Lenoir County, NC - BARWICK vs Barwick, 1850
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
#6758 BARWICK vs BARWICK & others
Andrew J. Barwick vs Joshua Barwick, James Wood and John M. Brown Lenoir
County 1850
Action of trespass for the conversion of two slaves named Allen & Betsy to the
Wayne County Court Spring Term 1850. Plt offered into evidence the Will of
Benjamin Sutton, a copy of the record of Lenoir Co Court at July Term 1846, a
bill of sale from Joshua and wife Winifred all showing the slaves were in
the possession of Sarah Sutton plf stated that shortly after the division of
the slaves they were in his possession. A wit stated that Joshua Barwick told
him after the execution of the Bill of Sale that he had sold the negroes to
the deft Wood for $550 and that Wood had paid him $25 and a note for the
residue the wit purchased this note from Joshua and after the bringing of
this suit presented it to the deft Wood for payment who refused to pay until
the suit was settled and he also stated he had given his own note and paid
some on it.
Richard King was also a wit for the plt and said he served the writ in this
case on the deft Wood and Wood said to tell Brown not be be scared and not to
say anything Brown then said he saw Wood carry off the negroes to sell and
he went with Wood to the railroad
The defts introduced no evidence that Sarah Sutton was dead
The defts stated that at the time of qualification of the will of Benjamin
Sutton the will had not been probated and the extrs could not divide the
property.
Jury found for the plf
END OF DOCUMENT
A. J. Barwick said the slaves were worth Simon $125, Nicey $200, Benj $400 and
Allen $400 bond given of $2250
The Wayne Co Court found for the plt in the amount of $1050 for conversion of
Betsy and Allen
DEED
State of North Carolina, Duplin Co
30 Nov 1837 (sic) - Joshua Barwick & Winifred Barwick to Jackson Barwick Bill
of sale for negroes Linda, Nat, Grace, Betsy, Arab, Beu, Ava, Charity, Allen,
Lear, Niscea for $300 all rights, titles and interest lot of negroes and
refers to the Will of Benjamin Sutton
Both signed by mark
WIT E. Cobb
To Court in Duplin Co Jan Term 1838 on oath of E. Cobb
Jas Dickerson, Clk
Copy made on 29 May 1850
END OF DOCUMENT
At Court in the July Term 1846 Jesse Lassiter, Joshua Moseley and Nathan G.
Blount were appointed to a committee to divide the negro slaves belonging to
the estate of Sarah Sutton between Nancy Sutton, Mary Rouse wife of Richard
Rouse, Winifred Barwick wife of Joshua Barwick, Elizabeth Ellis wife of Alfred
Ellis heirs at law of Sarah Sutton.
The division was returned at Oct Court 1846 as follows
Betty Ellis wife of Alfred Ellis drew Lot No 1 viz
Ben valued at $400
Charity valued at $400
Mary valued at $300
Total of $1100
Mary Rouse wife of Richard Rouse drew Lot No 2
Ava & Scevis ?? valued at $500
Grant valued at $400
Sylvia valued at $225
Total of $1125
Winifred Barwick wife of Joshua Barwick drew Lot #3
Simon & wife valued at $250
Allen valued at $400
Betty valued at $400
Total of $1050
Nancy Sutton drew Lot #4
Ava valued at $400
Grace valued at $200
Sarah valued at $350
Lettress valued at $175
Total $1125
The distribution share was $1100 so Richard Rouse and Nancy Sutton will each have
to pay to Winifred Barwick wife of Joshua $25 to make the shares equal
END OF DOCUMENT
COURT DECISION
Benjamin Sutton by his will gave a number of slaves to his wife Sarah Sutton for
her life and at her death to be divided among his four daughters, one of whom was
Winifred the wife of Joshua Barwick one of the defendants. Joshua Barwick and
his wife sold the interest in said slaves to the plt who took four of them into
his possession. Afterwards the said Joshua sold the two slaves sued for to Wood,
one of the defendants - defendants marked through - who with the assistance of
the other defendant Brown took them from the possession of the plff and sent
them out of the state whereupon this action was brought.
The case made up by his Honor states that it was not proven that Sarah Sutton
was dead. The plf insisted that he was entitled to recover on two grounds 1st
because he had the title and 2nd because he had the possession and could recover
against wrong doers.
His Honor charged that the plt could not recover on the first ground because it
was not proven that Sarah Sutton was dead but he charged on the 2nd ground that
if the plt was in possession of the slaves and the defts took them and sent them
out of the country he was entitled to recover their value with interest from the
time of the conversion as the defts were wrong doers. The defts excepted the 2nd
charge.
A slave possession is sufficient to maintain an action of trespass against a
wrong doer.
The Supreme Court reversed the original decision.
Copy of Will of Benjamin Sutton attached.
___________________________________________________________________
Copyright. All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
This file was contributed for use in the USGenWeb Archives by
Martha Mewborn Marble <mmarble@erols.com>
___________________________________________________________________