Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1858-07-02
interesting Ioossioh Of the supreme CeaNt
Of VfrRfuias

I0terestinr Decision Of the suprsihe CeeEt \
Of virginias
A very imporisnt legal decision has been recently /
rendered in Virginia. BY the Supreme Court Of APP
pealE Of that State in reference to tie point whether
tsstor in making win dispOsng Of slave property
can confer upon his slaves the privilege Of elsating
whether they shall remain free or slave. A Mr..
PouDzxTER, Of New Kent county, left will In
which the following provision occurs:
tcTbe negroes loaned my wife, at her death wish
to have their choice Of being emsneipated er sold
publicly. If they perfer being emenoipated, 1t Is
NV vish they be hired out until Sufficient sum Is
raised to defray their expenses to land where lhey
can enjoy freedom; and there should not DC eNoegg
of the parshabe property loaned my VIE 70 pay on
fbs lngsaiez 10 Anne Lewis HoWle and 6eorglana
Brvan they are 70 be hired out until sufficient sum
is raised to pay the deficiency fthey prefer De.Sg
so.a II IL my wish they be sold publicly anu ine
money arising be equally divided between ny sister
Ellie Marshall, and other heirs mentioned IN 'h'
instrument
The viii was first brought before Judge CIOPrON'
ofthe Superior Court Of New Kent county VINO DC
cied in fact tibet the above provision was legal ana
that 1t was equivalent to full deed Of emancipation
iftbs slaves CONSENTED to accept their freedom An
sppesl was taken to the Supreme Court from this
decision By the blood heirs Of the deceased ana after
long argument upon the case, the decision oil the
court below was reversed upon the ground that
under the principles laid down in the DRIED SCOTT
decision, the slaves in question, being property Aea
no lssl right Of election between the Two eonoiions
in the clause We have cited.
Depsndant upon the decision Of this case was an
other. in which the language OF the 'eslari1 was
even more distinct in regard to the wish to manumit
her slaves, though in reference to giving them the
choice of determining their condition, Nde words Of
the win we're not so clear as in the Other instance
i T,ba case referred to was that Of WILLIAMSON and
others, heirs OF the party deeendent Vsrus CoA1TER
| srsoator. II cane before the Supreme Court upon
spneaI from the Circuit Court Of Stafford county in
an aciop brought by the executors against devisees
and Ie0stess in order to obtain Judicial eOnstruc-
ton Of n clause in the will of the late Mrs il. H.
CouIrER. of Fredericksburg, Virginia. The parti-
cular clause referred to reads as follows;
se1direot in regard to the balance Of my negroes,
tb.f tbev shall be mauumited en- the LIST day Of Jan
narv 1858; and l authorize and request my said
sc1tors 20 ascertain what fund will be sufficient Il
nrovide the usual out6tfor and remove said negroes
To Liberia and hereby direct my executors to rais
| said fund or such an amount as IN their Judgmen
NAV he sufficient for that purpose, from my saiC
estate. and to use the said fund IN removing an'
settling nv said servants in Liberia, or any other fire.
state OF country in which they may elect to ive-th
admits selecting for themselves, and the parents 70
their infant children and further direct that if an
ofv said servants shall prefer to remain in Virgins
instead Of accepting the foregoing provisions, it
NV desire that they shall be permitted by my exeeu
tors TO select among my relations their respeetiv
owners. said election to be made by the adults an
parents as aforesaid
The FIRST part of the provision is the key to tn
wish Of the testatrx and this bears its face proc
that she really was desrOus Of giving freedom to he
! servants. The intent is clearly expressed in tn
frs. sentence, and the conclusion is merely an atel
thought or slight qualification. Yet the SuPrem
Court held tina. this clause, comforting the right
choosing their status, rendered the principles of tn
J decision made in the other case applicable to il
and this provision was therefore annulled
These are the first cases of The kind in Virgins
D and We do not know that any similar opinion hl
been rendered in any other State. The issue in Ii
latter of the above cases involves nearly hundre
5 negroes. great number of wills are on record
Virginia in which similar provisions occur, aDd Il
present decision must necessarily affect hundreds
+ thousands Of dollars worth Of slave property.