North Carolina, Supreme Court, Raleigh : Stone (executor of Stone) v Hinton et al, June 1840.

In her will, Sarah Stone directed that after her death her slave Happy was to go to Stone's sister, Margaret Hinton, and after Hinton's death to be sold or freed at her discretion. Stone's other slaves were to be sold in families, and to buyers intending to make use of them themselves...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Corporate Author: Adam Matthew Digital (Firm) (digitiser.)
Format: Electronic eBook
Language:English
Series:Slavery, abolition & social justice.
Subjects:
Online Access:Click for online access

MARC

LEADER 00000nam a2200000Mi 4500
001 on1391999430
003 OCoLC
005 20240623213015.0
006 m o d
007 cr ||||||||a||
008 230622s1840 ncu o 000 d eng d
040 |a UKAMD  |b eng  |e rda  |c UKAMD  |d OCLCO 
035 |a (OCoLC)1391999430 
049 |a HCDD 
245 0 0 |a North Carolina, Supreme Court, Raleigh :  |b Stone (executor of Stone) v Hinton et al, June 1840. 
264 0 |a Raleigh, North Carolina :  |b North Carolina Supreme Court,  |c 1840. 
300 |a 1 online resource. 
336 |a text  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a computer  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a online resource  |2 rdacarrier 
490 1 |a Slavery, abolition & social justice 
520 |a In her will, Sarah Stone directed that after her death her slave Happy was to go to Stone's sister, Margaret Hinton, and after Hinton's death to be sold or freed at her discretion. Stone's other slaves were to be sold in families, and to buyers intending to make use of them themselves rather than to speculators. The money arising from these sales was to be invested in bank stock, the interest from which would accrue to Margaret Hinton and Thomas Dashiel, Stone's brother; after their deaths, the stock was to go to Dashiel's son, Grayson. A later codicil modified the provision about the stock such that the bequest would be shared between Grayson Dashiel and two cousins of his if the education and tuition of Grayson Dashiel is withheld from me. After Sarah Stone's death her executor, David Stone, sold the slaves (other than Happy) on a twelve-month credit, with interest accruing on the debt during that period. On the payment date coming due, Margaret Hinton's husband, Joseph, insisted that only the principal of the money raised on the sale of the slaves should be invested in bank stock, and that two thirds of the accrued interest should be paid to him as due to his wife. Joseph Hinton also insisted that the title to the slave Happy had passed to his wife (and therefore to him) not merely for his wife's lifetime but absolutely, and expressed his intention to sell her. In addition, David Stone found himself unable to decide whether the conditions outlined in the codicil had come to pass, and so was uncertain on whom to settle the bank stock once bought. He therefore mounted a legal action, that the courts might rule on these questions. On the first issue the Supreme Court determined that since it was the established custom in North Carolina to sell slaves on credit, as purchasers generally paid for them out of the proceeds of their annual crop, then Sarah Stone could be assumed to have expected this to happen in the case of her own slaves; the money arising from the sale thus encompassed the principal and the interest, and both were to be invested in bank stock. On the second issue, it was determined that Grayson Dashiel had left Sarah Stone's home no later than 1832, that the codicil was dated 1835, and that by the time of Stone's death in 1839 he had never returned to her; the circumstances in the codicil regarding Dashiel's education being out of Stone's supervision were thus determined to have come to pass. Having decided on the two questions, the court determined that the plaintiff was to pay the costs of the suit out of the funds of the estate. 
535 1 |a North Carolina State Archives 
542 |f Material sourced from the North Carolina State Archives 
650 7 |a Court records  |2 fast 
650 7 |a Slave trade  |2 fast 
650 7 |a Slavery  |2 fast 
650 7 |a Wills  |2 fast 
651 7 |a North Carolina  |2 fast 
710 2 |a Adam Matthew Digital (Firm),  |e digitiser. 
710 1 |a North Carolina.  |b Division of Archives and History,  |e owner. 
830 0 |a Slavery, abolition & social justice. 
856 4 0 |u https://holycross.idm.oclc.org/login?auth=cas&url=https://www.slavery.amdigital.co.uk/documents/detail/north-carolina-supreme-court-raleigh-stone-executor-of-stone-v-hinton-et-al-june-1840/17607058  |y Click for online access 
903 |a AMD-SLAVERYABOLITIONJUSTICE 
994 |a 92  |b HCD