Brownlow's Knoxville Whig. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1866-1869, 1868-12-02

their emaEeipatopsin 1885. After their emancipation
The relation Of husband and wife continued until Jan
uary, 1867. Then he abandoned his wife aud married
another A. common law We have shown il is the de-
ared assent of the win TO the act Of marriage which
makes II legal Such declare their assent shall be
bound Though the plaintiff IN was incapable OF
making any valid contract while in state of slavery
and the marriage ycd, and he could have dissolved
the relation as soon as he was capable oil eontraoung
vet he having continued live with the woman be had
married IL slate Of slavery, vas rauneaiion ~
marriage. Bishop, ii bis work en- marriage $40
s 1872 in reference to ths marriage of slaves says'
IL after the emancipation, the parties live together as
husband and wife, and if before emancipation they were
married in the form which either usage or law had e
abishcd for the marriage of slaves, this subsequent
mutual acknowledgment Of each other as husband and
wife should be held to complete the act Of matrmony SO
as to make them lawfully and fully married from the
time at which this subsequent living together com
menced Aud in support Of this principle 70 MISS,
40. Pointer on Marriage and Divorce 57 aud the case
of Cole vs. Cole Sneed. Doubts existing in the public
mind as to the validity Of such narringesswhe in state
Of slavery, the Legislature, with view TO elevate TINS
class Of the population in morals, and to Keep them To-
eether as families who had contracted marriage IN
state Of slavery, the 26th Of May, 1866, passed An
define the term Of free persons OF color and to de-
clare the rights Of such persons. The 9TH section oil
said act is follows "That all free persons OF color
who Living together as hHsband and wife in this
State while ~ state OF slavery are heisoy aea,eu
he man and wife, and their children legitimatey en-
titled to an inheritance in any property heretofore ac-
uirsd OF that may be hereafter acquired by said par
cnts full extent white children are entitled
! under existing laws Of this statute"
The passage Of this act did not change alter the
law IN reference to those who married while in
slavery and continued to cohabt together man and
wife after their emancipation. The marriage of such
persons made valid by their eonsentng to live to
goher after their emancipation, and having given while
state Of slavery moral assent soon as they were
capable Of contracting legally asserting to the mar
rage, il would become valid. - -.
The act Of eeLegslature was proper under The cir
cum stances ia which it was passed n vas suppose
this class Of persons embraced within the rules
Of law regulating marriage. The object Of the Legisa-
give the sanction Of law and bring under It's
rules this class Of persons in their domestic relations
Such being the principles Of law governing this case,
was the charge Of the correct? He instructed the
Jury if the plaintiff in had prior TO his freedom
racted marriage with women Of scOlex, and lived
with her a husband, and had married another woman
while the Wifs he had married in state Of slavery
living, the jury instructed he guilty. This is
erroneous. To constitute the crime Of bigamy there
must be valid marriage subsisting at the time Of the
second marriage His Honor should have instructed the
Jury that if the plaintiff in had married before
their emancipation, and had continued TO live and CO.
habit with his wife he had married while in state Of
slavery after their freedOm,it was legal assent and
ratification OF the markings, end the plaintiff in error
having married another while the FIRST marriage existed
guilty The Judgment Of the court must be reversed
aud trial awarded, when the law viii be charged
settled in this opinion.
SHACKELF0Rp, Judge.
Attest: J. G.. FRAZER, Clerk.