Case ID: pen-w_1/html/0093-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOHN COBEAN, plaintiff in error against THOMAS THOMPSON.
    “Yeoman” is a sufficient designation of .the occupation of the owner of a slave, under the act of 1780.
    Error to Adams county.
    The only-question in this case is, whether “ Yeoman” is such a designation of the occupation of a master, as is required by the act ■of Assembly for the gradual abolition of slavery, to be returned to the clerk of the quarter sessions.
    
      'Stevens, for plaintiff in error
    Contends that in this country the name yeoman and farmer are synonymous terms, and if farmer is a sufficient designation under the act,' yeoman is. — Walker’s Dictionary, word “ Yeoman.”
    
      Miller, for defendant in error.
    The fifth section of the act of 1780, Purd. Dig. requires the occupation of the owner to be set ■out on the record, and yeoman, in this country, is not such a designation as will distinguish a' farmer from any other employment ■or occupation. Commonwealth v. Darker, 11 Serg. Rawle, 360. In ■this case it was proved that the master was a farmer, and It would ■'have been easy to have designated him as such. Wilson v. Belinda, . .3 Serg. Rawle, 401.
   By the Court.

The designation is sufficiently certain.

Judgment reversed.