The New York herald., 1879-12-25
A RELIC OF SLAVERY.

SUIT by AN Ex-sLAvE WOMAN AGAINST TIM
ESTATE OF HER OWNER AND FATHER FoR
sERv1cEs-INTEREsTINa POINTS OF LAW.
WASHINGTON, Dec. "a, 1879.
case involving some novel points Of law has just
been submitted in brief in tho Supreme Court. It
comes ON writ of from the Circuit Court OF the
Eastern district of Arkansas. In November. 1874.
there died In Chcot county. in that State. one Elisha
worthngton. who had been before the war o rich
saveholding planter. whose wealth estimated st
100000. A. short time after his death suit ives
brought by Martha w. Mason. colored woman. to
recover tho Of 100000 from the administrators
OF worthingtons estate for services alleged to have
been rendered said worthington for managing his
household affairs for thirteen years.
THE PLAINTIFFS CASE.
The plaintiff in her charge set forth that she wss
tho natural dsughter Of worthington. her mother
having been o slave on of his plautstions: that
her father. having no family of his own. treated her
a. II she had been his lawful child and intrusted her
almost exclusively with the charge Of his business
matters; that in 1868 he placed her at Oberln Col
loge Ohio to be after remaining there
several years she returned voluntarily to said
Worthington, with whom she continued to remain
until his death; that for all this service Worthington
had on many occasions promised to reward her
hor two entire plantations, valued at that time ~
high as $2500OO but he died suddenly before carry
through her counsel General Albert Pike. to recover
the amount named from the estate.
JUDGEs cHAnaE.
When tho case camo to trial In Arkansas the Judge
charged the jury that when Colonel Worthngton
voluntarily took the n<atH into the Stat8 of Ohio
and placed hor theGD 1t school the constitution
and laws Of that stats fmmodatey dissolved the
aton Of master and slave previously existing be-
tween Colonel Worthirgton aud the plaintiff and tho
plaintiff became free woman aud could never there
after be claimed or held by Colonel Worthington 40
his slave In virtue Of his previous ownership OF her
Nor did the subsequent return of tho plaintiff from
Ohio to Arkansas affect hor rights a. free woman
acquired under the laws OF Ohio
THE vEnD1Cr AND APPEAL.
The jury brought IN q verdict OF $4,000 for the
plaintiff. Senator Garland. Of Arkansas. who DO.
plaintiff In error, excepted to- tho Jury charge. In
his briof he denies all nstsrisi allegations OF Marths
Mason to any contract agreement or obligation
of said worthington to pay her any sum OF money
for so-cailed services aud contends that her manu-
mission could only date from the repeal or abro.
CATION of the law OF the state recognizing slavery
herein she was resident ut the time and that under
the law Of slavery existing In Arkansas no right OF
family hershp. connection. descent or dtstributon
could exist, ana any subsequent manumission or
emancipation under any law could not confer upon
any slave any such right Tho Senator says. In con-
cluding his brief,--
diving q slave o complete and thorough educsr
ton, embracing music and drawing and daucings
ala not free tho slave. under the Arkansas law, aud
that the law of emancipation had to DO pursued.
Tho case 10 likely to provoke much comment and
discuasiou.