Case ID: scl_1/html/0260-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Rutledge, Ch. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Guardian of Sally, a Negro, against Beaty.
    If the master of a negro wench permits her to work, or hire herself out, upon, condition of paying him certain stipulated wages, all she saves ormakes beyond such wages shall be at her own disposal. And if she thinks proper to purchase the freedom of a-fa-vourite negro girl, with the surplus, such negro girl shall be entitled to her freedom, and shall net be. deemed the property of the master.
    THIS was a special action, in nature of ravishment of ward, to establish the freedom of a negro girl, according to the form prescribed by the act of the legislature for that purpose.
    The ca_se was this : a negro wench slave, the property of the' defendant, by working out in town, with permission of her master, had, by her industry, acquired a considerable sum of money, over and above what she had stipulated to pay for her monthly wages, to her master; and having an affection for a negro girl, Sally, she purchased her with this money, which she had been for years accumulating, and gave her her freedom. For a considerable time after the purchase was made the defendant never claimed any property in the negro girl — never paid taxes for her; but, on the contrary, acknowledged he had no property in her. Some short time, however, before the commencement of the present action, when called upon to deliver up the girl as free, he refused ; in consequence of which this action was brought.
    
      For the defendant it was argued, that goods acquired by a slave enured to the use of the master. It was acknowledged that the common law did not contemplate a system of slavery ; consequently, none of its rules could reach this case fully — but the civil law did. Our maxims in matters respecting slaves, were borrowed from the civil law. By the civil law, then, it was a rule that property acquired by a slave, went to the master ; nay, so strict was the law of the ancient Romans, that in cases of voluntary slavery, which was permitted by them, as well as in some of the eastern countries at the present day, the very price he seemed to receive, devolves, ipso facto, to the master, the instant he becomes his slave. 1 Flack. Com. 424» In the present Case, therefore, not only the money which the defendant’s wench acquired belonged to the master, but, also, every purchase made by her with it, became, ipso facto, his, the instant the purchase was made. That as to the defendant’s saying he had no property in the girl, such a declaration might have been made under an ignorance of his right; and it was an established rule of law, that ignorance of a right shall not devest a man of his right. That, at all events, the defendant’s wench could not be considered in law, in any other light than as a trustee for her master. He permitted her, in some degree, to be at her own disposal, and work or hire herself out as she pleased •, consequently, all she gained was for his use. It became a vested right in him as soon as she acquired it, and, of course, she hadno right to manumit the girl, or do any other act to the prejudice of his interest, without his liberty and consent.
    
      For the plaintiff, in reply, it was confessed that the common law would not apply to this case, but the rules of equity and justice, which were a part of the civil as well as of the common law, would. That the laws of South-Carolina, and the nature of its climate, justified slavery. Its truest interests made it indispensably necessary to make use of them for agricultural and other laborious purposes. But notwithstanding the law gave the master a claim on the labour and services of his slave, it disclaimed, at the same time, that tremendous power of life and death which the Romans, as well as some of the modem nations on the coast of Bar= hary, exercised on their slaves : so far Christianity had ameliorated the condition of slaves in this country. Here, the counsel said, was one exception to the general rules of the civil law, in favour of the condition of slavery, and others might be found equally necessary and proper. That the present was a case of a new impression : it was as it were, sui generis. There is no case similar to it in the history of our judicial proceedings. It was necessary, therefore, to Tesort to principles, and square this decision by such rules as would not injure the rights of the master, nor offer violence to the most benevolent affections of the slave. The master, in this case, gave his slave permission to work, or hire herself out, in any manner she pleased, upon paying him a weekly or monthly sum. Here was an implied con» dition, that upon such payment he would be perfectly satisfied, and that ail she could make over she might dispose of as she pleased. At least, the rules of right and equity would warrant such a conclusion. If, therefore, in the course of time, she had, by her frugality and industry, acquired a sum sufficient to purchase this girl, in order to set her free, besides paying her master what he stipulated for, .the plain principles of justice must sanction the act. The master could certainly have no reason to complain, because he had been fully satisfied. The generosity of the act, and the strong affection the wench múst have had for the girl, ought not, they said, to pass unnoticed. A slave herself, and having the means of purchasing her own freedom, she still preferred to remain in slavery, in order to give liberty to her young favourite. This act, the counsel contended, was so singular and extraordinary in itself, so disinterested in its nature, and so replete with kindness and benevolence, that to thwart or defeat the wench’s intention, would be doing violence to some of the best qualities of the human heart.
   Rutledge, Ch. J.

delivered the opinion of the court; and, in his charge to the jury, observed, that although the case was a new one, yet the court found no difficulty whatever in forming an opinion on it; for if the master got the labour of his wench, or what he agreed to receive for her monthly wages, (which was the same thing,) he could not be injured ; on the contrary, he was fully satisfied, and all that she earned over ought - to be at her own disposal; and if the wench chose to appropriate the savings of her extra labour to the purchase of this girl, in order afterwards to set her free, would a jury of the country say no? He trusted not. They were too humane and upright, he hoped, to do such manifest violence to so singular and extraordinary an act of benevolence.

The jury, without retiring from their box, returned a verdict for the plaintiff’s ward, and she was set at liberty.