To the Honorable Luke and lawfel,
Judge of the eighth, Judicial Circuit for the state
of Missouri

The petition of Aspasia a woman of
color respectfully represents that she is the daughter
of Judy , who was born in the state of Virginia , about
the year 1786 and when about 10 or 11 years old
was brought to Louisville , Kentucky , and sold to a
certain William Sullivan , who kept her for a short
time as a slave and then sold her to a certain Robert
Bunton , a resident of the town of Vincennes , in
the North western Territory That the said Bunton ,
took your petitioners mother to the town of Vincennes ,
in the territory aforesaid about the year 1798, in which
place she was owned and continued to be held as a
slave by the said Bunton , for the space of two years
or upwards - That after your petitioners mother had been
held and treated as a slave in the town of Vincennes ,
and territory aforesaid for the length, of time set for the
above she was sent to Kaskaskia , in the said territory
and some short, time afterward sold to a certain
William Lecompte , of the town of Saint Louis in the
province, of upper Louisiana , where she has remained
in slavery ever since, and gave birth to your petition
about thirty two years ago in the town of saint
Louis

Your petitioner further represents that she
is now illegally held in slavery by a certain Hardage
Lane of Saint Louis contrary to the provisions of an
ordinance, passed by the Congress, of the United , States
on the day of july seventeen hundred and
eighty seven-your petitioner therefore prays that she
may be permitted to sue as a poor person in order to
establish her right to freedom, that counsel, be assigned,
her for that purpose and finally that your

honour may grant the usual orders in such cases and
as in duty bound will ever pray

Assisa her X mark a woman of color

State of Missouri
Saint Louis County

This day Judy a woman
of color personally appeared before the undersigned
and made
oath that the matter and things in the foregiong petition
contained so far as they depend upon her own
knowledge are true and those coming from the information
of others she believes to be true

sworn, to and subscribed before
me this,twenty fourth day
of june eighteen hundred
thirty seven
James J Purdy Justice, of the Peace, Judy her X mark a woman of color

1st It is hereby orderd that Assisa be permitted to sue,
as a poor person for the recovery of her freedom and
that F W Risque, be assigned her as counsel, for that
purpose

2nd That the said Assisa have reasonable liberty to attend
her counsel, and the court as occasion may require
that she be not removed out of the jurisdiction, of the
court, and that she be not subject to any severity
on account of her application for freedom.

filed 24 June 1837

John Ruland Clerk

Petition

Circuit Court Term 1837
Saint Louis County to wit

Aspisa , a woman of color
by FW Risque, her attorney complains of Hardage Lane ,
of a plea of trespass, for false imprisonment : For that
whereas the said Hardage Lane heretofore, to wit on the
15th day of January 1837 at the city of St. Louis in the
County aforesaid with force and arms made an assault,
upon the said aspisa, to wit, at and then and there
beat, bruised, and ill treated her the said aspisa and then
and there imprisoned her and kept and detained her in
prison there, without any reasonable or probable, cause
whatsoever for a long time, to wit, for the space of

then next following, contrary to the laws of the
land and the will of the said aspisa and the said
aspisa that at the time and before the committing
of the said grievance, she was and still is a free person,
and that the said Hardage Lane held and still holds
her in slavery to the damage of the said aspisa of the
sum of $300 and therefore she brings suit

FW Risque Counsel,
for pltff,

No
Circuit Court July Term
1837

Declaration

This is an action for false imprisonment
in for the
recovery of freedom Damage
$300 The Clerk will issue,
a summons

FW Risque,

filed 24th June 1837

John Ruland Clerk, Clerk

"1st It is hereby ordered that Aspisa be permitted to sue as a poor person for the recovery of her freedom, and that F. W., Risque
be assigned her as counsel for that purpose. 2nd That the said Aspisa have reasonable liberty to attened her counsel
and the court as occasion may request, that she be not removed out of the jurdiction of the court and that she be not
subject to any severity on account of her application for freedom. L.E. Judge .”

A true copy of the order endorsed upon the petition. John Ruland Clerk.

County of St. Louis .ss.
The State of Missouri To the sheriff of the county of St. Louis Greeting:

We command you to summon Hardage Lane , if he be found in your county, to appear before
our Honorable Circuit Court on the first day of the next term thereof, to be begun and held at
the city of St. Louis within and for the county of St. Louis , on the second monday of July next
then and there to answer the, unto Aspisa , a woman of colour, of a plea of trespass, for false
imprisonment, to the damage of said plaintiff of three hundred dollars, and have you
then there this writ.

Witness John Ruland Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof herto affixed this 24th June 1837.
John Ruland Clerk

Executed this writ on the 24th day of June 1837 in the
County of St.Louis by offering to read, it and the declaration
to Hardage Lane , the defendant which he refused
to hear and acknowledged the service thereof

James Brotherton Sheriff
By J Gordon DShff,
Service 1.00

No 263
St.Louis Circuit Court
July Term 1837

Freedom

Filed 24th June 1837
John Ruland Clerk

263
In the St. Louis Circuit Court
July Term 1837

and the said Hardage Lane ,
by Geyer , his attorney comes and defends the
force and injury when and says that he
is not guilty of the said suffered, trespass,
and above said to his charge in manner form as
the said plaintiff hath above thereof complained
against him and of this he the said defendant
puts, himself upon the the county -

-

No 203
St.Louis Circuit Court
July Term 1837

plea
not guitly

Filed 12th July 1837
John Ruland Clerk

verdict, judgement for book 9 page 242264
Verdict a judgement for plff,475

To, Hardage Lane
Sir,

Take notice that on thursday the tenth
day of august next between the hours of eight O'clock of the fornoon and of seven O'clock in the
afternoon at the dwelling house of Thomas I. Beeler,
about six, miles from Vincennes , in the County of
in the state of Indiana , defositions of witnesses will
be taken to be read as evidence upon the trial of
an action of trespass, for false imprisonment in for
man for the recovery of freedom now depending in the circuit court of Saint Louis county wherein
I am plaintiff and you are defendant. If the depositions
should not be finished on that day they
will be continued at the same place and between
the same hours from day to day until finished
when and where you will please attend

Aspisa a woman of color
by By F,. W,.Risque her Attorney
St. Louis July 27th 1837

Served this notice by delivering, a copy of it to
Hardage Lane in the county of St. Louis on the
28th day of July 1837

James Brotherton Sheriff
By J , Gordon D , Sheriff
Service 50

copy

County Of St. Louis , Sct.The State Of Missouri ,To any Judge or Justice of the Peace or other judicial officers of the State of Indiana
Greeting:

We, reposing special trust and confidence in your integrity and circumspection, do authorize
and require you, that you cause to come before you, such person or persons as shall
be named to you by Aspasia , a Women of color, her
Attorney or Agent, and him or them examine upon his, her or their corporal oath, (to be by
you administered,) now pending in our Circuit Court , for the county of St. Louis , wherein
Aspasia is plaintiff and Hardage Lane , is
defendant on the part of the plaintiff and having so reduced
the said depositions so taken by you as aforesaid in writing, you are required to send the
same, together with this commission, enclosed under, your seal, to our said Circuit Court ,
with all convenient speed.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit
Court , at the City of St.Louis , this twenty nineth
day of July in the year of our Lord, one
thousand eight hundred and thirty Seven.
Johan Ruland Clerk C.C.

St.Louis Circuit Court

-

Opened & filed 15th august 1837
John Ruland Clerk

Depositions of Witnesses produced sworn and examined
at the dwelling house of Thomas I Beelen about six
miles from Vincennes in the County of and State
of Indiana . before me John Collins a Justice of the
peace in and for the County of Knox in a
certain cause now depending in the Circuit Court
of St. Louis County in the State of Missouri between
Aspasia (a woman of color) plaintiff and Hardage
Lane defendent on the part of the Plaintiff

Robert Buntin , lawful age being produced
sworn and examined on the part of the Plaintff
deposith and saith

Question by plff atty,- In what year did you come to Vincennes ?

Ans - I came, to Vincennes in April or May 1793
By same- Have you been the owner of any slaves
since your residence in Vincennes ?

Ans - I have been the owner of Black people
I bought them generally with the intnention,
of liberating, them, I bought them all after
1878 the first I bought was William and
Old Judy his wife with Sally her oldest child
I bought also afterwards young Judy from
William Sullivan , in the year 1799- as appears
by his Bill of sale to me filed in the
Circuit Court of St. Louis County Missouri
in the case of Judy in a suit for freedom attached to my depsition therein which
should be taken as a part of this.

By same- How long did you own young Judy ?
Ans - I don't know perhaps two. three or four years.

By same, How did you dispose of young Lady and to whom
did you sell on transfer her?

Ans- I cant be positive, but believe I transfered
her to Louise and Duboir and, I am pretty
sure,of it, but will and state so positively,
I think I heard that he afterwards had sold her to Pierre Menard ,, This was the common repeat

By name - did you or did you not sell her as
a slave. State if so how you sold her?

Ans- I did not sell her as a slave, I believe
I never sold any black or blacks as slaves
I think I sold her with her Indentures for
fifteen years. She was bound to me for a certain length of time to repay me the amount,
I had expended for her, and I sold only her services for the time specified in the
Indenture whatever it was which I cant
certainly recollected, it has been so long since
but believe it was fifteen years from the
time she was bound. I generally took
an indenture for this time-

By same- Did you or did you not bring young Judy to Vincennes from Kentucky ?-

Ans - I bought her in Louisville and brought
her to Vincennes immediately.

By same- What became of the indenture of which
you speak and where are they now ?

Ans - I dont know what became of them
nor where they are now . I generally took
an indenture and gave them a copy of it for
their own use.

old Judy and young Judy did not agree
very well and for that reson I sold young
Judy or her services. I have no recollection
of giving the purchaser any Indenture
and think that the purchaser from me neither, took a bill of sale, Indenture
or any thing else.

I John Collins a Justice of the Peace do hereby certify
that Robert Buntin the deponent whose place of
residence is Knox County in the State of Indiana
was by me affirmid to testify the whole truth
of his knowledge touching the matter in countroversy in the cause aforesaid. That deponent was examined
and his examination reduced to writing and
subscribed by said deponent in my presence
on the 10th day of August eighteen hundred and thirty seven and
between the hours of 8 O clock
in the forenoon and of seven O clock in the afternoon
at the house of Thomas I Beeler about six miles
from Vincennis in the County of Knox and State of
Indiana .

Given and certified this 10th day of August 1837
John Collins,

I John Collins a Justice of the peace in and
for the County of Knox and State of Indiana do
certify that in pursuance of the annexed
commission and Notice came before me

at the house of Thomas I Beeler about six miles
from Vincennes in the County and State last aforesaid
Robert Buntin who was by me there sworn
and examined and such examination reduced
to writing and subscribed by him in my presence
and his said depsition is now here with returned
given at the House of Thomas I Beeler aforesaid
in the County of Knox and State of Indiana this
10th day of August A . D .1837.

Jno Collins,
Justice Peace

State of Indiana
Knox County

I Alexander Clerk
of the Knox Circuit Court to hereby certify that
John Collins on the tenth day of August in the year
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty
seven was and now is a Justice of the Peace within
and for the County of Knox in the State of Indiana duly Commissioned and acting as such and
that full faith, and credit are due his acts as such
In testimony whereof A D Scott Clk,
have heareunto subscribed my name and
affixed the seal of Office at Vincennes
this 11th day of August Eighteen hundred
and thirty Seven

A.D.Scoll
By W.R. M.Cord
Clerks fees for certificate 50

Witness, fee$:50Clerks fee as above:50Justices $20:00 Jno Collins,$3 :00

Afdvt.

Geyer & Hudson
Pd

Filed 30th Nov:1837

John Ruland Clerk

Suit for freedom
Hardage Lane the above
named deft. makes oath that
Peter Menard is a material witness for him on the
trial of the above entitled cause that there is no
other witness in attendance upon whose testimony the
said Deft. can safely rely to prove the same facts
that the said Peter Menard is expected to prove Deft.
states that he cannot safely go to trial without the
testimony of said Menard , that said Menard is not
absent by the consent connivance or procurement
of this affiant. Affiant states that he verily believes
the testimony of said Menard to be of the utmost
importance on his behalf. Affiant states that said
Menard is a resident of the town of Kaskaskia
in the State of Illinois and that said Menard informed
this affiant that he would be in the City of St.Louis
during the present term of this Hon. Court, and could
give his testimony orally on behalf of affiant,
which mode was deemed preferable to the taking
the deposition of said Menard . Affiant further
states that said Menard did come to the City of
St.Louis & was in the city at the commencement of this Court assurable to his statement to this affiant
but left the city without giving to this affiant
sufficient notice to take the deposition of the
said Menard . Affiant states that he has not
taken the depositon of the said Menard for
the reasons above stated and for the further rea
son that he thought he would be able to have
the personal attendance of said Menard on the
trial of the above cause. Affiant states that if a continuance is granted him he will be
able by the next term of this Hon. Court to have
the personal attendance of said Menard or
his deposition. Affiant states that since the
commencement of the present term of this
Court he has discovered, other evidence which

he is advised and believes will also be material
for his defence, which evidence can only be procured
by going or sending to the town of Vincennes
in the State of Indiana , and which evidence
was discovered too late to be obtained at the
present term of this Hon. Court. Affiant states
that he believes that he will be able to procure
all the necessary evidence for his defence by
the next Term of this Court should a conti
nuance be granted, affiant states that if he
is forced to go to trial at the present Term of this
Hon. Court, that he believes manifest injustice
will be done him, he further states that this
continuance is not asked for the purpose
of vexation of delay but for the attainment
of justice above.

Sworn to and subscribed
in open court this 30th
Novr. 1837.
John Ruland Clerk.
Hardage Lane .

Dep: for Deft
Opened & filed Aug: 13th 1838

John Ruland Clerk

St. Louis Cricuit Court.

Take notice, that on the twenty first day of July in the
year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and thirty eight, between the hours of
seven, in the forenoon, and seven in the afternoon, of that day, at
the office of George W. Ewing in the
town of Vincennes State of Indiana
depositions will be taken by the undersigned, to be read on the trial of the above entitled case, on
behalf of the Defendant; and that the taking of side depositions, if not completed
on that day, will be continued from day to day, at the same place, and between the same hours,
until completed.

To the above named Plff
Hardage Lane .
By H B Hudson
his Atty.

copy of the within notice this
9th day of July 1838.

F.W. Risque
Atty for
Plff.

County Of St. Louis , Sct.The State Of Missouri ,To any Judge or Justice of the Peace or other Judicial Officer of the
State of Indiana .
Greeting.

We, reposing special trust and confidence in your integrity and circumspection, do au
thorize and require you, that you cause to come before you, such person or persons as
shall be named to you by Hardage Lane , his
Attorney or Agent, and him or them examine upon his, her or their corporal oath, (to be
by you administered,) touching their knowledge of any thing that may relate to a certain
matter of controversy, now pending in our Circuit Court , for the County of St. Louis ,
wherein Aspasia is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane is
defendant on the part of the defendant and having
so reduced the said depositions so taken by you as aforesaid in writing, you are required
to send the same, together with this commission, enclosed under your seal, to our said
Circuit Court , with all convenient speed.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit
Court , at the City of St. Louis , this Eleventh
day of July in the year of our Lord, one
thousand eight hundred and thirty-Eight.
J.W.Ruland
Clerk C.C.

St. Louis Cir: Court.

Depositions of witnesses produced, sworn and
examined at the office of George W Ewing in Vincennes
in the County of Knox and the State of Indiana before
me Martin Robinson a Justice of the Peace in and for
said County in a certain cause now depending in
the Circuit Court for the County of Saint Louis and State
of Missouri wherein Aspasia is plaintiff and Hardage
Lane is defendant.

David Warford of lawful age being produced
sworn and examined on the part of the defendants
deposeth and saith, that he is unacquainted with
the parties and knows nothing of the matters in controversy
between them.

David Warford ,

I Martin Robinson a Justice of the Peace within and
for the County of Knox and State of Indiana do
certify that David Warford the deponent
whose place of residence is Vincennes County of Knox
and State of Indiana was by me sworn to testify
the whole truth of his knowledge touching the matters in
controversy in the cause aforesaid, that the deponent
was examined and his examination reduced to
writing and subscribed by said deponent in my
presence on the twenty first day of July in the year
of our Lord one thousand Eight Hundred and
thirty Eight between the hours of seven in the forenoon
and seven of the afternoon at the office of George
W Ewing in Vincennes in the County of Vick and
State of Indiana

Given and certified the 21 day of
July 1838.
Martin Robinson P

Not being able to complete the taking of said depositions by
reason of the absence of the witnesses I adjourn the further

taking of the same Monday the 23rd day of July tomorrow
being Sunday, there to be continued at the same place
and between the same Hours mentioned in the annexed
notice

Martin Robinson P

Pursuant to the adjournment above stated on the 23rd day
of July in the year Eighteen Hundred and thirty
Eight between the hours of seven in the forenoon and
seven in the afternoon at the office of George W
Ewing in Vincennes , County of Vick and State of
Indiana I continued the taking of said depositions
as follows,

Robert Bunton of lawful age being produced
sworn and examined on the part of the defendant
deposeth and saith-

Question by deft: When did you come to Vincennes
answer: about April or May in the year 1792

Question by deft, at which time did you bring to Vincennes ,
a colored woman called young Judy .

Answer, in the fall of the Year 1799.

Question by deft. How long did you keep said
colored Woman in Vincennes .

Answer: I do not recollect.

Question by deft, How and where did
you obtain said colored Woman
called Judah

Answer, I obtained her of William Sullivan in
Louisville Kentucky in October 1799 and
received a Bill of sale for her of that date
which was attached to my deposition given
at a former examination.

Question by deft, What became of said Judy -
Answer I think I transferred her to Taussaint Dubais

Question by deft, did you purchase her as a slave

Answer I did but it was my instruction to set her
free, so soon as I was paid for the money advanced
for her, for which purpose I took her indentures
for fifteen years as I believed

Question by deft, What became of those Indentures

Answer, I do not know certainly but believe I transferred
them to the person I transferred her to.

Question by deft, Was Eliher Stuart residing in Vincennes
at the time you brought said Judy there.

Answer I think he was, but I am not certain my
impression in that Eliher Stuart came to Vincennes
in the year 1796

Question by deft, did you ever own any other colored
woman called Judy , in Vincennes , except
the said Judy

Answer I owned one, other colored woman in
Vincennes and at the same time called
Old Judy who with her children I set free
and are now living in the State of Indiana .
Except one called Sarah who left with her own consent, and went away with her
husband

Question by deft, did you know Mrs.

Answer, I did, she was brought in by the Indians
as a prisoner, it might have been about
the time I brought said Judy here, I do not

know positively

Question by deft, How long did you keep said
young Judy in Vincennes after you brought
her there

Answer I do not know, whether six months or
four years, but I think it was not more than
four years

Question by plff, What induces you to belive you
took Indentures from your Judy for
fifteen years.

Answer, My intention was when I purchased
her and others to set them free after
fifteen years service and I recollect
dinstinctly that I wished to transfer her
indenture, to the person I sold her
services and I offered to the person to
whom I sold her services a Bill of sale
stating that the time she had to serve which
he refused, as I think, stating that he did
not want a Bill of Sales.

I Martin Robinson a Justice of the Peace of Knox , county
in the State of Indiana do hereby certify that Robert ,
Buntin the deponent place of Residence is Knox
County in the State of Indiana was by and sworn
to certify the whole truths of his knwledge touching the
matter in controversy in the cause aforesaid that
deponent was examined and his examination
reduced to writing and subscribed by said
in my presence on the 23rd day of July.

In, the year Eighteen Hundred and thirty
Eight between the hours of seven in the forenoon
and seven in the afternoon at the office of
George W . Eweing in Vincennes Knox county
and State of Indiana .

Given and certified the 23rd day of July 1838
Martin Robinson

I Martin Robinson a Justice of the Peace within & for Knox
county in the state of Indiana do certify that in
pursuance of the commission and notice
cause before me at the office of George W Ewing
Vincennes in the county and State of aforesaid
David Warford , and Robert Bunton served
by me sworn and examined and such examinations
reduced to writing and subscribed by them respectively
in my presence and then said depositions are
now, herewith returned

Given at, Vincennes in the county of
Knox and State of Indiana the 23rd day of July
1838.Martin Robinson J P.

State of Indiana
Knox County B

I Alexander D Scott Clerk of
the Knox Circuit Court do hereby certify that Martin Robinson
Esq on the twenty first and twenty third days of July in the year
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty eight
was and now is executing Justice of the Peace within and for the
County of Knox in the State of Indiana duly commissioned
and acting as such and that full faith and credit are
due to his acts as such.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed
my name and affixed the seal of said court
of Vincennes this county this twenty fourth day of July
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred thirty eight.A.D. Scott Clk
By Wm. Cord D C

County of St. Louis , sct.The State Of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St. Louis County --- Greeting.

You are hereby commanded to summon Francis Culy, Wilson Primm
Michael Jesson, Madame Belcour , Rev. J.A. Lutz
Madame Zamar, and Hardage Lane
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on friday 24th of august
Instant at the City of St. Louis then and there to Testify,
and the truth to say, in a certain matter of contoversy now pending in our said court
wherein Aspisa a woman of color is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane is
defendant on the part of the plaintiff
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court ,
at the City of St. Louis , this 17th day of august
in the year of our Lord, eighteen hundred and thirty eightM O Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Spoe

Friday 24th August
F. Culy W. Primm
M. Jesson, Madame Zamar
Madame Belcour
Hardage Lane
Rev. J. A. Lutz
for plaintiff

Served this writ on F Creely
W Primm M Jesson Madame
Zamar and J A Lutz on the 18th and
Madame Belcour on the 20th and
Hardage Lane on the 24th day
of August 1838 in the county
of St Louis

Service $3.50
M Brotherton
Shff

County of St. louis, Sct.State Of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St.Louis County--Greetings.

We command you to attach Michael Jesson, Jos:A Lutz, Madame Belcour
by their bodies and them safely keep, so that you have their bodies before
the Judge of our Circuit Court , now in session at the City of St.Louis , within and for the County of St .
Louis , forthwith (this28th August) 1838 then and there to testify and
the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy, now pending in our said Circuit Court , between Aspisa Plaintiff and Hardage
Lane defendant wherein the said Michael Jesson, J A
Lutz & Madame Balcour have heretofore been summoned on the part of the said Aspisa .

Witness John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court , at the City
of St. Louis , this 28th day of August
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight and thirty eight. John Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Attachment
Witnesses

Mr JessonMa Belcour I.A.Lutz.

Executed this writ and have now the
the body of the within named persons in
open Court.

Marshall Brotherton
Sheriff
Service $3.00.

County of St. Louis ,sct.The State Of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St. Louis County - Greeting.

You are hereby commanded to summon Adam L Mills
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, he be and appear in proper person
befoe the Judge of our Circuit Court forthwith
at the City of St. Louis , then and there to Testify,
and the truth to say, in a certain matter of controversy now peding in our said Court,
wherein Aspisa is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane
defendant on the part of defendant
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court ,
at the City of St. Louis , this 28 day of August
in the year of our Lord, eighteen hundred and thirty eight
John Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Executed this writ by offering to read it to
to A L Mills on 28th day August
1838 in the County of St Louis

Marshall Brotherton Sheriff
By Benjamin Lucy Dpt

dft

A L Mills
for 29th

Executed this writ in the County
of St Louis by reading it to A L
Mills on the 29th Aug 1838

Marshall Brotherton
Sheriff
Service,50

County of St. Louis , sct.State Of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St. Louis County - Greetings.

We command you to attach Francis Mallett Pierre Chouteau Sr . Madame Tamey Mad Bouis Mad Gion
by their bodies and them safely keep, so that you have their bodies before
the Judge of our Cicuit Court , now in session at City of St. Louis , within and for the County of St .
Louis , forthwith1838 then and there to testify and
the truth to say in certain matter of controversy, now pending in our said Cicuit Court , between
Aspese plaintiff, and Hardage
Lane defendant wherein the said witnesses,
have theretofore been summoned on the part of the said

Witness John Ruland , Cleark of our said Circuit Court , at the City
of St.Louis , this 28th day of August
in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight.
John Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Executed this writ and have now the bodies
Francis Mallet, Pierre Chouteau Sr &
Mad Bouis in open court.
Mad Tamey
being sick was not brot in.
Mad Guion
was not found

Marshall Brotherton
Sheriff

Service3.00 non est, -1.00$4.00

Attachment for

Francois Mallett
Pierre Chouteau
Madame Tamey
Mad Bouis
Mad Gion

County of St. Louis ,sct.The State Of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St. Louis County - Greeting.

You are hereby commanded to summon John H Baldwin and
Mr Denny (Grocer near Green Tree)
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , forthwith
at the City of St. Louis , then and there to Testify,
and the truth to say, in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
wherein Aspisé is
plaintiff and Lane is
defendant on the part of Defts
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court ,
at the City of St. Louis , this 29th day of August
in the year of our Lord, eighteen hundred and thirty eight
Jno Ruland Clerk, C.C. by
Geo A Hyde Depty

Executed this writ by reading it
to John H Baldwin
Denny
not found in my County

Marshall Brotherton
Sheriff

Service,50Nonest121/2,621/2

July term 1838
Ent

Deft

Jno.H Baldwin 29
Mr Denny
forthwith

1. If the Jury shall be of opinion that the
Mother of the plaintiff was in the year 1799 a slave
in the State of Kentucky and was brought
from there to Vincennes in the N.West
county and domiciled there by the owner they shall find for plaintiff

2. If the Jury shall be of opinion on the whole
of the evidence that the plaintiffs Mother
was only in the N.West County and
was conducted or sent through this County
by her owner for the purpose if being sold as a
slave in upper Louisiana they shall find for def.

If the Jury shall be of opinion that the female
ancestor of the plaintiff was a slave in Kentucky
on the 22nd Oct 1799 was then sold to Robert Buntin
and by said Buntin brought to Vincennes and
used by said Buntin at Vincennes or elsewhere
in Indiana or Illinois as his slave domiciled
with himself they ought to find for plaintiff

If the jury shall be of the opinion that the evidence
before them does not satisfactorily prove that said
female ancestor of the plaintiff was used
by said Robert Buntin or any other person has
the lawful control over her under said
Buntin as a domiciled slave in the North West County they
ought to find for defendant.

If the Jury shall be of opinion that the female ancestor
of the plaintiff was not detained or used as, a
domiciled slave at Vincennes or any other place
of the North County but was only carried through the
County between Kentucky and Mississippi as SLouis
for the purpose of selling her as a slave at
St.Louis or on the front side of the Mississippi
they shall find for Def.

Verdict of Jury
Aspisa Versus Lane

The Jury in the case of Aspisa against Lane find
for the Plantiff.

Saint Louis August 29.1838. Timothy Oakley Sr Foreman.

Suit for freedom
And the said deft
comes and moves the Court to set aside
the verdict of the Jury rendered in this
cause for the following reasons -

1. The verdict is against evidence

2. The verdict is against the right
of evidence

3. The verdict is against law and
evidence

4. The verdict is against law

5. The Court misdirected the Jury

6. That illegal testimony was admitted
and went to the Jury

7. That the Deft has discovered new
evidence since the trial.

Geyer Hudson & Primm
Atty for Defendant

Reasons for New Trial

Geyer et al
Atty for Def.
Filed August 31st 1838
John Ruland Clerk

In the Circuit Court of St. Louis County July Term 1838

Suit for freedom

Be it remembered that upon the trial of this cause
the plaintiff in support of her action offered and read in evi
dence the depositions of Robert Bunton taken on behalf of
the plaintiff and the defendant, the bill of sale from William
Sullivan to Robert Bunton of a negro girl Judy , and the
deposition of Pierre Menard taken on behalf of the de
fendant and produced and examined the witnesses hereinafter
named. The first depositoin of Robert Bunton offered and
read upon the said trial is in the words, letters and
figures following to wit (after striking out that por
tion of the said deposition which was subjected to at the
trial) "Robert Bunton Sr, of lawful age being pro
duced sworn and examined on the part of the plaintiff
deposeth and saith Question by Plffs Atty: In what
year did you come to Vincennes ? Ans: I came to
Vincennes in April or May 1793. By same: Have
you been the owner of any slaves since your resi
dence in Vincennes ? Ans: I have been the owner
of black peeple. I bought them generally with the

intention of liberating them, I bought them all after
1787. The first I bought ws William and old
Judy his wife with Sally her oldest child. I bought
also afterwards Young Judy from William Sullivan
in the year 1799 - as appears by his bill of sale
to me filed in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County
Missouri in the case of Judy in a suit for freedom
attached to my deposition therein such should be
taken as a part of this. By same: How long
did you own Young Judy ? Ans: I dont know,
perhaps two, three or four years. By same: How
did you dispose of young Judy and to whom did
you sell or transfer her? Ans: I cant be positive
but believe I transferred her to Tousaint Dubois decd, I am pretty sure of it, but will not state
so positively. (Here follows in the deposition the part
stucken out not read at the trial and not copied here) By same: Did
you or did you not sell her as a slave, state if so
how you sold her? Ans: I did not sell her as a
slave. I believe I never sold any black or blacks
as slaves.
(Here follows an other part of the said deposi
tion not read upon the trial and not copied here)

By same. Did you or did you not bring young Judy
to Vincennes from Kentucky ? Ans: I bought her
in Louisville and brought her to Vincennes im
mediately. By same. What became of the indenture
of which you speak and where are they now. Ans: (a part of the answer to the above question was not read
upon the trial and is here omitted)(it concludes as follows)
old Judy and young Judy did not agree very
well and for that reason, I sold young Judy or
rather her services. I have no recollection of giving
the purchaser any indenture and rather think the
purchaser from me neither took a Bill of sale,
Indenture, or any thing else. (Signed) Robert Bunton ". The Plaintiff next offered in evidence and read the second deposi
tion of the said Robert Bunton taken on behalf of
the defendant in the words, letters and figures follow
ing to writ: Robert Bunton of lawful age being pro
duced, sworn and examined on the part of the defen
dant deposeth and saith. Question by deft: When did you
come to Vincennes . Answer.
About april or may in
the year 1793. Question by deft: At what time did
you bring to Vincennes a colored woman called young
Judy ?
Answer.
In the fall of the year 1799.

Question by Deft.
How long did you keep said colored
woman in Vincennes . Answer.
I do not recollect. Question by deft.
How and where did you obtain
said colored woman called Judy ?

Answer. I obtained her of William Sullivan in
Louisville Kentucky in October 1799 and received
a Bill of sale for her of that date which was
attached to my deposition given at a former
examination. Question by deft.
What became
of said Judy . Answer.
I think I transfered
her to Tousiant Dubois . Question by deft.
Did
you purchase her as a slave? Answer.
I did
but it was my intention to set her free so soon
as I was paid for the money advanced for her. Question by deft.
Was Elisha Stout residing in
Vincennes at the time you brought said Judy
then. Answer.
I think he was, but am not
certain my impression is that Elisha Stout came to

Vincennes in the year 1796.

Question by Deft.
Did you ever own any other colored
woman called Judy , in Vincennes except the said
Judy ? Answer.
I owned one other colored woman in
Vincennes and at the same time called old Judy
who with her children I set free and are now living in
the State of Indiana , except one called Sarah , who
left with her own consent, and went away with her
husband. Question by deft.
Did you know Mrs Cheer Answer. I did, she was brought in by the Indians
as a prisoner. It might have been about the
time I brought said Judy here, I do not know
positively. Question by deft.
How long did you
keep said young Judy in Vincennes after you
brought her there? Answer.
I do not know,
whether six months or four years, but I think
it was not more than four years.

My intention was when I purchased
her and others to set them free after fifteen years
service,

- and I offered to the person to whom I
sold her services, a Bill of sle stating the
time she had to serve which he refused, as
I think, stating that he did not want a Bill
of sale. (Signed) Robert Bunton . The Bill of sale
produced and read upon the trial and referred to in this
deposition, of the said Robert Bunton is in the words
letters and figures following to writ. Know all men
by these presents that I, William Sullivan of the
County of Jefferson and State of Kentucky for and
in consideration of the sum of Two hundred and
fifty dollars to me in hand paid have this
day bargained, sold, and delivered unto Robert
Bunton of Knox County a negro woman
named Judy being the same that I purchased
of Peter Stacey, about sixteen years old the said
negro woman I will warrant and defend from
the claim of all persons whatever. Witness my
hand and seal this twenty second day of October
1799(nine).

(Signed) William Sullivan ,
Witness.
C. James Beauvary

The Plaintiff then read in evidence the deposition of
Pierre Menard in the words, letters and figures following
to wit. Peter Menard of lawful age being produced sworn
and examined on the part of the defendant deposes
and says. Sometime between the year 1793 and 1804
I sold a black girl named Judy to Guillaume He
bert Lecompte of St. Louis for four hundred dollars
cash, and sold her as a slave for life. She was
not my property, but was brought to me by Tou
saint Dubois as the property of Robert Bunton to be
sold by me, the money I received as aforesaid
I paid to Dubois for Bunton . I am not
sure, but I believe that after I had made the sale
verbally that a bill of sale, was sent to me by
Bunton from Vincennes , but I may have given
him a bill of sale myself. At the time I sold her
she was very young, but large of her age, she
had no children. I was asked by Dubois whether
I could sell a slave belonging to Robert Bunton . I told him I could not tell, but would try. Judy the woman here present is the same produced to me
by Dubois , and who was represented to me as a
slave for life, and was as such by me sold to
said Lecompte . Mr. Dubois was a person in whom

I had the most unfounded confidence and whose
character stood very high for honesty and integrity. He and Bunton both lived at Vincennes In
diana,
cross examined by attorney for plaintiff. Ans: I can say that it was in the life time
of my first
wife (whom I married in 1792 & who
died in 1804 in the month of June) that I sold
Judy , it was several years I think before 1804,
perhaps about 1798. Ans: I think she remained
at my house in Kaskaskia eight or ten days. Ans: I was acquainted with Robert Bunton &
thought him to be a clever fellow - when I first
knew him he enjoyed a pretty good character. He was commissary of the V.S.Troops & was after
wards clerk of the Court of Knox County in the North
Western Territory. Ans: I believe his general repu
tation as a man of integrity was good. (signed).

Pierre Menard

The palintiff next produced and examined as a witness Francis Crely , who states that he was born and raised
in Vincinnes, where he remained with the family of Robert Bunton
and was raised in three squares of him. That Bunton had several colored persons living with him, viz old

Judy and her two children Salley and Louisa . She also
had one by the name of Nancy who ran off. Bunton
also has young Judy who was no relation of old
Judy . That the colored woman now produced
in court is the same person called young Judy
whom he saw in the possession of Robert Bunton
and performing the ordinary duties of a servant in the family
at Vincennes Indiana . Her age when in the possession
of Bunton he did not precisely know, but she
was a good sized girl. He saw her in St. Louis
for the first time in year 1819 or 1820
in the possession of Madame Lecompte . He did
not recognize Judy on seeing her in St.Louis at
first sight, but did so, afterwards. He could not
say how long Judy was in the possession of Robert
Bunton at Vincennes . That the family of negros in
the possession of Madame Lecompte , when he first
knew them were the young Judy and her children
Aspisa, Celeste and Tousaint. That Aspisa the plain
tiff was in the possession of Hardage Lane the de
fendant at the time of the institution of this suit. Upon cross examination he stated, that while he lived

with his father in Vincennes between 1800 & 1806 he first
saw Judy and did not see her after he went ap

prentice which was in 1806, at which time he was not
quite fourteen years old. He knew Judy in the possess
ion of Bunton at least one year or more, but does
not recollect how long. He came to St.Louis in the
year 1816 and left his apprenticeship in 1814.

He was twenty years and six months old when he came
out of his apprenticeship. Judy was changed in her ap
pearance, when he first saw her in St.Louis , she
had grown fleshy and older. When Bunton was a
tolerably aged man and a man of family when wit
ness first knew him, and at present he must be quite
an old man. Witness saw him about a year ago
supposses him to be man on to seventy and was
more than thirty years old when he (witness) first
knew him at Vincennes . His oldest child was older
than witness. The object of witness going to Vincennes
a year ago was to see his relations and to accompa
ny a Mr Bunton who was employed to take depo
sitions in this suit. Witness called on Bunton and told
him that Judy was in St.Louis . He had not just
come out of his apprenticeship when he came to St .
Louis . He had not seen Judy from the time she
left Vincennes until he saw her in St.Louis . That he was employed by Mr Risque to go to Vincennes and was
paid two dollars and fifty cents a day and his expenses.

Wilson Prison a witness being produced and examined
on behalf of the plaintiff stated that he had known Judy
as long as he can remember and that she belonged to Ma
dame Lecompte when he first knew her. Her children
as far as his recollects are Aspisa, Celeste and Tousaint. In the inventory of Madame Lecompt states Judy
& her three children Aspisa, Celeste & Tousaint are
named, and were sold by the administrator of
Mrs. Lecompte in November or December 1832.

Madame Belcour a witness produced and examined on
the part of the plaintiff stated that she has known
Judy for a great many years. She belonged to her
grand father William Hebert Lecompte who bought
her ( Judy ) (as she witness thinks) from Col:Menard
of was a pretty stout girl when bought
by his grandfather Lecompte , she had no children
at the time, but afterwards had Aspisa, Celeste
and Tousaint. That her grand father had no other
Judy , but she was sold to him by Col: Menard. This being all of the evidence on the part of the plaintiff
the defendant then produced and read in evidence
Bill of sale in the Spanish language only interpreted

into the english language from Pierre Menard
to William Hebert Lecompte dated the 7th(seventh)
day of August 1800,(eighteen hundred) made at
St.Louis before the then commandant of St.Louis
in the usual form and was produced upon the
trial as one of the spanish archives now
& then in the custody of the recorder of St.Louis
County, by which it appeared that Pierre Menard
sold said Judy as his own property to said Lecompte as a slave
for life for the sum of four hundred and fifty
dollars with warranty and a clause of
mortgage to secure the purchase against defect
of . To the reading of which said spanish bill of
sale the plaintiff did not object.

Francois Mallet a witness produced and sworn and
examined on the part of the defendant stated that
he became a resident of Vincennes in the year
1804. That Robert Bunton lived there
that time and was an old man. That he became acquainted with his family a short time after
his arrival. That he ( Bunton ) had a son older than
witness. That the said Bunton had a negro woman
named Judy who at the time had children.

and who was living in the State of Indiana when
witness left. Witness did not see Judy this mother
of plaintiff during his residence in Vincennes
nor has he ever seen her in the possession of
Robert Bunton . That witness knew Tousaint Du
bois who was drowned about sixteen years ago
and lived a short distance from the town of
Vincennes when witness knew him.
That in ordinary or good weather
it took about four ro five days to travel from Louis
ville Kentucky to Vincennes Indiana and as many
days to travel from Vincennes to Kaskaskia . But some times owning to high waters travellers
were often detained for several weeks. That owning to the indians who then inhabited-
Indiana and llinois it was dangerous to travel
through Kentucky and that sincerely
there was as much talk and preparation in
travelling from Louisville to Vincennes and from
Vincennes to Kaskaskia as is usual now in
a trip to the Rocky Mountains. This being all the evidence adduced upon the trial material to the issue the was
submitted to the Jury who found a verdict for

the plaintiff. After the rendition of the said verdict
the defendant by his counsel moved the court to
set aside the verdict aforesaid and sent a
new trial upon his reasons filed which are in the
words letters and figures following to wit: And the said defendant comes and moves the court to
set aside the verdict of the jury
for the following reasons. 1. The verdict is against
evidence. 2. The verdict is against the weight of evidence. 3. The verdict is against law and evidence. 4. The verdict is against law,. 5. The court misdirected
the jury. 6. That illegal testimony was
admitted and went to the jury. 7. That
the defendant was discovered new evi
dence since the trial.

(Signed) Giyor Hudson & Primm.
for Deft. The instructed the jury in the words letters
and figures following to wit, (here insert the, instructions of the Court
hereto, attached.)

There was no affidavit filed or evidence adduced to
prove that the defandant had discovered new
or material evidence since the trial aforesaid
or the rendition of the said verdict. The court
sustained the motion of the said defendant and gran
ted a new trial, to which opinion of the

court in granting the new trial aforesaid the
plaintiff by her counsel excepts and prays
that this her bill of exception may be
signed which is done accordingly
on third day of September in the
year of our Lord one thousand eight
hundred and thirty eight.

.

Bill of Exceptions
by Plff

Filed Sep:15th 1838.
John Ruland clerk.

In the Circuit Court
Novr Term 1838

Hardage Lane the above named defen
dant being sworn on his oath says that Pierre
Menard is a material witness for him & in the
trial of the above case, that no other witness
is in attendance by whom he can prove the
same facts that he expects to be able to prove
by said Menard , that he cannot safely proceed
to trail without the testimony of said Menard ,
that said Menard is absent without the
consent connivance or procurement of said
affaint, that if this case is continued be
believes he can obtain said Menard's tes
timony by the next term of this Court;
that this application is not made for vexa,
tion or delay but for the purposes of sub
stantial justice; & that the reason why he
has not the testimony of said Menard at
this time, is, that he was fully under the im
pression that this case was removed from this
Court to St Charles County, & made his ar
rangements to have said Menard's testimony
at the Court of said St.Charles County, and
that he was not undeceived, until a few
days since when it was too late to obtain
said Menard's testimony.

Hardage Lane .
Sworn to & subscribed in open court.
Decr 7th 1838.
Jn. Ruland Clerk.

Affidavit.

Filed Decr. 7th 1838.
Jn. Ruland Clerk.

County of St. Louis , sct.
The State Of Missouri ,
To the Sheriff of St. Louis County...Greeting.

You are hereby commanded to summon Francis Culy,
Helen Lasouk, Madame Belcour ,
Madame Zamean or Zama
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, he be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court ,on the 5th of Dec
ember instant at the City of St.Louis , then and there to Testify,
and the truth to say, in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court, wherein Aspisa or aspasia is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane is
defendant on the part of the plaintiff
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , clerk of our said Circuit Court ,
at the City of St. Louis , this 20 day of Decemeber
in the year of our Lord, eighteen hundred and thirty eight. JW. Ruland , Clerk, C.C.

Executed this writ by reading it
to all the withon named witnesses.

M.Brotherton Sheriff.
Service $2.00.

Ext.

.

Witnesses for Plaintiff.

Tuesday 5th Dec:
F.Culy.
Helen Lasouk.
Madame Belcour .
Madame Zama.

County Of St. Louis , Sct.State Of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St.Louis County,---Greeting:

You are hereby commanded to summon Adam L Mills Jno H
Baldwin, Denny Francis Mallet, Pierre Chouteau
Mme Bouis Mdme Guion
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 3rd Aprilnext
at the city of St.Louis , then and there to testify,
and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
wherein Aspisa is
plaintiff and H. Lane is
defendant on the part of Deft
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court , at
the City of St.Louis , this 6 day of March
in the year of our Lord, eighteen hundred and thirty nine.
Jn.Ruland , Clerk, C.C.

Executed this writ by reading it to Pierre
Chouteau sen,1st April, 1839 in the County
of St.Louis .

Marshall Brotherton .
Sheriff.
Service 50 .

March 7 1839

Deft. Adam L Mills

Jno H BaldwinDennyFrancis Mallet Pierre Chouteau Mdme Bouis Mme Guion .3 April.

County of St.Louis , Sct.
Sate Of Missouri ,
To the Sheriff of St.Louis County, - Greeting:

You are hereby commanded to summon Francis Crely , Wilson Primm
Michael Jesson, Madame Lamar, Madame Bel
Cour, Hardage Lane , J A Lutz
That setting aside all manner of execuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the judge of our Circuit Court , on the 3rd April
Next
at the city of St.Louis , then and there to testify,
and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
Wherein Aspisa is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane is
defendant on the part of plaintifF
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , clerk of our said Circuit Court , at
the City of St.Louis , this 6 day of March
in the year of our Lord, eighteen hundred and thirty - nine
JW Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Executed this within the
County of St Louis by reading
it to Wilson Primm & Michael
Jesson 1st april 1839

Service 1.00
Marshall Brotherton
Sheriff

March 1 1839

Plff

Francis Crely
Wilson Primm
Michael Jesson
Madame Lamar
Madame Belcour
Hardage Lane
J A Lutz
3 April

County of St.Louis , Sct.
State Of Missouri ,
To the Sheriff of St. Louis County - Greeting:

You are hereby commanded to summon Francois Crely, Wilson , Primm
Michael Jesson, Madame Lamar, Madame Bel
Cour, Hardage Lane , J A Lutz
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the judge of our Circuit Court , on the 19th April
at the city of St. Louis , then and there to testify,
and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
Wherein Aspisa is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane
defendant on the part of Plff
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit
Court , at the City of St.Louis , this 5th
day of April in the year of our Lord, eighteen
hundred and thirty - nine. JW Ruland Clerk,C.C.

March 7 1839

Plff
Francois Crely

Wilson Primm Michael JessonMadame LamarMadame Belcour Hardage Lane J A Lutz not served by order of plffs atto
19 April

Executed this writ in the County
of St Louis by reading it to F.
Crely, W.Primm - M. Jesson, Madame
Belcour & H. Lane on the 10th 11th,13
april 1839 M Lamar not found
in my County J A Lutz not served by
order of plffs atto-

Service2.50honest12262

M. Brotherton shff

County of St.Louis , Sct.
State Of Missouri ,
To the Sheriff of St.Louis County - Greeting:

You are hereby commanded to summon Adam L Mills, John H
Baldwin - Denny, Francis Mallet, Pierre
Chouteau Mme Bouis Mme Guion
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 19th April
inst at the city of St.Louis , then and there to testify,
and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
wherein Aspisa is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane
defendant on the part of Deft
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court , at
the City of St.Louis , this 5 th
day of April in the year of our Lord, eighteen
hundred and thirty - nine
Jno Ruland Clerk,C.C.

Executed this writ in the County
of St Louis by reading it to A.L.
Mills Jno H Baldwin Frs Mallet
Pierre Chouteau , Mm Bouis - &
Mme Guion 10th April 1839
Denny not found in my County

Marshall Brotherton
Shff

March 7 1839

Adam L Mills
John H Baldwin
Denny
Francis Mallet
Pierre Chouteau
Mm Bouis
Mme Guion
19 April

County of St.Louis , Sct.
State Of Missouri ,
To the Sheriff of St.Louis County - Greeting:

You are hereby commanded to summon Adam S Mills, John H. Baldwin, - Denny , Frs. Mal
lett, Pierre Chouteau , Mdme Bouis , Mdme Guion ,
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 19th inst;
at the city of St.Louis , then and there to testify,
and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
wherein Aspisa is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane is
defendant on the part of the Deft:
and have you then and there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit
Court , at the City of St.Louis , this Seventeenth
day of April in the year of our Lord eighteen
hundred and thirty nine
Jno Ruland Clerk,C.C.

Executed this writ in the County
of St Louis by reading it to A.S.Mills
Jno H Baldwin F Mallett P.Chouteau
Mme Bouis & Mme Guion 15th april
1839 Denny not found in my County-

Mashall Brotherton
Shff

March Term 1839

Deft

A.S.Mills,
J.H.Baldwin,
Denny,
F.Mallett,
P.Chouteau,
Madme Bouis ,
Madme Guion ,
19th Apl.

County of St.Louis , sct.
State Of Missouri ,
To the Sheriff of St.Louis County - Greeting:

You are hereby commanded to summon Pierre Menard
that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, they be and appear in proper person
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the Ninteenth day
of AprilAD 1839 at the City of St.Louis , then and there to testify,
and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy now pending in our said Court,
Wherein Aspisa is
plaintiff and Hardage Lane is
defendant on the part of Defendant
and have you then there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit Court , at
the City of St.Louis , this 19 th
day of April in the year of our Lord eighteen
hundred and thirty - nine
John Ruland Clerk,C.C.

Served this writ on Pierre
Menard on the 19th day of
April 1839

M Brotherton
Sheriff
Service = 50

spa,

Pierre Menard
for Dft,
19th April

The Jury in the case Aspisa against Lane
find for the Plaintiff-

Saint Louis April 26th 1839- Foreman

Verdict of Jury
Aspisa against Lane

Menard
to
Lecomte
Bill of sale of Judy a negro girl 15 years old Augs 7 1800,

I hereby release Pierre Menard from all liability to me
in virtue of his bill of sale of a negro girl named Judy
dated August 7.1800-

Witness my hand and seal this 26th
day of April A D.1800
Hardage Lane seal
Jus Wilson Primm

Hardage Lane

Decisions in main cases for Freedom

Merry vs Jefferi & Menard - Ms Rep 725

The Principles decided in this case is that any colored
person born in the N W, Ty after the ordinance
of 1787 is entitled to freedom if born of a Mother
residing there

Denny vs Whitesides Mo Rep 472 the court uses these
words - “This court thinks that the parson who takes his
blame into said Territory & by the length of his residence
there indicates an intention of making that place
his residence & that of his slave and thereby induces a
Jury to believe, that fact does by such residence-
declare his slave to have become a free man.

Case of-

Franceas Lagrange alias Isidore 2 Mo Rep 20 The facts
as stated by the Court are that in 1816
being owner of Plff sold him to P.Menard for $500
That Menard immediately took him to St Geneveve,
& from there sent him to Mern La Matte in this
state to work - that some time after this Plff
went to Kaskaskias where he was put on Board
a Keel Boat and after remaining about 2 days
went in said Boat as a working hand to New
Orleans - that about the last March 1817 the
plaintiff returned in same boat to Kaskaskias
where he remained a few days (one witness, stated
8 or 9) assisting to reload said Boat, then was
sent in said Boat to the Big Swamp in
Cape Girardeau County & after remaining there
five or six weeks returned in the Boat to Kaskas
kias & after two or three days was sent to deft
P Chouteau Jr , where he has been ever since.
The principles decided in this case are 1 The ordinance
of 1787 was intended as a fundamental law for those
who may choose to live under it rather than as a penal
statute
2 That construing the ordinance the court
will not be tied down to the particular exceptions
contained therein but will construe it according
to its spirit.

Any Sort or Residence construed, or permitted by the
Legal Owner upon the faith of trusts or
contracts in order to defeat the ordinance & thereby
introduce slaver de facto should doubtless entitle a
slave to freedom and should be promoted by a
forfeiture of title to the property”

The Owner of a slave removing to Illinois and carrying his
slave along with him there to remain permanently must
intend to introduce, involuntary servitude, or slavery
against the express terms of the ordinance. But the
Owner of a slave who is merely passing through
the country with him or who may be a resident
in Illinois and may choose to employ him Mining in Missouri or as a sailor or Boat hand upon
the rivers or high seas in Boats or inlets that
occasionally unload their cargoes at
same port or place within the state, though he
may not do much in extending the fundamental
principles of civil, & religious liberty, certainly does
nothing towards slavery on the of the state

Slaves carried into Illinois with a view to Residence
and staying there long enough to acquire the character
of residents do by such residence became free
Milly vs Smith 2 Mo Rep 36

Nat vs Ruddle 3 Mo Rep 400 In this case the court
Instructed the jury - that if they believed from the
evidence that the Master took the slave into Illinois
and used him there as a slave or permitted him
to be used there as such they should find for
the slave. But that if the slave went into
the state on a mere visit or ran away from
Missouri to that State he would not therby
be entitled to his freedom

The master who permits his slave to go to Illinois
& there hire himself commits as great an offense
as he who takes his slave along with him to
reside there.
Ralp vs Davidson 30 Mo Rep 194.

Where a slave stayed in Illinois 30 days during
which she was hired out two days & the
owner pay in Soap held the slave was
entitled to freedom
Julia vs Mr. Kenney 3 Mo Rep
270-

In the case of Rachael vs Walker 4 Mo Rep 350

The question where a slave claims freedom
on account of Residence in Illinois is whether
the master made any unnecessary Delay in
Illinois with his slave it is not whether the
slave acquired a Residence nor is it whether
the Master became a Domesticated resident of
Illinois nor is it of any consequence that
the slave remains voluntarily in Illinois 592
4 Mo Rep
The construction of ordinance of 1787 &

Illinois ban should be the same 4 Mo Rep 592.
Risque & Bird for
Plff

In the cases of Judy vs Meachum , Andrew vs Sarpy
and Aspisa vs Lane in which the facts are the same there inteligent juries have decided
in favour of the Plaintiff. This, I contend, is equivalent to these
verdicts in the same case. Will the court pay no res
pect to the opinions of thirty six honest and intiligent
men this solemly expressed? If the verdict in the
case of Aspisa vs Lane , a case so well and clearly
made out, should be set aside by the court,
the inestimable right of the trial by Jury will become
a mere farce, with which the administration of jus
tice is closed. All which is respectfully submitted

By Risque & Bird
for Pltf.

Suit on Mo
for N.Trial