FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   737   738   739   740   741   742   743   744   745   746   747   748   749   750   751   752   753   754   755   756   757   758   759   760   761  
762   763   764   765   766   767   768   769   770   771   772   773   774   775   776   777   778   779   780   781   782   783   784   785   786   >>   >|  
berate consideration. It has accordingly been again argued by counsel, and considered by the court; and I now proceed to deliver its opinion. There are two leading questions presented by the record: 1. Had the Circuit Court of the United States jurisdiction to hear and determine the case between these parties? And 2. If it had jurisdiction, is the judgment it has given erroneous or not? The plaintiff in error, who was also the plaintiff in the court below, was, with his wife and children, held as slaves by the defendant, in the State of Missouri; and he brought this action in the Circuit Court of the United States for that district, to assert the title of himself and his family to freedom. The declaration is in the form usually adopted in that State to try questions of this description, and contains the averment necessary to give the court jurisdiction; that he and the defendant are citizens of different States; that is, that he is a citizen of Missouri, and the defendant a citizen of New York. The defendant pleaded in abatement to the jurisdiction of the court, that the plaintiff was not a citizen of the State of Missouri, as alleged in his declaration, being a negro of African descent, whose ancestors were of pure African blood, and who were brought into this country and sold as slaves. To this plea the plaintiff demurred, and the defendant joined in demurrer. The court overruled the plea, and gave judgment that the defendant should answer over. And he therefore put in sundry pleas in bar, upon which issues were joined; and at the trial the verdict and judgment were in his favor. Whereupon the plaintiff brought this writ of error. Before we speak of the pleas in bar, it will be proper to dispose of the questions which have arisen on the plea in abatement. That plea denies the right of the plaintiff to sue in a court of the United States, for the reasons therein stated. If the question raised by it is legally before us, and the court should be of opinion that the facts stated in it disqualify the plaintiff from becoming a citizen, in the sense in which that word is used in the Constitution of the United States, then the judgment of the Circuit Court is erroneous and must be reversed. It is suggested, however, that this plea is not before us; and that as the judgment in the court below on this plea was in favor of the plaintiff, he does not seek to reverse it, or bring it before the court for r
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   737   738   739   740   741   742   743   744   745   746   747   748   749   750   751   752   753   754   755   756   757   758   759   760   761  
762   763   764   765   766   767   768   769   770   771   772   773   774   775   776   777   778   779   780   781   782   783   784   785   786   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

plaintiff

 

defendant

 
States
 

judgment

 

citizen

 

jurisdiction

 

United

 
Missouri
 

brought

 

questions


Circuit

 

African

 

declaration

 

opinion

 
erroneous
 

abatement

 

joined

 

slaves

 

stated

 

Before


demurrer

 

overruled

 
demurred
 
verdict
 
sundry
 

issues

 
Whereupon
 

answer

 
reverse
 
disqualify

Constitution
 

suggested

 
reversed
 
legally
 

arisen

 

dispose

 
proper
 
denies
 

question

 
raised

reasons

 

determine

 

presented

 

record

 

parties

 

leading

 
argued
 

berate

 
consideration
 

counsel