From Transcribe Wiki
Revision as of 23:26, 31 January 2022 by Kmh33469 (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Isbell vs Peters Halsey as the agent of Peters sold a negro man slave Edm to Isbell on the 2 January 1833 for $300 payable 1 January 1834- The slave was badly knock kneed. The sum agreed to be given considering this visible defect is conceded to be a fair [ & socend] price- Immediately after the sale Halsey [apigned] the note to Peters without recourse. After it fell owe Peter commenced suit +prosecated it to a judgement and Isbell applied for and obtained an injunction, alledging in his bill - That he purchased the slave for a full + fair price- That he was induced to purchase by the false representation of [socendny] on the part of Halsey- That the slave was [iemocend] at the date of the purchase, laboring under a [lalerl] disease of which he shortly died- That he was altogether [valueble] . That this [unrocend] was known to Halsey and by him [gau] overtly concealed- That he acted as the concealed agent of Peters for the purpose of the letter purpetrating the fraud. But in the event of being unable to establish these charges against the agent Halsey and upon the hypothesis of Halsy innocence of fraud . deceit or false representation the [pff] . charges that Peters was cognizant of the censorship of the slave and sought to perpetuate the fraud of the employment of an innocent agent, who was ignerant of the latent defect- Halsey in his answer states he does not remember whether he [ouiclesed] his agency but think it was perfectly understood between the parties that he had no interest in the transaction. He denies explicitly that he made any false expectation of [locenship] aor concealed from the [parte]