Fourth Generation Inclusive

Historical Documents of Genealogical Interest to Researchers of North Carolina's Free People of Color

Month: May, 2014

Duplin County Apprentices, 1853-54.

At January Term 1853, Sarah Rouse was bound to John D. Abernethy.

At October Term 1853, Matilda Rouse, age 10, was bound to John B. Hussey, and James C. Burnett, age 5, and Caleb W. Burnett, age 3, were bound to William M. Bowden.

At January Term 1854, Betsey Rouse, age 4, and Mary Rouse, age 3, were bound to Calvin Jernigan.

At October Term 1854, Mary S. Aldridge, “mulatto girl,” was bound to John W. Chambers.

In the 1850 census of Duplin County, in the household of white farmer James Maxwell, Matilda, 7, and Sarah Rouse, 5, both mulatto. Nearby, Eliza Rouse, 27, and son Samuel, 1, both mulatto, in the household of white farmer James Tucker.

In the 1850 census, North Side of the Neuse, Wayne County: Mary, 48, Sarah, 26, Mary, 4, James, 2, Charles, 20, Churchill, 22, and William Burnett, 24.

Minutes, Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions, Court Records, Duplin County Records, North Carolina State Archives.

Release him from any further cull.

It appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that Noah Mitchel a free person of color is a blacksmith by trade and without his services the farming interests of the County must be materially impaired. It is therefore ordered by the Court that the proper authorities be requested to release him from any further cull of the free negroes from the County to perform labor for the Government. [15 February 1864]

Minutes, Superior Court of Sampson County.

By her tender years incapable.

To the General Assembly of the State of North Carolina

The petition of John Monroe, Zebulon Hunt, Alexander B. Caldcleugh, and James Sawyer Executors of the last Will and Testament of Andrew Caldcleugh late of the County of Rowan dec: respectfully sheweth That their Testator on the 11th of february 1822 made and published his last Will and Testament in writing, in which among other things, he devised as follows — That his woman Slave Fanny Kelly should be emancipated for meritorious serviced, rendered to him and his wife, during their sickness, their Testator further devised that the daughter of the said woman Fanny Kelly, called and known by the name of Sally Zimmerman a child of tender Years, should be also emancipated. The said Testator in and by his last Will made ample provisions for the maintenance and support of the said Fanny and Sally as will be seen by reference to his Will.

For the purpose of carrying their Testators Will into effect, Your petitioners applied to the Superior Court of law held for Rowan County at October term 1822, and were permitted by the Judgment of the said Court to emancipate the said woman Fanny Kelly, which they have done in conformity with law. But the said Court having power only to allow emancipation of Slaves for meritorious services rendered to their Owners, and the said Sally from her tender Years, being incapable of rendering such services as are contemplated by the act of Assembly Your petitioners are unable to affect the emancipation of the said Child Sally by the Judgment of said Court.

Your petitioners further state, that no other person then Your petitioner Alexander R. Caldcleugh has any interest in retaining the said Girl Sally in a state of Slavery, he being the only child and heir at law, as well as resduary legatee of the said Andrew Caldcleugh.

Your petitioners being unable from the circumstances they have stated to give effect to the wishes of their Testators, without the Assistance of the General Assembly respectfully pray, that an act may be passed for the emancipaton of the said Sally Zimmerman.  /s/ Alex R. Caldcleugh, James Sawyer, Jno. Monroe, L. Hunt

General Assembly Session Records, Box 1 (November 1832-January 1924), Folder November 29, North Carolina State Archives.

 

George & Minnie Manuel.

 manuels

George S. Manuel and wife, Mary Jane “Minnie” Bear Manuel, Greene County, Tennessee.

Jesse Manuel, born around 1775, and his wife, Beaty Revels, left Sampson County, North Carolina, about 1830 and settled in Greene County, Tennessee. Their children included Ephraim, James, Mahala, Elkana, Levi, Sylvania and Travis. Several of his sons, including Travis Manuel, appear as heads of household in Greene County in 1840, and by 1850, Ephraim and James, had migrated further to Brown County, Indiana. By 1860, they had pushed even further north to southern Michigan, though their siblings remained in the Greene County area.

In the 1850 census of Greene County TN, 35 year-old NC-born Travis Manuel, 61 year-old Mary Manuel, and George (13) and Margaret Manuel (11). 

[Sidenote: Many thanks to Edie Lee Harris for use of this photograph and information about her family.]

 

 

In connexion with the falsehoods uttered by them all.

State v. Joab B. Cheek, 35 N.C. 114 (1851).

Case appealed from Chatham County Superior Court.

Joab Cheek, Aaron Malone, and free man of color Robert George were indicted for passing a counterfeit $20 notes, purporting to have been issued by the Bank of Georgetown in South Carolina.  All three were found guilty, and Cheek appealed.

At trial, one Seymore testified that he kept a shop on a high road in Chatham County, leading to Fayetteville. In March 1850, Berry Davidson and a man named Stout stopped their wagons for the night about 250 yards from his house. The same evening, Cheek, Malone and George showed up asking for liquor and a place to spend the night. They said they had been working for McCullock, a contractor working on a improvement project for the Navigation Company on the Deep River. When Seymore served them, they said they did not have change. After quiet discussion among themselves, George offered Seymore a $20 bill. Seymore refused it, saying that he was no judge of South Carolina banknotes, but did not think the bill was good. George then paid with a silver coin and for additional drinks with a knife. Cheek got drunk and fell asleep. Malone and George left, but returned for Cheek, who left as well.

Berry Davidson testified that Robert George came to his camp, identified himself as John George, a free man. George asked to buy Davidson’s watch, but Davidson “refused to trade … because he was a negro.” George said he would get his “young boss” to make the trade and returned with Malone, who called himself James Johnson. Malone and Davidson bargained a $13 price for the watch, and Malone offered the $20 note in payment. Davidson asked if it were good, and Malone told him that it was, that they had received it from McCulloch, for whom they had worked. Davidson took the bill and gave Malone the watch and one dollar in change. He did not have the other six, and they agreed that he would leave that amount with a man in Haywood the next day. Thirty minutes later, George returned with Cheek, who told Davidson that his name was Brooks, that he had lent Malone six dollars and would take five in repayment at that time. Davidson borrowed six dollars from Stout, paid Cheek, and Cheek and George left.

A man named Harris testified that an hour before daybreak the next morning, Cheek and George came to his house, claiming they had “lost their road.” Cheek was drunk and said his name was Brooks, and Thomas Brooks was his father.

McCulloch testified that he was a superintendent for contractors at Buckhorn Falls on the Deep River and paid out all the money spent there; that Cheek, Malone and George had worked for him in February or March; that he had paid the white men three dollars and “the negro $1”; and he had never given them a $20 note. McCulloch further testified that he had consulted his account books to refresh his memory, to which the defense objected.

The State introduced a copy of the South Carolina statute incorporating the Bank of Georgetown and called a Mr. Dewey, a clerk at the Bank of North Carolina, to offer expert testimony on the validity of the $20 note. The defense objected to both.

The issues before the North Carolina Supreme Court: (1) whether McCulloch should have been allowed to refresh his recollection without producing his account books at trial; (2) whether the copy of the South Caroline statute was properly received; (3) whether Dewey was qualified to assess the genuineness of the bank note; and (4) and whether Cheek, who was drunk and asleep when the note changed hands, was guilty as a principal in the crime.

The court made short work of the issues, responding yes to all four. As to the last, the justice noted: “The three persons formed one party, and appeared to be acting on secret consultations with each other, and all the little they had seemed to be in common.” The evidence raised a strong presumption against Cheek, and there was no error in judgment.