From Transcribe Wiki
Revision as of 14:38, 23 April 2021 by Acmwitz (talk | contribs) (Protected ".MzUzOTI.MTIyNzMy" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite)))
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

To the Honorable John Brown Judge of the Superior Court of Chancery holden the Narrator: Your orator Wm Morris, humbly complaining sheweth to your Honour that is the year 1818, a certain Sampson a free man of colour of the county of Rockingham, executed two several notes to your orator, he standing indebted to your orator the sums ascertained by the sd notes at their expiration dates. the first note was executed and due on the 9th of June 1818 for £9.15:4 the second one the 8th of December 1818 for $39.58 Costs. On which two notes suits were brought on the 12th day of August 1819 and judgments were obtained at the Rockingham February term 1820 for the amount of sd notes, with interest and costs, which judgments are referred to as part of this bill. Previous to the date of sd judgement and whilst the sd writs were depending, your orator understood a certain William Cravens knowing the embarrassed situation of the sd Sampson, proposed to take him and his family to the state of Illinois, which the sd. Cravens purposed removing himself. The said Craven in this way, may have intended to perform a generous act, but it is understood and believed that he adopted his arrangements in such a manner, as eventually to secure to himself some remuneration from his pious labours. The sd Cravens (who he prays may be made a Deft to this bill) is a Reverend Clergyman of the Methodist Church, and who is therefore greatly averse, (as in fact he professes himself to be) to everything in the shape and character of slavery. From his profession it would be derogating from the purity of his motives to charge, that he would do an act which he considers sinful in itself, that good might come of it. Or in other words, he would not, if we judge him by the sanctity of his profession, corrupt the moral sense of the publick by the contagion of his example in owning a slave for one instant. Though it should redound to the interest and happiness of the individual, thus to be owned. He who has almost become a disturber of the public peace, by his numerous invectives against slavery would be indignant it is presumed, at any declaration which would charge him (no matter whether with good or bad motive) of being but for a moment a slave holder. He would, it is hoped, disdain to lay the