The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1878-05-29
Vol. XLI.---No 27.

Jefferson was at the time in Mexico
though he returned before the copclu
sion OF the suit. Joseph was acting dur
ing his absence as his general agent, anC
there was annexed to the bill, an exhib
1t showing that the tax on "Brierfield'
was assessed against Jefferson. These
we believe, comprise all the facts occur
ring previous to the seizure of 'Brierfeld'
by the Federal authorities, which tenC
to show continued OWE ership in Joseph
1t Is at once apparent that several OF
them, however pertinent to other cues
tons in the case, are not admissible on
an issue Of title; since nothing is better
settled, than that title can not be affect.
ed by the acts or declarations of a party
not in possession, when uttered and
done in his own intererts, and not in the
presence of the adverse party. All ties
timony in relation to them was on this
ground objected to in the lower court.
The facts which indicate that Jeffer-
son held in his own right, and not as
| tenant of his brother, are as follows: 1st.
During his long occupation he had no
other home. The land when received
was wholly wild, subject to inundation,
and differing in no respect from govern
ment lands 10 be secured readily at ST.
20 per acre. 1t constituted, as Jo-
seph +. said many years afterwards, a
gift of but little value until improved by
Jefferson. He devoted the best years
Of his manhood to it; and expended
| twenty times its value in clearing,
and fencing, and draining, and levying,
and building upon it. He assessed and
paid taxes on it as his own, and he al
ways so spoke of it, both to Joseph E.
and to others. BY will prepared in
ownership higher than those habitually
exercised by him can be conceived of,
save a sale of it; and his right to do this
seems to have been conceded by his
brother, as will be hereafter seen. ID.
Nineteen witnesses testify to the general
repute within and without the family,
that he was owner, and that he was al
ways so spoken Of by Joseph f., and by
the world at large. These witnesses
embrace former slaves Of both brothers;
the overseers; commission merchants;
and mutual friends of both: daughter
and son-in-law of Joseph E.; a brother
in-law; and four nephews and neices.
Outside the family it was not known
that no deed had been made. Within
the family knowledge of this fact does
not seem to have affected the general I'M
derstanding that Jefferson was owner.
Mrs. Stamps, niece by marriage of the
two brothers, expresses what seems to
have been the general understanding in
the family. After stating that Jefferson
held as owner, and not as tenant, she
says: "My answers are derived from
my connection with the Davis family;
among all of whom, it was a matter of
common repute, universally conceded,
that Mr. Jefferson Davis was the
owner of 'Brierfield:' and [ never heard
that fact called in question or doubted
by any one. So that | may say, the re-
pute of such ownership was~ general
both in and out of the family. x X X *
1t was understood and reputed among
the family, that Jefferson Davis was tn
real and actual owner of 'Brierfeld,
though the title was nominally in Jo-
seph Z. Davis" The testimony of
other relatives, except Mrs. White, is sub
stantially the same. Sd. Joseph E.
Davis habitually spoke of 'Brierfield'
as "Jefferson's place." both in ordinary
and upon occasions calling
for accurate language. During Jeffer
sons frequent and protracted absence in
the public service, Joseph sometimes
acted as agent for his brother, and at |
other times the agency was devolved
upon others. While acting as agent |
his letters, draft ard orders. relative to
''Brierfeld" were always signed ''Jeffer
son Davis by J. E. Davis" Many such |
are in the record. He gave it in to the
tax assessor as Jefferson's property, and
paid taxes on it in Jeferson's name.
When other persons were acting as
agents, he explicitly refused to interfere
in any manner with the plantation.
Soon after Jefferson's marriage, which
occurred in 1915, and while he was in
Mexico, one of the daughters of Joseph
r. twitted Mrs. Jefferson Davis with the
taunt that her husband owned nothing,
and was dependent on his brother.
Stung by the remark, Mrs. Davis
sought her brother-in law, and demanded
to know explicitly and distinctly
whether he or her husband was the owner
IF esBrierfeld." He assured her that
Jefferson was owner, saying that he
1ad given it to him. He prepared the
will in 1916, by which Jefferson devised
sBrierfeld." Many years after this will
rad been destroyed, Mrs. Jefferson Davis
Who regarded it as unjust towards her
elf taxed her brother in-law with having
nstieated it. He resented the charge
With warmth declared that he had only
,ut it in legal shape at his brother re-
NEST and said that it was most unjust
hat he should be held responsible for
he DISPOSITION Jefferson had seen tit to
make of his own property. In 1897
Turing a temporary alienation between
he brothers, Joseph E. made written
,oboso stRrierfeld"