About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Morgan McAfee, Madison McAfee, and James Alford, Plaintiffs in error, v. James T. Crofford U.S. 447 (1852)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0248 and id is 1 raw text is: DECEMBER TERM, 1851. 447 McAfee et al. v. Crofford. should be reversed, and the proceedings remitted; with directions to enter a decree that the complainant is entitled to the fund in court collected upon the judgment against Bennett, together with vosts of suit in this court and in the court below. Order. This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the Circuit Court- of the United States for the Southern District of Alabama. and was argued by counsel. On considera- tion whereof, it is now here ordered, adjudged and decreed by this court, that the decree of the said Circuit Court in this cause be, and the same is hereby, reversed with costs, and that this cause be, and the same is hereby, remanded to the said Circuit Court, with directions to that court to enter a decree in favor of the complainant for the fund in court collected upon the judgment against Bennett, together with the costs of this suit in this court and in the said Circuit Court. MoRGAN MCAFEE, MAADisoN McAFEE, AND, JAMES ALFOrp, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, V. JAMES T. CROFFORD. In an action of trespass, for forcibly invading a plantation, carrying off'some slaves, and frightening others. away. it was proper for the plaintiff to give in evidence the consequential damages which resulted to his wood and corn. It was proper, also, to allow the defendant to give in evidence a judgment against the own& of the plantation, as principal, and himself as surety, and his own pay- nent of that judgment. It was allowable, both as an explanation of his motives, and to show how much he had paid both reasons toncurring to mitigate the damages. Evidence was also allowable to show that arrangements had been entered into be- tween the principal and surety, whereby time would be given for the payment of the debt. This was allowable, as a palliation of the conduct of the principal in removing his slaves without the State. Evidence was also admissible to show that the surety had not been compelled to pay the debt, by showing that the creditor had been enjoined from collecting it. This was admissible, in oider to rebut the evidencer previously offered on the other side. It was proper for the court to charge the jury that, in assessing damages, they had a right to take into consideration aft the circumstances. THIS case was brought up, by writ of error, from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of MissiS- sippi. It was an action of trespass brought by Crofford, who de- scribed himself as a citizen of Tennessee, but who had a plant- ation in Arkansas. The suit was brought against the McAfees

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most