Case Name: John Dawson, Jesse A. Dawson, and Martha Dawson v. Sally Dawson, Evelina Alston, and George Alston
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1830-06
Citations: 1 Dev. Eq. 396
Docket Number: 
Parties: John Dawson, Jesse A. Dawson, and Martha Dawson v. Sally Dawson, Evelina Alston, and George Alston,
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 16
Pages: 396–398

Head Matter:
John Dawson, Jesse A. Dawson, and Martha Dawson v. Sally Dawson, Evelina Alston, and George Alston,
From Halifax.
Volunteers, who claim under a deed of. gift, executed under the impulse of feeling, rather than the convictions of the understanding, in which apparently the grantor did not exercise perfect free will, are not aided by a Court of' Equity.
After the ¡demurrer to this bill had been overruled f ante p. 93) the Defendants filed their answers, in which they admitted that the commissioners were requested by them, in making a division, to allot to the Defendant, Sally, the negroes which had belonged to her before her marriage — and (hat out of twenty eight slaves, which were assigned her in the division, eight only had been the property of her deceased husband.
The Defendant, Sally, in her answer, stated, that soon after the death of her husband, the Plaintiff, Jesse, who had beért upon terms of intimacy with her husband and herself, ceased to frequent her house, and she learned that he felt great dissatisfaction at the disposition which her husband had made of his property — and particularly at the liberal provision lie hstd made for her — that being much afflicted at the death of Iter husband, her distress was aggravated at. this alienation of the Plaintiff. Jesse, his brother — and that she became very desirous to conciliate him — that she accordingly requested him to visit Iter, and told him, that to preserve the peace of the family, she was willing to relinquish all her right to the property which had belonged to her husband — that actuated by these f clings, she did, within a month after her husband’s death, execute the deed mentioned in the bill.
Replications were filed to the answers, and amongst other proofs, (hat of the person who drafted and attested the deed that was taken. He stated, that the Defendant, •fSally, from the death of her husband up to line timo when the deed was rxet utrd, was in great dist.nsa", which was much heightened by the dissatisfaction, expressed by the FI,lintiff Jesse, with the provision which his brother had made for her — to remove which, and to restore She good understanding which had subsisted between them, she was prevailed upon to execute the deod — tliat when the witness was about to draw it, the Plaintiff observed to him, that his sister, the Bet end ant, Sally, wished to give tip a part of the 5and and negroes, which she had re-* reived under the will * f h.-r husband — -that the Defendant replied, íñ No, Mr. Dawson, I do not wish to do it, I do if for the sake of peace”- — upon which, tile Plaintiff's countenance besp >ke anger. The Defendant replied, si fix it es yr,o pirase, I shall be satisfied.” That the Plain tiff, Jjsss, then prevailed upon the witness to draw the deed — and that, if he, the witness, had not in torfersd, the deed w«v:M have roLvcyed a present interest in the slaves to the Plaintiff, instead of reserving a life estate to the D«*$>nd*ut* Sally,
Gaston, for the Plaintiffs.
Seawell & Badger, for the Defendants.

Opinion:
Hall, Judge.
— -Wi'hoaf examining into Hie question which the demurrer p-vsed'-;, viz: whether the Plaintiffs are volunteers, and how far this Court will aid them by setting aside die division of the slaves,, according to ¡he praye'* of the bill, the case ¡noy, and 1 think ought, to he decided upon the circumstance* which preceded the execution of the deed, and those which were ciuempora-ncous with it.
Ilis Honor then recapitulated the testimony of the attesting witness. as above stated, and proceeded :
it is to carry into effect a deed of gift thus obtained, that the present bill is filed. It does not appear to me, that i!h? free assent of the grantor was given to the exe- cation of the deed. It ivas more the offspring of her-feelings, than of her understanding. The Plaintiff is at liberty to use it at law, if it will be of any avail to him there. But a Court of Equity cannot grant him any relief, without transcending those limits which for ages it has professed, to be governed by.
Per Curiam.
— Let the bill.be.dismissed with costs..