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

David Randon, Plaintiff in error, v. Thomas Toby U.S. 493 (1851)

handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0257 and id is 1 raw text is: DECEMBER TERM, 1850. 493 Randon v. Toby. DAVID RA'.nON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, V. THOIDIAS TOBY. An agreement by a debLor to apply a certain portion of his crops towards the extin- guishment of the debt in consideration of further indulgence, will take a case out of the statute of limitations, and may be set up in avoidance of the plea byway of estoppel upon the debtor. The detendant is not at liberty to complain that the construction of this instrument was left to the jury, because it was so done at his own request, and because, if the court had construed it, the construction must have been unfavorable to the de- fendant. The bankruptcy of the plaintiff prior to the time when he took the notes payable to himself was no legal defence to.the action. He was one of the persons authorized to settle up the insolvent estate, and whether or not he accounted to his creditors fqr the proceeds was no question between him and the maker of the notes.. The plea that the notes were given for African negroes imported into Texas after 1833 was no legal defence. The creditor had no connection with the person who introduced the negroes contrary to law. If the negroes bad been declared to be free, the consideration of the notes would have failed, but the debtor still held them as slaves, and therefore received the full consideration for his notes. Tins case was brought up, by writ of error, from the District Court of the United States for Texas. It was a suit brought by Toby, a citizen of Louisiana, by way of petition, upon two promissory notes executed by Ran- don. The notes are stated in the first bill of exceptian. The reporter will not undertake to trace the history of the sui d refers to the opinion of the court for his reasons for not c.s ng so. The following table will present a summary view of the condition in which the pleadings were finally placed: - 1847, January 4, petition filed. 18'17, February 4, demurrer, plea of limitations, and answer filed by defendant. 1848, February 10, petition amended. 1848, February 28, answer amended, and says notes given for purchase of African negroes, &c. 1848, March 11, defendant withdraws part of first plea, and demurs and excepts to part of petition. 1848, May 15, plaintiff further amends petition. 1848, May 31, defendant further answers plaintiff's amend- ment, craves oyer, &c. 1848, June 5, defendant ainends two pleas and files three further answers. 1848, June 8, plaintiff further amends petition. 1849, June 8, defendant amends answer. 1848, June 9, defendant demurs. 1848, June 12, plaintiff further amends petition. 1848, December 14, defendant further amends answer. 1848, December 15, plaintiff files exceptions to demurrers and pleas. VOL. xI. 42

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