Fourth Generation Inclusive

Historical Documents of Genealogical Interest to Researchers of North Carolina's Free People of Color

Category: Caselaw

Adultery and fornication.

State v. Joel Fore and Susan Chestnut, __ NC __ (1841)

Joel Fore of Lenoir County, a free man of color, and Susan Chesnut, a white woman, lived together and had one or more children, and the inartful pleading of their indictment would not defeat a finding that marriages between such persons were null and void under the Act of 1838, and subsequent cohabitation between them was adultery and fornication.

Joseph [sic] Fore married Susan Chestnut on 13 January 1840 in Craven County. (See marriage records of that county.)  The 1840 census of Lenoir County shows Joel Fore as the head of household that included one white female aged 30-40, one colored male aged 24-36, and 5 slaves.  By 1860, the family had moved to Moore County, where Joel, “Susa” and their children Tootle, Elizabeth, Nancy, Anna J., Hardey, Henry and Sarah, aged 1-20, are described as white.  In 1870, Joel and Susan Fore and their children are listed in Greenwood township, Moore County.  Joel and children Augustus and Henry are classified as mulatto.  Susan and the remaining children as white.

She lived to herself and was controlled by no one.

William Brookfield v. Jonathan Stanton, 51 NC 156 (1858)

William Brookfield, whom Jonathan Stanton claimed as a slave, brought the action to try his right to freedom.  Brookfield introduced evidence that for 30 years or more prior to his birth, his mother and maternal grandmother were recognized and admitted to be free people of color.  They were known as the McKim negroes.  His mother had moved from Carteret to Hyde County and lived as a free woman.  She was reported to be the wife of a slave “but lived to herself and was controlled by no one.”

Stanton sought to prove that Brookfield’s mother and grandmother were slaves.  He proffered (1) an attachment made on behalf of an Elijah Cannady against John McKim, who resided in another state, that was levied upon a negro woman named Beck and her children Fan and Olly in 1809 and (2) a bill of sale for the purchase of Bookfield. Both were rejected.

The Supreme Court noted that when a person is black, i.e. dark-skinned, a presumption arises that he is a slave.  Nonetheless, where that person’s mother and grandmother have been treated as free for 30 years, there is an inference that they were lawfully manumitted.  The case was remanded to Craven County court.

There are no free colored Brookfields or McKims listed in antebellum North Carolina census records.

Went a-hunting with white folks.

State v. John Harris, 51 NC 448 (1858)

An indictment against John Harris, a free man of color, for carrying firearms.  Harris had obtained a license from the Craven County court “to keep about his person, and carry on his own land a shot-gun.”  At the time of the alleged offense, Harris, “in company with certain white persons, went a hunting” and carried his gun off his property.  The trial judge found that Craven County had no power to limit Harris’ gun license and judged him not guilty.  On appeal, the Supreme Court disagreed.

Two free black men named John Harris appear in the 1850 census of Craven County, one born in 1785, the other in 1828.

Treated and regarded as free.

David Jarman v. L.W. Humphrey, 51 NC 28 (1858).

The case was brought to try the question of L.W. Humphrey’s right to hold David Jarman as a slave.  Jarman was once the slave of Edward Williams and is Humphrey’s slave, unless he has been legally emancipated.  Benjamin Jarman filed a petition in Onslow County Superior Court attesting that he had been the slave of John Jarman and had been lawfully manumitted by the court for meritorious services; that, while a slave, he fathered a child named David, who was now about 30 years old; that David’s master, Williams, had been offered a large sum of money to free David but had refused and had, instead, sold David to his father Benjamin for a reduced price.  Williams attested that he had owned David about 30 years; that he reposed unusual confidence in David; and that he had refused higher sums in order to sell David to his father.  At September term, 1822, the Onslow County Superior Court entered a judgment that David was liberated, and he had conducted himself as a free man since.  However, Humphrey asserted that Benjamin himself was a slave at the time he petitioned for David’s emancipation and therefore could neither have owned nor freed him.  State Supreme Court held that Williams’ acquiescence in and recognition of David’s freedom demonstrated that the transfer of title had been valid and as “he and all other persons had treated and regarded [David] as free for more than thirty years, every presumption ought to be made in favor of his actual emancipation.”

See also State v. William Patrick, 51 NC 308 (1859), a Brunswick County indictment for carrying firearms: “It is clearly settled that it is evidence in favor of a negro, in a suit for his freedom, that he is generally reputed to be free, and has always acted and passed a free man. …  If such evidence be admissible to establish the fact of a negro’s being free, when it is to operate in his favor, it seems to us, that it must equally be so when it is to operate against him.”

Valid or void?

State v. Alfred Hooper & Elizabeth Suttles, 27 NC 201 (1844).

Alfred Hooper, a free man of color, and Elizabeth Suttles, a white woman, were tried in May, 1842, in Rutherford County on an indictment for adultery.  Their defense?  That they were married.  A jury found that the couple had lived together as man and wife for ten years prior to the indictment and referred to the court the question of whether that marriage was valid or void.  (If valid, they were innocent of adultery.  If not, guilty.)  The court held that, as the marriage took place prior to Act of 1838, chapter 24, which barred marriages between colored and white people.  Hooper and Suttles’ marriage was valid.  On appeal, the State Supreme Court pointed out the 1830 statute that also made it unlawful for a free negro to marry a white person.  Because Hooper and Suttles’ marriage took place while the 1830 statute was in force and, accordingly, was invalid.  And they were adjudged adulterers.

Judgment notwithstanding, the 1850 federal census of Montfords Cove, Rutherford County, lists Alfred Hooper (age 54), wife Elizabeth (36) and their children Toliver (18), Henry (17), Charity (14), Eliza (12), Mahala (10), Martha (8), Amanda (6) and Mary (4).

No interest in the question.

Harriet Owens v. Jasper Chaplain, 48 NC 323 (1856).

Currituck County Court bound free colored girl Polly Gordon to Frederick Owens, a free man of color, at August Term, 1851. In October 1854, Owens sailed for the West Indies and was not heard from again, leaving Gordon with his wife, Harriet Owens. Jasper Chaplain took Gordon from Harriet Owens’ custody, and Currituck County Court Court rebound her to him without notifying Harriet Owens and without the girl’s presence. Reversing the lower court, North Carolina Supreme Court held that, because Owens was derelict in his duty towards Gordon, Currituck had the authority to rebind her without notice to the wife (who “had no interest in the question”) and without the girl.

Frederick Owens married Harriet Owens (her maiden name) on 13 July 1850 in Tyrrell County.  The couple appear in Frederick’s mother Mary Owens‘ household in the 1850 census of Poplar Branch, Currituck County.  They are not found in the 1860 census.

In the 1860 federal census of Powells Point township, Currituck County, 53 year-old farmer Jasper Chaplin and his wife share a household with six free colored children, Sidney (17) and Lydia Patterson (15), Joseph Case (14), and Polly (13), Aaron (9) and Pater Gordon (5).

Sarah Wesley’s death certificate reveals that Polly Gordon married her fellow apprentice, Joseph Case.  Wesley was born 7 July 1874 in Jarvisburg NC and died 29 May 1925 in Poplar Branch.  Polly and Joseph are listed as her parents, and they appear together in the 1870, 1880 and 1900 federal censuses of Currituck County.