To the Hon. Alexander Hamilton Judge
of the Circuit Court of St. Louis
County State of Missouri .

Your petitioner
Samuel an infant by his next friend
Marcy T Andrews states that he is
a free person of colour and as
such is entitled to his freedom
for the following reasons to wit
That many years since the time to
your petitioner unknown but previous
to his your petitioners birth that his
mother Mary was the slave of and
owned by an Bowde in the State
of Kentucky and that her said master
and owner removed and took with
him to the State of Ohio your petitioners
mother the said Marcy and there
continued as a permanent resident
and resided in said State of Ohio for
more than one year and as by the residence
aforesaid of petitioners mother
in Ohio she became and is a free person
Your petitioner claims that he is also
a free person and entitled to his freedom
But is now held as a slave by
one Barnard M Lynch .
Your petitioner
further that he is a poor person without
any estate & prays the Court for leave to sue
as a poor person according to the statute
in said cases provided.

Edward by
his next friend
M T Andrews .

To the Clerk of the Circuit Court of St .
Louis County State of Missouri .

It is hereby
ordered that the within named petitioner
Samuel a person of colour by his next friend
Marcy T Andrews be allowed to sue for his
freedom as a poor person without giving security
for costs and that he be allowed reasonable
liberty to attend his counsel and the Court as
occasion may require and that he be not removed
out of the jurisdiction of this court and that
he be not subject to any severity on account of
his suit for freedom.
Given under my hand
as Judge of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County
and State of Missouri this 3rd day of June A.D.
1851

A. Hamilton
Judge 8th

Samuel by next friend

Marcy T. Andrews Petition.

an infant by his
next friend
plaintiff
vs
defendant

In the Circuit
Court of St. Louis
County State of
Missouri

Plaintiff by his next friend
states that he is a free person of color
and that he is entitled to his freedom for the
reasons following to wit.
That many
years since his (plaintiff's) mother was
taken by her then owner and master
Bowde from the State of Kentucky to
the State of Ohio to which latter named
State he Bowde removed and resided permanently
as a citizen for more than
twelve (12) months having plaintiff's
mother in possession and thereby
(her residence in the State of Ohio ) she became
and is free.
Plaintiff states also that since
the time at which his said mother was
taken to and remained in the State of
Ohio that he has been born and then
that his mother being a free person
he is also free and entitled to his
freedom. And therefore plaintiff
prays judgement for his freedom
against the defendant Barnard M
Lynch who claims
owner to be plaintiff's owner.

Samuel Edward by his next friend
M. T. Andrews .

Joel C Richmond attorney for plaintiff
makes oath and says that the
matters and things as stated in
the within petition are true to
the best of his knowledge and belief

Joel C. Richmond . Sworn to and Subscribed before
me this 3rd day of June A.
D. 1851.
M S. Cerre Clk.

by next
friend
vs
.

Filed June 4th 1851

M S Cerre Clk.
R Joel C Richmond Atty for Plff.

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

We command you to summon Barnard M Lynch
to appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the first day of the next
term thereof, to be held in the City of St. Louis , within and for the
County of St. Louis , on the third Monday of November
next, then and there to answer the complaint of Samuel an infant
by his next friend Marcy T Andrews
as set forth in the annexed petition
and have you then there this writ.

Witness, Michael S. Cerre , Clerk of said
Court, with the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in
the city of St. Louis , this 4th
day of June in the year of our
Lord eighteen hundred and fifty one. M. S. Cerre Clerk

I acknowledge myself bound for all costs that may accrue in the above cause.

Witness my hand and seal at St. Louis , this day of
185

Nov. 1851 Judgt of liberation by default, 9th Dec 185121 .p. 248
Judgt &c set aside. Leave to amend pet. & 10 days after amendt to ans. 21. p.362
10 days further to amend. 21. p. 381
Amendt filed 21. p. 397.
Demurrer
filed 22. p. 130. Dismissed Oct 2d by plff 22. p. 179.

No.29
Saint Louis Circuit Court
November Term 1851

an infant by his
next friend
vs.

Summons

Pet:

R F & J . C. Richmond atty

It is hereby ordered that the within named petitioner
Samuel a person of colour by his next friend Marcy
T Andrews be allowed to sue for his freedom as
a poor person without giving security for costs
and that he be allowed reasonable liberty to attend
his counsel and the court as occasion may require
and that he be not removed out of the
Jurisdiction of the Court and that he be not
subjected to any severity on account of his suit
for freedom given under my Court as Judge
of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County and State
of Missouri this 3rd day of June AD 1851.

A Hamilton Jus.8th.Cir.
true copy attest
M S Cerre Clk.

Issued June 4th 1851

M S. Cerre Clk & writ $3 due
Copy writ 25 cts dueClk.

Executed this writ in the County of Saint Louis this 11th day
of June 1851 by delivering to Barnard M Lynch a true copy
thereof and of the Petition, & by reading to him the order of
the Judge endorsed herein.

Henry B Bell Shff
By R Peyinghaus Dpty

Service$1.00Order.50$1.50

of Color Plff
vs

Deft

In Circuit Court
of
St. Louis County

Samuel T Glover on his oath says he was
retained as counsel by deft in this case before
the commencement of the present regular
term of this Court, and was told by his client
at the time either that an arrangement
had been made, or could be made with Mr.
Richmond the atty for the plaintiff by which
the determination of this case and the case of
Edward vs. same deft then & now pending in
this Court might depend upon the determination
of the case of Mary vs. Calvert which last
named case was also pending in this Court
and is still pending.

Afterwards Mr. Richmond atty for the plffs in
said three above mentioned causes having as
he informed affiant sent specially to Ohio
for witnesses whose evidence by him deemed
deemed pertinent to the causes of all said
plaintiffs met this affiant by an amicable
appointment to take the depositions of
said witnesses this affiant and Mr. Richmond
agreeing to take the said depositions
by consent.

On the occasion last named a conversation
was held between the affiant and Mr. Richmond
in regard to the said depositions and
the said cases, and this affiant understood
Mr. Richmond distinctly to say that as the determination of the cases of Samuel & Edward
would depend upon the determination
of the case of Mary vs Calvert he would
only take the depositions of the witnesses
in Marys case, and to refer to affiant
for his assent to the same, and this affiant
did say to Mr. Richmond that in
that case it would duly be necessary to
take the testimony of the witnesses in
Marys case, and said depositions were
accordingly taken by consent in Marys
case and were not taken in either of
the cases of Samuel or Edward , and he
believes said witnesses returned to Ohio ,
This affiant does not charge Mr. Richmond
with any intention to deceive him or lull
him into security, but the effect of the above
conversation on his mind was to place him
entirely at ease in regard to the said cases of
Samuel and Edward , and affiant gave himself
no care as to pleading in or preparing
the same for trial, nor did the
plaintiffs make any preparation of said
cases or either of them nor did he suppose any
step would be taken
in them till Marys
case was decided.

Samuel T Glover Sworn to & Subscribed 8th
Jany 1852
M. S. Cerre Clk.

vs

Affidavit

filed 8th Jan 1852
M. S. Cerre

of Color
Plff
vs

Deft Freedom
suit

St. Louis
Circuit
Court

The deft moves the court to set aside
the Judgement by default and allow
the deft to plead to this case

1. Because the declaration in the
case is not a declaration in
trespass as the statute in such
case requires, and no other
declaration could be filed
than one in trespass.

2. Because the said declaration
or petition if it be more proper
to call it a petition does not
contain any fact which
would amount to trespass
either by the statute or common
law,

3. Because the same contains
no averment which can
constitute any action either
in law or equity,

4. That to claim to be the owner
of a person - is not actionable
the person who sues for freedom must aver that he or she is held in
slavery and show that physical
restraint is exercised over him
or her,

5. For aught that appears by the plff
showing he was at the institution
of his suit and is now
in the full enjoyment of his
freedom

6. There is no averment showing
whether slavery is or is not allowed
to exist in Ohio ,

7. There is no averment that plffs mother
was ever held in slavery in Ohio .

8. There never was any proceedings so far
as the record in the case shows
appointing a next friend, for the
plff.

9. Because the defts attorney was induced
to believe that this case was
to depend upon the of
Marys case (See affidavit of S T
Glover filed in this case)

10. Because no proof was offered to show
the plffs right to freedom.

S. T. Glover for
Deft

11 The Court had no jurisdiction of the
person

S T Glover
for Deft

vs

Motion to set
aside judgment.
Glover
filed 8th Jany 1852

M. S. Cerre Clk

By next friend

vs

In the Circuit Court of
St. Louis County, State
of Missouri , November
Term 1851

Plaintiff amends his original petition filed in this cause and states that at the
time his mother Mary mentioned in his
original petition resided in the State of Ohio as is
stated in said petition that slavery and involuntary
servitude was prohibited in said
State of Ohio and she the said Mary became
free and is a free person because of her residence
in the aforesaid State of Ohio and as plaintiffs
mother was at the time of his birth a free person, he
also is free.
Plaintiff states that before and at the
time this suit was commenced that defendant
held and still holds him in slavery and he
therefore asks Judgement for his freedom.

Samuel By next friend
Marcy T Andrews
By att. Richmond

Joel C Richmond attorney for plaintiff makes oath
and says that the matters & things as stated
in the foregoing petition are true as he
verily believes

Joel C Richmond
Att for Plff Sworn to & Subscribed
6th Feby 1852
M. S. Cerre Clk

29
By next friend
vs

Filed 6th Feby. 1852

M. S. Cerre Clk Amendment to
petition
Circuit Court

In Cir Court
St Louis
County

[of color] Plff
vs
Deft

The said defendant answers the said
petition and says that whether the said
plaintiff is the said child of the mother mentioned
in the petition the deft has no knowledge
sufficient to form a belief, whether the said supposed mother of
the plaintiff was ever carried by any
owner or master into Ohio or ever resided there as mentioned
in said petition this deft has no knowledge
sufficient to form a belief.

Whether the said Bowde ever resided
in Ohio or not defendant has no
knowledge sufficient to form a
belief.
Whether the said Mary the supposed mother
of plff is a free person or not this deft
has no knowledge sufficient to form
a belief.
This deft makes no answer
to the allegation in said petition
that at the time the said Mary resided
in Ohio slavery and involuntary
servitude was prohibited in said
state because deft is not able to ascertain
from said petition either in its original or amended form
when it was that said supposed
residence existed.

The color of the plaintiff is darker than
a Mulatto; and he was purchased by deft
as a slave in this State and was held as a
slave prior to the commencement
of this suit and is still so
held by deft, and was held as
a slave by the person who sold
him to this defendant

Polk Glover & Campbell
for Deft

The deft Barnard M Lynch says
on his oath he believes the
statements in the above
answer to be true as
there stated, the words “or ever resided there” on first page underlined before signing.

B M Lynch

Sworn to & Subscribed
9th Feby 1852

M. S. Cerre Clk

vs

Ans of deft.

Filed 10th Feby 1852
M. S. Cerre Clk

.(of color)
vs

C.C.Apl 2 1842

And now moves defendant & demurs
to plff's original & amended petition &
says that the same no legal
cause of action against Deft

J. Polk P . O .

764
C.CApr 9, 1852

(of color)
vs

Demurrer

J. Polk P . O . Filed 2nd July 1852
M. S. Cerre Clk