooper- 14 November 1835 – p.460- continued for the plaintiff on the affidavit of Gustavus A. Bird

Lewis a man of color v. James Newton & Jacob Cooper (same day) p.461o “The court order and direct that the sheriff of the count of Saint Louis take possession of

the said Lewis the petitioner and hire him out to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit and that he take a bond from the person hiring said petitioner in the penalty of Five hundred dollars conditioned that the said petitioner shall at all times during the pendency of this suit have a reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court when occasion may require it and that said petitioner shall not be removed out of the Jurisdiction of this court nor be subject to any severity of treatment on account of his said application for freedom;”

Josephine LaCourse v. Edward Mitchell 17 November 1835 – p.464

71

o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendant although solemnly called comes not but asks default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against him wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendant but because it is unknown to the court what damage the said plaintiff hath sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in teh declaration mentioned therefore it is commanded to the sheriff of the county of Saint Louis that he summon twelve good and lawful men of this county that they be and appear at the next March term of this court then and there to enquire what damage the said plaintiff hath sustained by reason of the premises and the same day is given to the said defendant and it is further considered by the court that the said Josephine LaCourse be liberated and entirely set free from the said Edward Mitchell and all persons claiming by through or under him;”

Eliza Tyler v. Nelson Campbell 1 December 1835 – p.481o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid and

neither of the parties requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is guilty in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and they assess the damage of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the wrongs and grievances in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent, therefore it is considered that the said Eliza Tyler be liberated and entirely set free from the said Nelson Campbell and all persons claiming by form through or under him and it is further considered that the said Eliza Tyler recover against the said Nelson Campbell her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution;”

Josephine LaCourse v. Edward Mitchell 1 December 1835 – p.481-2o “Upon the affidavit of Arthur L. Magenis stating that the Rule of ths court has been

violated by the defendant it is ruled that the said Edward Mitchell show cause on Saturday next why an attachment should not issue against him for a contempt of court in removing the plaintiff out of the Jurisdiction of this court contrary to the order of the court made in that behalf;”

Harriet, an infant v. Samuel McKinney & Thomas D. James (1833) 1 December 1835 – p.482o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and the attorney for the said

defendant appears and suggests here to the court that since the last continuance of this case Samuel T. Mckinney the defendant hath died which suggestion is not denied but aditted to be true whereupon by consent of parties Lucinda Carrington who claims said plaintiff as a slave is made defendant to this action and the said Lucinda Carrington by Hamilton R. Gamble her attorney enters her appearance as defendant in this case and says nothing in bar or preclusion of the action aforesaid of her the said plaintiff whereby the said plaintiff remains therein undefended against her wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover against the said defendant and the said plaintiff not requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by her submitted to the court and by consent the court do find that the said plaintiff hath sustained damage by the reason of the wrongs and grievances in her declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent therefore it is considered that the said

72

Harriet be liberated and entirely set free from the said Lucinda Carrington and all persons claiming by through or under her and it is furter considered that the said Harriet recover against the said Lucinda Carrington her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution;”

Agness (Agnis) v. Pierre Menard (1835) 5 December 1835 – p.489o “Now at this day come again the said defendant by his attorney and it appearing on the

petition of the said Pierre Menard that he is a citizen of the State of Illinois and the said Agness claim to be a citizen of the State of Missouri and it further appearing that the matter in dispute exceeds the value of Five hundred dollars exclusive of costs and the said Pierre Menard having offered good and sufficient security for his enterein in the United States Court for the Missouri district on the first day of its next session copy the process against him in this suit and also for there appearing and the same being accepted it is therefore ordered that all further proceedings in this cause in this court be stayed and that the same be removed into the next United States court for the Missouri district;”

END RECORD 7, START RECORD 8

Courtney a woman of color v. Samuel S. Rayburn- 14 Mar 1836- p.2- Plea Filed Benjamin v. Thomas J. White- 16 Mar 136- p.6- Plea Filed Jeffrey v. Joseph Robioux- 18 Mar 1836- p.11- continued Lewis a man of color v. James Newton & Jacob Cooper- 23 Mar 1836 – p.21-22

o “And now at this day comes the said plaitiff by his attorney and says he will not further prosecute his said suit against the said Jacob Cooper, impleaded with the said James and Newton, but, as to him, the said Jacob Cooper voluntarily suffers the action aforesaid to be discontinued. Therefore it is considered by the court that the said Plaintiff take nothing by his suit aforesaid as to the said Jacob Cooper and that he the said Jacob go thereof without day;”

Rachel a mulatress v. William Walker (1834) 23 March 1836 – p.23o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered that an attachment issue against

Elias T. Langham, that he be brought forthwith before the court to answer for the contempt by him committed in not attending this court as a witness on the part of the said plaintiff, after having been regularly summoned so to do;

Andrew Dutton v. John Paca 23 March 1836 - p.23o “And now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and neither

party requiring a Jury, all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court but because the court are not sufficiently advised in the premises time is taken to consider of them;”

Rachel v. William Walker (1834) 24 March 1836 – p.24o “And now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon come a jury to wit Timothy H. Hedges, James Nichols, gibson Cothran, Russell Hubbard, Anthony B. Bouis, John Ward, Elijah Compton, William Eads, Hiram B. Bascom, Thompson Douglas, James Boyd, James C. Essex, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue joined between the parties aforesaid on their oaths do say that the said defendant is guilty of the wrongs and injuries and each and every of them, in manner and form as the

73

said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him;” Judy alias Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 24 March 1836 – p.24

o “And now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys aforesaid thereupon come a Jury, to wit, Timothy H. Hedges, James Nichols, Gibson Cothran, Russell Hubbard, Frederick D. Ortley, Samuel Miller, Anthony Bouis, John Ward, Elijah Compton, Hiram B. Bascom` Thompson Douglas, James Boyd, twelve good and lawful men of the county of St. Louis, who being duly elected, tried and sworn the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid, well and truly to try, on their oaths do say as to the first issue within joined that the said defendant is guilty of the wrongs and grievances, and each and every of them in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof alleged against him, and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, the jurors aforesaid on their oaths aforesaid, further say that the said plaintiff, at the time of the commencement of her said action, was not, nor is, a slave, in manner and form as the said defendant in his said second plea hath above thereof alleged against her, and the jurors aforesaid assess the plaintiff's damages by her sustained by reason of the premises, to the sum of one dollar - therefore it is considered by the court, and accordingly adjudged, that the said Judy be liberated and entirely set free from the said Berry Meachum, and all persons claiming by through or under him and that she recover against the said Meachum her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid as the Jury assessed, together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and that she have thereof execution;”

James Duncan v. Francois Tayon And now at this day comes the said pl in his own proper person and says he will not furnter prosecute this suit but voluntarily suffer the same to be discontinued. March 24, 1836. P. 20.

Judy alias Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 25 March 1836 – p.26- And now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney and moves the court for a new trial of the cause, and files his reasons therefore;

James Henry v. William Walker 28 March 1835 - Plea filed p. Lewis a man of color v. James Newton 29 March 1836 - affidavit filed and cause

continued; p.34 Andrew Dutton v. John Paca 2 April 1836 – p.41

o “And now this day come again the parties aforesaid by ther respective attorneys and the court now being sufficiently advised in and concerning the premises after mature deliberation thereupon had doth as to tthe first issue within hjoined find that the said defendant is guilty of the wrongs and trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff in his declaration hath alleged and as to the second issue within joined the court doth find that the said plaintiff at the tims when &c. Was not a slave in manner and form as the said defendant in his said second plea hath above alleged. Wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover of the said defendant and the said plaintiff consenting to nominal damages, the court doth assess the damage by him sustained by reason of the wrongs and trespasses aforesaid, to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said Andrew Dutton be liberated and entirely set free from the said John Paca and all persons claiming by through or under him the said Jon Paca, and that he recover of the said Paca his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended, and the he have thereof execution;”

74

Abraham Dutton v. John Paca 2 April 1836 – p.41o “And now this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

neither party requiring a jury, all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court, which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, the court doth find as to the first issue within joined find that the said defendant is guilty of the wrongs and trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff in his declaration hath alleged and as to the second issue within joined the court doth fidn tha the said plaintiff at the tims when &c. Was not a slave in manner and form as the said defendant in his said second plea hath above alleged. Wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover of the said defendant and the said plaintiff consenting to nominal damages, the court doth assess the damage by him sustained by reason of the wrongs and trespasses aforesaid, to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said John Paca and all persons claiming by through or under him the said Jon Paca, and that he recover of the said Paca his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended, and the he have thereof execution;”

Lemman Dutton v. John Paca 2 April 1836 – p.41o “And now this day come again the parties aforesaid by the respective attorneys and

neither party requiring a Jury, all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, the court doth find as to the first issue within joined find that the said defendant is guilty of the wrongs and trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff in her declaration hath alleged and as to the second issue within joined the court doth find that the said plaintiff at the tims when &c. Was not a slave in manner and form as the said defendant in his said second plea hath above alleged. Wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover of the said defendant and the said plaintiff consenting to nominal damages, the court doth assess the damage by her sustained by reason of the wrongs and trespasses aforesaid, to the sum of one cent. Therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said Lemman Dutton be liberated and entirely set free from the said John Paca and all persons claiming by through or under him the said John Paca, and that he recover of the said Paca his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges by her about his suit in this behalf expended, and the she have thereof execution;”

Rachel a mulatress v. William Walker (1834) 2 April 1836 – p.42o “And now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and neither

party requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, the court doth find, as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, that the said defendant is not guilty of the wrongs and injuries above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above declared against him. Therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit and that the defendant go thereof without day;”

James Henry v. William Walker 2 April 1836 – p.42o “And now at this day comes the said parties by the respective attorneys and neither

party requiring a Jury, all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court

75

which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, the court do find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid thet the said defendant is not guilty of the wrongs and injuries above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him. Therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that the defendant go thereof without day;”

Rachel v. William Walker (1834) 5 April 1836 – p.43- The plaintiff by her attorney moves the court for a new trial, and files her reasons therefore which motion is overruled by the court and Bill of exceptions filed;

James Henry v. William Walker 5 April 1836 – p.43- The plaintiff by his attorney moves the court for a new trial and files his reasons therefore which motion is overruled by the court and Bill of exceptions filed;

Rachel v. William Walker (1834) 6 April 1836 – p.44-5o “By consent of parties the affidavit of the defendant filed yesterday on his application for

a new trial is waived, and the defendant by Mr. Spalding, his attorney, prays an appeal to the Supreme Court from the judgment of this court, which is granted (rescinded and reendtered on next page);”

o (next page) The defendant by his attorney, prays the court for an appeal from the judgment rendered in this case on a previous day of tis term, and by consent, the affidavit required by law is waived, whereupon the appeal is granted and the cause ordered to be certified up to the Supreme Court;

James Henry v. William Walker 6 April 1836 – p.44-5o By consent of parties, the affidavit of the defendant filed yesterday on his application for

a new trial, is waived, and the defendant by Mr. Spalding, his attorney, prays an appeal from the judgment of this court, which is granted (Rescinded and reentered next page);

o (next page) The defendant by his attorney prays the court for an appeal from the judgment rendered here in on a previous day of this term, and, by consent, the affidavit required by law is waived, whereupon the appeal is granted and the cause ordered to be certified to the Supreme Court;

Andrew, Abraham, and Lemman Dutton v. John Paca 8 April 1836 - p.46- o “These three cases having been decided in favour of the plaintiffs and bills of exceptions

taken in them all, shewing that they defendant on the same facts and principles, it is agreed by the parties that one of the cases shall be taken up to the Supreme Court, and the other two abide the judgment of the Supreme Court, in the case to be taken up, and judgments to be entered in this court accordingly;”

Judy alias Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 9 April 1836 – p.48- And now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney, and moves the coutt to grante him a new trial of this cause and files his reasons therefor which being seen and heard and mauture deliberation thereupon had by the court the said motion is overruled;

Andrew, Abraham, and Lemman Dutton v. John Paca 9 April 1836 - Bill of Exceptions filed; p.48

Milly v. James Duncan (1835) 11 April 1836, p.48 - By order of the court this cause is dismist (sp?)

Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 14 April 1836 – p.54o “Now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney and having filed his affidavit

76

therefore prays an appeal from the judgment of this court rendered at the previous day hereof and the said appeal is granted and the said defendant ordered to be recognized with two securities to be approved of by the court in the sum of eight hundred dollars for the effectual prosecution of his appeal. Thereupon the said defendant offers to the court as his security, Samuel Willi and William Myers, whom the court approve. Whereupon the said Berry Meachum, as principal and the said Samuel Willi and William Myers as his securities, acknowledge themselves to owe the said plaintiff the sum of eight hundred dollars to be levied of their respective goods and chattels, lands and tenements - yet upon condition that if the said Meachum shall prosecute his appeal now taken, with due diligence to a decision in the Supreme Court, and that if the judgment of this court be affirmed, or his appeal dismissed, he will pay whatever of debt, damages or costs have been recovered against him by the judgment of this court and also pay the costs and damages that may be adjudged against him in the Supreme Court upon his appeal - in which case this recognizance to be null and void otherwise to remain in full force and effect;”

Green Berry Logan v. Berry Meachum 15 April 1836 – p.55o “It is ordered by the court that the sheriff take possession of the said peititioner and hire

him out during the pendency of his suit according to the provision of the statute in such cases made and that he require bond of the person he may hire him to, in the sum of Five hundred dollars;”

Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 16 April 1836 – p.56o “It being represented to the court that the said Meachum is unwilling to be longer

responsible under his bond, for the said Judy alias Julia Logan, therefore it is ordered by the court that the said sheriff take possession of her the said Judy alias Juila Logan and hire her out during the pendency of her said suit for freedom according to the directions of the statute in such cases made and provided, and that he take bond of the person to whom she may be hired in the sum of six hundred dollars;”

Daniel Wilson v. Edmunds Mellvin (1835) 18 April 1836 – continued p.57 Sally Melvin v. Robert Cohen 18 April 1836 - continued p.57 Hetty v. Arthur Magenis (1835) 22 April 1836 – p.60

o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered that a commission issue to the state of Illinois to take depositions there in her behalf to be read upon trial of this case;

Hetty v. Arthur Magenis (1835) 30 April 1836 – p.66 o The Judge of this court being of kin to one of the parties in this cause it is ordered by

the court that the Venue thereof be changed to the county of Washington in the seventh Judicial Circuit of this State and that the clerk of this court make out and transmit to the clerk of the circuit for the said county of Washington, a full and complete transcript of the record and proceedings herein, together with all original papers appertaining to and filed in the cause;

Jeffrey v. Joseph Robidoux (1822) 25 July 1836 – dismissed p.82 Lewis a man of color v. James Newton impl. 27 July 1836 – p.83- continued at costs of

defendant; Andrew and Abraham Dutton v. John Paca 29 July 1836 – p.87

o “By agreement of the parties made at the last term of this court it is ordered that the judgments rendered herein be set aside and the cases stand open for further trial in

77

conformity wit opinion of the Supreme Court delivered in the case which was taken up by writ of error to that Court;”

Mary Johnson (alias Bienvenue) v. Michael Menard 3 August 1836 – p.89o “Now at this day come the said plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further

prosecute her suit against the said defendant but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued - therefore it os considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that the said defendant go thereof without day;”

Daniel Wilson v. Edmunds Melvin (1835) 5 August 1836 – p.92o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by ther respective attorneys and thereupon

come a jury, to wit, John Lockwood, Joseph Charless, William W. Watson, Edmund J. Knapp, John S. King, Robert R. Berry, Henry Gordon, James S. Lucas, Hugh O'Neil, Solomon P. Ketchum, Stewart Matthews, Peter Gallagher twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid say that the said defendant is not guilty in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him; therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit, but that the said defendant go thereof without day;”

o Daniel Wilson v. Edmunds Melvin (1835) (same day) motion and reasons for new trial filed;

Daniel Wilson v. Edmunds Melvin (1835) 13 August 1836 – p.103o Now at this day come again the said parties by their respective attorneys and the court

here being now sufficiently advised of the said motion of the said plaintiff for a new trial of this cause, it is considered by the court that the said motion be overruled;

Lemmon Dutton v. John Paca 16 August 1836 – p.105- cause remanded from Supreme Court filed and continued;

James Henry v. William Walker 19 August 1836 – p.109- On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that the judgment herein rendered at the last term of this court, and which was then agreed by the parties might abide the decision of a similar case in the supreme court, be & the same is hereby set aside;

Josephine LaCourse v. Edward Mitchell 23 August 1836 – p.115o “On motion of A.L. Magenis, attorney for the plaintiff, it is ordered that the rule upon the

defendant be made at the last November term of this court be renewed therefore it is ordered by the court taht the said Edward Mitchell shew cause on Saturday next why an attachment should not issue against him for a contempt of court in removing the plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of this court, in violation of the order herein before made;”

On petition & affidavit of Philis, a woman of colour, stating therein that her infant child, Julia, alias Mary Ann, is unlawfully detained in custody by Robert Duncan & Sally Adams, it is ordered that a writ of Habeas Corpus issue in this behalf, forthwith, commencing the said Duncan & Adams to have the body of said Julia, alias Mary Ann, before this court, to do, submit, and receive whatever this court in that behalf shall consider. 24 August 1836 - p.116

Daniel Wilson v. Edmund Melvin (1835) 24 August 1836 - Bill of exceptions filed; p.116 Andrew (Andrea) v. John B. Sarpy 24 August 1836 - (suit for freedom) – p.?

o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon come also a jury to wit Robert Forsyth, Joseph Cedars, William Price, Henry P.

78

Smith, Thomas Wash, Francis Sessant, Martin Hannah, Hugh B. Myers, William A. Coontz, Hiram Darby, Thomas J. Jassic, Henry P. Bell, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oath aforesaid say that the said defendant is guilty of the premises in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof declared against him and they assess the plaintiff damages by him sustained by reason of the trespasses in his declaration mentioned to the sum of one cent - therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit that he recover of him the said plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf and have thereof execution;”

Sally v. Henry Chouteau 25 August 1836 – continued p.117 Josephine LaCourse v. Edward Mitchell 27 August 1836 – p.119

o “Now at this day come te said parties by their respective attorneys and teh court being satisfied from the return on the rule made upon the defendant in this cause that the said defendant did not remove said plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of this court it is ordered that said rule be discharged as to the defendant but renewed as to James Mitchell the defendant's father. Therefore it is ruled by the court that James Mitchell shew cause on the firs day of the next November term of the court why an attachment should not issue against for a contempt of court by him committed in removing the plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of this court, contrary to the order made in this cause;”

Julia alias Mary Ann v. Robert Duncan 27 August 1836 – p.119o “On return of the writ of Habeas Corpus hereinbefore issued on the petition of Philis a

woman of color the court having examined and questioned the said Julia as to the alleged constraint and coercion exercised over her and being satisfied that she is contented with her situation and does not wish to exchange it, it is ordered that the said writ be discharged;”

Daniel Wilson v. Edmund Melvin (1835) 27 August 1836 – p.121o “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney and having heretofore filed his

affidavit for prays an appeal from the decision of this court hereinbefore rendered and the said plaintiff suing in forma pauperis the said appeal is granted without recognizance;”

Michael v. Pierre Chouteau, Sr. (Suit for Freedom) 27 August 1836 – p.121-o The Judge of this court having been of counsel for the above named defendant, it is

ordered that the venue of this cause be changed to the county of Jefferson in the judicial circuit of this State, as well as the cases of Carmelite against said Chouteau, Joseph against the same, and Mary against the same, for the same reason, and that the clerk of this court make out and transmit to the clerk of the circuit court of said country of Jefferson, a complete transcript of the record and proceedings in the said causes, together with all the original papers appertaining to and filed in the same.

Celeste v. Helen Chevalier’s adm Sothers (Suit for Freedom) 27 August 1836 – p.121- o The Judge of this court having been of counsel for the defendants above named, as also

in the case of Auguste against the same it is ordered that the venue thereof be changed to the county of Jefferson in the Judicial Circuit of this State, and that the clerk of this court make out and transmit to the clerk of the circuit court of said country of Jefferson, a complete transcript of the record and proceedings in the said causes, together with all the original papers appertaining to and filed in the same.

79

Jeffrie by his next friend Rachael Camp v. Joseph Robidoux (1822) 27 August 1836 - p.121o The Judge of this court having been of counsel in various causes in this court involving

the same principles as those contested in this cause, it is ordered that the venue thereof be changed to the county of Jefferson in the Judicial Circuit of this State and that the clerk of this court make out and transmit to the Clerk of the Circuit court for said county of Jefferson, a complete transcript of the record and proceedings in said cause together with all the original papers appertaining to and filed in the same.

Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 28 August 1836 - (assumpsit) - p.o “Now at this day come the parties by their respective attorneys and thereupon come also

a jury, to wit, Jefferson Clark, John r. Dicks, Thomas J. Massie, Luther G. Conklin, William J. Austin, William A. Harriet, John S. Hopkins, Edward Dobyns, Jesse Stone, William Pease, David M. Hammond, william Glasgow, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn te issues within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oath aforesaid say , as to the first issue within joined that the said defendant did undertake a promise in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof declared against him and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the jurors aforesaid on their oath aforesaid say that the said plaintiff is not indebted to the said defendant in the sum of in said second plea alleged or any part thereof in manner and form as the said defendant in said plea hath alleged and they assess the plaintiff's damages by her sustained by reason of the premises to the sum of 88 eighty-eight dollars - therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff recover of the said defendant her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid assessed together with in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;”

Delph v. Stephen Dorris (1836) 22 November 1836 - Plea filed; p.128 Philis alias Susan v. Reddin B. Herring (1836) 28 November 1836 - Plea filed; p.136 Josephine LaCourse v. Edward Mitchell 28 November 1836 – p.138

o “On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered that the rule made herein at the last term of this court be renewed and that James Mitchell therein mentioned shew cause at the next term of this court to be held on the second Monday of March next, why an attachment should not issue against him for a contempt by him committed in removing the said plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of this court;

Lewis a man of color v. James Newton impl. 2 December 1836 – p.144o “Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and neither

party requiring a Jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court doth find as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is guilty of the wrongs and grievances above laid to his charge, in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the court doth find that the said Lewis at the time. Was not, nor is a slave in manner and form as the defendant in his said second plea hath allegedand ths said plaintiff in writing agreeing to nominal damages the court assesses the same to one cent; therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said Lewis be liberated and entirely set free from the said James Newton and all persons claiming by through or under him and that the said plaintiff recover of the said defendant his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the cout assessed together with his

80

costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;”

Ben- a boy of color v. Thomas J. White, impl.- 9 Dec 1836- p. 153- continued by consent Rachel v. William Walker (1834) 16 December 1836 – p.164 (suit for freedom - cause

remanded from supreme court); o “Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon neither party requirin a jury, all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court, which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, the court doth find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, that the said defendant is guilty of the said wrongs and injuries above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and the said plaintiff consenting to nominal damages, the court doth assess the same to the sum of one cent - therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated, and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons whatsoever and that he recover of the said defendant her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;”

James Henry v. William Walker 16 December 1836 – p.164 (suit for freedom - cause remanded from supreme court); o “Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon neither party requiring a jury, all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court, which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, the court doth find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, that the said defendant is guilty of the said wrongs and injuries above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him and the said plaintiff consenting to nominal damages, the court doth assess the same to the sum of one cent - therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated, and entirely set free from teh said defendant and from all persons whatsoever and that he recover of the said defendant his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;”

Andrew, Abraham, and Lemmon Dutton v. John Paca 16 December 1836 – continued p.165

Green Berry Logan v. Berry Meachum 22 December 1836 (by Judy, alias Julia Logan his next friend) – p.174o “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney and the said defendant although

solemnly called, comes not, but makes default, nor hath he pleaded to the aforesaid action of the said plaintiff, who thereby remains undefended against him - wherefore, the said plaintiff ought to recover of the said defendant, and not requiring a jury to assess his damages, all and singular the premises are by him submitted to the court, which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, the court doth find that the said defendant is guilty of the trespass in the declaration mentioned in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof declared against him, and the said plaintiff consenting to nominal damages, the court doth assess the same to the sum of one cent: therefore it is considered by the court and according by adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from all person and that he recover of the said defendnat his

81

damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges by him about his suit in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;”

Sally Melvin v. Edmund Melvin 23 December 1836 – continued p.175 Andrea (Andrew) v. John B. Sarpy 15 March 1837 - Plea filed; p.193 Sally Melvin v. Edmund Melvin 24 March 1837 – continued p.207 Judy alias Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 25 March 1837 – p.208

o (Trespass on the case) “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendant although solemnly called, comes not but makes default, nor hath he pleaded to the said action of the said plaintiff, who thereby remains undefended against him. Wherefore, the said plaintiff ought to recover of the said defendant;”

Judy alias Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 27 March 1837 – p.210o “Judgment by default having been taken in this cause on Saturday last, and the court not

knowing what damage the said plaintiff hath sustained by reason of the premises in her declaration mentioned, it is commanded to the sheriff to summon twelve good and lawful men of his county to appear at the next term of this court to enquire what damage the said plaintiff hath sustained by reason aforesaid, and the same day is given to the defendant;”

Sally a woman of colour v. Henry Chouteau 27 March 1837 – p.211o “Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon come also a Jury, to wit, Elihu H. Bobbins, Stewart Matthews, Thomas Hannon, John R. Dix, Hugh B. Myers, David S. Jamison, Nathaniel B. Atwood, William C. Shed, Hiram B. Bascum, Thomas P. Bray, James A. M. McDonald, Alexander Moore twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried, and sworn, are by consent of the parties discharged from giving a verdict in this cause;”

Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 6 April 1837 – p.219o On motion of the defendant by his attorney and upon affidavit filed herein, it is ordered

that the judgment by default rendered in this cause be set aside upon the defendant's paying costs;

Andrew Abraham and Lemman Dutton v. John Paca 6 April 1837 – continued p.220 Judy alias Julia Logan v. Berry Meachum (1835) 7 April 1837 - Pleas filed by leave of

court; p.221 Sally v. Henry Chouteau 10 April 1837 - (suit for freedom by next friend Sam Willi) p.223

o “Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and neither party requiring a jury, all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court, which being seen and heard, and by the court here fully understood, the court doth find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, that the said defendant is guilty of the trespasses above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him, and the said plaintiff consenting to nominal damages, the court doth assess the same to the sum of one cent. Therefore, it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming by through or under him and that she recover of the said defendant her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the cot assessed together with her costs and charges by her about her suit in this behalf expended and have thereof execution; Bill of exceptions filed;”

Delph v. Stephen Dorris (1836) 10 April 1837 - continued; p.224 Aspisa v. Joseph Rosati (1837) 11 July 1837 - (suit for freedom) p.244

82

o “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and says that she will not further prosecute her said writ, but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued, therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ, but that said defendant go thereof without day;”

Celeste v. Laforce Papin (1837) 11 July 1837 - (suit for freedom) p.245o “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney, and saith she will not further

prosecute her said writ, but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued; therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ, but that the said defendant go thereof without day;”

Celestine v. Laforce Papin (1837) 11 July 1837 - (suit for freedom) p.245o “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney, and saith she will not further

prosecute her said writ, but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued; therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ, but that the said defendant go thereof without day;”

Aspisa v. Hardage Lane (1837) 12 July 1837 – p.251- Plea filed Celeste v. Alexander Papin (not Laforce Papin) (1837) 12 July 1837- Plea filed Celestine by her next friend v. Alexander Papin (not Laforce Papin) (1837) 12 July 1837-

Plea filed Lewis Stubbs v. William Burd (1837) 13 July 1837 - p.256- Plea filed William Stubbs v. William Burd- 13 July 1837- p.257- Plea filed Jack a man of color v. Absalom Link (1837) 17 July 1837 – p.266

o “The said plaintiff comes and applies to the court to be permitted to sue for his freedom as a poor person and the court being satisfied from the petition herein filed that there is a reasonable ground for said application, it is ordered that the said Jack be permitted to sue as a poor person in order to establish his right to freedom, and J. Spalding Esquire, is assigned as his counsel. It is also further ordered that said Jack have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the court as occasion may require, that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction of this Court, and that he be not subject to any severity on account of this application for freedom;”

Sally Melvin v. Robert Cohen 27 July 1837 – p.285o “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and files her petition praying for

a change of venue of this cause and the said petition appearing to the court to contain a reasonable ground for said application, it is ordered that the venue thereof be changed to the county of St. Charles in the third judicial circuit of this state and that the clerk of this court make out and transmit to the clerk of the circuit court for said county of St. Charles, according to law, a complete transcript of the record and proceedings in said cause, together with all the original papers appertaining to and filed in the same;”

William Stubbs v. William Burd (1837) 27 July 1837 – p.285o “On motion of the plaintiff who files his affidavit stating his apprehension that he will be

removed by the defendant out of the jurisdiction of this court, it is ruled that the said defendant shew cause to this court forthwith why he should not enter into a recognizance according to law, conditioned that the said plaintiff during the pendency of this suit shall have reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the court, that he shall not be removed out of the jurisdiction of this court, nor be subjected to any severity on account of his application for freedom;”

83

Philis alias Susan v. Reddin B. Herring (1836)16 August 1837- p.297 - continued rejoinder filed;

Delph v. Stephen Dorris (1836) 16 August 1837 - continued by consent; p.297 Judy a woman of colour (Julia Logan) (LaCompte) v. Berry Meachum (1835) 23 August

1837 - (suit for freedom) p.304-05 “Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and the said defendant

though solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action of the said plaintiff who thereby remains undefended against hi, wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover of the said defendant, thereupon come also a jury, to wit, Harvey Williams, William H. Cable, Ira Kingsley, Hiram B. Bascum, William Pease, Silas Bascum, Gibson Cothran, James Sprigg, Joseph Stearns, Moses Powers, Titus Hale, John C. Abbott, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected tried and sworn a true enquiry of damages to make upon their oath aforesaid say that the said plaintiff hath sustained damage by reason of the trespasses in her declaration mentioned to the amount of one cent. Therefore it is considered by the court that the aid plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from all the said defendant, and for all persons claiming by through or under im - that she recover of him, the said defendant her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid assessed together with her costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;”

Andrew (Andrea) by Judy his next friend v. John B. Sarpy- 25 August 1837 - p.306o Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies, and thereupon

come also a jury to wit, Robert Forsyth, Joseph Cedars, William Prince, Henry P. Smith, Thomas Wash, Francis Sessant, Martin Hannah, Hugh Bellyers, William A. Coonty, Hiram Darby, Thomas J. Massic, Henry P Belt, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried and sworn, the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oath aforesaid say that the said defendant is guilty of the premises in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof declared against him, and they assess the plaintiff’s damages by him sustained by reason of the ties papers in his declaration mentioned, to the sum of one cent- therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming, through, or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit the recover of him, the said plaintiff, his costs and charges in this behalf expended, and have thereof execution.

Andrew (Andrea) by Judy his next friend v. John B. Sarpy- 25 August 1837 - p.308 - motion and reasons filed for new trial

Andrew (Andrea) by his next friend v. John B. Sarpy 4 September 1837 – p.319o “Now at this day come the parties aforeaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon

the said motion of the said defendant for a new trial is by them submitted to the court, which being seen and heard and by the court fully understood, it is considered that the said motion be sustained and a new trial of said cause is granted accordingly;”

Jack a man of colour v. Absalom Link (1837) 15 November 1837 p.350 - Plea filed

END ROLL C25799; BEGIN ROLL C25800 Andrew (Andrea) by his next friend vs. John B. Sarpy 29 November 1837- p.382

o Continued on affidavit and at the costs of the defendant” Josephine LaCourse vs. Edward Mitchell p. 398, 4 Dec 1837- Continued

84

Andrew Dutton vs. John Paca p.399, December 4 1837o It is ordered by the court to be entered that if the plaintiff in this cause, as well as in the

cases of Lemon Dutton and John Dutton vs. John Paca, be not prepared with his evidence at the next term of this court when the causes respectively shall be called for trial that the same will be dismissed from the docket.”

o Philis v. Reddin B. Herring p. 399, December 4 1837- continued at the costs of the plaintiffo Delph vs. Stephen Dorris p.401, Tuesday December 5 1837

Now at this day came the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies, and thereupon came also a jury, to wit, Nicolas Tiernan, John McEvery, John Hawkins, John Blackbourne, M. Lewis, Benjamin Backinstoe, Michael J. Horine, Jacob W. Hoffman, Almond Ried, George Godefendantrey, David Adams, Jonathan Neil, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried, and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try, retire to consider of their verdict.”

o Delph v. Stephen Dorris p.401, Wednesday December 6 1837 It is signified to the court that the jurors in this cause, not being able to agree upon a

verdict, were discharged by consent of counsel after the adjournment of the court on yesterday, therefore this cause is continued.”

o Delph v. Stephen Dorris p.409, December 8 1837- Additional plea filed by leave of court. Replication(?) filed and cause continued.

o Lewis Stubbs vs. William Burd p.416, December 11 1837 Suit for freedom. Now at this day comes as well the said plaintiff by his attorney as the

said defendant in his own proper person, who comes and by leave of court withdraws his pleas herein filed and further nothing saith in bar or preclusion of the aforesaid action of the said plaintiff who thereby remains undefended against him, wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover of the said defendant & not requiring a jury, all and singular the premises are by him submitted to the court which being seen & heard, and by the court here fully understood, it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming by, through, or under him by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and by agreement the costs of this action are to be paid by the said plaintiff.”

o William Stubbs v. William Burd p.417, December 11 1837 Now at this day comes as well the said plaintiff by his attorney as the said defendant in

his own proper person, who comes and by leave of court withdraws his pleas herein filed and further nothing saith in bar or preclusion of the aforesaid action of the said plaintiff who thereby remains undefended against him, wherefore the said plaintiff ought to recover of the said defendant & not requiring a jury, all and singular the premises are by him submitted to the court which being seen & heard, and by the court here fully understood, it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming by, through, or under him by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and by agreement the costs of this action are to be paid by the said plaintiff.”

o Nancy Stubbs v. William Burd p.417, Monday December 11 1837 Declaration filed by consent. Now at this day comes as well the said plaintiff by her

attorney as the said defendant in his own proper person, who says he cannot deny the action aforesaid of the said plaintiff, nor but that he, the said defendant is guilty of the

85

wrongs and injuries above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath declared against him, and confesses judgment thereof – therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated and set free from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming under him by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and by agreement the costs of this action are to be paid by the said plaintiff.

o Phebe Stubbs v. William Burd p.417, Monday December 11 1837 Declaration filed by consent. Now at this day comes as well the said plaintiff by her

attorney as the said defendant in his own proper person, who says he cannot deny the action aforesaid of the said plaintiff, nor but that he, the said defendant is guilty of the wrongs and injuries laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof declared against him, and confesses judgment thereof – therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming under him by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and by agreement the costs of this action are to be paid by the said plaintiff.”

o Robert Stubbs v. William Burd p. 417, Monday December 11 1837 Declaration filed by consent. Now at this day comes as well the said plaintiff by his

attorney as the said defendant in his own proper person, who says he cannot deny the action aforesaid of the said plaintiff, nor but that she, the said defendant is guilty of the wrongs and injuries above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath declared against him, and confesses judgment thereof – therefore it is considered by the court and accordingly adjudged that the said plaintiff be liberated and set free from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming under him by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and by agreement the costs of this action are to be paid by the said plaintiff.

End Record 8, Begin Record 9 (w/ index)o Philis, alias Susan vs. Reddin B. Herring p.45, April 14 1838 continued by consent.o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p.45, April 14 1838 continued by consento Celeste vs. Alex Papin Page 45, April 14 1838- continued by consent.o Andrew vs. John B. Sarpy p.45 April 14 1838- continued by consent.o Celeste (Celestine), by her next friend vs. Alexander Papin p.45, April 14 1838- continued

by consent.o Josephine LeCourse vs. Edward Mitchell p.49, Tuesday April 17 1838- continued.o Delph vs. Stephen Dorris p.51 Thursday April 19 1838

Trespass. Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and by leave of court the said defendant withdraws the plea by him firstly above pleaded and thereupon come also a jury, to wit, Henry Philips, Abner Hood, Mathias Steits, William Ritter, James McNeace, Charles Henderson, John D. Randall, Charles A. Ely, Anthony Chapouil, James G. Barry, Edwin Adriance, Frederick Brown, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried, and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try, retire to consider of their verdict.

o Abraham Dutton vs. John Paca p.52, Thursday April 19 1838 Now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney, and the said plaintiff, although

solemnly called comes not but makes default, nor hath he prosecuted his said writ with

86

effect therefore it is considered by the court that said plaintiff take nothing by his said writ but that said defendant go thereof without day.”

o Andrew Dutton vs. John Paca p.52, Thursday April 19 1838 Now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney, and the said plaintiff, although

solemnly called comes not but makes default, nor hath he prosecuted his said writ with effect therefore it is considered by the court that said plaintiff take nothing by his said writ but that said defendant go thereof without day.

o Lemon Dutton vs. John Paca p.52, Thursday April 19 1838 Now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney, and the said plaintiff, although

solemnly called comes not but makes default, nor hath he prosecuted his said writ with effect therefore it is considered by the court that said plaintiff take nothing by his said writ but that said defendant go thereof without day.

o Delph vs. Stephen Dorris Page 53, Friday April 20 1838 Trespass. Now at this day comes again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys,

and the jurors aforesaid being now agreed upon a verdict, return, here into court and on their oath aforesaid say as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said plaintiff before and at the time of the commencement of her suit aforesaid against him the said defendant was and still is the slave of him, the said defendant, in manner, and form as he, the said defendant in his said, second plea hath alleged - therefore it is considered by the court that said plaintiff take nothing by her writ, but that the said defendant go thereof without day.

o Delph vs. Stephen Dorris Page 56 Saturday April 21 1838 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and prays an appeal to the

supreme court from the judgment herein rendered against her and the affidavit of the plaintiff being filed therefore according to law, said appeal is granted – bill of exceptions filed.

o Delph vs. Stephen Dorris p. 83, Wednesday May 2 1838 By consent of parties it is ordered that the sheriff take possession of the said plaintiff and

hire her out to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit, and take bond from the hirer payable to the state of Missouri, in the penalty of one thousand dollars, with sufficient security, conditioned as the law directs.

o Rebecca vs. James Black & Louis Matlock p.185, 13 July 1838- Plea filed.o Ben vs. Thomas J. White & Joseph L. Woods p. 221, August 13 1838 continued.o Philis – alias Susan vs. Reddin B. Herring p.227, August 21 1838 continued.o Rebecca vs. James Black & Louis Matlock p.232, August 24 1838

By consent of parties it is ordered by the court that the sheriff take possession of said petitioner and hire her out to the best advantage during the pendency of this suit, and that he take bond and security of the hirer according to the statute in such cases made and provided, in the sum of five hundred dollars.

o Andrew (Andrea) vs. John B. Sarpy p.240, August 29 1838 Suit for freedom- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies,

and thereupon come also a jury to writ – Christopher Mason, Matthew F. Lind, David C. Dow, James W. Chapman, J.C. Thurston, Timothy Oakley, William A. Thornhill, Alexander Caldwell, William M. Wood, John McDowell, Walter R. Boswell, R.A. Gregory, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried, and sworn, the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try, thereupon the said

87

plaintiff although demanded, comes not, but makes default nor hath he prosecuted his writ in this behalf with effect – therefore it is considered by the court that said plaintiff take nothing by his said writ, but that said defendant go thereof without day.

o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p.240, Wednesday August 29 1838 Suit for freedom- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies,

and thereupon come also a jury, to writ Christopher Mason, Matthew F. Lind, David C. Dow, James W. Chapman, J.C. Thurston, Timothy Oakley, William A. Thornhill, Alexander Caldwell, William M. Wood, John McDowell, Walter R. Boswell, R.A. Gregory, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try, retire to consider of their verdict.

o Jack vs. Cambell Link p.241, Wednesday August 29 1838- continued. o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p.242 Thursday August 30 1838

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies, and the jurors aforesaid return also into court, and being now agreed upon a verdict, on their oath aforesaid say as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, that the said defendant is guilty of the trespass and imprisonment above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof declared against him – therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming by, through, or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit, and that she recover of the said defendant here costs and charges in this behalf expended, and have thereof execution.

o Celeste & Celestine vs. Alexander Papin p.244, Friday August 31 1838 Suit for freedom- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies

and consent that these two causes may be tried together by the same jury as one action and thereupon come also a jury, to wit, Robert H. Carey, Daniel Pindell, Oliver Harris, Samuel S. M. Shipp, George M Willing, Thomas Dowler, Samuel Farley, Patrick M. Dillon, John Arthur, George H. Callender, James Johnson, James Morris, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried, & sworn the issue within joined well & truly to try retire to consider of their verdict.

o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p.245 Friday August 31 1838- motion for new trial filed.o Celeste & Celestine vs. Alexander Papin p.247 Saturday September 1 1838

Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies, and give the court to understand and be informed that the jury in this case after their retirement being unable to agree upon a verdict, were discharged by consent from rendering a verdict, and thereupon this cause is continued.

o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p.257, Saturday September 8 1838 Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and

thereupon the said motion for a new trial is by them submitted to the court who not being sufficiently advised of the premises take time to consider thereof.

o Celeste & Celestine vs. Alexander Papin p.263 Wednesday September 12 1838 On the petition and affidavit of said Celeste stating her belief that the judge of this court

is prejuced (prejudiced?) against her and her child’s claim to freedom, it is ordered that the venue of the cause be changed to the county of Saint Charles in the third Judicial Circuit of this state, and that the same be certified to the circuit court of that county accordingly. (FINAL)

88

o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p.264 Wednesday September 12 1838 Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies, and the

court here being now sufficiently advised of and concerning the said motion for a new trial, it is considered that the same be sustained.

o Philis – alias Susan vs. Reddin B. Herring p.331 Wednesday November 28 1838- continued by consent.

o Ben vs. Thomas J. White & William L. Wood p.332, Thursday November 29 1838- continued by consent

o James Talbot, a man of colour vs. James G. Musick Ex of David Musick p.344, Saturday December 8 1838 The said James Talbot, by W. Bird, his attorney, presents to the court here his petition,

verified as the law requires praying to be permitted to bring his suit in this court for freedom against the said James C. Musick, executor as aforesaid, and the said petition, in the opinion of the court, containing sufficient ground thereof, it is ordered that said plaintiff be permitted to sue in forma pauperis, and that Gustavus A. Bird, esquire be assigned him as counsel.

o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p. 348, Tuesday December 11 1838- continued on affidavit & at costs of defendant.

o Jack vs. Campbell Link p.348, Tuesday December 11 1838- continued by consent.o Ben, a man of colour vs. William L. Wood impleaded with Thomas J. White p.367 Dec

28 1838 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies, and agree as

follows, to writ – “Ben, the plaintiff, was born a slave, and at the time hereinafter referred to, before the commencement of this suit, was, and still is, claimed as the property of defendant, William L. Woods. About five years ago and before this suit was commenced, the said Woods loaned the said negro to his brother in law, one Dickerson, who was then about to come hither from the state of Virginia to reside here, who brought him out to this state, and after having remained here for several months, took the slave over into St. Clair County in the state of Illinois, for the purpose of working him as a hand in the coal mines, and did work him there as such coal hand, for seven or eight weeks, after which he was brought back to this state, and this suit was commenced by the slave for his freedom. The agent, Dickerson, still resides in this state, and has done so ever since he first came out here. Sometime during the continuance of the employment of the slave in Illinois, the said agent, by letter, informed the said Woods, who then resided in the state of Virginia, that he had so employed the said slave in the state of Missouri, who wrote to Dickerson expressing his gratification at the success of Dickerson in his operation at the coal mines. Dickerson, at the time of taking the negro over into Illinois, was expressly informed and knew that there would be danger in thus taking the slave there, and was told that he might get his freedom. Is it agreed that if upon the above stated facts the court shall be of opinion that the said slave is entitled to his freedom judgment shall accordingly be rendered for him, otherwise judgment shall be entered for the defendant. _ A. Hamilton, Atty for Deft._Ias B. Bowlin, Atty for Plff.” Which being seen and inspected by the court and mature deliberation being thereupon had, and the court being of opinion therefrom that the said plaintiff is entitled to his freedom, doth consider and adjudge that the said plaintiff be liberated, and entirely set from the said defendant, and from all persons claiming by, through, or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit –

89

and that the said defendant recover of the said defendant his costs and charges in this behalf expended and that he have thereof execution.

o Phillis, alias Susan vs. Reddin B. Herring p.446, Thursday March 28 1839 on motion of attorne for the plaintiff leave is given him to amend his declaration by

reinserting the word five which had been stricken out in.o Philis, alias Susan vs. Reddin B. Herring p.460, Tuesday April 16 1839

Now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff although demanded comes not, but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her writ in this behalf with effect – therefore it is considered by the court that said plaintiff take nothing by her said writ but that said defendant go thereof without day thereupon said plaintiff by her attorney comes into court & by consent this nonsuit is set aside & cause continued.

o Rebecca vs. Black & Mattock p.466 Saturday April 21 1839- continued by consent.o Jack vs. Absalom Link p.468 Tuesday April 23 1839

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and thereupon come also a jury, to writ, J.F. Jeta, Isaac Burbage, H. Holman, Richard S. Tilden, Stephen Spellin, William Tighe, Joshua Keely, Joseph Christy, George Todd, Thomas Durlington, Bernard Finney, & Ephraim Carter, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried & sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try, upon their oath aforesaid say that the said defendant is not guilty in manner and form as the said plaintiff in his declaration hath alleged _ therefore it is considered by the court the said plaintiff take nothing by his said writ but that said defendant go thereof without day.

Jack vs. Absalom Link p.470 Wednesday April 24 1839- motion & reasons for new trial filed.

o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p.475 Friday April 26 1839 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and thereupon

comes also a jury, to writ, Jothan Bigelow, H.A. Jamison, Thomas Hensley, Almond Reed, John Grant, James Parker, Alexander McHaut, William Harris, Charles C. Burkley, David Adams, Peter Lindell, Richard Marsh, twelve good & lawful men, who being duly elected, tried, and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well & truly to try, retire to consider of their verdict.

o Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane p.475, Saturday April 27 1839 Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and the said

jurors return here also into court, and being now agreed upon a verdict, on their oath aforesaid say that the said defendant is guilty of the said trespasses and imprisonment above laid to his charge in manner & form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof declared against him_therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant, and from all others claiming by through, or under him, by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that the said defendant pay all costs which have accrued in the prosecution & defence of this action.

o Jack vs. Absalom Link p.486 4 May 1839 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and thereupon the

said motion of the plaintiff to grant him a new trial of this cause is by them submitted to the court, which being seen & heard and by the court here fully understood, it is considered that said motion be overruled.

90

o Sidney, alias Susan vs. William Littleton p.504 Tuesday November 19 1839 Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and it appearing to the court that this

suit has been amicably settled the same is dismissed by consent of the parties – It is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff recover of said defendant her costs and charges by her about her suit in that behalf expended and that she have thereof execution.

o Celeste, a woman of color vs. Alexander Papin p.506 Tuesday November 19 1839- Plea filed.

o Polly Wash vs. Joseph M. Magehan p.514 November 20 1839- Pleas filedo Andrew, a man of color vs. Peter Sarpy p.577 Wednesday November 27 1839- plea filed.o Daniel Talbot, a man of color v. James C. Music, Prudence Music & Delford Benton,

Nov 30, 1839, p. 591 Now at this day comes G. A. Bird attorney for the plaintiff and files his affidavit verified

according to law, setting forth that sometimes in the night time, on or about June last, said plaintiff was taken in a clandestine manner and removed forcibly from the jurisdiction of this court, that he has good grounds to suspect and believe that Delford Benton aforesaid, aided by others so took and removed said plaintiff, that he has been informed and believes that said Benton crossed St. Charles Ferry with said plaintiff, that he staid at St. Charles one night about June last, and put said plaintiff in jail for safe keeping, and the next day left there on board of a Steam Boat bound up the Missouri River, with said plaintiff on board, and praying for a warrant directed to any Sheriff of any county in the State of Missouri, commanding them forth with to take said Daniel, if he be found, and forthwith bring him before said court, or the Judge thereof in vacation, and also to notify said defendants in said suit of the time and place, when and where you will have said Daniel before court in Judge, which is accordingly granted.

o Lewis, by Celeste his next friend vs. John Stacker p.593 December 2 1839- Plea filedEnd Record 9, Begin Record 10 on C 25800

o Josaphine La Course, an infant of color by her next friend vs. Edward Mitchell p.1 Monday December 9 1839- continued.

o Phillis, alias Susan vs. Redding B. Herring p.4,Tuesday December 10 1839- continued. o Rebecca vs. James Black & Lewis Mattock Page 68, Friday January 10 1840- continued by

consent.o Polly Wash v. Joseph M Mageham- p. 87, Jan 20, 1840

By consent of parties it is ordered by the court, that the Sheriff take possession of said petitioner and hire her out to the best advantage during the pendency of this suit, and that he take Bond and security of the herein, according to the Statute, in such cases made and provided, in the sum of five-hundred dollars.

o Aspasia alias Aspisa v. Hardage Lane, March 26, 1840, p.333- Pleas filed.o *New Suit?* Charles, a negro man v. Joseph Rosatti- April 23, 1840, p.392

Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney, and files his petition, and thereupon it is ordered by the court that the said plaintiff be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish hi right to freedom, and it is further ordered that Trusten Polk and C. C. Carroll be assigned him as counsel. Also that said Charles have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel, and this court, as occasion may require, and that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction of this court, and that he be not subject to any severity on account

91

of his application for freedom.o Aspisa alias Aspasia v. Hardage Lane, April 25, 1840, p.409- Replications filed.o Josephine Le Course v. Edward Mitchell- May 4, 1840 p.440

On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney, it is ordered that the rule made herein at the July Term of this court for the year eighteen hundred and thirty six be renewed, and that James Mitchell therein maintained show cause at the next term of this court to be held on the third Monday of July next why an attachment should not issue against him for a contempt by him committed in removing the said plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of this court.

o Phillis alias Susan v. Reddin B. Herrin- May 5, 1840, p.444- continued by consento *Same suit as above? Different?* Charles a negro man v. Peter Verhagan- May 22,

1840 p.459 Petition for freedom- Now at this day comes the said plaintiff, and files his petition and

there upon it is ordered by the court that said plaintiff be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish his right to freedom, and that Trusten Polk and C. C. Carroll be assigned him as counsel. Also that said Charles have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and this court as occasion may require, and that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction of this court, and that he be not subject to any severity on account of his application for freedom.

End of Record 10, Begin Record 11 (with index)

o Charles, a man of color v. Peter Verhagan- July 20, 1840, p. 3- Plea Filedo Archibald Barnes by Peter Charleville his next friend v. Berry Meachum- July 30, 1840

p.165 (Petition for freedom) Now at this day comes the said plaintiff and files his petition, and thereupon it is ordered

by the court that said plaintiff be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish his right to freedom, and that Thomas T. Gantt and George F. Strother be assigned him as counsel, also that said petitioner have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and this court as occasion may require, and that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction of this court, and that he be not subjected to any severity on account of his application for freedom.

o Brunetta Barnes by Peter Charleville her next friend v. Barry Meachum- July 30, 1840 p.165 (Petition for freedom) Now at this day comes the said plaintiff and files her petition, and thereupon it is ordered

by the court that said plaintiff be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish her right to freedom, and that Thomas T. Gantt and George F. Strother be assigned her as counsel, also that said petitioner have reasonable liberty to attend her counsel and this court as occasion may require, and that she be not removed out of the jurisdiction of this court, and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of his application for freedom.

o Archibald Barnes by Peter Charleville his next friend v. Berry Meachum- Aug 1, 1840 p.177- Bond filed

o Brunetta Barnes by Peter Charleville her next friend v. Barry Meachum- Aug 1, 1840 p.177- Bond filed

o Brunetta Barnes by Peter Charleville her next friend v. Barry Meachum- Sept 1, 1840 p.218 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney, and files her petition, which

being seen and heard, and by the court here fully understood, and thereupon it is ordered

92

by the court that a warrant issue to bring said petitioner before this court then and there to be dealt with as the shall due it(?).

o Brunetta Barnes by Peter Charleville her next friend v. Barry Meachum- Sept 2, 1840, p.225 The Sheriff having made return of the warrant issued in this by having the petitioner in

court, and thereupon all and singular the premises are by the parties submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood it is ordered that the defendant relieve the petitioner from the grievances complained of in her petition and find other employment for said petitioner, and that she be remanded to the care and custody of said defendant.

END OF ROLL C2500, BEGIN ROLL C25801

o Brunetta Barnes by Peter Charleville her next friend v. Barry Meachum- Nov 17, 1840, p.310- Plea filed

o Archibald Barnes by Peter Charleville his next friend v. Berry Meachum- Nov 17, 1840, p.310- Plea filed

o Pierre v. Therese Cerre Chouteau- Nov 17, 1840, p.310- Plea filedo Diana Cephas, a woman of color v. James Scott- p.313, 11-17-1840.

On motion of defendant’s attorney, it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the State of Illinois to take depositions to be read on the part of said defendant

o Josiah Cephas by next friend Diana Cephas v. James Scott & Murray McConnell- p.313, 11-17-1840 On motion of Defendant’s attorney, it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the State of

Illinois to take depositions to be read on the part of said defendants.o Josiah Cephas by next friend Diana Cephas v. James Scott & Murray McConnell-

p.362, 11-21-1840- Pleas filed.End Record 12, Begin Record 13

o Phillis alias Susan vs. Redden B. Herrin, Pg. 2, 1/4/41■ Now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney and the said plaintiff

although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her suit with effect it is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that said defendant go thereof without day and recover of said plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Rebecca v. James Black & Lewis Matlock- Jan 21, 1841, p.26- continued by consento Charles Endicott by his next friend Gustavus A. Bird vs. Benjamin Clapp- Pg. 62-63,

1/23/41 Freedom, Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and

thereupon come also a jury to wit: William G. Wheeler; Joseph Barrett; James L. Brown; John C. Elder; Hiram Moss; Robert Holmes; Edward Castello; Joseph Locke; Samuel Mills; Charles Armslee; James Powers; and John Atkinson, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid will and truly to try upon their oath aforesaid say that said defendant is guilty of the said supposed grievances above laid at his charge and all and

93

each of them and every part thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above complained against him. It is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit and also that said plaintiff recover of said defendant his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution. (FINAL)

o Lewis by next friend Celeste v. John Stacker Jan 29, 1841, p.69 Now at this day comes the said defendant by his attorney, and the said plaintiff although

solemnly called comes not but makes default, not hath he prosecuted his suit with effect, it is therefore considered by the court, that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit, but that said defendant go thereof without day, and recover of said plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf upended and have thereof execution.

o Celeste/a woman of color vs. Alexander Papin- Pg. 78, 2/1/41 On motion of defendant’s attorney, leave is given him to file an additional plea herein and

the cause is continued. o Aspasia, alias Aspisa vs. Hardage Lane- Pg. 79, 2/1/41

Trespass, Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and neither party requiring a jury, all and singular, the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court doth find as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is not guilty of the said supposed trespasses and grievances above laid to his charge or any or either of them or any part thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him: and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, the court doth find that she the said plaintiff at the time the said trespasses and grievances in the declaration mentioned are alleged to have been committed, was a slave in manner and form as the defendant has above thereof in his aid second plea alleged, and as to the third issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, the court doth find that the trespasses and grievances in the said declaration in this action mentioned are the same trespasses and grievances as those in the said last plea mentioned and for and in respect whereof the said supposed judgment in the said last plea mentioned was recovered; it is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that said defendant go thereof without day and recover of said plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Andrew by Celeste his mother and next friend vs. Peter Sarpy- 2/2/41, Pg. 81 Freedom, Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and

neither party requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court doth find as to the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is guilty of the said supposed grievances above laid to his charge and all and each of them and every part thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above complained against him. It is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit and also that said plaintiff recover of said defendant his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution. (FINAL)

o Richard Tompson a man of color vs. James E. Blount and Leakin D. Baker- 2/3/41, Pg.

94

87 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney and files his petition verified

according to law setting forth that the has commenced suit against said defendants to recover his freedom and that he will be removed out of the jurisdiction of this court unless by the timely interposition of the same wherefore he prays that a warrant may issue to bring him before this court then and there to be dealt with as the court shall see fit which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, it is ordered that a warrant issue as prayed for and that the same be made returnable tomorrow morning at 10 o’clock.

o Richard Tompson a man of color vs. James E. Blount and Leakin D. Baker- 2/5/41, P. 93 On motion of attorney for the plaintiff it is ordered that the Sheriff take possession of the

petitioner, and hire him out from time to time during the pendency of this suit, and that he take Bond from the hirer according to the statute in such cases made and provided.

o Alsey, a woman of color vs. William Randolph Sullivan, 2/25/41, Pg. 111 It having been ordered by the court that the plaintiff herein be allowed to sue as a poor

person and also that counsel be assigned here which was not entered of record. It is therefore ordered that the same be entered which is done as follows:■ Alsey, a woman of color vs. William Randolph Sullivan, 2/22/41, Pg. 111

Now at this day comes the said plaintiff and files her petition verified according to law and praying to be allowed to sue in forma pauperis which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, it is ordered that said plaintiff be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish her right to freedom and that messrs. Risque, Murdock and King be assigned her as counsel and it is further ordered that said plaintiff have reasonable liberty to attend her counsel and the court as occasion may require and that she be not removed out of the jurisdiction of this court and further that she be not subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom.

o Charles a man of color vs. Belina Christy- 2/25/41, Pg. 111 Suit for freedom, Now at this day comes the said plaintiff and files his petition verified

according to law and praying to be allowed to sue in forma pauperis which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood it is ordered that said plaintiff be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish his right to freedom and that Messrs. Risque, Murdock and King be assigned him as counsel and it is further ordered that said plaintiff have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the court as occasion may require and that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction of this court and further that he be not subjected to any severity on account of his application for freedom.

o Alsey, a woman of color vs. William Randolph Sullivan, 2/25/41, Pg. 113- Amended declaration filed by leave of court

o Charles a man of color vs. Belina Christy, 2/26/41, Pg. 113- Amended declaration filed by leave of court

o Charles a man of color vs. Belina Christy, 3/1/41, Pg. 121 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney and files his petition verified

according to law setting forth that he is danger and fears he will be removed out of the jurisdiction of this court unless by the interposition of this court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, it is ordered that a warrant issue to bring said plaintiff before this court then and there to be dealt with as the court shall see fit and

95

direct. o Archibald Barnes by next friend v. John Berry Meachum- March 2, 1841, p.125

On motion of plaintiffs attorney, it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the State of Ohio to take deposition to be read on the part of said plaintiff.

o Brunetta Barnes by next friend v. John Berry Meachum- March 2, 1841, p.125 On motion of plaintiffs attorney, it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the State of Ohio to

take deposition to be read on the part of said plaintiff.o Charles a man of color vs. Belina Christy, 3/2/41, Pg. 125

On motion of attorney for the plaintiff it is ordered that the Sheriff take possession of the petitioner and hire him out from time to time during the pendency of this suit, and that he take Bond from the hirer in the sum of six hundred dollars, according to the state in such case made and provided.

o Alsey, a woman of color v. William S. Randolph- Mar 15, 1841- p.133- Plea filedo Charles a man of color vs. Belina Christy, 3/20/41, Pg. 185- Pleas filedo Celeste v. (Alexander) Papin- Mar 30, 1841, p.214- Plea filedo Rebecca v. Black & Matlock Mar 30, 1841, p.215- continued for want of depositions on

part of plaintiffo Celeste/a woman of color v. Alexander Papin- April 6, 1841, p.237- Replication filedo Diana Cephas v. James Scott & Murray McConnel- April 9, 1841, p.257

Now at this day comes Merim(?) Leslie attorney and voluntarily enters the appearance of Murray McConnel to this action.

o Sidney, a women of color v. William Littleton, April 12, 1841, p.262 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by her attorney and saith she will not further

persecute her suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued. (FINAL)

o Charles a man of color vs. Joseph Rosati pg. 318, 4/26/41 Now at this day comes the said plaintiff by his attorney and saith he will not further

prosecute this suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be discontinued. (FINAL)

o Charles a man of color vs. Peter Verhagen p.319, 4/26/41 Freedom, The judge of this court having given no opinion whilst at the bar in this case it

is ordered that the venue of this cause be changed to the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas and that the clerk of this court make a full transcript of the record and proceedings in the cause and transmit the same duly certified together with all the original papers filed in the cause and not forming a part of the record to the clerk of the said Court of Common Pleas. (FINAL)

o Alsey/ a woman of color v. William S. Randolph- July 19, 1841 p.363- Agreement of parties filed & continuance

o Charles of color v. Belina Christy, July 19, 1841 p.363 – Replication filedo Charles of color v. Belina Christy, July 24, 1841 p.410 – On motion of plaintiffs attorney it

is ordered that said defendants rescind plea be stricken out.

End Record 12, Begin Record 13

o Pierre v. Therese Cerre Chouteau, Oct 11, 1841, p.16 – continued by consent

96

o Joseph Cephas v. James Scott & Murray McConnel, Oct 12, 1841 p.19- continued by consento Diana Cephas vs. James Scott October 12, 1841, Pg. 20

Agreement of parties filed substituting Murray McConnell as defendant for James Scott and appearance of said McConnell entered by attorney.

o Louis Scott vs. William Burd: October 18, 1841, Pg. 41 On motion of plaintiffs attorney, it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the State of Illinois

to take depositions to be read on the part of said plaintiff.o Rebecca a colored girl v. James Black & Lewis Matlock, Oct 21, 1841, p.51- continuedo Charles a man of color v. Melanie Christy, Oct 23, 1841, p.57- Petition of defendant filed

for a change of venueo Peter a colored man vs. John Richardson Wednesday October 27, 1841, Pg. 63 (Petition

for Freedom) Now at this day come the plaintiff and files his petition verified according to law, which

being seen and heard, and by the court here fully understood: it is ordered by the court that said Peter be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish his right to freedom: and John Davis Esquire is a assigned him as counsel and further ordered that the said petitioner has reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the court as occasion may require: that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction of the court, and that he be not subject to any severity on account of his application for freedom.

o Polly Wash v. Joseph M. Magehan, November 17, 1841, Pg. 85- continued at costs of defendant to obtain the evidence of Thomas Botts.

o Celeste (a woman of color) vs. Alexander Papin, November 17, 1841, Pg. 85 Trespass, Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and

thereupon come also a jury to wit: Joseph Powell, James McCormack, John Baker, Samuel Rudder, Franklin Rabery, Daniel L. Rizer, Robert P. Hall, George M. Willing, Ringrose D. Watson, John H. Gay, William Smith, and James K. Thompson, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly try upon their oaths aforesaid find as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is not guilty of the said supposed grievances above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him. And as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the jurors on their oaths aforesaid say that the said wrongs and grievances in the said declaration mentioned were and each and all of the same identical wrongs and grievances as those in said second plea mentioned and for and in respect whereof and form as the said defendant hath above in his plea aforesaid alleged, it is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that said defendant go thereof without day and recover of said plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Celeste a woman of color vs. Alexander Papin, Nov 18, 1841, p.87- motion filed for new trial

o Celeste a woman of color vs. Alexander Papin, Saturday Dec. 4, 1841, Pg. 122 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and thereupon the

said motion of said plaintiff is by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood. It is considered by the court that said motion be sustained and a new trial granted herein.

o Charles (a man of color) v. Belina Christy Jan 6, 1842, p.204

97

Now at this day comes the said defendant by her attorney and files her petition verified according to law and praying for a change of venue herein which petition being seen and heard and by the court deemed sufficient, it is ordered by the court that the venue of this cause be changed to the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas and that the clerk of this court make our a full true and complete transcript of the record and proceedings herein and transmit the same duly certified together with all the original papers filed in the cause and not forming a part of the reend? to the clerk of the said Court of Common Pleas. (FINAL)

o Alsey (a woman of color) vs. William S. Randolph, January 10, 1842, Pg. 211 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and thereupon

come also a jury to wit: Charles M. Bobb; John W. Burd; John G. Lehman; Frederick Dings; Robert King; John Davis; Mason Johnson; William Beales; Henry S. Taylor; Henry H. Gilson; William Hawkins and David McDowell; twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try retire to consider of their verdict and after being absent sometime return here against into court and say they cannot agree upon a verdict and thereupon by consent of parties the jurors are discharged and the cause is continued.

o Diana Cephas v. Murray McConnell- Jan 11. 1842, p.212- continued by consento Mary Robinson v. Ringrose Watson- Jan 12, 1842, p.215- Replication filedo Vica (a woman of color) who sues by her next friend Chesley Evans vs. Samuel Hobart;

Thadeus Alonzo (a boy of color) who sues by his next friend Chesley Evans vs. John H. Sparr, George Charles, Samuel Hobart and George H.C. Mellody; Musa Ben Abel Gazen who sues by his next friend Chesley Evans vs. John H. Sparr, George Charles, Samuel Hobart and George H.C. Mellody, Wednesday July 20, 1842, Pg. 227 Suit for Freedom- And now at this day come the attorneys for the plaintiffs and

defendants in the above entitled causes and represent to the court that the said several causes have been arranged and settled between the said several parties in interest and a transfer and conveyance by the defendant in interest in the said several causes to Chesley Evans of all their right and little to the said several plaintiffs: Vica, Thadeus Alonzo and Musa Ben Abel Gazen, and thereupon the court on motion of the plaintiffs attorney, rescinds the orders by the said court made in the said several causes requiring the sheriff of the county of St. Louis to hire out the said Vica, the said Thedeus Alonzo and the said Musa Ben Abel Gazen and that the said sheriff discharge from his custody and keeping the said Vica, the said Thadeus Alonzo, and the said Musa Ben Abel Gazen and it is further ordered by said court on motion of plaintiffs attorney that the said several causes be dismissed.

o Mary, a colored woman v. Dougherty & Curle- July 27, 1842, p.258- disclaimer of R.J. Curle filed

o Squire Brown v. William C. Anderson- July 27, 1842, p.261- continuedo Rebecca (a colored girl) vs. James Black and Lewis Matlock, July 28, 1842, Pg. 268

Now at this day come the said defendants by their attorney and the said plaintiff although solemnly called comes not but makes default nor hath she prosecuted her suit with effect. It is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that said defendants go thereof without day and recover of said plaintiff their costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Jinney Jackson vs. James O Fraser, July 29, 1842, p. 278- Declaration & plea filed by

98

consento Henry Jackson/ a person of color v. James O. Frazer- July 29, 1842, p. 278- Declaration

& plea filed by consento Anna Maria/ a person of color v. James O. Frazer- July 29, 1842, p. 278- Declaration &

plea filed by consento Sally alias Sarah Jackson/ a person of color v. James O. Frazer- July 29, 1842, p. 278-

Declaration & plea filed by consento Margurett Jackson/ a woman of color v. James O. Frazer- July 29, 1842, p. 278-

Declaration & plea filed by consento William Henry/ a person of color v. James O. Frazer- July 29, 1842, p. 278- Declaration

& plea filed by consento Smith/ a person of color v. James O. Frazer- July 29, 1842, p. 278- Declaration & plea

filed by consento Jinney Jackson vs. James O Fraser, August 10, 1842, Pg. 299

On motion of plaintiffs attorney, it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the State of Maryland to take depositions to be read on the part of said plaintiff.

o Brunetta Barnes by Peter Charleville her next friend vs. Berry Meachum (Trespass): Monday August 22, 1842, Pg. 326 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and neither

party requiring a jury, all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood the court doth find as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid that the said defendant is guilty of said supposed trespasses wherewith he is charged in manner and form as in the declaration set forth, and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the court doth find that at the time of the committing of the trespasses in the said declaration mentioned plaintiff was and still is a free person and not the slave of defendant as in the said plea is alleged and the court doth further find that said plaintiff hath sustained damages by reason of the premises in her declaration mentioned in the sum of one cent. It is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit and that she recover from said defendant her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with her costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Archibald Barnes by Peter Charleville his next friend vs. Berry Meachum, Monday August 22, 1842, Pg. 326 (Trespass) Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and

neither party requiring a jury all and singular the premises are by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood, the court doth find as to the first issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, that the said defendant is guilty of the said supposed trespasses above laid to his charge and as to the second issue within joined between the parties aforesaid the court doth find that at the time of the committing of the said trespasses in the said eclaration mentioned, plaintiff was and still is a free person and not the slave of the defendant as in the said plea is alleged, and the court doth further find that said plaintiff hath sustained damage by reason of the premises in his declaration mentioned in the sum of one cent, it is therefore

99

considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit and that he recover from said defendant and his damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the court assessed together with his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Pierre v. Therese Cerre Chouteau, August 22, 1842, Pg. 326 Now at this day comes Wilson Pumim, Esp. and suggests to the court here the death of

Therese Cerre Chouteau defendant herein and thereupon it is ordered by the court that this suit abate.

o Josiah Cephas by next friend Diana Cephas vs. James Scott and Murray McConnell, Tuesday August 23, 1842, Pg. 328 The death of the plaintiff having been heretofore suggested, it is ordered by the court

that this suit be abated. (FINAL)o Jonathan (a man of color) vs. Marshal Brotherton impleaded, Sept. 1, 1842, p.357-58

Suit for freedom, Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and thereupon come also a jury to wit: Erasmus Elliott, George H. Gill, W.G. Whitfield, William H. Brown, Benjamin K. Hersey, Lewis S. Grant, Josiah H. Crane, James Crawford, John Cole, Frederick Lynch, William Salisbury and Charles E. Long, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid find that the defendant is guilty of the trespasses grievances and false imprisonment in manner and form as the said plaintiff has alleged against him. It is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit and that he recover from said defendant his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution. Motion and reasons filed for new trial.

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose Watson- Sept. 1, 1842, p.358- continued by consento Pierre (of color) v. Gabriel S. Chouteau- Nov. 21, 1842, p.367- Plea filedo Peter (a man of color) vs. John Richardson, November 21, 1842, Pg. 370

There having been no service of process on the defendant in this action, it is ordered by the court that this suit abate at the cost of the plaintiff and that execution issue thereof.

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose Watson- Nov. 28, 1842, p.376 Now at this day comes Marshall Brotherton Esq. late Sheriff of the county of St. Louis

and brings the body of said petitioner in open court and thereupon it is ordered by the court that said petitioner be transferred to the custody and charge of William Milburn present Sheriff of the County of St. Louis which was accordingly done and it is further ordered by the Court that the Sheriff hire out said petitioner to the but advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit and take a bond from the direr payable to the State of Missouri in the sum of four hundred dollars with such security as the Sheriff approves conditioned that the hirer will pay the hire to the Sheriff and return the petitioner at the expiration fo the term for which she is hired or as soon as the action is determined.

o *Lucy Ann Britton by her next friend Polly Wash v. David D. Michell, Dec 13, 1842, p.391 Now at this day comes the said petitioner by her attorney and files her petition verified

100

according ot law setting forth among other things that she is confined in the jail of Sta. Louis County and that she is suffering from a severe cold occasioned as she believes from a deficiency of clothing and the dampness of the room in which she is confined and that had it not been for the careful attention of her mother who visited her frequently, her sufferings would have been incalculable and she believes that death would have been the consequences of such cruelty, which petition begin seen and heard and by the Court here fully understood, the Court doth order the Jailer to inquire into her condition as to lodging and clothing and make report thereof to this court without delay.

o Lucy Ann Britton by her next friend Polly Wash v. David D. Michell, Dec 16, 1842, p.399- Plea filed

o Rebecca (of color) vs. Thomas Horine and George H. C. Mellody, Jan. 7, 1843, Pg. 418 Now at this day comes the defendant George H. C. Mellody and brings the body of said

plaintiff in open court and thereupon it is ordered by the court that said plaintiff be transferred to the custody and charges of William Milburn, Esq. Sheriff of St. Louis County which was accordingly done. It is further ordered that the sheriff hire out said plaintiff to the best advantage from time to time during the pending of the causes and take bond from the hirer payable to the State of Missouri on the penalty of four hundred and twenty five dollars with such security as the ?? conditioned that the hirer will pay the hire to the sheriff and return the plaintiff at the expiration of the term for which she is hired or as soon as this action is determined.

o Mary (a colored woman) vs. Richmond J. Carle impleaded with James alias E.C. Dougherty, Saturday Jan. 7, 1843, Pg. 418-19 Freedom, Now at this day comes the plaintiff by her attorney and the defendant

Richmond J. Carle comes by attorney disclaim any ownership or claim upon said plaintiff or that he ever had said plaintiff in his possession. It is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit and also that said defendant recover of said plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Mary (a colored woman) vs. Richmond J. Carle impleaded with James alias E.C. Dougherty, Friday Jan. 13, 1843, Pg. 423 It appearing to the court that judgment of liberation has been rendered in this suit in favor

of said plaintiff and that she is still confined in the jail of St. Louis County only abiding the judgment in the cause. It is therefore ordered that a writ issue herein directed to the sheriff of said county commanding him to cause said plaintiff to be discharged from the custody of the jailer and set at liberty and to make return of said writ to this court forthwith.

o Jonathan (of color) vs. Marshall Brotherton impleaded, Jan. 14, 1843, Pg. 424 Now at this day comes the parties aforesaid by their respective attornies and thereupon

the said motion of the defendant for a new trial herein is by them submitted to the court which being seen and heard and by the court here fully understood it is considered by the court that said motion be overruled.

o Pierre (of color) vs. Gabriel L. Choteau, Tues. Jan. 24, 1843, Pg. 433 It is ordered by this court that William Milburn Esq. Sheriff of St. Louis County hire out

the said plaintiff herein to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit and take bond from the hirer payable to the State of Missouri in the penalty of

101

seven hundred dollars with such security as be approved conditioned that the hirer will pay the hire to the sheriff and return the plaintiff at the expiration of the term for which he is hired or as soon as this action is determined.

**End of Record 13 (w/index), Begin Record 14

o Celeste (of color) v. Alexander Papin- May 29, 1843, p.50- continued at defendant’s costso Lucy Ann Britton v. David D. Mitchell, May 29, 1843, p.51-52On motion of the defendant it is ordered that the sheriff of this country take charge of the plaintiff herein and hire her out to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of the cause, taking bond payable to the state of Missouri in the penalty of six hundred dollars conditioned to pay the hire of said plaintiff and to retain her at the expiration of the term for which she is hired or as long as this action is determined.o Polly Wash v. Joseph M. Magihan: (Suit for Freedom) Tuesday June 6, 1843, Pg. 67

Now at this day come the parties by their attornies and thereupon come a jury to wit: Reuben B. Austin, Gibson Covthion,, William Bailey, Ralph Peters Sr., Henry G. Soulard, Olly Williams, William Wiseman, Thomas Wiseman, Robert G. Coleman, Thomas Sappington, Green Park and Enoch Price twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid say that as to the issue joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths do find that the said plaintiff before and at the time of committing the said several grievances in the declaration mentioned was not nor is she now a slave in manner and form as the said defendant hath in his said plea alleged and they assess the damages of the said plaintiff by her sustained by reason of the said several grievances in the declaration mentioned to the sum of one dollar. It is therefore considered by this court that said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit, and that said plaintiff recovers of said defendant her damages aforesaid in form aforesaid by the jurors assessed together with the costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Lucy Ann Britton v. David D. Mitchell: Monday July 3, 1843, Pg. 71 Suit for Freedom: In motion of plaintiffs attorney, it is ordered that a dedimus issue to

the State of Illinois to take depositions to be read on part of said plaintiffs.o Mary (a girl of color) v. The Jailer of St. Louis County, Friday August 25, 1843, Pg. 139

Petition for Habeas Corpus: Now at this day comes the plaintiff by her attorney and files her petition and on her motion a writ of habeas corpus is awarded her agreeably to the prayer thereof, actionable immediately, whereupon said plaintiff was brought into court in custody of defendant in obedience to said writ, and this case was heard and the court being fully advised of an concerning the premises it is ordered that said defendant release and discharge the said plaintiff from his custody.

o James Talbot v. Delford Benton, James C. Musick and Prudence Musick, Tuesday September 12, 1843, Pg. 165 Suit for Freedom: Now at this day come the defendants by their attorney and the

plaintiff allthough demanded comes not nor has he prosecuted his suit with effect. It is therefore considered by the court that said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit but that said defendants go thereof without day and recover of said plaintiff their costs and

102

charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.o Alsey (a woman of color) v. William S. Randolph: Trespass:

Wednesday Sept, 13, 1843, Pg. 170 Now at this day come the parties by their attornies and thereupon come a jury to wit:

J.S. Dougherty, J.B. Washburn, Thomas E. Hucketip?, Samual Block, F. Bollinch, J. Scott, B.S. Hollingsworth, James C. Lynch, Robert Rankin, Joel Crittenden, Peter Thomas, Joseph Lowell, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid say that the defendant is guilty of the trespass and false imprisonment in manner and form as the said plaintiff has alleged against him. It is therefore considered by the court that said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit, and that said plaintiff recover of said defendant her costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Alsey (a woman of color) v. William S. Randolph, Thursday Sept. 14, 1843, Pg. 173 Trespass: The defendant by his attorney this day filed a motion for a new trial herein.

o Alsey (a woman of color) v. William S. Randolph: Trespass, Saturday Sept. 16, 1843, Pg. 177 Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and thereupon the motion of the

defendant for a new trial herein is submitted to the court which being heard and the court being sufficiently advised of and concerning the same it is ordered that the said motion be overruled.

o Diana Cephas v. Murray McConnell, Monday Sept. 18, 1843, Pg. 179 Trespass: Now at this day come the parties by their attornies and thereupon come a jury

to wit: T. Angelback, Edward Atkinson, John H. Adams, Charles Amos, Jacob Arnold, Benjamin Lackland, James W. Lick, James Eddy, John Rice, Austin Piggott, W. H. Henshaw and Henry Lewis, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid say that they find the defendant guilty of the trespass and false imprisonment in manner and form as the said plaintiff has alleged against him. It is therefore considered by the court that said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit, and that said plaintiff recover of said defendant her costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution. Motion for a new trial filed herein.

o Alsey (a woman of color) v. William S. Randolph: Nov. 1, 1843, Pg. 241- Bill of exceptions filed.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, Nov. 20, 1843, Pg. 242- Plea filed

**END of Roll C 25801, START of Roll C 25802, Record 14 cont.**

o Preston, a man of color, v. George M. Coons, 5-24-43, p. 247 Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys are

thereupon the motion of the said defendant to dismiss this suit is by them submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion be overruled.

103

o Nat a man of color v. George M. Coons 5-24-43, p. 247 Trespass- Now at this day the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and

thereupon the motion of the said defendant to dismiss this suit, is by them submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion be overruled.

o Madison a person of color v. George M. Coons 5-24-43, p. 247 Suit for freedom- Now at this day comes the parties aforesaid by their respective

attorneys and thereupon the motion of the said defendant to dismiss this sit is submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion be overruled.

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson, 15 January 1844, page 330- Trespass - Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by her attorney, and says she will not

further prosecute her suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed at her costs; It is therefore considered by the Court that said Defendant go thereof without day and recover of said Plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf expended, and have thereof execution;

o Squire Brown v. William C. Anderson 17 January 1844, page 338 Suit for Freedom- Now at this day comes the plaintiff by his attorney and says he will

not further prosecute his suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed; It is therefore considered by the Court that said Defendant, William C. Anderson got thereof without day.

o Squire Brown v. Charles R. Anderson 17 January 1844, page 338 Suit for Freedom- Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and by consent the

plaintiff files a petition herein verified according to law, praying to be allowed to sue as a poor person, and also a declaration which petition being seen , heard, and by the Court here fully understood, it is ordered that said Plaintiff be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish his right to freedom and that Benjamin B. Dayton Esquire be assigned him as counsel, and it is further ordered that said Plaintiff have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the Court as occasion may require and that he be not subjected to any severity on account of his application for freedom and further that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction of this Court. The Defendant this day files a plea herein.

o Louis Scott v. William Burd, 18 January 1844, page 339 - Trespass - Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and thereupon come also a

Jury, to wit James Burn; John Burke; Lafrenier J. Chauvin; Andrew C. Clopper; Dennis Courteis; Wiliam Tighe; Dennis Galvino; Albert G. Jamison; William Carroll; Michael Powers; James Kahoe and William C. Hull, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tried and sworn, well and truly to by the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid upon their oaths aforeasid say they cannot agree upon a verdict, whereupon by consent of parites they are discharged;

o In the matter of Squire Brown, a person of colour (Squire Brown v. Charles R. Anderson) 26 January 1844, page 357 It having been heretofore proven to the satisfaction of the Honorable Bryan Mullanphy,

Judge of this Court sitting at chambers, that said Squire Brown, a person of colour, a

104

petitioner for freedom, has instituted suit in this Court against one Charles R. Anderson to recover the same was being forcibly removed out of this jurisdiction of this Court, a warrant was issued commanding to the Sheriff of St. Louis County to have said Squire Brown before said Judge at the Jail of the County aforesaid on the twentieth day of January Eighteen hundred and forty four, and to summon any person claiming said negro, or in whose possession he might be found, to appear at said time and place; whereupon said Sheriff made return that he had executed said writ by having said negro at said Jail and summoning one Israel Morris in whose possession said negro was found and who claimed to be the owner of said negro, to appear at the time and place aforesaid, when and where said Israel Morris, although demanded, came not; wherefore it is considered by the Court the said Israel Morris and said Charles R. Anderson pay the costs and charges in this behalf expended and that execution issue therefor.

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson, 7 February 1844, page 366 The Plaintiff files an affidavit in support of her motion to reinstate this cause on the

Docket; o Lucy Ann Britton v. David D. Mitchell, 7 Feb. 1844, page 366- Plea filed.o Lucy Ann Britton v. David D. Mitchell, 8 February 1844, page 368

Trespass - Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and thereuopn come also a Jury, to wit: Simpson Harris, John Hyatt, Isaac Lockwood, Henry F. McClosky, Henry Phillips, Abram Allen, Joseph H. Conin, M. Kline, Elikie H. Shepherd, Charles Collins, John Lux and Ringrose D. Watson, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sorn, the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try, upon their oaths aforesaid say that the said plaintiff before and at the time of the committing of the said several grievances in her declaration mentioned, was not, nor is she now a slave in manner and form as the said Defendant hath in his said plea alleged; It is therefore considered by the Court that said Plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the Defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit. That said Defendant pay the costs of this suit, and that execution issue therefore. The Defendant files a motion for a new trial.

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson, 9 February 1844, page 370 Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys, and therupon the motion of said

Plaintiff to set aside the judgment of nonsuit heretofore rendered in this cause, is submitted to the Court, which being seen, heard and by the Court fully understood, it is ordered that said motion be sustained and said cause reinstated;

o Pierre, a person of colour v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, 13 February 1844, page 380-81 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and thereupon come also a

Jury, to wit: Joseph Neil, Samuel S. McCullough, R. H. Stone, William Kiddie, E.M. Martin, Hiram Morgan, Elihu H. Shepard, George Morton, Peter connelly, Robert Rankin, James H. Eddy, and James Jennings, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid say, that the said Defendant is guilty of the said several trespasses in the Plaintiff's declaration mentioned in manner and form as said Plaintiff hath above thereof in his said declaration alleged; It is therefore considered by the Court that said Plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said Defendant and from all persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the

105

commencement of this suit; that said Defendant pay the costs and charges in this behalf expended and that execution issue therefore;

o Pierre a person of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, 15 February 1844, page 384 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and thereupon the motion

of said Defendant for a new trial of this cause is submitted to the Court which being seen heard and by the Court here fully understood, it is ordered that the same be overruled; whereupon said Defendant files an affidavit and a Bill of Exceptions, and on his motion an appeal is granted him from the judgment herein to the Supreme Court, whereupon said Defendant as principal and Louis V. Bogy and Peter Ferguson as Securities, acknowledge themselves indebted unto said Plaintiff in the sum of Eight hundred dollars to be levied of their respetive goods and chattels, lands and tenements, to be void upon condition that said Defendant shall prosecute his appeal, now taken, with due diligence to a decision in the Supreme Court and that if the judgment appealed from is affirmed or his appeal dismissed that he will pay whatever of debt damages and costs have been recovered against him by the judgment of the Circuit Court, together with the interest that shall grow due thereon, or that he will otherwise perform the judgment of the Circuit Court and that he will pay the costs and damages that may be adjudged against him in the Supreme Court upon his appeal, otherwise this recognizance to be and remain in full force and virtue;

o In the matter of Squire Brown, a person of colour, 23 February 1844, page 398 Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys, and thereupon the motion of

William Charles R. Anderson to set aside the judgment for costs against him herein is submitted to the Court, which being seen, heard and by the Court fully understood, it is ordered that said motion be overruled.

o Celeste, a woman of color v. Alexander Papin, 29 February 1844, page 406 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys, and thereupon come also a

Jury, to wit: Gregory Byrne, Joel Cruttenden, Peter Long, Auguste Lefrerre, William P. Harrison, William Meyers, Oliver A. Hart, FRancis McGrath, J. Lowry, Charles Sanguinet, Jeremiah Sullivan and Charles F. Jacoby, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried and sworn, the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try, upon their oaths aforesaid, say, that the said Defendant is not guilty of the several grievances above laid to his charge, in manner and form as the said Plaintiff hath above thereof iin her declaration alleged; It is therefore considered by the Court that said Defendant go thereof without day and recover of said Plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;

o In the matter of Squire Brown, a person of colour, Feb. 29, 1844, page 407 Charles R. Anderson by his attorney this day files a motion to set aside the

judgment overruling the motion of said Andersen to set aside the judgment for costs herein against him.

o Lucy Ann Britton, a woman of colour by her next friend Polly Wash vs. David D. Mitchell, 1 March 1844, page 411 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and therupon the motion of

the Defendant for a new trial of this cause is submitted to the Court, which being seen, heard and by the Court here fully understood, it is ordered that the same be overruled;

o In the Matter of Squire Brown, a person of colour, 15 March 1844, page 422 Now at this day come the parties by their respective attorneys and thereupon the motion

106

of Charles R. Anderson for a rehearing of his motion to set aside and vacate the judgments herein as to him, is submitted to the Court which being seen, heard and by the Court here fully understood, it is ordered that said rehearing be granted, whereupon said motion to vacate and set aside said judgment as to the said Charles R. Anderson, is submitted to the Court, which being seen, heard and by the Court fully understood, it is ordered that the same be overruled said Charles R. Anderson this day files a Bill of Exceptions herein;

o Adrean (Adrian) Paschall v. Richard W. Ulrici, 19 March 1844, page 435-36 Trespass - Now at this day comes the said Adrean Paschal by this attorney and files his

petition herein, which being seen heard and by the Court fully understood, it is ordered that said petitioner have leave to sue as a poor person in order to establish his right to freedom: and it appearing to the Court that said petitioner is about to be removed out of the jurisdiction of this Court, it is ordered that the Sheriff of St. Louis County take possession of said Adrean Paschall, and hire him out to the best advantage, from time to time, during the pendency of this suit , and take a Bond from the hirer, payable to the State of Missouri, in the penalty of 650 dollars and with such Security as shall be approved by the Sheriff, conditioned that the petitioner shall, dureing the pendency of this suit, have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the Court, that he shall not be removed out of the jurisdiction of this Court, that he shal not be subjected to any severity on account of his a pplication for freedom and that the hirer will pay the hire to the Sheriff, and return the petitioner at the expiration of the term for which he is hired, or as soon as this action is determined;

o In the matter of Squire Brown, a person of colour, 21 March 1844, page 439 Now at this day comes Charles R. Anderson, against whom in connection with one Israel

Morris, a judgment was rendered for the costas herein, and on his motion an appeal is granted him from said judgment to the Supreme Court; whereupon said Charles R. Anderson as principal and John Low as Security, acknowledge themselves held and firmly bound into said Squire Brown in the sum of one hundred dollars to be levied of their respective goods and chattels, lands and tenements, to be void upon condition that the said appellant shall prosecute his appeal, now taken, with due diligence to a decision in the Supreme Court and that if the judgment appealed from is affirmed or his appeal dismissed, he will pay whatever costs have been recovered against him, by the judgment of the Circuit Court or that he will otherwise perform the judgment of the Circuit Court, and that he will also pay costs that may be adjudged against him in the Supreme Court upon his appeal, otherwise to remain in full force and virtue;

o Rebecca (a negro woman) v. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H. C. Melody, 25 March 1844, page 444 – Continued.

o Thomas Jefferson v. Milton W. Hopkins, 25 March 1844, page 444 Continued at the Defendant's costs, on account of the absence of John Hildreth and __

Drexler;o Thomas Jefferson v. Milton W. Hopkins, 26 March 1844, page 453

Trespass - The Defendant this day files an admission in this cause which is in the words and firgures following, to wit: "Milton W. Hopkins, the Defendant in this case admits that at the time of the institution of this suit he held the said Thomas Jefferson, a man of color, in his service as a slave, having hired him of Doctor Prosser of Jacksonville, Illinois. Milton W. Hopkins." On which is endorsed the following agreement, to wit: "I agree that

107

the above facts are true and that this may be read in evidence. M. Leslie, Attorney for Prosser" which is also filed;

End of Record 14, C25802, Begin Record 15

o Samuel (a man of color) vs. John Howdeshell 16 April 1844, page 3 - Plea filed;

o Martha Ann (a person of color) vs. Hiram Cordell, 18 April 1844, page 4 Petition to sue as a poor person Now at this day comes the said Martha Ann and files her petition herein for leave to sue

as a poor person for her freedom, whereupon it is ordered by the Court that the prayer of said petition be granted; that the said Martha Ann have leave to sue as a poor person; that Roswell M. Field, Esquire, be assigned her as counsel; that she have reasonable liberty to attend her counsel and the Court as occasion may require from time to time; that she be not removed without the jurisdiction of this Court, and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of his said application;

o James (a person of color) v. Hiram Cordell, 18 April 1844, page 5 Petition to sue as a poor person- Now at this day comes the said James and files his

petition for leave to sue as a poor person for his freedom, whereupon it is ordered by the Court that the prayer of said petition be granted; that the said James have leave to sue as a poor person; that Roswell M. Field, Esquire, be assigned him as counsel; that he have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the Court from time to time, as occasion may require; that he be not removed without the jurisdiction of this court, and that he be not subjected to any severity on account of his said application;

o Louis Chouteau v. Gabriel Chouteau 29 April 1844, page 18 - Plea filed;o Adrean Paschall v. Richard W. Ulrici, 29 April 1844, page 18 - Plea filed;o Celestine (of color) v. Julia Dumont, 3 May 1844, page 21 -

Now at this day comes the said Celestine and files her petition herein and it appearing to the Court that said petition containes sufficient matter to authorize the commencement of a suit, it is therefore ordered, that said petitioner have leave to sue as a poor person to establish her right to freedom, and the court assign as her counsel, F. B. Murdoch, Esquire, and it is further ordered, that said petitioner have reasonable liberty to attend her counsel and the Court as occasion may require; that she be not removed without the jurisdiction of this Court, and that she be not subject to any severity on account of her application for freedom;

o Hannah v. John Pitcher, 7 May 1844 – p.25 Now at this day comes the said Hannah, and files her petition, and it appearing to the

Court that said petition contains sufficient matter to authorize the commencement of a suit, it is therefore ordered that said petitioner have leave to sue for her freedom as a poor person, and the Court assigns F. B. Murdoch, as her counsel; andit is further ordered that said Hannah have reasonable liberty to attend her counsel and teh Court, as occasion may require, during the pendency of this suit; that she be not removed without the jurisdiction of this Court, and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom;

o Samuel (a man of color) vs. John Howdeshell, 9 May 1844, p.30 - Plea filed (again?);o Louis Scott v. William Burd, 24 May 1844 – p.75

108

Trespass - Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and therupon come also a Jury, to wit: George Brewster, Joseph L. Papin, James Willoughby, Charles F. White, Lewis Patterson, John J. Palmer, B. Noecker, B. Dikeman, Frderick Cline, Patrick Lawler, Lewis McMurray and William Harris, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried and sworn, the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid, well and truly to try, upon their oaths aforesaid do say, that the said Defendant is not guilty of the trespass and false imprisonment above laid to his charge in manner and form as in said declaration is mentioned; It is therefore considered by the Court that said Plaintiff take nothing by his said action, but that said Defendant go thereof without day;

o Lucy Ann Britton v. David D. Mitchell, 24 May 1844 – p.76- The Defendant this day files a motion to retax costs filed;

o Thomas Jefferson v. Milton W. Hopkins, 27 May 1844, page 77 Trespass - The Judge of this Court having heretofore acted as counsel in this cause, it is

ordered that the venue thereof be changed to the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, and that the Clerk of this Court make out a full true and complete transcript of the record and proceedings in this cause and transmit the same duly certified, together with all original papers filed in the cause and not forming part of the record thereof, to the Clerk of said Court of Common Pleas;

o Louis Scott v. William Burd, 27 May 1844, page 79 - The Plaintiff this day files a motion for a new trial of this cause;

o Rebecca (a negro woman) vs. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H.C. Melody, May 27, 1844, page 80 Trespass - The Judge of this Court having heretofore acted as counsel in this cause, it is

ordered that the venue thereof be changed to the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, and that the Clerk of this Court make out a full, true and complete transcript of the record and proceedings herein and transmit the same, duly certified, together with all the original papers filed in the cause and not forming part of the record thereof, to the Clerk of said Court of Common Pleas. (FINAL)

o Hannah (of color) by her next friend Charles Edmon vs. John Pitcher, 27 May 1844, page 80-81 Now at this day comes the Plaintiff by her attorney and says that she will not futher

prosecute her suit in this behalf, but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed at ther costs; It is therefore considered by the Court that Plaintiff take nothing by her said suit, but that said Defendant go thereof without day;

o Jesse (a man of color) vs. George W. Coons, 28 May 1844, page 82 - Now at this day comes the petitioner and files a petition praying to be allowed to sue as a

poor person, ant it appearing to the Court that said petition contains sufficient matter to authorize the commencement of a suit, it is ordered that said petitioner have leave to sue for his freedom as a poor person and the Court assign Messrs. Risque and Townsend, as his counsel; and it is further ordered that said Jesse have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the Court, as occasion may require, during the pendency of this suit; that he be not removed without the jurisdiction of this Court and that he be not subjected to any severity on account of his application for freedom;

o Hannah, a person of color v. John Pitcher, 3 June 1844, page 92 - Now at this day comes the said Hannah, and files her petition herein, and it appearing to

109

the Court that said Petition contains sufficient matter to authorize the commencement of a suit, it is ordered that said Hannah have leave to sue as a poor person, and the Court assigns F. B. Murdoch, Esquire, as her counsel; and it is further ordered that said Petitioner have reasonable liberty to attend her counsel and the Court, as occasion may require, during the pendency of this suit; that she be not removed without the jurisdiction of this Court, and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom;

o Hannah, a person of color v. John Pitcher, 4 June 1844, page 95-96 Trespass - The Defendant as principal, and Henry Pitcher as surety, this day come into

Court here, and acknowledge themselves held and firmly bound unto the State of Missouri in the sum of 500 dollars, to be levied of their respective goods and chattels, lands and tenements, be void upon condition that the Petitioner, Hannah, shall, during the pendency of this suit, have reasonable liability to attend her counsel and the Court; that she shall not be subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom, and that she shall not be removed without the jurisdiction of this Court; otherwise this recognizance to be and remain in full force and virtue.

o Louis Scott v. William Burd, 14 June 1844, page 125 And now at this day come the parties by ther attorneys and the Court now here being

sufficiently advised concerning the motion herein for a new trial , doth order that said motion be overruled;

o Lucy Ann Britton v. David D. Mitchell, 14 June 1844, page 126 On the motion of said Defendant by his attorney, it is ordered by the Court that the Bill of

Costs against said Defendant, be retaxed, which is done by striking out of said Bill the item of Jailor's fees for seventy eight Dollars;

o Squire Brown v. Charles R. Anderson, 18 June 1844, page 131 Trespass - The Judge of the Court having heretofore been of counsel in ths cause, it is

ordered that the venue thereof be changed to the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas and that the Clerk of this Court make out a full true and complete transcript of the record and proceedings herein and transmit the same duly certified together with all original papers filed in the cause and not forming part of the record thereof, to the Clerk of said Court of Common Pleas;

page 134 (same day) ■ The Judge having been engaged in the cause as counsel, it is therefore ordered that a

change of the venue of this cause be awarded to the St. Louis Court of common Pleas, there to be proceeded in according to the Statute in such case made and provided;

o Ann (a woman of color) v. John M. Jameson, 21 June 1844, p. 147 Now at this day the said Ann being brought before the Court upon the writ of Habeas

Corpus, and the cause of her imprisonment being heard and by the Court now here fully understood, and no legal cause appearing to the Court for the imprisonment or restraint of the said Ann, The Court doth order that she be forthwith discharged from the restraint under which she is held; and the Court doth order that the costs of these proceedings be paid by the said William Wilson;

o Rebecca, a person of color v. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H. C. Melody, 27 June 1844, p. 169 Trespass- Now at this day come the parties, by their respective attorneys, and on their

motion it is ordered that the order heretofore made in the cause, changing the venue

110

thereof to the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas, be and the same hereby is rescinded, and said cause continued;

o Chloe Ann Smith v. Franklin Knox, 9 September 1844, p. 220 Now at this day comes the said Chloe Ann Smith, and files her petition which being seen

heard and fully understood and it appearing to the Court that said Petitioner is about to be removed out of the jurisdiction of this Court, by said Franklin Knox, it is ordered that a warrant issue, according to the statute in such case made and provided returnable on tomorrow, the tenth day of September Eighteen hundred and forty four;

o Chloe Ann Smith a person of color v. Franklin Knox, 11 September 1844, p. 225-26 Now at this day, come the parties by their attorneys and therefrom the premises are

submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood and it appearing to the Court that said defendant in unwilling to give the Bond required by the Statue, it is ordered that the Sheriff take charge of the petitioner, and hire her out according to Law. And it appearing to the Court that the Petition of said Chloe Ann Smith contains sufficient matter to authorize the commencement of a suit for her freedom ,it is ordered that she be allowed to sue as a poor person, and the Court assigns as her Counsel, Francis B. Murdoch Esquire and further that said petitioner be not removed without the jurisdiction of this Court, the she have reasonable liberty of attending her counsel, and the Court as occasion may require during the pendency of this suit, and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom.

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson, 23 September 1844, p.245 - Continued; o Amy Moore v. Robert N. Moore, 24 September 1844, p. 248

Now at this day comes the said Amy Moore, by her attorney and files a petition, which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said petitioner have leave to sue as a poor person and the Court assign as her counsel E. B. Smith, Esquire, and it is further ordered that said petitioner have reasonable liberty to attend her counsel, and the Court, as occasion may require, during the pendency of said suit; that she be not removed without the jurisdiction of the State, and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom;

o Jinny Brown, a person of color (Jane) v. Francis Sturges, 30 September 1844, p. 257 Now at this day comes the said Jinny Brown and files her Petition, which being seen

heard and fully understood, and it appearing to the Court taht the Petition of said Jinny Brown, contains sufficient m atter to authorize the commencement of a suit for her freedom, it is ordered that she be allowed to sue as a poor person, and the Court assigns as her Counsel Elias B. Smith, Esquire, and farther that said Petitioner be not removed without the jurisdiction of this Court that she have reasonable liberty of attending her Counsel and the Court as occasion may require during the pendency of this suit, and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom;

o Mary Ann Speaks v. John M. Jameson, Jailor of St. Louis County, 30 September 1844, p. 258 - Petition for Habeas Corpus filed;

o Rebecca (a negro woman) v. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H. C. Melody, 2 October 1844, p. 262 Now at this day come the defendants by their attorney and the plaintiff although

demanded comes not nor hath she prosecuted her suit in this behalf, wherefore said defendants ought to recover against her. It is therefore considered by the Court, that said plaintiff take nothing by her suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day and

111

recover of said plaintiff their costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, 2 October 1844, p. 263 - Continued;o Rebecca (a negro woman) vs. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H.C. Melody,

10-3-44, p. 268 On motion of the plaintiff by her Attorney it is ordered that the judgment of nonsuit

heretofore rendered in this cause be set aside, and the cause is continued.o Louis Scott v. William Burd, 15 October 1844, p. 281

The Plaintiff by his attorneys this day files a Bill of Exceptions in this cause; o Louis Scott v. William Burd, 16 October 1844, p. 283

The defendant by his attorney moves the Court to strike out the bill of exceptions filed on behalf of the plaintiff on the 15th day of October instant in this cause, which motion is overruled, and thereupon the defendant files his bill of exceptions herein;

o Chloe Ann Smith v. Franklin Knox, 18 November 1844, p. 290 - Plea filed; o Jim Brown by his next friend Jenny Brown v. William Head, 18 November 1844, p. 290 -

Plea filed; o Mary Brown by her next friend James Brown v. William Head, 18 November 1844, p.

290 - Plea filed;o Stephen Brown by his next friend Jenny Brown v. William Head, 18 November 1844, p.

290 - Plea filed;o Preston a man of color v. George W. Coons, 18 November 1844, p. 292- Plea filed; o Madison, a person of color vs. George W. Coons, 18 Nov 1844, p. 292- Plea filed;o Nat, a person of color v. George W. Coons, 18 November 1844, p. 292 - Plea filed; o Lucy Ann Britton by her next friend Polly Wash v. David D. Mitchell, 18 November

1844, p. 293 - Plea filed; o Martha Drusella v. Richmond J. Curle, 19 Nov 1844, p. 296 - Plea filed;o Mary, a negro woman v. James Clemens, 19 Nov 1844, p. 297 - Plea filed; o Jinny Brown (Jane) v. F. (Francis) Steigers

19 Nov 1844, p. 297 - Plea filed; o Amy Moore v. Robert N. Moore

19 Nov 1844, p. 299 - Plea filed;o Martha Ann of color v. Hiram Cordell, 20 November 1844, p. 305 - Plea filed; o Hannah (a person of color) (1) v. John Pitcher, 22 November 1844, p. 311 - Plea filed; o Celestine of color v. Julia Dumont, 22 November 1844, p. 312 - Plea filed; o Ann of color v. William Wilson and John M. Jameson, 22 November 1844, p. 318 -

Trespass - Now at this day comes the plaintiff by her attorney and says she will not further prosecute her suit in this behalf, but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Cout that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day;

o James, a person of color v. Hiram Cordell, 25 November 1844, p. 325 Petition for Freedom - Now at this day comes the plaintiff by his attorney, and the

defendant although demanded coes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid, wherefore said plaintiff ought to recover against him. It is therefore considered by the Court, that said plaintiff be liberated and set free from servitude and slavvery to all and every person claiming by through or under him, and that execution

112

issue for the costs in this behalf expended;o Mary (a negro woman) v. James Clemens Jr., 11-26-44, p. 330

Trespass and False Imprisonment Now at this day comes the plaintiff by her Attorney, and says she will not further

prosecute her suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day.

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson , 27 November 1844, p. 338 – Trespass Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and thereupon

comes also a Jury to wit: Martin Power, James Gresham, Oliver A Hart. J. P. Hellenstein, Henry H. Holland, John Cavender, Henry D. Hart, John B. Higdon, Henry L. Wells, A. H. Evans, John Hart, and Lawrence Hoyle twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid do dind as to the issue firstly joined between said parties, that the defendant is not guilty of the said supposed trespass above laid to this charge, or any or either of them, or any part thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath complained against him, and as to the issue secondly joined between said parties they do find that at the time of the institution of said suit the said plaintiff was and still is a slave in manner and form as the said defendant has in his second plea alleged, and as to the issue thirdly joined between said parties they do find that at the time of the institution of said suit the said plaintiff was and still is a slave, the property of one Amos L. Corson in manner an and form as the said plaintiff hath complained against him, and as to the issue secondly joined between said parties they do find that at the time of the institution of said suit the said plaintiff was and still is a slave in manner and form as the said defendant has in his second plea alleged, and as to the issue thirdly joined between said parties they do find that at the time of the institution of said suit the said plaintiff was and still is a slave, the property of one Amos L. Corson in manner and form as the said defendant has in his third plea alleged. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day;

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson and Amos L. Corson, 2 December 1844, p. 354 Now at this day comes the said Mary Robinson and files her petition, which being seen

heard and fully understood and it appearing to the Court that the petition of said Mary Robinson contains sufficient matter to authorize the commencement of a suit for her freedom, it is ordered that she be allowed to sue as a poor person, and the Court assign as her Counsel Smith and Langhu (?) Esquires, and farther that the said petitioner be not removed without the jurisdiction of this Court that she have reasonable liberty of attending her Counsel and the Court, as occasion may require during the pendency of this suit and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom;

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson and Amos L. Carson, 4 December 1844, p. 361 Now at this day come the parties by their attorneys and it appearing to the Court, that the

said defendants are unwilling to give the bond required by statute. It is ordered that the Sheriff of St. Louis County take possession of said petitioner and hire her out to the best advantage according to Law;

o Rebecca a negro woman v. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H. C. Melody, 16

113

December 1844, p. 389 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon comes also a Jury to wit: C. F. Hoyt, John M. Cartner, Hudson E. Bridge, Edward Humphreys, Joseph Sappington, John Shaw, Charles Collns, Joseph Schoultz, James Adams, William Ernest, Charles F. Holzle, John Maguire twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid do find that the defendants are guilty of the trespasses laid to their charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against them. It is therefore considered by the Court that said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendants and from all persons claiming by through or under them, by title derived since the commencement of this suit and that said plaintiff recover of said defendants her costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;

Motion and reasons for new trial filed; o Rebecca v. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H. C. Melody, 21 December 1844,

p. 408 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon the motion of the defendants to set aside the verdict rendered by the Jury in this cause and for a new trial is submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that the said motion be sustained;

o Samuel a negro v. John Howdeshell, 23 December 1844, p. 410 On motion of the defendant by his attorney it is ordered that a Dedimus issue in the cause

to the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses, on behalf of said defendant;o Andrian Paschall v. Richard M. Ulrici, 1-18-45, p. 462

Suit for Freedom- Now at this day comes the plaintiff by his attorney and says that he will not further prosecute his suit in this behalf, but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day.

End of Record 15, Begin Record 16

o James, a person of color v. Hiram Cordell 24 January 1845, p. 9 Trespass - The defendant by his attorney this day files a motion to set aside the

judgment by default rendered herein and an affidavit in support of said motion; o Rebecca v. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H. C. Melody

27 January 1845, p. 11 - Bill of Exceptions filed;o Samuel v. John Howdeshell, 11 February 1845, p. 22

The plaintiff by his attorney this day files exceptions to the depositions of the defendant taken herein;

o Samuel v. John Howdeshell, 12 February 1845, p. 23 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon comes also a Jury to wit: Wiliam H. Stocker, Francis Sweeny, C. H. Weissenfells, J. W. Clark, William Moore, J. Clark, John H. Ferguson, Stephen Smith, Thomas G. Settle, Thomas Hart, George R. H. Clark and H. H. Strohbeck, twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within

114

joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid do find that the defendant is not guilty of the several trespasses in said plaintiffs declaration mentioned or any or either of them in manner and form, as the same are above thereof complained against him. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day;

oSamuel v. John Howdeshell, 14 February 1845, p. 32 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys

and thereupon the motion of the plaintiff to set aside the verdict rendered in this cause and for a new trial is submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood, it is ordered that the said motion be overruled;

o Samuel v. John Howdeshell, 17 February 1845, p. 34 The plaintiff by his attorney this day files his affidavit for appeal herein;

o Louis Chouteau v. Gabriel Chouteau, 18 February 1845, p. 35 Suit for Freedom - Now at this day comes the defendant by his attorney, and the

plaintiff although demanded comes not but makes default, nor doth he prosecute his suit in this behalf with effect, wherefore said defendant ought to recover against him. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day; (final?)

o Samuel a man of color v. John Howdeshell, Feb. 19, 1845, p.39 The plaintiff by his attorney this day files a motion for an appeal herein.

o Samuel v. John Howdeshell, 26 February 1845, p. 59 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and

thereupon the motion of the plaintiff for an appeal herein is by them submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion be and the same is hereby overruled and on motion of the said defendant by his attorney it is ordered that the Sheriff of St. Louis County delver over to him the said slave Samuel;

o James a person of color v. Hiram Cordell, 1 March 1845, p. 65 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon the motion of the defendant to set aside the judgment by default heretofore rendered in the cause is by them submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood is ordered by the Court that said motion be and the same is hereby overruled;

o Martha of color (Drusella) v. Richmond L. Curle, 7 March 1845, p. 79 The defendant by his attorney this day files a motion to dismiss this suit for

reasons filed;o Andrian Paschall (Adrian) v. Richard W. Ulrici, 17 March 1845, p. 106

On motion of the defendant by his attorney it is ordered that the Sheriff of St. Louis County delver the slave Andrian Paschall plaintiff in this suit to the defendant who is the legal owner of said plaintiff;

o Martha Ann a peron of color v. Hiram Cordell, 18 March 1845, p. 109 On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered that a Dedimus issue to the

State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the trial of said cause on behalf of said plaintiff;

o Martha Drusella v. Richmond L. Curle, 24 March 1845, p. 128

115

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid y their respective attorneys and thereupon the motion of the defendant to dismiss the said suit is by then submitted to the Court which being send heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion be overruled;

o Samuel v. John Howdeshell 25 March 1845, p. 132- Bill of Exceptions filed;

o Jesse, a man of color v. George W. Coons, 26 March 1845, p. 136-7 Trespass - Now at this day comes the plaintiff by his attorney and the defendant

although demanded comes not but makes default nor hath he pleaded to the action aforesaid of him the said plaintiff wherefore said plaintiff ought to recover against him. It is therefore considered by the Court that said plaintiff be liberated and set free from servitude and slavery to all and every person claiming by through or under said defendant by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that execution issue against said defendant for the costs and charges in this behalf expended;

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson, 28 April 1845, p. 165 - Plea by defendant Watson filed.

o Thomas Jefferson v. George A. Colton (and Jonathan B. Moulton), 29 April 1845, p. 175 Now at this day come the plaintiff by his attorney and files his petition herein, and it

appearing to the Court that said petition contains sufficient matter to authorize the commencement of a suit the Court doth order that said Thomas Jefferson be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish his right to freedom, and doth assign Andrew H. H. Davison as his counsel. That said plaintiff have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the Court as occasion may require that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction of the Court and that he be not subject to any severity on account of his application for freedom, and the said plaintiff by his attorney stating that he has good reason to suspect and believe that the defendants will unless prosecuted send said plaintiff away in order to prevent the successful prosecution of his suit it is ordered that a warrant issue to the Sheriff of St. Louis County commanding him to bring the said plaintiff to Court and summon the said defendants also to appear in the thirtieth day of April instant to abide the order of the Court in the premises;

o Thomas Jefferson v. George A. Colton (and Jonathan B. Moulton), 30 April 1845, p. 179 Suit for freedom - Now at this day come the defendants and the Sheriff returns into

Court the body of the said petitioner and thereupon George A. Colton as principal and Richmond J. Curle as security acknowledge themselves to be indebted unto the State of Missouri to be levied in the amount of four hundred dollars of their respective goods and chattels lands and tenements yet upon condition that the petitioner during the pendency of this suit have reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the Court that he shall not be removed out of the jurisdiction of the Court, and that he be not subjected to any severity on account of his application for freedom then this recognizance to be void otherwise to be and remain in full force and virtue;

o Amy Moore v. Robert N. Moore, 2 May 1845, p. 186 On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered that a Dedimus issue to the

State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in the trial of said

116

cause on behalf of said plaintiff; o Martha Drusella v. Richmond L. Curle, 5 May 1845, p. 190

On motion of the defendant by his attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the Law Commissioner of St. Louis County to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in the trial of said cause on behalf of said defendant;

o Martha Drusella v. Richmond L. Curle, 8 May 1845, p. 200 The defendant by his attorney this day files exceptions to the depositions taken on

behalf of the plaintiff herein; o Madison, a person of color v. George W. Coons, 9 May 1845, p. 202

The defendant by his attorney this day files a motion to dismiss this action, and reasons in support of said motion;

o Preston, a person of color vs. George W. Coons, 9 May 1845, p. 202 The defendant by his attorney this day files a motion to dismiss this action, and

reasons in support of said motion;o Nat, a person of color v. George W. Coons, 9 May 1845, p. 202

The defendant by his attorney this day files a motion to dismiss this action, and reasons in support of said motion;

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel J. Chouteau, 5-24-45, p. 246-47 Suit for freedom - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective

attorneys and thereupon comes also a Jury to wit: C. C. January, George Kingsland, D. L. Jamison, D. L. Musick, John McCutchem, Moses Ruggles, John Jones, John Lewis, Jacob Lash, Washington Ross, S. B. Ball, and Singer twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected trid and sworn the issues within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid do say as to the first issue within joined between said parties that the said defendant is not guilty of the said trespasses and grievances above laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath in her declaration alleged and as to the second issue within joined between said parties the Jurors aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do say that at the time when said several supposed trespasses were committed the said plaintiff was a slave in manner and form as the said defendant has in said second plea alleged. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day;

o Preston, a man of color v. George W. Coons, 24 May 1845, p. 247 Trespass & c. - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective

attorneys, and thereupon the motion of the said defendant to dismiss this suit is by them submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that the said motion be overruled;

o Nat v. George W. Coons, 24 May 1845, p. 247 Trespass & c. - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective

attorneys, and thereupon the motion of the said defendant to dismiss this suit is by them submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that the said motion be overruled;

o Madison a person of color v. George W. Coons, 24 May 1845, p. 247-8 Suit for Freedom - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective

attorneys, and thereupon the motion of the said defendant to dismiss this suit is by them submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood it is

117

ordered that the said motion be overruled; o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, 26 May 1845, p. 252

The plaintiff by her attorney this day files a motion to set aside the verdict rendered in this cause and to grant a new trial for reasons filed;

Lucy Ann Britton v. David D. Mitchell 3 June 1845, p. 271 Trespass - Now at this day comes the plaintiff by her attorney and says that she

will not further prosecute her suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed at her costs. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day and recover of said plaintiff his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof executed;

o Martha Drusella v. Richmond L. Curle, 7 June 1845, p. 281 The defendant by his attorney this day files a motion to dismiss this suit for

reasons filed; o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson

7 June 1845, p. 282 - additional plea filed by leave of Court; o Martha Drusella v. Richmond L. Curle, 16 June 1845, p. 296

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon all and singular the premises pertaining to the exceptions of the defendant to the depositions taken in behalf of the plaintiff herein is by them submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said exceptions be overruled;

(Same day) - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon the motion of the said defendant to dismiss this suit is by them submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion by overruled;

Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau 18 June 1845, p. 299 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon the motion of the plaintiff to set aside the verdict rendered herein and to grant a new trial is by them submitted to the Court which being seen heard and the Court being sufficiently advised thereof doth order that said motion be overruled;

o Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, 30 June 1845, p. 321 On motion of the plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the

City of Montreal in the province of Lower Canada to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in the trial of this cause on behalf of said plaintiff;

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, 1 July 1845, p. 324 The said plaintiff by her attorney this day files a bill of exceptions herein;

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, 7 July 1845, p. 327 The said plaintiff by her attorney this day files a motion for an appeal herein to

the Supreme Court, and an affidavit in support of said motion; o In the matter of Jesse a man of color, July 15, 1845, p. 347

On Petition for Habeas Corpus- Now at this day comes John M. Jamison jailor of the County of St. Louis and returns into Court here the body together with his return to writ issued herein of the said petitioner showing his authority for detaining the same in his custody, and therefrom the said petitioner for his attorney moves the Court to be discharged from custody under said return and thereupon all and singular the

118

premises are submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood the Court doth order that said petitioner to be released from the custody of said Jailor and recover his costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

o Thomas Jefferson v. George A. Colton (and Jonathan B. Moulton) 22 November 1845, p. 403 - The defendants by their attorney this day file a plea

herein; o Sarah a person of color v. William Waddingham 22 November 1845, p. 404

On motion of the defendant by his attorney the time for pleading herein is extended until the tenth day of December next;

o Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, 12-5-45, p. 432 Cause continued on appreciation of plaintiff as on affidavit.

o Rebecca (a negro woman) v. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H. C. Melody, 5 December 1845 p. 432

Suit for freedom - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon comes also a Jury to wit: Adam S. Kennedy, Frederick Latresse, Edward Latresse, Charles Klunk, John Kurdler, Patrick Keating, J. J. Labeau, Joseph Labarge, Lucas Leonhard, Joseph Klein, Joseph Sullivan, and William Loop twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sword the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try, upon their oaths aforesaid say that the said defendants are not guilty of the supposed trespasses above laid to their charge, or any part thereof in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained against them. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that the defendants go thereof without day;

o Sarah a person of color v. William Waddingham, 9 December 1845, p. 440 The defendant by his attorney this day files a plea herein;

Rebecca (a negro woman) v. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H. C. Melody, 9 December 1845, p. 441

The plaintiff by her attorney this day files a motion to set aside the verdict rendered by the Jury in this cause and to grant a new trial for reasons filed;

End Record 16, Begin Record 17

Rebecca (a negro woman) vs. James Black, Thomas M. Horine & George H.C. Melody, 12-24-45, p. 9

Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon the motion of the plaintiff to set aside the verdict of the Jury and to grant a new trial herein is by them submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion be overruled.

o Thomas Jefferson of color v. George A. Colton and Jonathan B. Moulton, 19 January 1846, p. 44

On motion of the defendants by their attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in the trial of this cause on behalf of said defendants;

o Martha Ann, a person of color v. Hiram Cordell, 21 January 1846, p. 47 Petition of freedom - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their

119

respective attorneys and thereupon also come a Jury to wit: John T. Ames, John G. Atkins, John Barnhurst, William Burchstedt, William H. Boswell, Taylor Blow, John Bunding, James Burrough,, D. S. Bigham, J. R. Sprigg, Selar Surrins and William Tumbly twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try and after hearing the evidence and arguments of Counsel are unable to agree upon a verdict and are thereupon discharged and the cause continued until the next term of the Court;

o Hannah a person of color v. John Pitcher, 1-21-46, p. 48 Trespass and false imprisonment - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their

respective attorneys and thereupon also come a Jury to wit: John T. Amos, John G. Atkins, John Barnhurst, William Burchstead, Taylor Blow` William E. Brush, john Burding, James Burrough, D. S. Bigham, j H. P. Blackwood, Selar Simons, and Hugh Rose twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforeadi well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid say that the said defendant is not guilty of the said supposed grievances or either of them in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath thereof above complained. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day. The plaintiff by her attorney this day files a motion for anew trial herein and reasons accompanying said motion;

o Preston, a man of color v. George W. Coons, 21 January 1846, p. 49 Trespass and false imprisonment - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their

respective attorneys and thereupon come also Jury to wit: John T. Ames, John P. Atkins, John Barnhurst, William Burchstead, Taylor Blow, William E. Brush, John Burnding, James Burrough, D. L. Bigham, J. H. P. Blackwood, Selar Simons and Hugh Rose twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly whereupon the plaintiff voluntarily submits to a nonsuit with leave to move to set the same aside. It is therefore considered by the Court that the plaintiff take nothing by his said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day;

o Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, 22 January 1846, p.52 On motion of the defendant by his attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to

Canada East to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the trial of this cause on behalf of said defendant;

o Celestine of color v. Madam Julia Dumont, 26 January 1846, p. 56 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys

and thereupon come also a Jury to wit: G. B. Allen, F. B. Chamberlin, T. J. Albright, George Baum, A. L. Allen , W. B. Atwood, Francis Chenot, William Turnbly, F.S. Beeker, James A. Bryan, George P. Roberts, and J. G. Maxwell twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and trly to try upon their oaths aforesaid say that the said defendant is not guilty of the said supposed trespasses or either of the in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath thereof above complained. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day. The plaintiff by her attorney this day files a motion and reasons for new trial herein;

120

o Preston v. George W. Coons, 26 January 1846, p.57 The plaintiff by his attorney this day files a motion to set aside the nonsuit and

grant a new trial in this cause for reasons accompanying said motion; o Chloe Ann Smith of color v. Franklin Those, 1-27-46, p. 59

Suit for Freedom- Now at this day comes the petitioner by her attorney and files her petition for a change of venue of this cause, which being submitted to the Court, and being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said application be overruled.

o Madison (a person of color) v. George W. Comb, 1-27-46, p. 59- Cause Continued.o Nat v. George W. Coons, 27 January 1846, p. 59

Suit for freedom - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon also come a Jury to wit: G. B. Allen, F. B. Chamerlin, T. J. Albright, George Baum, A. L. Allen. W.B. Atwood, Francis Chenot, William Twornbly, F.S. Becker, James A. Bryan, George P. Roberts and J. G. Maxwell twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try upon their oaths aforesaid say that the said defendant is not guilty of the said several supposed grievances or either of them in manner and form as the same are by said plaintiff in his declaration alleged. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by his said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day;

o Nat v. George W. Coons, 28 January 1846 p. 62 The plaintiff by his attorney this day files a motion to set aside the verdict of the

Jury rendered in this cause and for a new trial for reasons accompanying said motion;

o Chloe Ann Smith of color v. Franklin Kruse, 1-30-46, p. 67 Suit for freedom- Now at this day comes the defendant by his attorney and the

defendant (plaintiff??) although demanded comes not but makes default nor doth she prosecute her suit in this behalf wherefore said defendant ought to recover against her. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that defendant go thereof without day and the plaintiff by her attorney files a motion to set aside the nonsuit and certify the case to the St. Louis Court of Common Pleas for trial;

o Jim Brown by his next friend Jenny Brown v. William Head, 2-2-46, p. 72 Trespass and false imprisonment. Now at this day comes the plaintiffs by his

attorney and says that he will not further prosecute his suit on this behalf, but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the plaintiff take nothing by his said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day.

o Mary Brown by her next friend James Brown v. William Head, 2-2-46, p. 72 Trespass and false imprisonment- Now at this day comes the plaintiff by her

attorney and says that she will not further prosecute her suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the plaintiff take nothing by her said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day.

o Stephen Brown by her next friend Jenny Brown and William Head

121

2 Feb. 1846, p. 72 Trespass and false imprisonment- Now at this day comes the plaintiff by his

attorney and says that he will not further prosecute his suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the plaintiff take nothing by his said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day.

o Jenny Brown (Jane) v. F. Steigers, 2-2-46, p. 72 Trespass and false imprisonment- Now at this day comes the plaintiff by her

attorney and says that she will not further prosecute her suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day. (FINAL)

o Nat a person of color v. George W. Coons, 4 February 1846, p. 76 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon the motion of the said plaintiff to set aside the verdict rendered in this cause and to grant a new trial is by them submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion be overruled and thereupon the plaintiff files a Bill of Exceptions herein;

o Pierre v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, 5 February 1846, p.79 On motion of the plaintff by his attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to

Canada East to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the trial of t his cause on behalf of said plaintiff;

o Mary Ann Speaks v. John M. Jameson, Jailor of St. Louis County 9 February 1846, p. 84 - Agreement of facts filed;

o Martha Drusella v. Richmond L. Curle, 10 February 1846, p. 88 The defendant by his attorney this day files his affidavit and moves the Court for a

continuance of this cause until the next term thereof which motion is by the Court overruled;

o Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, 11 February 1846, p. 93 - Agreement of Counsel filed;

o Nat, a person of color v. George W. Coons, 11 February 1846, p. 93 Now at this day comes the plaintiff by his attorney and files his affidavit and

prays the Court for an appeal from the Judgment herein rendered to the Supreme Court, which is granted him accordingly;

o Martha Drusella v. Richmond L. Curle, 12 February 1846, p. 95 Trespass - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys

and thereupon comes also a jury to wit: R. B. Goodwin, Henry Glover, Wooster Goodyear, William Harris, Levi B. Clark, George Stansbury, William Glasgow, Jr., R.P. Todd, David Sheppard, J. B. Le Beau, Isaac Van Houten, and Paul Berger, twelve good and lawful men who are duly empanelled tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly and thereupon the cause is laid over until tomorrow morning;

o Martha Drusella v. Richmond L. Curle, 13 February 1846, p. 101 Trespass - Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective

attorneys and the Jurors empanelled in the cause also come and upon their oaths aforesaid say that the said defendant is guilty of the said several grievances

122

above laid to his charge in manner and form as the plaintiff hath above thereof complained against him. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all other persons claiming by through or under him by title derived since the commencement of this Court (?), and that she recover of the said defendant her costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution;

o Hannah a person of color v. John Pitcher, 2-27-46, p. 122 Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereafter the motion of the plaintiff to set aside the verdict on this cause and grant her a new trial herein is by them submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood, it is ordered that said motion be overruled.

o Celestine of Color v. Madam Julia Dumont, 2-27-46, p. 122 Now at this day came the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and

thereupon the motion of the said plaintiff to set aside the verdict rendered in this cause and to grant a new trial is by them submitted to the Court which being seen heard and fully understood it is ordered that said motion be overruled.

o Preston a man of color v. George McCoons, 2-26-46, p. 122 By consent of parties it is ordered that the motion for a new trial pending in this

cause be continued until the next term of the Court.o Mary Ann Speaks v. James S. Quisenberry and John Jameson, 3-2-46, p. 129

Suit for freedom - Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon all and singular the facts of the case being submitted to the Court on the agreement of the parties herein filed and being by the Court seen heard and fully understood the Court doth find from te evidence aforesaid that the said defendants are not guilty of the said supposed trespasses above laid to their charge in manner and for as the said plaintiff hath complained against them. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that the defendants go thereof without day;

o Mary Robertson v. Ringrose D. Watson, 2 March 1846 p. 129 Trespass and false imprisonment - Now at this day comes the parties aforesaid by

their respective attorneys and thereupon the plaintiff says that she will not further prosecute her suit against the said defendant Ringrose D.Watson but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed as to him and the Sheriff having returned the writ issued herein not executed as to the said defendant Amos L. Corson therefore it is considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by their said suit but that the defendants go thereof without day; (FINAL)

o Elsa Hicks v. James S. Burrell & James Mitchell, 5 March 1846, p. 138 Trespass There having been no service of process in this cause it is ordered that

the cause be stricken from the docket; (final)o Chloe Ann Smith v. Franklin Knox, 7 March 1846, p. 145

Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and thereupon the motion of the of the by consent of parties it is ordered that the nonsuit heretofore rendered in this cause be and the same is hereby set aside and the cause reinstated for trial;

o Rachel Steele v. Thomas Taylor, 11 March 1846, p. 156 Suit for freedom - The Sheriff having made return to the summons issued in this

123

cause that the defendant was not found within his county it is therefore ordered that this suit be and the same is hereby dismissed; (final)

o Amy Moore v. Robert N. Moore, 9 April 1846, p. 231 On motion of the plaintiff by their attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to

the State of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in trial of this cause on behalf of said plaintiff;

o Sarah of color v. William Waddingham, 9 April 1846, p. 234 On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the

state of Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read on the trial of this cause on behalf of said plaintiff;

o Hannah v. John Pitcher, 9 April 1846, p. 235 - Bill of Exceptions filed; o Malinda of color v. George M. Coons administr.- April 10, 1846- Plea filed. p.238

***End of Roll C25802; Begin Roll C25803 *** (Jake was supposed to do this roll. It was never done. –ND)

Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel S. Chouteau- April 25, 1846, p.255 – On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney an appeal is granted her from the judgment herein rendered to the Supreme Court.

Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau Apr 29, 1846, p.262- Cause Continued Madison a person of color v. George W. Coons- May 6, 1846, p.277- Cause continued by

consent Malinda of color v. Goerge W. Coons admr. May 6, 1846, p.277 Cause Continued Chloe Ann Smith of color v. Franklin Knox May 6, 1846, p.278

o Tresspass- Now at this day comes the defendant by his attorney, and the plaintiff although demanded come not but makes default not doth she prosecute her suit in this behalf with effect wherefore said defendant ought to recover against her. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit but that the defendant go thereof without day.

*Martha Ann a person of color v. Hiram Cordell May 6, 1846, p.278o Petition for freedom- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective

attorneys and therefore comes also a Jury to wit: James Fountain, John S. Graham, James Knight, William B. Emmitt, Abram C. Hull, Leny Laughn, James Sullivan, James A. Reed, J.W. Ourugs, Arthur Kavannah, David Grant, and John M. Camum twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try and after hearing the evidence and arguments of Counsel retire to deliberate of and concerning their verdict herein.

*Martha Ann a person of color v. Hiram Cordell May 7, 1846, p.280o Petition for freedom- Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective

attorneys and the jurors aforesaid say that they are unable to agree upon a verdict whereupon it is ordered by the Court that they be discharged from the further consideration of said case and the cause continued until the next term of the Court.

*Martha Ann a person of color v. Hiram Cordell May 13, 1846, p.296o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to take the

depositions of Robert Rerrick upon interrogatories propounded to the said witness, and

124

upon cross interrogatories exhibited upon by the said defendant to said witness to be read as evidence in this cause.

Sarah a woman of color v. William Waddingham- May 15, 1846, p.300o On motion of the plaintiff by her attorney it is ordered that a dedimus issue to the state of

Illinois to take the depositions of witnesses to be read in the trial of this cause on behalf of said plaintiff.

Matilda Thomas v. Willliam Littleton, May , p.352o The defendant by his attorney this day files a motion to dismiss this action, and also a

plea herein. Dred Scott v. Irene Emmerson, Nov. 19, 1846, p. 357

o The defendant by her attorney this day files a plea herein Harriett woman of color v. Irene Emmerson, Nov. 19, 1846, p. 357

o The defendant by her attorney this day files a plea herein Elsa Hicks v. S. Burrell & James Mitchell, Nov. 25, 1846, p. 375

o Trespass- The Sherriff having made return upon the summons issued in this cause that the defendants were not found in this county it is therefore ordered that this suit be dismissed at the costs of the said plaintiff and that execution issue therefor.

Matilda Thomas alias v. William Littleton Nov. 28, 1846, p.387o Trespass- Now at this day comes the plaintiff by her attorney and says that she will not

further prosecute her suit in this behalf but voluntarily suffers the same to be dismissed Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff take nothing by her said suit bu that the defendant fo thereof without day.

Thomas Jefferson v. George A. Colton & Jonathan B. Moulton, Nov. 30, 1846, p.390o Trespass- Now at this day come the defendant by their attorney and the plaintiff

although demanded comes not but makes default not doth he prosecute his suit in this behalf with effect wherefore said defendant ought to recover against him. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the plaintiff take nothing by his said suit, but that the defendant go thereof without day.

*Sarah a person of color v. William Waddingham, Dec. 15, 1846, p. 434o Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and

thereupon comes also a Jury to wit, William B. Emmett, George H. Meudin, John Malone, Jacob Rudolph, T.P. Gubberly, L. Jarvis, George Beaty, Christopher Victor, Clark Hooper, Samuel H. Speilman, George W. Bushey, and S. H. Peake twelve good and lawful men who being duly empanelled tried and sworn the issue within joined between the parties aforesaid well and truly to try the trial progressed but not being concluded, is laid over until tomorrow morning.

*Sarah a person of color v. William Waddingham, Dec. 16, 1846, p. 436o trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and the

Jurors empanelled in the cause also come and say that the said defendant is guilty of the several grievances laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff has above thereof complained against herein. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under him, by titled derived after the commencement of this suit and that she recover of the defendant her costs and charges in this behalf expended and have thereof execution.

125

*Sarah a person of color v. William Waddingham, Dec. 17, 1846, p. 438o The defendant by his attorney this day files a motion to set aside the verdict in this cause

and grant a new trial. Jimmey Jackson, a person of color v. James O. Frazer, Dec. 21, 1846, p. 441

o Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and by agreement of parties herein filed it is ordered that judgment be rendered herein in favor of the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff pay the costs herein. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under him, by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit.

Henry Jackson a person of color v. James O. Frazer, Dec. 21, 1846, p. 441o Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and by

agreement of parties herein filed it is ordered that judgment be rendered herein in favor of the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff pay the costs herein. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under him, by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit.

Ann Maria Jackson a person of color v. James O. Frazer, Dec. 21, 1846, p. 441o Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and by

agreement of parties herein filed it is ordered that judgment be rendered herein in favor of the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff pay the costs herein. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under him, by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit.

Sarah Jackson a person of color v. James O. Frazer, Dec. 21, 1846, p. 441o Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and by

agreement of parties herein filed it is ordered that judgment be rendered herein in favor of the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff pay the costs herein. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under him, by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit.

Margaret Jackson a person of color v. James O. Frazer, Dec. 21, 1846, p. 441-42o Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and by

agreement of parties herein filed it is ordered that judgment be rendered herein in favor of the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff pay the costs herein. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under him, by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit.

William Henry a person of color v. James O. Frazer, Dec. 21, 1846, p. 442o Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and by

agreement of parties herein filed it is ordered that judgment be rendered herein in favor of the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff pay the costs herein. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under him, by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit.

126

Smith a person of color v. James O. Frazer, Dec. 21, 1846, p. 442o Trespass- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and by

agreement of parties herein filed it is ordered that judgment be rendered herein in favor of the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff pay the costs herein. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under him, by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that the plaintiff pay the costs of this suit.

Gabriel a man of color v. Andrew Christy Executor & Mary Coons Executrix of David Coons Dec. 2, 1846, p.447o Gabriel a man of color comes and files his declaration in trespass, alleging therin that he

is a free person, and that the defendant hold him in slavery and thereupon come the defendant in proper person and appear to the same, and file their plea to the same declaration, and by consent of parties the cause is ordered to be tried at the present term of the Court.

Jane McGray v. William R. Hophing et al. Jan 4, 1847, p.448o Suit for freedom- Now at this day this cause is continued.

Gabriel a man of color v. Andrew Christy Executor & Mary Coons Executrix of David Coons, Jan 4, 1847, p.448o Suit for freedom- Now at this day come the parties aforesaid by their attorneys, and

neither party requiring a Jury, all and singular the premises are by thereof submitted to the Court, which being seen heard and fully understood, the Court doth find as to the issue joined between the parties, that the said defendant are guilty of the several grievances laid to their charge in manner and from as the said plaintiff has thereof complained against them. Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and all persons claiming under them by title derived after the commencement of this suit, and that he recover his costs and charges in this behalf expended & have thereof execution.

Sarah (of color) v. William Waddingham, Jan. 16, 1847, p. 476o This day come the parties by their attorneys and submit to the Court the motion herein

before made by the defendant to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial in this cause which said motion is by the Court here fully advised in the premises overruled.

Sarah (of color) v. William Waddingham, Feb. 2, 1847, p. 508o This day domes the defendant and moves the Court to grant a rehearing of the motion for

new trial herein before overruled. Sarah (of color) v. William Waddingham, Feb. 8, 1847, p. 523

o This day come the parties and the Court overrule the motion of the defendant for a rehearing of the motion of the defendant for a new trial herein and the defendant files his bill of Exceptions and also his affidavit.

Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, April 27, 1847, p.564o This day come the parties by their attorneys and come also a Jury to wit: John

Manderville, Thomas Mossander, Campbell G. Sirah, Thomas Strohe, Charles P. James, John Bowlin, Charles M. Lewis, George W. Stayderr, Calvin Farrig, Dermis Loveklemid?, Archibald Gamble, and James M. Coursebound twelve good and lawful men who were elected tried and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joined between the parties and after the hearing of testimony the further trial of the cause was

127

adjourned until tomorrow morning at ten o’clock. Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, April 28, 1847, p.566

o This day again come the parties by their attorneys and also the jurors empanelled in this cause and after further progress made in the trial of this cause, it is again adjourned until tomorrow morning at ten o’clock.

Preston a man of color v. George W. Coons, April 29, 1847, p.566- Continued. Madison a person of color v. George W. Coons, April 29, 1847, p.566- Continued. Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, April 29, 1847, p.567

o This day come again the parties by their attorneys and also the jury herein empanelled and after further progress made in the trial of this cause, it is again adjourned until tomorrow morning at ten o’clock.

Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, April 30, 1847, p.568o This day come again the parties by their attorneys, and come also the jurors herein before

empanelled and the trial of the causes being concluded and the argument fo counsel closed, the jury retire to consult of their verdict.

Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, May 4, 1847, p.575o This day come into court the Jurors herein empanelled and by their foreman? say that

they are unable to agree upon a verdict in this cause. Thereupon with the assent of the parties, the Jurors aforesaid from the further consideration of the cause are discharged. It is ordered by the Court that the Sheriff of St. Louis Count hire out the said plaintiff herein to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit, and take bond from the hirer payable to the State of Missouri in the penalty of seven hundred dollars, with such security as he approves, conditioned that the hirer will pay the hire to the Sheriff and return the plaintiff at the expiration of the term for which he is hired or as soon as this action is determined.

Martha Ann (of color) v. Hiram Cordell May 13, 1847, p.592o This day come the parties by their attorneys and come als a Jury to wit: Thomas N.

Allen, Irvering L. Bales, Alssed? Barton, Richard Chesley, William D. Bovesor?, William Barnberry?, Uriah Burress, William S. Vaughn, Andrew Vaughn John S. Burreberry?, Cornelius Dermarest? and Jesse B. Underwood twelve good and lawful men who being elected tried and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joined between the parties, and the testimony being closed, retire to consult upon a verdict, and afterwards return into Court and by their foreman say that they are unable to agree upon a verdict herein. It is thereupon with the assent of parties ordered that the Jurors aforesaid from the further consideration of this cause be discharged.

Amy Moore v. Robert N. Moore May 17, 1847, p. 595o Freedom- This cause come on to be heard upon a case agreed between the parties this

day pled herein, and was argued by counsel on consideration whereof the Court is of opinion that the law of the case is with the defendant. Thereupon it is considered? thereof the said defendant go hence thereof without day.

Jane M. Gray v. William R. Hopkins, et al. June 16, 1847, p.624o Suit for freedom- This cause being called for trial, and the plaintiff though demanded

making default and failing to prosecute the same, it is ordered that this suit stand dismissed at the costs of said plaintiff and that execution issue therefor.

128

End Record 17 (Index follows), Begin Record 18

*Dred Scot of color v. Irene Emerson June 30, 1847, p.10o Trespass- This day comes the parties by their attorneys and comes also a Jury to wit:

John Lappington, Leonidas Willson, James Longworth, Benjamin Perry, John Rudder, Thomas Rudder, William Stanton, Richard Lumilty, Isasac Williams, John McLaughlin, Hugh Miller, and Mathew M. Krusty twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joining the parties upon their oaths do find and say that the said defendant is not guilty in manner, and form as the plaintiff hath in his declaration complained against her. Therefore, it is considered that the said defendant go hence without day and recover of the said plaintiff her costs in this behalf expended.

o The plaintiff by his attorneys files a motion for a new trial herein. Dred Scot v. Irene Emerson, July 31, 1847, p.38

o Freedom Dred Scot v. Alex Landefendantord & Sam P. Russel, July 31, 1847, p.38

o Freedom- It is ordered that the plaintiff in these two suits awake his election. Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, July 31, 1847, p.38

o Freedom Harriet of color v. Alex Landefendantord & Sam P. Russel, July 31, 1847, p.38

o Freedom- It is ordered that the plaintiff in these two suits awake her election. Dred Scot v. Alex Landefendantord, et al., Nov 18, 1847 p.48- Plea filed Harriet of color v. Alex Landefendantord et al., Nov 18, 1847 p.48- Plea filed Dred Scot v. Irene Emerson Dec 2, 1847, p.74

o Our consideration of the motion of the plaintiff for a new trial herein it is ordered that the same be sustained and that the verdict and judgment herein rendered be set aside and a new trial had.

Dred Scot v. Irene Emerson Dec 4, 1847, p.76- Bill of Exceptions filed Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Dec 11, 1847, p.89

o It is appearing to the court that certain proceeding had in this cause on the thirtieth day of June Eighteen hundred and forty seven, were by mistake omitted to be entered of record on that day; it is ordered that the same be now entered as of the day in the words and figures following to wit:

o Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson June 30, 1847, p.89 Trespass- This day come the parties by their attorneys and come also a Jury to wit:

John Lappington, Leonidas Willson, James Longworth, Benjamin Perry, John Rudder, Thomas Rudder, William Stanton, Richard Lunilty, Isaac Williams, John M. Laughlin, Hugh Miller, and Mathew M. Krustry twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected tried and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joined between the parties upon their oaths do find and say that the said defendant is not guilty in manner and form as the plaintiff hath in his declaration complained against her. It is therefore considered that the said defendant go hence without day and recover of the said plaintiff her costs herein and have thereof execution.

The plaintiff by her attorneys files a motion for a new trial herein. Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, Dec 13, 1847, p.91 - Continued

129

Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Dec 13, 1847, p.91 – Continued Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Dec 13, 1847, p.92

o It appearing to the court that certain proceeding had in this cause on the second day of December Eighteen hundred and forty seven were by mistake omitted to be entered of record. It is ordered that the same be now entered as of that day in the words and figures following to wit:

o Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Dec 2, 1847 On consideration of the motion of the plaintiff for a new trial herein, it is ordered that

said motion be sustained, and that the verdict and judgments herein rendered be set aside and a new trial had.

In the matter of Elsa Hicks (a slave), Feb 12, 1848, p.170o The said Lewis Burwell being brought into court by this Sheriff of St. Louis county, files

his affidavit purging himself of the contempt herein. Our consideration whereof iit is ordered that he be discharged from the custody of the said Sheriff under the attachment herein issued on the payment of the costs of this proceeding.

Elsa Hicks v. Patrick L. McSherry, Feb 12, 1848, p.170o On motion of plaintiff by attorney it is ordered that Lewis Burwell enter into

recognizance in the state of Missouri in the sum of one thousand dollars, with sufficient surety, conditioned that he will not remove said plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of this court during the pendency of this suit.

Elsa Hicks v. Patrick L. McSherry, Feb 12, 1848, p.171o Ellen E. Mitchell, James Mirchell, and Gblair Mirchell minors who claim to be the

owners of said plaintiff by Lewis Burwell their next friend file their motion to dismiss this suit.

Elsa Hicks v. Patrick L. McSherry, Feb 17, 1848, p.176o This cause coming on to be heard on the motion of the said Ellen A. Mitchell and others

to dismiss this suit was argued by counsel on consideration whereof it is ordered and adjudged that said motion be and the same is hereby overruled.

Jane Cotton v. James N. Little, Feb. 19, 1848, p.179 o Plaintiff by attorney files a motion for an attachment against said defendant for comtempt

in disobeying the order of this court. Dred Scott v. Alexander Landefendantord, Samuel Russell & Irene Emerson, Feb 28,

148, p.187o Freedom- This day comes said plaintiff by his attorney and says that he will not further

prosecute this suit. It is therefore considered that said defendants go hence without day and recover of said plaintiff their costs and have thereof execution.

Harriet of color v. Alexander Landefendantord, Samuel Russell & Irene Emerson , Feb 28, 1848, p.187o Freedom- This day comes said plaintiff by her attorney and says that she will not further

prosecute this suit. It is therefore considered that said defendants go hence without day and recover of said plaintiff their costs and have thereof execution.

Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, Mar 4, 1848, p.192- Bill of Exceptions filed. Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Mar 4, 1848, p.192- Bill of Exceptions filed. Elsa Hicks v. Patrick L. McSherry, Mar 13, 1848, p.202- Continued. Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson Mar 14, 1848, p.205

130

o Defendant files a motion for an order on the Sheriff to hire out said plaintiff during the pendency of this suit.

Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Mar 14, 1848, p.205o Defendant files a motion for an order on the Sheriff to hire out said plaintiff during the

pendency of this suit. Jane M. Gray v. William R. Hopkins et al., Mar p.20

o Freedom- On motion of plaintiff and by consent of defendant it is ordered that the order of dismissal herein before made to and the same is hereby set aside and rescinded.

Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, Mar 17, 1848, p.213o On motion of attorney for defendant it is ordered that the Sheriff of St. Louis county take

the said plaintiff into his possession and hire him out from time to time to the best advantage during the pendency of this suit and that he take bond from the hirer payable to the State of Missouri in the sum of six hundred dollars with good security conditioned that said hirer shall not remove said plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of this court, that he will pay the hire to said Sheriff and return said plaintiff at the expiration of the term for which he is hired, or as soon as this action is ended.

Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Mar 17, 1848, p.213o On motion of attorney for defendant it is ordered that the Sheriff of St. Louis county take

the said plaintiff into his possession and hire her out from time to time to the best advantage during the pendency of this suit and that he take bond from the hirer payable to the State of Missouri in the sum of six hundred dollars with good security conditioned that said hirer shall not remove said plaintiff out of the jurisdiction of this court, that he will pay the hire to said Sheriff and return said plaintiff at the expiration of the term for which she is hired, or as soon as this action is ended.

Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, April 1848, p.218o Defendant files demurrer to declaration & motion for a rule on the plaintiff to furnish

additional security herein. Nancy v. Enoch Steen, April 18, 1848, p.225- Plea filed. Nancy of color v. Enoch Steen, April 19, 1848, p.232

o On motion of defendant it is ordered that commissions be issues to the State of Georgia & Alabama, to take depositions of witnesses to be read in evidence on the trial of this cause, on behalf of the defendant.

Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, April 29, 1848, p.255o Plaintiff by her attorney comes and rejoins in the demurrer.

Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, May 1, 1848, p.260o Defendant withdraws his demurrer and files his plea.

Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, May 2, 1848, p.262o Defendant comes and withdraws his plea and on his motion the demurrer heretofore

withdrawn is recalled and this cause stands upon said demurrer. Nancy of color v. Enoch Steen, May 2, 1848, p.263

o Plea filed for Ann Page as co-defendanto On motion of plaintiff and affidavit filed, it is ordered that a special commission issue to

take examination of witnesses for plaintiff addressed to S. J. Moore, assistance Sergeant U.S. Army, Point Gabriel, Texas (commission with interrogatories annexed.) And this

131

cause is continued. Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, May 3, 1848, p.266

o This day come the parties by their attorneys and on a hearing of the demurrer to the declaration herein the Court is of the opinion that the same is sufficient in law to bar plaintiff’s action. Therefore it is considered that the said plaintiff have leave to amend his declaration and this cause is continued at Plaintiff’s costs.

Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, May 6, 1848, p.279o Motion heretofore for security for costs is withdrawn.

Nancy of color v. Enoch Steen, May 10, 1848, p.290o Plaintiff files interrogatories to be propounded to witnesses under a commission issued in

this cause. Malinda of color v. Milton Duty’s admr., May 22, 1848, p.315

o On motion of plaintiff it is ordered that this suit be dismissed at her costs and that execution issue therefor.

Peggy of color v. Joseph Philibert, May 1848, p.3__o Trespass false imprisonment- The said defendant comes and moves the Court to dismiss

the above pretended suit and files his reasons in support thereof. Preston (a man of color) v. George W. Coons, June 16, 1848, p.349

o Trespass & False Imprisonment- Continued by consent Madison (a person fo color) v. George W. Coons, June 16, 1848, p.349

o Freedom- Continued by consent. Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, June 22, 1848, p.354

o Ordered by the Court that this cause be continued. Peggy of color v. Joseph Philibert, June 27, 1848, p.366

o Trespass for false imprisonment- On a hearing of the motion to dismiss this suit it is ordered that the same be sustained.

Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, June 28, 1848, p.369o The clerk of this Court moves that the plaintiff be required to give security for the

payment of costs herein. Thomas Scott (of color) v. James Harrison, Nov 20, 1848, p.385- Trespass- Plea filed. Peggy of color v. Philibert, Nov 20, 1848, p.386- Plea filed. Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, Nov 21, 1848, p.389

o This day comes the said defendant by his attorney and moves the Court that the said plaintiff be ruled to give security for the payment of costs herein, and the Court being sufficiently advised of and concerning said motion, doth order that in default of plaintiff’s furnishing said security within ten days hereof this suit shall be dismissed

o Plea filed. Alfred Taylor of color v. Conrmelius Van Houten, et al., Nov, 22, 1848, p.391

o Plea of Martin Conway filed. Pierre of color v. Gariel Chouteau admr., Dec. 1, 1848, p.416

o This day came Samuel Conway late Sheriff of St. Louis county and filed his petition praying to be discharged from the further custody and charge of the above named plaintiff.

Jane Cotton v. James A. Little, Dec 4, 1848, p.421

132

o On motion of defendants by their attorney and it appearing to the Court that the plaintiff has failed to give security for the payment of costs in this cause as he was required by a rule heretofore enacted in this cause. It is ordered that this cause be dismissed and that the said defendant go hence without day and recover of the said plaintiff his costs in this behalf expended, and have thereof execution.

Peggy Perryman (of color) v. Joseph Philibert, Dec 5, 1848, p.421o It is ordered by the Court in this within named cause that the petitioner shall during the

pendency of the suit have reasonable liberty of attending her counsel and the Court that she shall not be removed out of the State or jurisdiction of this Court, and that she shall not be subject to any severity on account of her application for her freedom, and that she be permitted to sue as a poor person.

Alfred Taylor (of color) v. Cornelius Van Houten et al., Dec 14, 1848, p.445o On motion of plaintiffs, by their attorney, it is ordered that this cause be continued and

that an alias summons issue against defendant Cornelius Van Houten returnable to the next term of this Court.

Thomas Scott, a man of color v. James Harrison, Dec 21, 1848, p.459o Trespass- This day comes the said plaintiff by his attorneys and discontinued this suit.

Therefore it is considered by the Court that the said defendant go hence without day and recover of the said plaintiff his costs herein expended and have thereof execution.

Nancy of color v. Enoch Steen, Dec 22, 1848, p.462o Plea of Mrs. Ann Page withdrawn.

Record 18 ends, Record 19 begins

Nancy of color v. Enoch Steen, Jan 4, 1849, p.4o This day come the parties by their attorneys and submit this cuase to the Court upon the

issue joined; and therefrom the said defendant withdraws his plea, and by consent of parties, the Court doth find that the said defendant is guilty in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath complained against him, and assesses the damages of the said plaintiff, by reason of the premises to one cent. Therefore it is considered by this Court that the said plaintiff be liberated from the said defendant, and all persons claiming under him, and that the said plaintiff recover of the said defendant the said sum of one cent, her damages aforesaid, together with her costs herein expended to be taxed, and have thereof execution.

Peggy Perryman (of color) v. Joseph Philibert, Jan 25, 1849, p.26o Freedom- There being no service in term, this cause is not triable at this term.

Madison a man of color v. George W. Coons, Jan 29, 1849, p.32o Suit for Freedom- The said plaintiff by his attorney discontinues this suit. Therefore it

is considered by the Court that the said defendant go hence without day and recover of the said plaintiff his costs herein expended to be taxable and have thereof execution.

Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, Feb 2, 1849, p.37o On account of the sickness of Antoine Smith, a witness on behalf of the said defendant, it

is ordered that this cause be continued. Costs to abide the event of the suit. Peggy Perryman v. Joseph Philibert, Feb 8, 1849, p.48

o Freedom- The said defendant by his attorneys comes and moves the Court to dismiss this

133

suit. Pierre of color v. Chouteau, Feb 17, 1849, p.58- Affidavit filed. Jane M. Gray v.William R. Hopkins et al., Feb 21, 1849, p.62- Suit for Freedom-

continued. Peggy Perryman (of color) v. Joseph Philibert, Apr 17, 1849, p.99- Plea filed. *In the matter of Pierre a man of color, who is confined in the jail of the County of St.

Louis, by reason of the inability of the Sheriff to hire him out as a plaintiff in an action for freedom against Gabriel S. Chouteau, May 9, 1849, p139o It appearing now to the satisfaction of this Court that the former order of this Court for

the removal of the said Pierre to the County Farm cannot be carried into effect by reason that the County Court has not consented thereto, and the Court being also satisfied that the same causes for his removal from prison still exist, that is that he is unsound of mind and otherwise in ill health, the Court does order that said Pierre be discharged from prison.

Alfred Taylor of color v. Cornelius Van Houten et al., Sep 11. 1849, p.175o Trespass- On motion of plaintiff by his attorney it is ordered that this suit be dismissed at

his costs and that execution issue therefor. Peggy Perryman v. Joseph Philibert, Oct 6, 1849, p.212

o On a hearing of the motion of the defendant to dismiss this suit it is considered that the said motion be and the same is hereby overruled. Defendant files his bill of exceptions.

Elsa Hicks v. P.T. M. Sherry, Nov 26, 1849, p.231 – continued Pierre of color v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, Dec 5, 1849, p.252

o It appearing that the plaintiff has become a person of unsound mind, it is ordered that this cause stand continued.

*Martha Ann of color v. Hiram Cordell, Dec 12, 1849, p.265o This day come the parties by their attorney sand comes also a jury to wit: E.P. King, C.

Vosburg, F. Derming, F. Caldwell, C. D. Derrvarest, C. Bobb, J. A. Reed, L. Donohu, C. Khroue?, L. Chadbourne, R. F. Degge, and L.G. Conklin twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tired, and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joined between the parties upon their oaths do say that the defendant is guilty in manner and form as the plaintiff in her said declaration has alleged against him. It is therefore considered that the plaintiff recover of her freedom against said defendant and all persons claiming under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit. It is furthered considered that the plaintiff recover of the defendant her costs in his behalf and have thereof execution.

*Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, Jan 12, 1850, p.295 o Freedom- This day come the parties by their attorneys and comes also a jury to wit:

Calvin Farris, C. H. Vosburg, William Syphert, H.S. Taylor, Robert West, John C. Morris, L.P. Granthans, L. Whyland, D. Welsh, C. W. Granthans, A. H. Foster, and N. W. Sterrehuns? twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tired, and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joined between the parties upon their oaths do find and say that the defendant is guilty in manner and form as in the plaintiff’s declaration alleged. It is therefore considered that the plaintiff recover of his freedom against said defendant and all persons claiming under her by title derived since the commencement of this suit It is further considered that the plaintiff recover of the

134

defendant his costs in this behalf and heave thereof execution.o Defendant files her motion for a new trial.

*Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Jan 12, 1850, p.295o Freedom- This day come the parties by their attorneys and comes also a jury to wit:

Calvin Farris, C. H. Vosburg, William Syphert, H.S. Taylor, Robert West, John C. Morris, L.P. Granthans, L. Whyland, D. Welsh, C. W. Granthans, A. H. Foster, and N. W. Sterrehuns? twelve good and lawful men who being duly elected, tired, and sworn the truth to speak upon the issue joined between the parties upon their oaths do find and say that the defendant is guilty in manner and form as in the plaintiff’s declaration alleged. It is therefore considered that the plaintiff recover of her freedom against said defendant and all persons claiming under her by title derived since the commencement of this suit It is further considered that the plaintiff recover of the defendant her costs in this behalf and heave thereof execution.

o Defendant files her motion for a new trial. Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, Jan 19, 1850, p.307

o On a hearing of the motion of the defendant for a new trial in this cause, the said motion is by the court overruled.

Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Jan 19, 1850, p.307o On a hearing of the motion of the defendant for a new trial in this cause, the said motion

is by the court overruled. Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, Feb 12, 1850, p.339- Stipulations filed. Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, Feb 13, 1850, 340

o Defendant by her attorney files her bill of exceptions. Peggy Perryman v. Joseph Philibert, Mar 8, 1850, p.373

o On motion of plaintiff’s attorney this cause is continued as on affidavit at the costs of said plaintiff and it is ordered the execution issue therefor.

Patsy Curd v. William H. Barkodale, March 13, 1850, p.382o On motion of plaintiff’s attorney it is ordered that a commission issue to the State of Ohio

to take the depositions of witnesses on behalf of said plaintiff.

End of Roll C25803, Begin Roll C25804End Record 19, Begin Record 20

Patsy Curd v. William H. Barksdale, Oct 25, 1850, p.108- motion to suppress depositions filed.

Patsy Curd v. William H. Barksdale, Jan 10, 1851, p.258o The motion of said defendant to suppress the deposition herein filed by said plaintiff on

the 20th day of May 1850 being heard and the Court being fully advised of and concerning the premises, it is ordered that said motion be overruled.

Harry, Ellen, Nelly, Jordan, Preston, Lucinda, Caroline, Mary Duty v. John F. Darby, Mar 3. 1851, p.341o It is ordered that these causes be continued until the next term of this court.

Patsy Curd v. William H. Barksdale, Mar 3, 1851, p.342o Now at this day come said parties by their attorneys and thereupon come also a jury to

135

wit: George Weaver, Francis Revieu, Eugene Bonfit, William James, Henry Vaughn, James McKitten, Thomas Katskill, Francis J. Brown, Suther Elliot, H. M. Moore, F. M. Sonard, and Benjamin Sheets, twelve good and lawful men, who being duly elected, tried and sworn well and truly to try the issue joined between the parties aforesaid, the tial of this cause progressed, and being finished the jury retire to consult of their verdict.

*Patsy Curd v. William H. Barksdale, Mar 6, 1851, p.343o Now at this day come again the parties by their attorneys and the jury empanelled and

sworn herein also come, and being agreed upon their verdict upon their oaths aforesaid find the issues joined between the parties aforesaid in favor of the plaintiff. It is therefore considered by the Court that said plaintiff be set free and liberated from servitude to said defendant and all persons claiming under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit, and that said plaintiff recover of said defendant the costs of this suit and that execution issue therefor.

End Record 20, Begin Record 21 (Jake’s Records Begin)

o Mary of Color v. Lancelot H. Calvert April 26, 1851 p. 27 On motion of said defendant the time of filing an answer herein is extended one month.

o David McFoy v. William Brown May 12, 1851 p. 76 Petition for freedom- Now at this day come said parties by their respective attorneys and

by their consent it is ordered that the motion of said plaintiff to suppress the depositions herein filed be sustained.

(same day) Now at this day comes said plaintiff by his attorney and says that he will not further prosecute this action but voluntarily suffers a non-suit It is therefore considered by the court that the said plaintiff take nothing by his suit in this behalf and that that said defendant go hereof without day.

o David McFoy v. William Brown Suit for freedom, May 17, 1851, p. 88: The said plaintiff having failed to prosecute his suit and judgment having been herein

rendered in favor of said defendant in the twelfth day of May 1851, it is, on motion of said defendant by his attorney ordered that the Sheriff of St Louis County deliver possession of said slave David McFoy to said defendant without delay.

o Mary of color v. L. H. Calvert Wednesday May 21, 1851, p. 93 On motion of said defendant by his attorney one month further time is given him to plead

herein. o Mary of color & c. v. L. H. Calvert, Saturday May 24th 1851 p. 98

The said defendant by his attorney files herein a demurrer to the plaintiff's petition. o Mary of Color & c. v. L. H. Calvert, June 30th 1851 p. 147.

By consent of said parties by their attorneys it is ordered that the defendant’s demurrer herein filed be sustained. The plaintiff thereupon file an amended petition, and the defendant files his answer thereto.

o Edward by his next friend Mercy Andrews v. Barnard N. Lynch, Dec 9, 1851,p. 248 Petition for Freedom- Now at this day comes said plaintiff by his attorney but said

defendant although duly warned and called comes not but makes default, wherefore the Court doth on the motion of said plaintiff, under that his petition be taken against said

136

defendant as confessed. And thereupon, no jury being required, the Court doth on motion of said plaintiff by his attorney, find in favor of said plaintiff. It is therefore considered by the Court that the said plaintiff Edward be set free and liberated from servitude to said defendant and all persons claiming under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit. And that said plaintiff recover of said defendant the costs of this suit and that execution issue therefore

o Samuel, an infant by his next friend Mercy Andrews v. Barnard N. Lynch, Dec 9, 1851, p. 248 Petition for Freedom- Now at this day comes said plaintiff by his attorney but said

defendant although duly warned & called comes not but makes default, wherefore on motion of said plaintiff it is ordered by the Court that the petition be taken against said defendant as confessed. And thereupon, no jury being required, the Court doth on motion of said plaintiff by his attorney, find in favor of said plaintiff. It is therefore considered by the Court that said plaintiff Samuel be set free and liberated from servitude to said defendant and all persons claiming under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit. And that said plaintiff recover of said defendant the costs of this suit and that execution issue therefor.

o Pierre of Color v. Gabriel Chouteau, p. 330 January 6, 1852. This cause being at this day called for trial, and it appearing to the Court that said

plaintiff has failed to prosecute the same it is ordered that it be dismissed. o Jane McGray v. William R. Hopkins, Jan 7, 1852, p. 335

It appearing to the Court that said plaintiff has failed to prosecute this suit, it is ordered that it be and it is hereby dismissed.

o Edward a minor and Samuel (children of Mary) v. Bernard M. Lynch, Jan 8, 1852, p. 338- Motion to set aside judgment and for new trial filed and an affidavit in support.

o Edward and Samuel (Mary’s kids) v. Bernard Lynch, p. 362, Jan 17, 1852 The motion of said defendant that the judgment in these causes rendered by set aside, and

that he be allowed to plead herein, having been duly heard and considered by the Court, it doth order that said motion be sustained, and that the execution and order herein issued be recalled. The Court doth further order that said plaintiffs have leave to amend their petitions, and that said defendant have ten days time thereafter within which to file his answers to said amended petitions.

o Edward, an infant and Samuel (Mary’s kids) v. Bernard Lynch, Jan 30. 1852, p.381 On motion of said plaintiffs by attorney it is ordered that they have ten days further time

within which to file their amended petitions. o Edward and Samuel v. B. M. Lynch, Feb 6, 1852, p.397

Plaintiffs by their attorney file on each of their causes an amendment to the petition.o Edward and Samuel (Mary’s kids) v. Bernard Lynch, p. 401, Friday Feb 10, 1852

Said defendant files an answer in each of their actions.o Peggy Perryman (of color) v. Joseph Phillibert, Feb. 11, 1852, p.404

Luther M. Shreve, withdraws his appearance herein as attorney for said plaintiff, and thereupon this cause being called for trial, and said plaintiff although solemnly called coming not it is on motion ordered by the Court, that this case be dismissed for want of prosecution.

o Laura of color v. Henry B. Belt, February 26, 1852, p. 421

137

Whereas Joel C. Richmond attorney for the plaintiff in this cause has filed his affidavit in this Court, alleging among other things that one E. Curtis and James Christy did on the sixteenth day of February 1852 decoy said plaintiff Laura from the place where she was confined & from the jurisdiction of this Court during her pendency of her suit for freedom and with full knowledge by the said James Christy and E. Curtis of the orders of this Court that she the said Laura should not be removed out of the jurisdiction of the Court during the pendency of the said suit and with full knowledge that said Laura was prosecuting her suit for freedom therefore it is ordered that the Circuit Court that the said James Christy and E. Curtis show cause to said Court on Tuesday next the second day of March 1852 at 10 o’clock a.m. at the Courthouse of the City of St. Louis, why an attachment should not issue against them for a contempt of the orders of said Court in the premises.

o In the matter of Henry Lohre Suing for freedom, February 26, 1852, p. 421-22 Being satisfied from the within statement of Thomas Harney that the within named

petitioner Henry Lohre is likely to be removed beyond the jurisdiction of this Court before the termination of his suit for freedom, it is ordered by this Court that the clerk issue a warrant under the seal of the is Court for the apprehension of the said petitioner and that he be brought without delay before this Court. It is further ordered that the Sheriff take possession of said petitioner and hire him out to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of the suit, and that said Sherriff take a bond from the hirer payable to the State of Missouri in the penal sum of fourteen hundred dollars, with such security as the Sherriff approved conditioned that the petitioner shall during the pendency of his suit have reasonable liberty of attending his counsel and the Court. That he shall not be removed out of the jurisdiction of this Court during the pendency of his suit and that he shall not be subjected to any severity on account of his application for freedom and that the hirer will pay the hire to the Sheriff and return the said petitioner at the expiration of the term from which he is hired or as soon as said suit is determined.

o Laura of Color v. Henry B Belt, March 2 1852, p. 429 James Christy and Edward Curtis each file an answer to the order of the Court, make on

motion of plaintiff, on the 26th day of February last.o Laura of Color v. Henry B. Belt, March 3rd 1852, p. 432

On motion for attachment Plaintiff files herein answers to the response of James Christy and Edward Curtis.

o Henry, Ellen, Nelly, Preston, Lucina, Carline, & Mary Duty v. John F. Darby, administrator of Milton Duty, deceased- Mar 8, 1852, p.441 Freedom- On motion of said plaintiffs by their attorney, it is ordered that this cause be

dismissed.o Laura of color v. Henry B. Belt, Mar 20, 1852, p.467

On attachment against James Christy and Edward Curtis the said plaintiff as well as said James Christy and Edward Curtis now at this day come by their respective attorneys and the Court having fully heard and duly considered the matter, it doth order that the rule herein entered against said James Christy and Edward Curtis be discharged and that they go hence without day.

o Gabriel of color v. Michael Niles, April 21, 1852 p. 482- Demurrer filed.o Gabriel of color v. Michael Niles, May 4th, 1852 p. 543

138

Petition for freedom- Now at this day come said parties by their respective attorneys, and the Court having fully heard and duly considered said defendants demurrer to the petition, it doth order that said demurrer be sustained. It is therefore considered by the Court that said plaintiff be nonsuited, and that said defendant go hence without day and recover of said plaintiff his costs and charges herein expended and have execution therefor.

Record 21 Ends, Record 22 Begins

o Mary of color and her children Samuel and Edward v. L. H. Calvert, June 7th 1852 p. 34 By leave of Court said defendant withdraws the answer and demurrer filed herein by him:

o Harriet of color v. Irene Emerson, June 8th 1852, p.51 Now comes the defendant by her attorneys and files a motion for an order upon Samuel

Conway former Sheriff to return the bond taken by him under the order of the Court for the return and for the hire of the plaintiff to abide the order of the Court.

p. 58 Motion for order on S. T. Labeaume filed. Dredd Scott v. Irene Emerson, June 8th 1852, p.52

■ Motion for order on Samuel Conway filed.■ Motion for an order on S. T. Labeaume filed.

o Mary of color and her children Samuel and Edward v. Lancelot H. Calvert, June 8th 1852, p.52 Now at this day comes said plaintiff by her attorney, and on his motion it is ordered by

the Court that this action be dismissed at said plaintiff’s costs and that execution issue therefor. (FINAL?)

o Pierre of color v. Gabriel Chouteau, Thursday, June 17th, 1852 p. 74 Motion by Chouteau for an order on Milburn late Sheriff to render an account of the

hiring of Pierre, filed. o George Johnson of color v. Henry Moore, Tuesday June 22nd 1852 p. 87

It is ordered by the Court that said plaintiff be allowed to sue as a poor person to establish his right to freedom, and that he have reasonable liberty to attend his counsel and the court as occasion may require, that he be not removed out of jurisdiction and not suffer any severity on account of his application for freedom.

o George Johnson of color v. Henry Moore, June 23, 1852 p. 92- Return and petition of Sheriff filed.

o Harriet a woman of color / Dred Scot v. Irene Emerson, June 29, 1852, p. 111 The Court having duly heard and considered said defendant’s motion for an order upon

Louis T. Laubeaume and Samuel Conway late Sheriffs to return the bonds taken by them under the order of the Court for the return of the plaintiff to abide the order of the Court and for the payment of the hire of the plaintiff to abide the order of the Court, doth order that said motion be overruled.

o Samuel and Edward, infants by their next friend Mercy Andrews v. Bernard M. Lynch, p. 130-31 July 2, 1852- Demurrers filed

o Pierre of color v. Gabriel Chouteau, July 3rd 1852, p. 138 Motion to set aside dismissal and reinstate suit filed.

o Samuel and Edward infants by their next friend Morey T. Andrews v. Bernard M.

139

Lynch, Oct. 2, 1852, p. 179 On motion of said plaintiffs by their attorney, it is ordered by the Court that this cause be

dismissed. (FINAL?) o Pierre of Color v. Gabriel Chouteau, October 23, 1852, p. 237

The Court having duly heard and considered the motion of said plaintiff to set aside the judgment of dismissal doth order that said motion be overruled.

o George Johnston (of color) v. Reuben Bartlett, Nov 19th 1852 p. 272- Demurrer filed. o (There is a huge, year-long gap in freedom suit records at this point. ND.)

End Record 22/Roll C25804, Begin Record 23/Roll C25805

o In the matter of Hester Williams, Ella and Priscilla Oct 11, 1853, p.306 The said petitions having filed their applications for freedom herein and on motion of the

attorney of the said applicants, the court doth order that a warrant issue herein returnable tomorrow morning at nine o’clock.

o *Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau Oct 13, 1853, p. 309 Now at this day come said parties by their respective attorneys and thereupon come also a

jury to wit: Phillip Smith, John Schwaz, William Semft, Peter Sullivan, George A. Smith, John Stricker, G. Schaezel, C. Stephen, G. Schwegler, Philip Schafer, John Britchland, and James McCauseland, twelve good and lawful en who being duly elected tried and sworn the matter in controversy well and truly to try the trial of this cause progressed bu t not being concluded is laid over until tomorrow.

o In the matter of Hester Williams, et al. v. A. B. McAffee et al., Oct 13, 1853, p. 309 On motion of the said petitioners, it is ordered by the Court that an alias warrant issue

herein returnable tomorrow morning at nine o’clock. o Hester Williams, Ella Willimas, and Pirscilla Wililams by their next friend Jordan W.

Early v. A. B. McAffee, Frederick Norcum, G.C. Blakey, and William E. Moore, Oct 13, 1853, p.310 It appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that the said defendants and their agents have

filed to enter into a recognizance to the State of Missouri in conformity with the statute in such cases made and provided, it is therefore ordered by the Court that the Sheriff of the County of Saint Louis take possession of the said petitioners and hire them out to he best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit and it is further ordered that said Sheriff take a bond from the hirer of said petitioners payable to the State of Missouri in the sum of twelve hundred dollars, with such security as the Sheriff may approve and conditioned according to the Statute in such cases made and provided.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, Oct 13, 1853, p.310 Now at this day come again said parties by their respective attorneys and the Jury

empanelled and sworn herein also come and the trial of this cause progressed. But said plaintiff says she will not further prosecute her suit in this behalf. Wherefore, it is ordered by the Court that the Jury herein be discharged, and that said plaintiff take nothing by her suit in this behalf but that said defendant go hence without day and recover of said plaintiff his costs and charge herein expended and have execution therefor.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, Oct 15, 1853, p.313

140

Motion for new trial filed.o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel S. Chouteau, Oct 21, 1853, p.325

The Court having duly heard and considered that motion of said plaintiff for a new trial of this cause and being thereof fully advised doth order that said motion be overruled.

o Thornton Kinney (of color) v. John F. Hatcher and Charles C. Bridges, Oct 21, 1853, p.325 In the matter of the application in behalf of the said Thornton Kinney: It being made to

appear to the satisfaction of the Court that the said Thornton is in need of clothing, and that the defendants are new residents, and not within this state, it is ordered that the Sheriff of Satin Louis County out of the hire collected by him for the services of the said Thornton, do expend for suitable clothing for the said Thornton a sum not exceeding thirty-five dollars.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel S. Chouteau- Oct 22, 1852, p.329- Bill of Exceptions filed.o Thornton Kinney v. John F. Hatcher et al- Nov 25, 1853, p.344

Answer of Charles C. Bridges filed.o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel S. Chouteau- Dec 6, 1852, p.390

It appearing to the Court that Reuben Bartlett, the person in whose possession the said Mary Charlotte and her children to wit, Antoine, Victorie, Angeline, and her infant child whose name is unknown, and Euphrasia were found has failed to enter into a recognizance to the State of Missouri, with sufficient securities conditioned according to law. It is therefore ordered by the Court that John M. Wimer, Sheriff of the Country of Saint Louis take possession of the negroes above named, and that he hire them out to the best advantage from time to time during the pendency of this suit and that he take a bond in the sum of fifteen hundred dollars for each payable to the State of Missouri, according o the Statute in such cases made and provided.

o Thornton Kinney of color v. John F. Hatcher and Charles Bridges, Dec. 22, 1853, p. 427 It appearing to the Court from the return of the Sheriff that the said defendant John F.

Hatcher, against whom process issued in this suit cannot be found and the Court being satisfied that process cannot be served with process, it is therefore on motion of said plaintiff by his attorney ordered that the said defendant be notified by the publication, according to law, of this order that said plaintiff has instituted in the Saint Louis Circuit Court, and action the object of which is to establish hi freedom, and that unless said defendant be and appear at the next term of said Court to be begun and held at the City of St. Louis on the Third Monday of April next, and on or before the sixth day thereof, answers the petition of said plaintiff the same will be taken against him as confessed.

End Record 23, Begin Record 24

o Dred Scott of color v. Irene Emerson, Jan 25, 1854, p.33 Continued by consent awaiting decision of Supreme Court of the United States.

o Thornton Kinney of color v. John Hatcher and Charles Bridges, Feb 28, 1854 p. 91 John Hatcher enters his appearance and files his answer herein

o Hester Williams et al v. Ferderick Norcom et al., Mar 10, 1854, p.114 The Court having duly heard and considered the Demurrer of the said Defendants by their

attorney to the petition of said plaintiffs and being thereof fully advised doth order that

141

said Demurrer be sustained; Leave to plaintiffs to amend their petition on or before the first day of the next term thereof.

o Hester Williams et al v. Frederick Norcum et al., April 17, 1854, p.128 Declaration under statute filed.

o Thornton Kinney (of Color) v. John Hatcher et al., April 18, 1854, p. 130 Dedimus- On motion of said plaintiff, it is ordered by the Court that a Dedimus issue to

Virginia herein on the part of said plaintiff. On motion of said defendant by his attorney, it is ordered by the Court that a Dedimus issue herein to New Orleans, Louisiana on the part of said defendant.

o Hester Williams et al v. Frederick Norcum et al., April 21, 1854, p.142 Continued by consent

o Hester Williams et al v. Frederick Norcum et al., June 28, 1854, p.310 The Court having duly heard and considered the motion of said defendants to strike from

the file the paper filed as an amended petition and for an order that the Sheriff deliver the plaintiffs to the defendant Norcum or his agent and being thereof fully advised, doth order that said amended petition be stricken out with leave to petitioners to file an amended petition on or before the first day of the next term of the Court, and the Court doth overrule so much of said motion as relates to the delivery of said petitioners to defendant Norcum.

o In the Matter of Samuel Slaughter negro, November 23 1854, p.340 Habeas Corpus- John Hempstead, Jailor of the County of St. Louis, in obedience to a writ

of Habeas Corpus issued herein, brings here into open court the said Samuel Slaughter, negro who appears by his attorney and the court having fully heard and considered the petition and the proofs, doth order that the said Samuel Slaughter be discharged.

o Hester Williams et al v. Frederick Norcum et al., Nov 24, 1854, p.342 The defendant by his attorney files a motion to strike paper marked “filed November 20,

1854,” from Record, and for final order in the case, and the Court having duly heard and considered the said notion and being thereof fully advised doth order that said motion be overruled with leave to plead herein. Plea filed.

o Hester Williams et al v. Frederick Norcum et al., Feb 12, 1855, p.484 Continued as affidavit of plaintiff to procure the testimony of Frederick Norcum.

o Thornton Kinney of color v. James Hatcher et al, Feb 12, 1855, p.484 Continued by plaintiff as on affadavit, at the plaintiff's costs

o Hester Williams et al. v. A.B. McAfee et al., Feb 21, 1855, p.497 On motion of said defendants by their attorney it is ordered by the Court that a Dedimus

issue herein to the State of New York on the part of said defendant.o Mary of color, otherwise called Mary Davis v. Samuel B. Bellis, March 3 1855, p.512

On motion of said plaintiff, by her attorney it is ordered by the Court: First- that the said Mary be allowed to sue for her freedom. Second- that she have reasonably liberty to attend her counsel and the Court as occasion may require, and that she be not removed out of the Jurisdiction of this Court and that she be not subjected to any severity on account of her application for freedom as aforesaid.

o Mary of Color, Otherwise called Mary Davis v. Samuel B Bellis, April 23, 1855, p.562 Answer filed

142

Record 24 Ends, Record 25 Begins

o Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, May 17, 1855, p.54- Continued o Thornton Kinney of Color v. John Hatcher, June 30, 1855, p. 105

The court doth order that said plaintiff do on or before the first day of the next term of this court file a bond in accordance with the terms of the order allowing him to size for the costs accruing in this cause, and this cause is continued as on affidavit of the costs of said plaintiff.

o Hester Williams et al. v. A. B. McAfee et al., Nov 29, 1855, p.206- Continued.o Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, December 10, 1855, p.228- Continued o Thornton Kinney of color v. John Hatcher, December 21, 1855, p. 253

Dismissal- The plaintiff having failed to give security for costs herein as heretofore ordered to do, it is on motion of the defendants by their attorney ordered by the Court that this cause be dismissed at the costs of said plaintiff and that execution issue therefore.

o Mary of Color, otherwise called Mary Davis v. Samuel B Bellis, January 26, 1856, p.283 Continued by consent

o Thornton Kinney of color v. John Hatcher et al, Feb 19, 1856 p. 314 Motion to set aside order of dismissal and to reinstate cause file

o Thornton Kinney of color v. John Hatcher and Charles Bridges, April 9, 1856 p. 362 The Court having duly heard and considered the motion to reinstate this cause on the

docket and being fully advised of and concerning the premises, doth consider and adjudge that said motion be overruled.

o Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson, Monday April 14, 1856, p. 364- continued o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, May 16, 1856 p. 416

By consent of parties it is ordered by the Court that the Sheriff of St. Louis County summon Eighteen good and lawful men to appear before this Court on Thursday next the twenty third instant out of whom to empanel a Jury in this cause.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, Tuesday May 27 1856 p. 427 Now at this day come the parties by their respective attorneys and the Court having been

informed by the attorney for the plaintiff that she and her children are now confined in the Jail of this County on motion of plaintiff attorney it is ordered that the said plaintiff and her children be brought into court to attend the Court during the trial of this cause; and thereupon the Court proceeded to the examination of venire men summoned herein and no Jury being selected therefrom, it is ordered by the Court that the Sheriff of St. Louis County summon twelve good and lawful men to appear before this Court tomorrow morning at nine o’clock out of whom to complete the empanelling of a Jury herein, and further proceedings herein are continued until tomorrow morning.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, May 28, 1856, p.428-29 Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys and the

Court proceeds further to the examination of venire men, when William Warrance, Joseph Shoulty Delphy Carlin, Joseph Mallette, T. W. Levans, Frederick Jenkins, Hiram Paddleford Samuel Kosser, Thomas S. Warne, James L. Crane J. P. White, and N. C. Myer, twelve good and lawful men, being duly elected, tired and sworn well

143

and truly to try the issues herein joined, the trial of this cause progressed but not being concluded at the hour of adjournment further proceedings herein are continued ultil tomorrow morning.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, May 29, 1856, p. 429-30 Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys, and the

Jury sworn and empanelled herein also come, and thereupon the trial of this cause progressed, but not being concluded at the hour of adjournment, further proceeding herein are continued until tomorrow morning.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau, May 30, 1856 p. 430-31 Trespass- Now at this day come again the parties aforesaid by their respective attorneys

and the Jury sworn and empanelled herein also come, and thereupon the trial of this cause progressed and being concluded the Jury aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do find as to first issue herein joined that the said defendant is guilty of the said trespass and grievances laid to his charge in manner and form as the said plaintiff hath in her declaration alleged, and as to the second issue herein joined, the Jurors aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do find that at the time when said several supposed trespasses were committed the said plaintiff was not a slave in manner and from as the said defendant has in his said second plea alleged. It is therefore considered and adjudged by the Court that said plaintiff be liberated and entirely set free from the said defendant and from all persons claiming by, through, or under him by title derived since the commencement of this suit, and that said plaintiff recover of said defendant her costs and charges herein expended and have threreof execution. Motion for new trial filed.

o Mary Charlotte v. Gabriel Chouteau May 31, 1856, p.432 Trespass- The Court having duly heard and considered the motion for a new trial herein,

and being fully advised of and concerning the premises, doth consider and adjudge that the same be overruled. Bill of exceptions filed. Affidavit for appeal filed, and on motion of the defendant by his attorney, an appeal is granted him from the judgment herein to the Supreme Court, and thereupon Gabriel S. Chouteau, as principal and Thomas T. Gantt and Peter Ferguson, as securities, were? in open court, acknowledge themselves to owe Mary Charlotte the sum of two thousand dollars to be levied of their respective goods and chattels, lands and tenements: Yet, upon the following conditions, viz: that the appellants herein will prosecute his appeal with due diligence to a decision in the Supreme Court, and shall perform such judgment as shall be given by the Supreme Court , or such as the Supreme Court may direct the Circuit Court to give; and if the judgment of such Court or any part thereof be affirmed, that he will comply with and perform the same so far as it may be affirmed; and will pay all damages and costs which may be awarded against the appellant by the Supreme Court, then this recognizance to be void, else of full force and effect.

End of Roll C25805, End of Microfilm Records

144