Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-02-03
SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS.
Hunc1Ns against WRIGHTs.
(CoNcLUDED.)


human race are so visibly marked, that
those species may be- readily Disseminated
from each other by mere inspection only.
This, ut least, is emphaticdily true In re-
lation to the negroes, to the Indians OF n.
America, and the European white people.
When, however. these races become inter-
mingled, it is difficult, if not Impossible, to
saw from inspection only, which race pre-
d Eliminates in the offspring, and certainly
impossible to determine whether the de-
scent from a given race has been through
the paternal or maternal line. In the case
of a 1rohositls Of unmiXed blood, there
fore, do not see but that the fact may be
as well ascertained by the Jury or the judge,
ufon uiesv, as by the testimony Of the Wit
nesses, who themselves have no other means
ofinformation but where an intermiXture
has taken place in relation to the person in
question, this criterion is not infallible;
and testimony must be resortcd to for the
purpose of shelving through what line de-
scent from given stock has been detluced;
and also to ascertain, perhaps, whether
the coloring of the complexion has been de-
rived from u negro or an Indian ancestor.
In the case of a person visibly appearing
TO be a negro, the presumption is, in this
country, that he is a slave, and it is incum-
bent on him to make out his right TO free
appearing to be n white man, OF an Indian,
the presumption is that he is free, and it is
necessary for his adversary to shew that he
is a slave.
In the present case it is not and cannot
be denied that the appellees have entirely
the ahhearanee of white people: and how
does the appellant attempt to deprive them
of the blessing of liberty to which all such
persons are entitled? He brings no testi-
mony to shew that any ancestor in the fe
male line was a negro slave or even an In
dian rishtfitliy held in slavery. Length of
time shall not bar the right to freedom of
those who, trina facie, are free, and whose
poverty and oppression, Ito say nothing of
the rigorous principles of former times on
this subject has prevented an attempt to
assert their rights. But in the case before
us, there has been no acquiescence. 1t is
proved that John, "a brother of Hannah,)
broughta suit to recover his freedom and
that Hannah herself made an almost con-
tinuai claim, as to her right of freedom, in
somuch that she was threatened to be
whipped by her master for mentioning the
subject 1t is also proved by Francis Tenn
tte (perhaps the brother of Robert) that
the people in the ncighborhocd said "that
if she would try for her freedom she would
get it." This general reputation and Opt
tied to some credit: it goes to repel the
idea that the given female ancestor of Han
nah was a LAWFUL slave, it goes to confirm
the other strong testimony as 10 HdnntIh's
appearance as an Indian. 1t is not to be
believed but that some of the neighbors
would have sworn to that concerning which
they all agreed in opinion and, if so, Han
nah might, on their testimony, have per-
haps obtained her freedom, had those times
been as just and liberal on the subject of
slavery as the present.
No testimony can be more complete and
conclusive than that which exists in this
cause to shew that Hannah had every APP
pearance of an Indian.
That aitearance, on the principle with
which | commenced, will suffice for the
claim of her posterity, unless it is opposed
by counter-evidence shelving that some /S-
male ancestor of hers was a negro slave,
or that she or some female ancestor, was
la7vfuGy an Indian slave. As TO the first,
there is no kind oftestimony going to esta-
blsh it. Robert TEMPLE is not only entire
iy silent as TO the color and appearance of
the mother of Nan the mother of Hannah,
but also as to that of Nan herself. The
testimony of this witness, Ito say nothing
of his probable interest in the question: is
not satisfactory. His memory seems only
appellan; required. IF Hannuh's grand
mother (the mother of Nam were negro,
it is impossible that Hannah should have
had that entire appearance of an Indian
which is proved by the witnesses.--If they
tell the truth, therefore, Hannah's grand
mother was not a negro slave. This is
more especially the case, if the father of
Hannah were other than an Indian; and
1t is not froVed nor can be presumed, that,
In this country, at that time, her father
was an Indian: in that case, Ha1z,ah would
have had so little Indian blood in Her veins,
as not to justify the character of her ap-
pearance gwen by the witnesses. The no
Their and grandmother of Hannah must
therefore be taken 10 have been Indians
bu: this viii not suffice for the appellant
unless thsy Tor one Of them) be shewn 70
have been Indian slaves.
This court in the case of Coleman VS..
Dick and Pat, was of opinion that, since
the year 17o5, no American Indian could
be reduced to state of slavery and if the
act Of 1705 had been preyiouslJ enacted in
1891, as it would seem by the information
OF the manuscript act given by the Judge
who preceded me, the epoch on this subject
would he carried back to that year; which
would completely over-reach the date of
the birth of old Nan and exclude every hos-
ability of doubt on the subject. But. even