The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1884-12-11
An Interesting and Novel Case.

.
i An Interesting and Novel Case.
i On Saturday last, Judge Mclaughlin,
the Circuit Court. decided an interestln
an novel case. involving the constractlo
of a viii made more than three-quartel
Of a century ago. The amount involve
was not considerable, but the questions d.
cided were new and important. The styl
of the suit was Black Vs. Brown
In 1921, SAINT. Black made and execute
his will which WAS admitted 70 PROBATE
August Of the same year. 1t gave all Q
the testator's real aud personal propert
to his wife. Nancy, during her natura
life. After the death of the wife, two o
the slaves Richard Ciris aud Maria, wer
to he emancpated. together with any chill
dren which Maria might have at tina
time In addition some personal propert
was given to the two slaves. together will
alife interest in the real property on which
Black resided, with the exception OF 81
acres. which was devised in fee to sam
Roberts. nephew Furthermore, undel
the provisions of The will, the free heirs
Of Richard Ciras ana Maria who might
survive them. weres entitled to the ole
mansion and fifty acres OF land surround
| ing Tito lie laid of to suit the conve
nieiec aud wishes of the ,levisees share
aud share alike.
| Mrs Black. the wife OF the testator
died in 1851. and Maria the freed slave
survived her three years. The latter was
never married but had two children
! Newton and George Black, the former OF
whom died unmarried and without issue
! Richar.I Ciras about the year 1885, con
traeted a relation of marriage with slave
woman named Lucy, owned BY james
Berry. and by her had two children, Henry
and Harriet. the plaintiffs in this suit
! These children were born whilst their
mother was yet slave In 1871. Richard
Ciras died. his wife surviving him few
| years.
| Abont the year 1856, George Black, the
surviving child OF Maria lat that time the
only free issue of the two freed slaves.
AsiAiittA0 diiN &sAol OAliHhLllH, no uUuUL.
that the clai.n of Richard Ciras and any
children which he had. would terminate
with his RS life-the children being
slaves then, with no probability of their
ever becoming free and thus entitled to the
benefits Of the will-soll the fifty acres Of
land with genera, warranty To David l..
Fridley. Two years later. said Fridley
also purchased the life estate of Richard
Ciras in the land. Lucy, the wife of
Richard and slave, uniting in the deed.
Subsequently, Fridley conveyed tie land to
kunkle. trustee. in trust for his wife and
children, and W. A. Brown, in 1852. pur-
chased pf kunkle and the beneticiaries in
the trust deed. The suit in question was
instituted by the heirs of Richard Ciras
against WA. Brownand the prior grantees.
the plaintiffs claiming two-thirds Of the
fifty acres devised as remainder to the free
heirs of Richard CiTas and Maria by the
will
The question involved was whether the
children Of Richard Ciras born as slaves.
freed by the act of Emancipation and legit-
imized by the act of Feby. 20, 1866 passed
by the Virginia Legislature, legalizing
marriages between former slaves where
the parties had lived as man and wife and
desired to continue the relation answered
the character and description of the class
OF free heirs or children required by the
will. The defence set up was as to the
paternity of the children. The defend.
ants claimed that Lucy, the mother, being
slave. there could have been no valid
marriage between her and Richard. and
that consequently the father of the chill
dren was not known that the will should
be. construed under the laws which OBJ.
tanned at the date of its execution and
which forbid the devise of property to
slaves that the act of February, 1866. le-
CALLING marriages between former slaves,
was never intended to interfere with the
vested rights of innocent purchasers, and
that the purchase Of this land was made
at a time when the effect of that law
could not by any possibility have been
foreseen. The plaintiffs contended that
the will should be construed in the light of
the law as it existed at the date of
Richards death, the period at which the
remainder to the children was to vest in
possession that the act of Feby., &c. le-
Called the marriage and legitimized the
children, and that having been recognized
by Richard Ciras in his life time as his
children, they answered fully the char
acter and description of the class des-
ignated by the will as the free heirs' of
Richard Ciras.
The Court sustained the view taken by
the plaintiffs attorneys, holding that the
children were the free heirs of Richard
Ciras and entitled to the land under the
will that whether the children answered
the description could only be ascertained
after the death of Richard, and that the
purchaser took the risk
Messrs. Craig & Paul were the counsel
for the plaintiffs, Messrs. Sheffey 6 Bum
gardner representing the defence.
~,