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.
![handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0277 and id is 1 raw text is: 124 SUPREME COURT.
Bennett v. Butterworth.
JOHN H. BENNETT, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, V'. SAMUEL ].
BUTTERWORTH.
Where a plaintiff in the court below filed a petition for the recovery from the de-
fendant of four slaves, whose value he alleged to be $ 2,700, and the jury found a
verdict for the plaintiff for $ 1,200, the value of the negro slaves in suit, and the
plaintiff thereupon released the judgment for $ 1,200, and the court adjudged that
he recover of the said defendant the said slaves, the case is within the appellate
jurisdiction of this court.
The plaintiff averred in his petition, that the slaves were worth S-2,700, 2nd by his
releasing the judgment for $1,200. the only question before this court is the right
to the property. And as the defendant below prosecuted the appeal, the plaintiff
cannot be allowed to deny here the truth of his own averment of the value of the
property in dispute.
THIS case was brought up, by writ of error, from the District
Court of the United States for the District of Texas. The
facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
A motion was made to dismiss it for want of jurisdiction,
because the sum or matter in- controversy was not of the value
of two thousand dollars.
The motion to dismiss was sustained by Mr. Hughes and
Mr. Howard, and opposed by Mr. HBrrs.
-The reasons in support of the motion were the following.
The counsel for Butterworth move to dismiss the writ of
error, because the sum or matter in controversy is not of the
value of two thousand dollars. Bennett's counsel, on this mo-
tion, have taken affidavits to show the negroes to be worth two
thousand dollars and upwards.
We contend, for the defendant in error, that the affidavits
cannot be read: -
1. Because they contradict the verdict of the jury, which is
a part of the record. The error complained of is, that the court
erred in giving judgment for the negroes, instead of for the
value assessed by the jury; while, on the other side, it is
insisted that the judgment was right, and properly for the ne-
groes. The matter then in controversy is the negroes and
their value. If the court should be of the opinion, that judg-
ment ifn the court below could only have been rendered for the
value assessed, then the judgment will be reversed, and judg-
ment rendered on the verdict below for that value; and thereby
the plaintiff in error, by proving by affidavits what is insisted
upon to be the true value, will get off with paying the twelve
hundred dollars, though, by his own showing, the value is more
than two thousand dollars. Such a result as this will certainly
not be tolerated. Could the matter be so arranged that, in'the](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ussccases0277&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)