Petition of Louis Scott

It is ordered that Louis Scott
the within named petitioner
be allowed to sue in the St
Louis Circuit Court as a
poor person to establish
his right to freedom

It is also ordered
said petitioner have reasonable
liberty to attend his Counsel
and the Court as occasion
may require that he be not
removed out of the
jurisdiction of the Court
and that he be not subject
to any severity on account of
his application to
freedom

It is further order that
Jeremiah Langton be
assigned as Counsel for
the above named petitioner
Louis Scott Bryan Mullanohy
Judge of the 8th Jud Cir of Mo

St. Louis December 8th
1840To the Honorable Luke E. Lawless Judge
of the St. Louis Circuit Court

Your Orator Louis Scott humbly
complaining respectfully showeth unto your honor
that he is a man of colour free from the following
facts to wit that about two years since
he was sent by his master William Burd to
work in the state of Illinois for which work
your Orator verily believes his said master received
payment, that he remained as a slave from
Monday morning up to Saturday evening in the
said State of Illinois under the control and by
the orders of his said master contrary to the laws
of state of Illinois for such cases made and provided,
and that he is ever since said time and now is kept
as a slave by the said William Burd your
Orator therefore prays that he be permitted to
sue in your Honorable Court for his freedom
as a poor person your Orator will as is duty
bound forever pray

Louis his X mark Scott Sworn to and subscribed before me
this 9th day of December 1840
Louis Labeaume Justice of
the peace Saint Louis County

NoIn Circuit Court
March Term AD. 1841

Action falsh imprisonment

Damages $ 600

Langton
for Plainf

State of Missouri
County of St. Louis Ss Circuit Court
March Term AD 1841

Louis Scott a man of Colour by J Langton his
attorney complains of William Burd of
a plea of trespass for false imprisonment
For that heretofore to wit on the first day
of January in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and forty at the County
and in the State aforesaid the said Defendant
with force and arms an assault did
make on the said plaintiff and then and
there beat bruised and ill treated him the
said plaintiff and then and there imprisoned
him the said Louis Scott and kept
and detained him in prison there from
the day last aforesaid to this day contrary
to the form of the statute in such case
made and provided and against the peace
and dignity of the state. And the plaintiff
aforesaid avers that before and at the time of
committing of the said several grievances
he was and still is a free person and that
the Defendant aforesaid held and still holds
him the said Louis Scott in slavery
wherefore he the said plaintiff says that he is
greatly injured and hath sustained damages
to the amount of six hundred dollars
And therefore he brings his suit

J Langton for
Plaintiff

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To the Sheriff of St. Louis County-Greeting:

We command you to summon William Burd ,
if he be found in your County, that
he be and appear
before the judge of our Circuit Court , on the first day of the next term thereof, to be
held at the City of St. Louis , on the third Monday
of March next, then and there to answer unto Louis
Scott (a man of color) of a plea of trespass for false imprisonment,
to the damage of said plaintiff six hundred
dollars: And have you then there this writ.

Witness, John Ruland . Clerk of our said Court,
with the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the
City of St. Louis , this 27th day of
February in the year of our Lord eighteen
hundred and forty one Jn Ruland Clerk.

It is ordered that Louis Scott , the within named petitioner
be allowed to sue in the St. Louis Circuit Court as a
poor person to establish his right to freedom

It is also ordered that the said petitioner have reasonable
liberty to attend his counsel and the Court as occasion may
require; that he be not removed out of the jurisdiction
of the Court, and that he be not subject to any
severity on account of his application to freedom.

L. E. Lawless Judge Cr
Court

It is further ordered that Jeremiah Langton be assigned
as counsel for the above named petitioner Louis Scott .
Bryan Mullanohy Judge of the 8th Jud. Cir.
of Mo
A true copy of the ordered

Attest Jn Ruland Clerk

Bk 13 p 219

Jury verdict for Deft Bk 15 p 75
new trial refused 15 p 123 Bill of Exceptions filed Bk 15 p 281
Mo to strike out bill of exceptions & affidavit in support thereof filed
by Deft. Mo overruled & deft bill of exceptions filed Bk 15 p 283

No 362 St. Louis Circuit Court
March Term 1841

Summons

Suit for freedom
Langton

filed 27th Feb. 1841
Jn Ruland Clerk

Executed this writ in the county of St. Louis
on the 27th day of February 1841 by reading
it and the declaration to William Burd
the defendant
Service $1.00

Marshall Brotherton Sheriff
by Benjamin Lacy Dpt

St. Louis Circuit Court March Term 1841

And the said defendant
by his attorney comes and defends the
force and injury when &.C. and says that
he is not guilty of the trespass & false
imprisonment above laid to his charge
in manner and form as in said declaration
is , and of this he puts
himself upon the county &.C.

Spalding & Attys for deft

No. 362. March Term 1841
St. Louis Circuit Court

plea

Spalding & Filed 15th March 1841
Jn. Ruland Clk

St. Louis Circuit Court
November Term AD 1841Sir

Take notice that on the sixth
day of December in the year of our Lord
one thousand eight hundred and forty and
between the hours of six OClock in the
forenoon and six OClock in the afternoon
of that day at the office of Frederick Kretchmar a Justice of the peace in
and for the County of St. Louis Depositions
will be taken by the undersigned to be
read on the trial of the above case on behalf
of the plaintiff and that the taking of said
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

Louis Scott
by atty J Langton To - the above named
Defendant or to his
atty

In Circuit Court

Notice to take
Depositions
in behalf of Plaintiff

Langton atty
for Plaintiff

witness
SubpoenaDec. 2nd

Served the within notice by delivering
a true Copy thereof to William Burd .
The 2nd day of December 1841. in Saint
Louis Township

Louis DuBreuil , B. of D Evans of . Constable D . C.

[Subpoena.]The State Of Missouri ,To Louis DuBreuil To the Constable of St. Louis Township, in the County of St. Louis -Greeting:

We command you to summon Bernard Smelter
that, all excuses and delays being set aside, he personally be and appear before the undersigned, a Justice
of the Peace within and for the county aforesaid, on the sixth day of December
1841, at the hour of six o'clock A. M., at his office, in the Township of St. Louis , to testify on the trial
of a case wherein Louis Scott is
plaintiff, and William Burd
defendant, on the part of the plaintiff; and of this he is not to fail, at his peril;
and have you then there this writ.

Given under my hand, this second day of December 1841.
Frd. Kretschmar Justice.

No

Subpoena.

Justice 18 3/4

Bernard Smelter

Deposition to be taken
Decbr 6th 6 o'clock a'n

Summoned
Bernard Smelter
the 6th December
1841. in St. Louis ,
Township
Louis . Du Breuil
Constable
By A. D . Evans
for 25 cts D6

Depositions
of witness, produced, sworn and examined at the office of Frederick Kretcshmar, a Justice of the peace for and within the County of Saint Louis , State of Missouri , before me,
the said Justice, in a certain came now depending in the St. Louis Circuit Court , State of Missouri ,
between Louis Scott , plaintiff, and William Burd , defendant, on the part of the said plaintiff:

Bernard Smelter, of lawful age, being produced, sworn and
examined on the part of the plaintiff, deposeth and saith:

I know Louis Scott , a mulatto man, the plaintiff, and also William
Burd , the defendant. I bought in the year 1835. of Mr. Burd ,
the defendant, two stills, one new one and an old one; I also brought
in, at the same time, an old still, to have it mended at the shop
of Mr. Burd . The new still, which I took over to my place of
residence in Saint Clair County , State of Illinois , proved upon trial
to be defective; and I returned to St. Louis , making Mr. Burd acquainted with this fact, and requesting him to send over some of his
hands, to get the still put in good order. Mr. Burd wanted
to send his black man, Louis Scott , over to my place of residence,
to make the necessary repairs, I preferred a Pennsylvania
German, in the employ of Mr. Burd , as I could better speak
with him, but his family being sick, I could not have him
and then said mulatto Louis Scott came over to me with the
son of Mr. Burd - The son of Mr. Burd showed Louis what to
do on the still and assisted in the repairs, he then left, the day after
their arrival, leaving Louis at my house to complete the work.
Louis remained at work on the still until Friday or Saturday (he
and the son of Mr. Burd having commenced on Monday morning, preceding
said Saturday.) The still did not prove sound after these repairs, and I returned to Mr. Burd , requesting him to take it back.
I sent the still to him, it was weighed, and I was credited for the
weight of the still at the rate of old Copper. Mr. Burd also presented
to me an account of some twenty or thirty dollars for said repairs,
and demanded of me payment for of the amount thus accruing, I had given Mr. Burd an endorsed note for the first Bill, being for said new
still,, the old one, and for the repairs done in St. Louis on the old still I had sent there
He, Mr. Burd , now claimed of me a balance of some $150, after having
deducted the value of the returned new still as aforesaid. I considered this
balance extravagant and determined not to pay the same, unless compelled
by law. I was sued for this amount, and deprived of my defense by
my Endorser's settling the matter. This Endorser was John Schriber
who afterwards sued me for the amount paid for me. Before I was sued by Mr. Burd , he sent me a Bill to Illinois of the above mentioned amount
(about $150), which included an account of (from 20 to 30 dollars)
for the repairs done on the new still in Illinois by the said Louis Scott ,
and also an additional item for the materials used in said repairs. I offered
to settle the Bill by him a horse and some corn, but the
person presenting the Bill, refused to accept of them. As for as I know,
the settlement made by Mr. Schriber , my Endorser, with Mr. Burd ,
embraced all I owed Mr. Burd , and included the aforesaid charge for
repairs done by Louis Scott at my residence; and for which amount I gave my note to Mr. Schnider, which is still held by him All the
transactions with Mr. Burd , here referred to, were with him, I did not
know of Mr. Tildin until about a year afterwards, when I was sued.-
When the son of Mr. Burd left my house, he told me to keep Louis Scott there
until the repairs should be fully completed by him. I controlled him
in his work, until he left; I paid his boarding during his stay. Louis was boarded at Kennedy's boarding house in Jacksonville or Pomgam,
St . Clair County , Illinois . There was no one at my house to superintend
the work of Louis , after the son of Mr. Burd had left, except myself.
Further deponent saith not.

Bernard Smelter

I Frederick Kretschmar , a Justice of the Peace for and within
the County of Saint Louis , and State of Missouri , do hereby certify, that Bernard Smelter, the deponent, whose place of residence is in
St . Clair County, State of Illinois , was by me sworn, to testify the
whole truth of his knowledge, touching the matter in controversy in the

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Alfred M Rucker , Richard S . Tilden
Wm Burd & Thos. Andrews ,
Greeting:-

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the December30th 1841
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 Lewis is
plaintiff and Burd is
defendant on the part of defendant
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis ,
this 6th day of December in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty one.
Jn.Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Executed on A.M Rucker

M Brotherton
Shff
Fee 50

Sub for deft
for 30th Decr
for deft for

Alfred M. Rucker Richard . Tilden Wm Burd Jr . Thos. Andrews

6847021 County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Alfred M Rucker , Richard S . Tilden William
Burd Jr. & Thomas Andrews ,
Greeting:-

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 6th day of January 1842
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 Lewis Scott is
plaintiff and Willliam Burd is
defendant on the part of defendant
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis ,
this 28th day of December in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty one.
John Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Circuit Court
November Term 1841

Spa for defendant
for 6th January 1842

Alfred M Rucker Richd S Tilden Wm Burd Jr . Thos. Andrews Executed M . Brotherton
Shff
Fee 2.00

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Bernard Smelter
Greeting:-

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the sixth day of
January 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 Louis Scott is
plaintiff and Willliam Burd is
defendant on the part of Plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis ,
this sixth day of January in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty two.
Jn. Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Executed

M Brotherton
Shff
Fee 50

In Circuit Court
Set for trial
for the sixteenth Decmbr
on the Old Docket
for 6th of Janry
on new

for Plaintiff

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To John Schriber
Greeting:-

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the Instant
at ten OClock A.M., 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 Louis Scott is
plaintiff and William Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis ,
this 10th day of January in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty two.
Jn. Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Executed

M . Brotherton
Shff
Fee. 50

Circuit Court

Supoena John
Schriber on
behalf of Plaintiff
forthwith

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

We command you to attach John Schriber
by his body and him safely keep, so that you have his body
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , now in session at the City of St. Louis , within and for
the County of St. Louis , on the 11th day of January 1842 then
and there to testify, and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy, now pending in
our said Circuit Court , between Louis Scott
Plaintiff, and William Burd is defendant wherein
the said John Schriber had heretofore been summoned
on the part of the said plaintiff.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit
Court , at the City of St. Louis , this 10th day of
Jany in the year of our Lord, one thousand
eight hundred and forty two.
Jn Ruland Clerk, C.C.

attach

Jn Schriber

Executed

M Brotherton
Shff Fee $1.00

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Louis Vacharesa
Greeting:-

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 18th Instant
at 10 OClock 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 Louis Scott is
plaintiff and Willliam Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the city of St. Louis ,
this 15th day of July in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty two.
Jn. Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Not served

July Term
1842
In the St Louis
Circuit Court

Burd 18 July

Subpoena
Louis Vacharesa for Plff

Contd

Wit. keeps the Patriot
House on
Second Street

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Bernard Smelter
Greeting:-

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 18th day of July
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 Louis Scott is
plaintiff and Willliam Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the city of St. Louis ,
this 15th day of July in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty two.
Jn. Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Not served

In Circuit Court
July Term
AD. 1842

Subpoena

Bernard Smelter
for Plaiff
for 18th Inst
Contd

lives sometimes at
Patriot House Second Street

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Bernard Smelter
Greeting:-

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the thirtieth day of October
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 Lewis Scott is
plaintiff and Willliam Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis ,
this twenty third day of October in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty three.
John Ruland Clerk C.C.

In Circuit Court
July Term A.D. 1843

Subpoena

Bernard Smelter
on part of plaintiff
Trial the 30th, instant

lives at Camp Springs

Langton atty
for Plff

This writ not executed in
consequence of the adjournment
of Court October 30th 1843

Wm Milburn Shff By Murphy Dpy

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Bernhart Smelter
Greeting:-

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 20th day of December
at 9 OClock A.M. 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 Lewis Scott is
plaintiff and Willliam Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St. Louis ,
this 24th day of November in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty three.
John. Ruland Clerk C.C.

Executed 24th
November 1843

William Milburn Shff
Service 50cts

by Henry B . Beet Depty

In Circuit Court

Subpoena

x Bernhart Smelter
on 20th December
for Plaintiff -
Boards at Camp
Springs
Works for & Thomas

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Bernhart Smelter
Louis
Richard S. Tilden
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the8th of January
at 9 OClock 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 Lewis Scott is plaintiff
plaintiff and William Burd is
defendant on the part of the plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St .
Louis , this second day of January
in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and
forty four John Ruland Clerk C.C.

Circuit Court

Subpoena

x Richard S. Tilden
x Bernhart
Louis Plaintiff
Stays at Camp Springs for the 8th time

Executed the 8th Jany
1844 Wm Milburn

By D. Murphy Dptyfees $1.50

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To John Schriber
Louis
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 8th Instant at
9 o clock 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 Lewis Scott is
plaintiff and William Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St .
Louis , this 4th day of January
in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and
forty four John Ruland Clerk, C.C.

In Circuit Court

Subpoena
Louis
John Schriber for
the 8th Inst
at 9 O'Clock AM,
on part of the plaintiff

Witness in St. George
in the City of St. Louis
Langton
aty

Executed January 6th 1844

Wm Milburn Shrff
By E W Decker DptyService 1.00

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Alphred M. Rucker , Richard S. Tilden ,
Jacob Schriver
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the
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
plaintiff and
defendant on the part of
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St .
Louis , this day of
in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and
forty John Ruland Clerk C.C.

Subpoena for
deft for 9th
January for

Alfred M. Rucker Richard S. Tilden Jacob Schriver (The defendant will
tell where Schriver )

Executed the 8th July 1844
Wm Milburn Shff

By Danl. Murphy Dpty fees $1.50

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To John W . Burd
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 9th Jany 1844
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 Lewis Scott is
plaintiff and Wm Burd is
defendant on the part of defendant
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with the
seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the city of St. Louis ,
this 8th day of Janry in
the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty four Jn Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Sub. for deft for
9th Jany for
John W . Burd
(son of the deft)

Shff will find him
at a Burd & Tilden's
store at Main Street
& the witness is generally
called William

Exed the
13th Jany

Exd the

Wm Milburn Shfffees 50 cents

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

We command you to attach Bernhart Smelter
by his body and him safely keep, so that you have his body
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , now in session at the City of St. Louis , within and for
the County of St. Louis , on the tenth day of January at 9 OClock A.M. 1844 then
and there to testify and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy, now pending in
our said Circuit Court , between Lewis Scott is
plaintiff, and William Burd is defendant wherein
the said Bernhart Smelter has heretofore been summoned
on the part of the said plaintiff

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit
Court , at the City of St. Louis , this ninth day of
January in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and forty John Ruland Clerk, C.C.

In Circuit Court

Attachment for

x Bernhart Smelter
the 10th
Inst J Langton
Aty Plf

Executed this writ in the County of St. Louis
on the 13th January 1844 and had the body of
the within witness in open Court

Wm Milburn Shrff
By E W Decker DptyService $1.00

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

We command you to attach John Schriber
by his body and him safely keep, so that you have his body
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , now in session at the City of St. Louis , within and for
the County of St. Louis on the 16th Jany 1844 then
and there to testify and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy, now pending in
our said Circuit Court between Lewis Scott
plaintiff, and Wm Burd defendant wherein
the said deftwitness has heretofore been summoned
on the part of the said deft

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit
Court , at the City of St. Louis , this 15 day of
Jany in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and forty four John Ruland Clerk, C.C.

attachment
for John
Schriber for
16th Jany .

Executed Jan 16th 1844had the body of J . Schriber
in open court.

Wm Milburn Sheriff By EW Decker Dpty Service $ 1.00

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

We command you to attach Alfred M . Rucker
by his body and him safely keep, so that you have his body
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , now in session at the City of St. Louis , within and for
the County of St. Louis , on theforthwith 1844 then
and there to testify, and the truth to say in a certain matter of controversy, now pending in
our said Circuit Court , between Lewis Scott
plaintiff, and William Burd defendant wherein
the said Alfred M . Rucker has heretofore been summoned
on the part of the said , plaintiff Deft

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Circuit
Court , at the City of St. Louis , this 16th day of
January in the year of our Lord, one thousand
eight hundred and forty John Ruland Clerk, C.C.

Executed Jan 16th 1844 and had the body of the
within witness in open court.

Wm Milburn Shrff
By EW Decker Dpty Service $ 1.00

County of St. Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Adam Sadler & Bernhart Smelter
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 23rd 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 Louis Scott is
plaintiff and William Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St .
Louis , this 21st day of May
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty-four John Ruland Clerk C.C.

Executed the 22nd
May 1844

Wm Milburn Shff
By E . W . Decker Dpty.
Fees $ 1.00

In Circuit
Court

Subpoena

x Bernhart Smelter x Adam Sadler
term on
2nd Street
Sadler in Pine Street

County of St. Louis , ssThe State of Missouri ,To Alfred M Rucker , Richard S. Tilden
John Schriver . & John W . Burd
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on the 23d Mayinstant
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 Louis Scott is
plaintiff and William Burd is
defendant on the part of deft.
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St .
Louis , this 22d day of May
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty-four John Ruland Clerk C.C.

Executed the 23d
May 1844

Wm Milburn Shff
By E. W . Decker Dpty
Fees $ 3.50
Should be $2 1.62

Subpoena for
deft for 23d
May for

Alfred M . Rucker Richard S . Tilden John Schriver John W . Burd

County of St. Louis , ss.The State Of Missouri ,To Casper
John Renth
John
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on theforthwith
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 Louis Scott is
plaintiff and William Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St .
Louis , this 23rd day of May
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty-four John Ruland Clerk C.C.

John
.
J. Renth

Exd the 23rd May
1844

Wm Milburn Shff
By Danl Murphy Dpty
Fees $ 1.50

County of St Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To James Rees
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on theforthwith
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 Louis Scott is
plaintiff and William Burd is
defendant on the part of plaintiff
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St .
Louis , this 23 day of May
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty-four John Ruland Clerk C.C.

In Circuit
Court

Subpoena

James Rees on part of
plaintiff
forthwith

Executed the 23rd May 1844

William Milburn Shff
By E . W . Decker Dpty
Fees 50

County of St Louis , ss.The State of Missouri ,To Thomas Andrews
Greeting:

You are hereby commanded, that setting aside all manner of excuse and delay, you appear
before the Judge of our Circuit Court , on theforthwith
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 Lewis Scott is
plaintiff and William Burd is
defendant on the part of deft
and herein you are in no wise to fail.

Witness, John Ruland , Clerk of our said Court, with
the seal thereof hereto affixed, at office, in the City of St .
Louis , this 24 day of May
in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
forty-four John Ruland Clerk C.C.

Executed the 23rd May 1844

Wm. Milburn Shff By Danl Murphy Dpty
Fees 50 Cents

Sub. for deft forth-
with for

Thomas Andrews

In Circuit Court

Now this day comes the said
Louis Scott plaintiff by his attorney
J Langton and prays the Court
to grant him a new trial in the
above entitled case for the following reasons.

1st Because the Court erred in not
permitting the Jurors on the trial in
the above cause to be interrogated
on their voir dire to the following
effect to wit and in the following
words“ have your made up or
expressed yourself any opinion with
regard to the freedom of slaves
Have you any prejudices on your
mind that might interfere with
your Verdict in this case-”

2nd Because the Court erred
in not permitting Bernhart Smelter
the plaintiffs witness to have
an interpreter in the ab trial
aforesaid, the said Smelter being
a German

3rd Because the court's
instructions to the said Jury in
the said cause was against law-

4th Because the Verdict of
the said Jury was against law against, evidence and the weight of evidence

J Langton atty for
Plaintiff

Motion for new trial
by Plaintiff
filed27th day
of May 1844

filed 15 p 79.

In the St. Louis Circuit
Court April Term A.D. 1844
Trespass & false imprisonment

Be it remembered that on the trial of the
above cause to writ on the 23d - day of
May - A.D. 1844 in the said term
of the circuit court a jury was empanelled
and duly sworn on their voir dire, when
the plaintiffs counsel proposed to interrogate
the whether they or either of
them entertained
which in a suit for freedom would
prevent them from rendering a true
verdict, the same question was proposed
in several various forms, but the court
refused to allow the question to be put
to the Jurors, the jury were then sworn in
the usual form to try the said cause
The plaintiff then produced Bernhart Smelter
a German as a witness as in said cause who
on application for an interpreter of the German
into English and vice or versa was refused by the
court for the reason that the court was of
opinion that an interpreter was not necessary
after said witness proceeded some time to give
his testimony The plaintiffs counsel again applied
for an interpreter for said witness on the ground understood the English language
so imperfectly, which was again refused by the
Court. the said witness gave the following testimony
before the said Court the said cause
to wit that he had been acquainted with the parties
to this suit sinceDecember 1835, I Bought of
Burd Tilden &Co. of which firm defendant was
a member, two Copper stills to take to St Clair
County in the State of Illinois the stills after were
found imperfect, and I called at defendants shop in
St. Louis in the State of Missouri and defendant or his
partner said he would send over to Illinois the plaintiff
a yellow man to mend said Stills , I said that,
I would prefer a pensylvania dutchman to the yellow
man, one Adam Sadler was present and acted as interpreter
on the occasion, the dutchman could not go
on account of his family's sickness, defendant said that
the yellow man (the Louis Scott ) would do as well
as the dutchman this conversation was on the 15th
day of February 1836 at deft. shop in said St. Louis , I then
went over to St Clair County Illinois , and on the 19th or
20th of Feby 1836, Louis Scott the plaintiff came over to St
Clair County Illinois and worked on the Stills , he came
over a second time and staid about four days working
on said stills in the State of Illinois , the stills did
not yet answer and on the 7th of March 1836 the plaintiff
Lewis Scott came over again and said the soldering melted away, I had seen the defendant Burd or his partner
who sent over the said yellow man Lewis Scott in saw
St Clair County Illinois , he remained there four days
working on said stills, said Scott was in all about
thirteen or fourteen days in St Clair County State of
Illinois , during which time plaintiff's board
was paid by this witness, and the defendant
was to have pay for the hire of said yellow man
Lewis Scott , Mr. Burd the defendant presented the like
to me for the hire of said Scott for said work in
Illinois , I offered John Schriber as security therefor
I finally cost the Kettles or stills entirely. Defendant agreed
to take the Kettles or stills Back and give up my
notes which he held, I sent the Stills to Mr.
to give them to defendant, I was allowed 20 cents per pound
for them, defendant Brought in the Bill for the hire

of plaintiff for work in Illinois the Bill amounted
to $26 dollars The same was presented a second time
and I was told if I would not pay it I would be
sent to jail, and I was put in jail for said
Bill I sent for John Schriber , I know of no
person in the matter but John Schriber
I Burd the defendant, the stills were returned
and defendant received them, the said Bill for said
hire was presented for payment about 4 month after
the Stills were sent over the last time I was
put to jail I paid two dollars per week for the
Board of said Scott whilst he Scott was in St .
Clair County Illinois , Witness cross-examined
by deft's counsel, the said yellow man went to
the State of Illinois on the 15th of February 1836 the
first time, the last time 7th day of March 1836
the where the contact was made by
defendant to send plaintiff to Illinois was on main
Street in St. Louis not above the Bank, the
account was first presented shortly after the
work was done in Illinois at witness's place
there by Burds Clerk next time after
setting for the Stills At the
St. Louis Boarding house by Burd deft
himself he said he would put me in
jail, I said I had settled all by giving
up the stills, I was put in jail
Schriber paid some of it I paid Schriber
he was on a note of 300 dollars, witness
was on the note. I was not put in jail
for a note as I believe but for 30 dollars
Mr. Burd on cause up with the jailor
and the jailer let me go, I thought deft
did not treat me well, I feel no anger
towards defendant, young Burd may
have been over, I think he did not cometo my house, I Bought the old still
in 1835 they would not hot steam Mr
Sadler was there two weeks before, Sadler
interpreted 4 times 1st when some hooks
were made in last of december or January
& when the stills were taken over in
January next inFebruary 15th, when
the Kettles would not do next the 7th
day of March 1835 - Reexamined by plaintiff
counsel - I understood that I was
put in jail for the hire of the yellow
man Lewis Scott while in St Clair County
Illinois working on the stills or Kettles , young
Burd may have been at my house but
I cannot recollect it distinctly -
James Reed being sworn and examined
on behalf of the plaintiff gave the
following testimony to wit, I am acquainted with the parties in this suit, I was
not present when Burd deft. sold the
Kettles to Bernhart , defendant
said to him that plaintiff had sued
him for his freedom, Burd Claimed
plaintiff as his slave, defendant always
contracts for the services of plaintiff I
think that defendant told me some time after
suit was brought that he was at the
East when Lewis Scott did the work
in Illinois and that he did not know
that the boy had been sent there
till some time after the work
had been done; their place of doing
Business was on main between Pine
& Chestnut Streets in the City of St. Louis
in 1838 they had not two places of
doing business

Adam Sadler being sworn and examined
in behalf of the Plaintiff testified that
he was working in defendants
shop when plaintiff Lewis Scott was
sent to Illinois the firm was Burd
Tilden and Co Alfred M. Rucker one of
the witnesses in behalf of the defendant
was in the shop when defendant
was absent defendant was Boss
he saw Bernhart Smelter in the
shop defendant went to the east but
not at the time that plaintiff was
sent to Illinois defendant was not absent
on the 24th of February 1836, dont know
how long defendant remained in the east
he knew those facts from a Book he
saw the Book and it was kept
by Smelter's Clerk, saw it in Smelter's
office Smelter showed it to him
Smelter sent him a letter to come from Illinois and testify in this
case, he had the letter in his
possession, Smelter was to pay
him for his time & board where
attending as a witness in said cause
Alfred M. Rucker a witness in
behalf of the defendant being
sworn and examined and first sworn
on his voir dire states that he wants
neither gain or lose by the event
of the suit, when sworn in
he states that in 1836 he went to
work for Burd Tilden and Co
composed of Burd Tilden and this
witness, they had two different places
of doing business one north of the
Bank on Main Street and the other
several squares south of it between
Pine and Chestnut streets, In
February 1836Smelter called at the
Shop of Burd Tilden & Co to
have some work repaired done on stills
previously purchased of Defendant which
stills were at that time in St. Clair
county in the State of Illinois , that
Smelter requested some person
from Burd Tilder & Co's shop to go to
Illinois and do said repairs
Smelter wanted a German from
Pennsylvania who worked in sad
shop to do said repairs in Illinois
but his family having
sick he could not go Witness
then sent Louis Scott Defendant's
slave and the plaintiff in
this suit to the said St Clair
County Illinois to make the
repairs on said Still, that this
plaintiff Scott remained in St .
Clair County Illinois during
7 1/2 days the
for which work Smelter was
charged on the Books of defendant
at $ 2,50 per day, witness was in
defendantsStore of Burd Burd Tilden & Co. every day
except one week in June and
attended to sales and keeping Books
Plaintiff was usually there unless
when sick, Plaintiff is not healthy
the first time Smelter called was
the 11th day of February 1836 as witness

believes at which time defendant
was on his away to the East defendant
left for the East the 4th or 5th day of February
1836Witness is possitive that
defendant was not present when
Smelter called, a Mr. Sadler who
works in defendant shop interpreted
for Smelter on said ocasion,
the account against
Smelter for said repairs was
sent over to Illinois defendants
son went over to complete the
work and remained there some
time Witness went there himself
and concluded to do no more
repairs, the amount charged against
Smelter never was collected to
was demanded by witness
in June following, the account
was entered on Burd Tilden & Co's Books
untill after Plaintiff brought
suit for his freedom and then
it was erased by defendant
and defendant disaproved of it
Smelter owes yet for the materials
and work done Smelter Brought
back the said Stills as old
copper and gave them payment
for the stills
Witness tried to get the account
paid out of the proceeds of said
copper, but did not succeed

Cross examined by Plaintiff
Counsel- Witness is a son in
law of defendant Deft left
St. Louis for the east 4th or 5th
of February 1836 saw Mr Smelter on
16th of February. Witness was in the employment
of Burd Tilden & Co
Defendant may have
witness to collect the amount
for plaintiffs wages in Illinois
of said Smelter for said repairs,
Burd never knew that the
plaintiff was in Illinois , the witness
the act of sending
Plaintiff to Illinois his act
as agent for the said Firm of
Burd Tilden & Co witness
himself being one of the firm
the amount of the bill for said
repairs was 2 dollars defendants
son went over at the
request of witness-
witness always considered the
said debt for 26 dollars a
bad one & would not be willing
to give much for it after suit
was brought by plaintiff
defendant errased the demand
from the Books--
John W Burd - being sworn
and examined on part of defendant
stated that he was with
the firm of Andrews and Burd
about one year before it dissolved
& continued afterwards with the
said firm of Burd Tilden & Co
up to the present time, that
Smelter called on Mr Rucker
their salesman to have some
repairs done on certain stills

previously purchased by Smelter
of Andrews & Burd , the plaintiff Lewis
Scott the slave of defendant
was sent over to Illinois St Clair
County for the purpose of mending
said stills; defendant a few
days previously had left St .
Louis for the East- witness
was asked by said Rucker
about said repairs & plaintiff
was then sent to Illinois to
St Clair County aforesaid & remained
there at work about for 8 days-
the plaintiff never went there
more than once witness
finished the work that
plaintiff commenced witness
went over to Illinois in Company
with Smelter or his partner defendant
was at that time
on his way to the east, - defendant
as soon as he found out plaintiff's
claim to freedom, asked witness
how it was, & who sent him and errased the charge saying
it was improper.

Thomas Andrews - being duly sworn and examined in behalf the
defendant States that he had
said Smelter arrested on a note
that was given to Andrews and
Burd for Stills in 1835 that
he previously made several
efforts to collect it but could
not do so witness knew of no
work done by Burd Tilden & Co
for Smelter he finally had Smelter
discharged from jail because
he believed did not understand an oath

The following testimony
was then produced by plaintiff
and given in Rebuttal
Adolph being duly &c on part of plaintiff said that
he knew Bernhart Smelter
the witness for six or seven
years and that his character
is good for truth and veracity

Martin Shilling being sworn
in like manner he said that
he knew said Smelter for
several years last past and
that his character is good for
truth and veracity

Vergin Bule was also in like
manner sworn on behalf of Plaintiff
said he knew Bernhart Smelter and
that his character is good for
truth and veracity,
John Kemp
Adam Sadler - With them being
also in like manner sworn and
examined said that they knew
Bernhart Smelter for several
years past and that his character
is good for truth and veracity
several other witnesses were offered
to be sworn on the same point
but the court considered it unnecessary--
The following instructions were then asked for by plaintiffs counsel (the Clerk will

here insert instructions) the court overruled some of said instructions which was
excepted to by Plaintiffs counsel) the court then allowed the following instructions to be
given in part of defendant ) here insert defts instructions).
After trial in the above
cause and in the proper time
the plaintiff by his attorney moves

the court for a new trial for the
following reasons (Clerk will here
insert reasons) but the court overruled
said motion to which decision
the plaintiff by his attorney excepts
and prays that his bill of
exceptions in that behahalf
might be allowed

The following statement of facts

by Conduct of Counsel is added to the bill
of exceptions- to wit; that a short time after
the trial of the Cause aforesaid Plffs. Counsel
called at the office of Defts. Counsel for
the purpose of submitting to him the Bill of
exceptions in the above cause, & was
informed by the Partner of Defts Counsel that
Defts Counsel had on the 21st day of
July 1844 left. St. Louis & would be
absent some time - Mr Spaling was
absent from the City of St. Louis from the 21st
of July 1844, about one month
& after he returned he remained in
the City Constantly to this time- The Court adjoined from 18th July to 2nd of Sept 1844, & from day to day in the
regular transaction of business
from said 2nd of Sept. to this date-
This bill of exceptions was first presented to
the Court to be signed on the4th day of
October 1844, but was signed in
consequence of some argument about
the evidence, until the 15. of October
1844.

John M Krum

No 362
March Term 1841.
In St. Louis Circuit
Court

Bill of
Exceptions

Filed October 15th 1844. John Ruland Clerk. J Langton
Atty for
Plaintiff

St. Louis Circuit Court

Be it remembered
that on the 16th of October in the year
eighteen hundred and forty four the defendant
by his attorney made his motion
to strike out the Bill of exceptions in this case
as no part of the record & filed his filed his reasons
therefor & affidavits in support
thereof which are in the
words & figures following (here insert
the motion and reasons & affidavits)

The Court overruled this motion
to which decision of the Court the
defendant by his counsel excepted
and prays the Court to sign & seal this
his Bill of exceptions which is
done accordingly this sixteenth day
of October eighteen hundred forty
four.

John M Krum

St. Louis Circuit Court

Bill of Exceptions

FiledOctober 16th 1844
John Ruland Clerk

St. Louis Circuit Court

Josiah Spalding being duly
sworn on his oath Saith that Spalding &
Tiffany were the only attorneys of defendant
in this case; that nothing was ever said or
instructed to him or to Spalding & Tiffany
to his knowledge or belief respecting a bll
of exceptions, until some time after the
21st July 1844 but during that month when this deponent heard
that the plaintiff's attorney had said to
P.D . Tiffany his partner (deponent being absent
at Jefferson City ) that he was about to make out a bill of exceptions. Deponent had they then
that, the case had finally terminated.
Deponent returned to St. Louis , & attended the
Circuit Court aforesaid from 2nd. September
1844 till the present day & never gave
any consent to or Bill of exception nor did deponent ever hear
of the matter in his opinion, till on
or about the 4th October instant, when
the Judge of this Court handed to this
deponent, a draft of a Bill of exceptions
in this case: This deponent then & frequently & at all times, objected to
the Court the lapse of time & moved
the Court not to sign the same on
that account, but the Court overruled
the objection & signed the same
Bill after it has been by
him, & also by plaintiff's attorney.
And this deponent says he notified the
plaintiffs attorney, immediately after the
said Bill of exceptions was presented to
the Judge, of his objection to the same
But from the lapse of time, the Judge had no right to sign it.

J. Spalding
sworn to & subscribed before me
this 11th day of October 1844
John Ruland Clerk

State of Missouri
County St. Louis

P. Dexter Tiffany , being
duly sworn on his oath saith that he
never gave any consent to the making
out or preparing of any bill of exceptions
in the foregoing case

P. D . Tiffany
Sworn to & subscribed before me
this 11th day of October 1844
John Ruland Clerk

St. Louis Circuit Court

The defendant by his
counsel moves the Court to strike from
the files as a part of the record, or otherwise
quash, the Bill of exceptions filed
on behalf of plaintiff on the 15th of October
instant in this case for the following
reasons :

1 Because the same was improperly
signed by the judge & is not a part of the
record.

2. Because the same was not drawn
up nor presented for signing to the
judge till many months after the
trial.

3. Because of the lapse of time between
the trial, & the making out
of the Bill of exceptions &
of same for signing, no consent for
such delay or signing having been
given by defendant or his counsel.

4. Because the same was illegally
signed & filed.

Spalding & Tiffany
Attys for deft

St. Louis Circuit Court

Motion & affidavits
to strike out bill
of exceptions
Spalding & Tiffany
Attys for deft

Filed October 16th 1844
John Ruland Clerk

Supreme Court of Missouri January Term 1845

Error to St. Louis Circuit Court
Now at this day comes again the said defendant
by his attorney, and the said plaintiff though called, comes not,
and therefore the said defendant submits this cause to the Court
without argument; and the Court here, having seen and examined
the record and proceedings of the said Circuit Court , and the judgment
therein rendered in this cause; after mature consideration,
do consider and adjudge that the judgment aforesaid in form aforesaid,
by the said circuit court rendered, be in all things affirmed
and stand in full force.

State of Missouri Ss

I, Hampton L. Boon Clerk of the Supreme Court
of the State of Missouri , do hereby certify, that the foregoing judgment
of the Supreme Court aforesaid, at the January term (1845) in the case
of Lewis Scott (of color) against William Burd , is correctly copied from
the Records of said Court, now remaining in my Offices.

Given under my hand, with the seal of said
court affixed, at Office in the city of Jefferson
the second day of May A.D. 1845 H. L. Boon

Filed 16th May 1845
John Ruland Clk

1 That the plaintiff is not entitled to his freedom
in consequence of being sent to Illinois to do a job of
work & remaining there to do the same, if the
Jury believe from the evidence, that he was there
sent & remained there, without the knowledge, consent
or connivance of the defendant.

deft

given

(on first trial)

2.That the plaintiff is not entitled to his freedom in
consequence of his having been sent to the State of Illinois
to do work there by a member of the firm
to which defendant belonged, and remaining there
to do it, provided the jury believe from the
evidence that he was so sent & remained entirely
without the knowledge consent or connivance
of the defendant.

Deft

Refused
January 16/44
(on first trial)

Plff
If the Jury find from the evidence
that Burd a manufacturer and
repairer in copper used his slave
named Lewis Scott in the business,
that in Burd's absence from
the State the establishment
was carried on as tho he were
present, and that his interest
in it continued and that said
Lewis remained there working
as before, and was by the person
in authority in Burd's
establishment sent over to
repair copper works in St. Louis ,
and that the slave
did so go and work in Illinois it
is an introduction of slavery
into Illinois such as will produce
the freedom of a slave

No 362
March T 1821

This instruction was
given on first
trial

(On part of plaintiff)
If the Jury finds from the evidence that
Burd the Deft a manufacturer and repairer in copper
used his slave named Lewis Scott in the
business- That in Burds absence from
the state the Establishment was carried on
as tho he were present and that his interest in
it continued and that said Lewis remained
there working as before and was by
the person in authority in Burds establishment
sent over to repair copper works in Illinois
and that the slave did so go and work
in Illinois it is an Introduction of slavery
into Illinois - and such as will produce
the freedom of a slave- and the
Jury must find for the plaintiff

Refused

Instruction asked
by plff- refused
May 24. 1844

On part of Deft
1. That the plaintiff is not entitled to his freedom
in consequence of being sent to Illinois to do
work & or of remaining there to do the same, if the jury believes from the evidence that he was
thus sent & remained there,
without the knowledge,
consent or connivance of the defendant.
(Given)

2 That the plaintiff is not entitled to his freedom
in consequence of his having been sent to the
State of Illinois to do work there by a
member of the firm to which defendant
belonged, and of his remaining there to do it, provided the jury believe from the evidence that he was so sent & remained,
entirely without the knowledge consent
or connivance of the defendant.
(Given)

3 If the jury believes from the evidence that defendant
was owner of the plaintiff & hired him for
a year to a firm transacting business in the State of Missouri of which he the defendant
was member, and that said plaintiff was sent
to the State of Illinois by a member of that firm after the deft
to do work there & remained there to do it and
that he was there sent & remained, without
the knowledge, consent or connivance of the
said defendant, they are bound to find for
the defendant.
(Given)

Instructions prayed
for by Deft &
Given by Court
May 24 1844