Making History: Transcribe is made possible in part by federal funding provided through the Library Services and Technology Act program administered by the Institute of Museum and Library Services.

Daniel: Freedom Suit, Northampton County (Part 1 of 3)

image 14 of 24

Zoom in to read each word clearly.
Some images may have writing in several directions. To rotate an image, hold down shift-Alt and use your mouse to spin the image so it is readable.

This transcription is complete!

against the said Obedience White in his lifetime for the sum of $1575:94c with interest thereon from the 19th day of July in the year 1873 and for $8.71c costs, and that an execution was issued thereon on the 5th of February 1825, against the goods & chattels of said Obedience White, and that the same was returned countermanded as in the said bill is alleged. And this defendant saith that the said Obedience White departed this life in the early part of the year 1835 and he admits that William W. Centler qualified as his administrator on the 9th of March 1835. And this defendant saith that the said William W. Centler departed this life about the ninth of May in the year 1847 and that sometime subsequently thereto but at what time this defendant does not know the said James H. White qualified as admr de bonis non paid Obedience White. And this defendant admits that he is the admr de bonis non with the will annexed of the said Major S. Pitts deceased. And he admits that this defendant as such did revive by seire facias the aforesaid judgment against the said Obedience White, and that he sued out a court of fieri facias on such revived judgment as alleged and stated in the said bill of complaint. And this defendant admits the assignment of the said execution and revived judgment by this defendant to the defendant Charles J. D. West, but not for a small consideration but for the full value thereof. And this defendant admits the levying of the said execution on the complainants as the proper goods and chattels of the said Obedience White, deceased, and he admits that they were advertised by John H. Winder late sheriff of this county for sale on the 9th day of August 1857 to satisfy the same. Whether the said negroes mentioned in said bill remain free and at liberty from the time the aforesaid decree was made until levied on or not, this defendant has no personal knowledge and calls for proof of the same. He also admits that the said Leah Mary jr. George jr and Jenny & Joe have never heretofore sued for their freedom and he believes they have been held by the said Polly Frost and by her husband since his intermarriage as slaves until they were levied on by virtue of said last mentioned execution. And this defendant for further answer saith, that he denies that the said complainants were regularly and legally emancipated by the said paper [illegible] to be the will of Nancy White, or otherwise, because they were legally the slaves of the said Obedience White. And this defendant utterly desires the truth of the allegation in the said bill, that then has been paid upon account of the claim or bond on which said suit of Pitts v White was instituted and the said scire facias and execution upon the same sere'd out the whole amount due upon the same, except about he sum of $200, and that this defendant has often so declared; and this defendant levies that he has sued out the said execution for the whole amount of the said original judgment with a fraudulent purpose in collusion with the said James H. White or any other person, to defraud the complainants to make them slaves; and he denies all fraud and collusion charged or imparted in the said Bill of complaint. And this defendant further answering saith, that he is advised the statute of limitations could have formed no [boi?] to the revival by scire facias of the said judgment against Obedience White, under the circumstances of that case, but [abither?] it would or would not, this defendant is also advised, that it was the personal privilege of the said Jame H. White to plead it or not to the said scire faciss, if it would have awaited him, and that the complainants cannot avail them so [illegible] of the statute of limitations as a bar to that scire facias in this collateral controversy if it would have barred the said remedy by scire facias. And this defendant for further answer saith, that the said Major S. Pitter departed this life on the dat of A.D. 1829 that John Custis qualified as [cenetor?] of his estate shortly thereafter, and on the 12th day of January 1829, that the said John Custis relinquished and resigned his office of [cenetor?], and on this 12th day of September AD. 1837, this defendant qualified as admnr. de bonis mona the said Major D. Pitts. The said Major S. Pitts has been in bad health for some years before his death and this defendant was at that time a minor, and this defendant never became cognizant of the