Case Name: Boisneuf vs. Lewis
Court: General Court of Maryland
Jurisdiction: Maryland
Decision Date: 1799-10
Citations: 4 H. & McH. 414
Docket Number: 
Parties: Boisneuf vs. Lewis.
Judges: 
Reporter: Maryland reports, being a series of the most important law cases argued and determined in the Provincial Court and Court of Appeals of the then province of Maryland, from the year 1700 [i.e. 1658] down to the [end of 1799]
Volume: 4
Pages: 414–416

Head Matter:
GENERAL COURT,
OCTOBER TERM, 1799.
Boisneuf vs. Lewis.
Aiteax from Frederick county court, from a judgment rendered in that court in favour of the appellee, on a petition for freedom.
The bill of exceptions, taken at the trial, states, that the petitioner, ('Pierre Leivis,) claimed his freedom from having been brought into tisis state from the island of Saint Domingo in the year 1793. The defendant, in the court below, gave in evidence that he was a native of the island of Saint Domingo, and resided therein, and antecedently to the year 1786 went frequently from thence to France, and again returned. That it was customary with the people of fortune in that island to hold a small plantation in France. Thai in 1786 he went to France, and in 17S7 or 1788 purchased a small plantation, and lived and resided there until the year 1793. That in 1789 he was a member of the constituent assembly in France, being a deputy from the province of Touvaine to the said constituent assembly. That in June 1793 he determined to go to Saint Domingo, and left France with that intention, but there being no safe direct conveyance to Saint Domingo, availed himself of a neutral ship bound to America, with a view to go immediately from thence to Saint Domingo. That he landed in America in August 1793, when hearing of the disturbances in the island of Saint Domingo, declined going there in consequence of those troubles, and resided in America in the state of Maryland, where he has ever cinco resided, and still resides. That the petitioner wac the slave, in Saint Domingo, to Pierre Payen, the brother of tli© defendant, who was a native and resident of Saint Domingo, and held the said petitioner as bis slave until the said Pierre Payen’’s death, which happened in January 1791, in Saint Domingo. That the defendant was appointed executor and testamentary representative of the said Pierre Payen, hut had not taken out letters testamentary. That the defendant caused the petitioner to be brought from Saint Domingo to George-Town, in Montgomery county, in the State of Maryland, where lie was landed on the 4th of November 1793; and that on the 31st of December 1793, the defendant did deliver and lodge with the clerk of Montgomery county court, a list of the slaves by him so imported, among which was the said Pierre Lewie, raid is in the words following; (being a translation of it, the original being in the French language;) that is to say, “1 the undersigned, an inhabitant of the French part of the island of Saint Domingo, at this time a resident of Frederick-Town in Maryland, and in conformity to the law of this state of the 23d of December 1792, declare, that three negro slaves, sent from Saint Domingo, arrived the 4th o£i\o= veraber last at George-Town, in Maryland, in the vessel commanded by Capt. Henry Dunning, to wit; Pierrs Lewis, aged about thirty-five; Lambert, aged about five years; and the negro girl Filleüe, aged about eight years: which domestics I keep in my service, conformable to the authorisation granted me by the aforesaid law. Bone at Frederick-Town, in Maryland, this 24th of December, 1793.
Paten Eoxsneue-N
That the. said Pierre Lewis never was used as a domestic or house slave, by the defendant, before he was brought, to America.
The defendant, upon the aforegoing evidence, prayed the opinion of the court, and their direction to the jury, that if they believed the evidence m siafed, the said
Pierre Lewis, the petitioner, was not entitled by law to freedom. The County Court [Potts, Ch. J.] Was of 0p¡nx0n, and directed the jury, that if they believed the evidence as above stated, the petitioner was entitled to his freedom. The defendant excepted, and prosecuted this appeal.
Mason, for the appellant.
J. Dorsey, for the appellee.

Opinion:
The Generar Court affirmed, the judgment of the County Court.
By the act of 1792, ch. 55, it is provided, «that French emigrants from any of the French islands, who seek an asylum in this state, may import and keep their domestic slaves, to the number ox five, if a master of a family? hut if a single man, the number of three." «That every such French emigrant who shall or may thereafter import any such slave or slaves as aforesaid, shall, within thx*ee months thereafter, deliver and lodge, with the clerk of the county into which the same shall first be first brought or imported, a list of such slaves so imported, and shall at the same time elect and notify in the said list to the said clerk, which of the said slaves he will retain as his domestic or house slaves, which list shall be recorded by the said clerk."