Actions for North Carolina, Supreme Court, Raleigh : Abernathy v Hoke, June 1842

Email RIS file
Bookmark
Report an Issue

North Carolina, Supreme Court, Raleigh : Abernathy v Hoke, June 1842

Published
Raleigh, North Carolina : North Carolina Supreme Court, 1842.
Physical Description
1 online resource
Additional Creators
Adam Matthew Digital (Firm)
Access Online

Availability

I Want It
I Want It

Finding items...

Series
Summary
Abernathy was in debt, so in 1827 he conveyed to Robert Burton, as security, a family of ten slaves, that they might be sold to satisfy his debts from the proceeds. Between the conveyance and the sale, two more slaves were born into the family. Burton offered the slaves for sale and sold them all for cash. Hoke, the defendant, purchased seven of the twelve, Sue and six of her children, for [dollars] 954. Abernathy claimed in his bill that he had applied to Hoke, a friend, to purchase them for him, and that Hoke had agreed, if he concluded that the slaves reached the value of Abernathy's debts, to purchase them, discharge the debts and then leave the slaves in Abernathy's possession until Abernathy should be able to redeem them. The slaves stayed with Abernathy until 1831, when Hoke took them into his possession. In 1837 Abernathy filed the present bill, praying that the slaves, now thirteen in number through natural increase, be returned to him in exchange for [dollars] 954. Hoke answered he bought the slaves purely for himself and denied all existence of an agreement with Abernathy, either written or verbal, that he would buy them for his benefit. He also claimed he allowed Abernathy to keep the slaves until 1831 because he had no use for them until then, and that when he requested that Abernathy give them up he did so without a qualm or any claim to title to them. Several witnesses deposed that at the sale Hoke had said to Abernathy that all he wanted was his money and that if he got it he would give the slaves back at any time, and that the price the slaves sold at was unfairly low. Other witnesses said the slaves sold at a price remarkably high for their age and appearance. The court ruled that the only real proof of the plaintiff's claim had been furnished by Hugh Wilson, the auctioneer who had sold the slaves, but that he had been deemed to be an unreliable witness in numerous testimonies. Other witnesses for the plaintiff were too vague, relying on overheard snatches of conversations for their claim that there had been an agreement to redeem; it was inconceivable that the parties should have agreed to an arrangement like the one alleged by the plaintiff without committing it to writing or pledging it in front of several express witnesses. Possession of the slaves by the plaintiff continued until 1831 not because he really claimed any interest in them but because of the defendant's will. Bill dismissed with costs.
Subject(s)
Other Subject(s)
Reproduction Note
Electronic reproduction. Marlborough, Wiltshire : Adam Matthew Digital, 2007. Digitized from a copy held by the North Carolina State Archives.
Location of Originals
North Carolina State Archives
Copyright Note
Material sourced from the North Carolina State Archives
View MARC record | catkey: 41990547