Case ID: del-cas_2/html/0125-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE v. JOSEPH PRETTYMAN.
    Court of Quarter Sessions. Sussex.
    April 27, 1799.
    
      Rodney’s Notes.
      
    
    Indictment for [assault and battery and false imprisonment], Bayard [for defendant].
    William Parrimore. The boy was received by Joseph Pretty-man at the old field. I met with him, Mr. Jones and James. They inquired if there was any trade for the Carolina men. Pretty-man asked me if I would ride with him told me he’d give me $8 to ride with him. I went to the old field with him when he received the sign I suppose agreed upon from Levin Parrimore and Hezekiah Lacey; he lifted the boy up behind me and three or four miles on the road he took him had a line round him.
    
      Bayard.
    
    Prettyman, as I am informed, did not know whether the boy was a slave or not and was deceived by the Parrimores.
    Elias James. In August Parrimore came to me and told me he had one or two negro boys to sell. One sixteen or seventeen for £45 or £50. I told him if he was likely I would buy of him; Prettyman did not buy him for me.
    
      Curtis Jacobs. Prettyman had money of mine to purchase a Negro, if I liked.
    On motion Mr. Bayard to examine [-]  West the mulatto boy. That at common law Negroes were admissible till the Act passed. That he is now offered in favor not against the white person.
    
      
       This case is also reported in Wilson’s Red Book, 231.
      
    
    
      
       Blank in manuscript
    
   The Court were of opinion the mulatto boy was inadmissible. It appearing to be intention of the legislature to prevent Negroes from giving testimony either for or against whites except to obtain redress for injuries done to their person or property.

Verdict, not guilty.