Lenoir County, NC - BARWICK vs Barwick, 1850 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ #6758 BARWICK vs BARWICK & others Andrew J. Barwick vs Joshua Barwick, James Wood and John M. Brown – Lenoir County 1850 Action of trespass for the conversion of two slaves named Allen & Betsy to the Wayne County Court Spring Term 1850. Plt offered into evidence the Will of Benjamin Sutton, a copy of the record of Lenoir Co Court at July Term 1846, a bill of sale from Joshua and wife Winifred – all showing the slaves were in the possession of Sarah Sutton – plf stated that shortly after the division of the slaves they were in his possession. A wit stated that Joshua Barwick told him after the execution of the Bill of Sale that he had sold the negroes to the deft Wood for $550 and that Wood had paid him $25 and a note for the residue – the wit purchased this note from Joshua and after the bringing of this suit presented it to the deft Wood for payment who refused to pay until the suit was settled and he also stated he had given his own note and paid some on it. Richard King was also a wit for the plt and said he served the writ in this case on the deft Wood and Wood said to tell Brown not be be scared and not to say anything – Brown then said he saw Wood carry off the negroes to sell and he went with Wood to the railroad The defts introduced no evidence that Sarah Sutton was dead The defts stated that at the time of qualification of the will of Benjamin Sutton the will had not been probated and the extrs could not divide the property. Jury found for the plf END OF DOCUMENT A. J. Barwick said the slaves were worth – Simon $125, Nicey $200, Benj $400 and Allen $400 – bond given of $2250 The Wayne Co Court found for the plt in the amount of $1050 for conversion of Betsy and Allen DEED State of North Carolina, Duplin Co 30 Nov 1837 (sic) - Joshua Barwick & Winifred Barwick to Jackson Barwick – Bill of sale for negroes Linda, Nat, Grace, Betsy, Arab, Beu, Ava, Charity, Allen, Lear, Niscea– for $300 – all rights, titles and interest – lot of negroes and refers to the Will of Benjamin Sutton Both signed by mark WIT E. Cobb To Court in Duplin Co Jan Term 1838 on oath of E. Cobb Jas Dickerson, Clk Copy made on 29 May 1850 END OF DOCUMENT At Court in the July Term 1846 Jesse Lassiter, Joshua Moseley and Nathan G. Blount were appointed to a committee to divide the negro slaves belonging to the estate of Sarah Sutton between Nancy Sutton, Mary Rouse wife of Richard Rouse, Winifred Barwick wife of Joshua Barwick, Elizabeth Ellis wife of Alfred Ellis heirs at law of Sarah Sutton. The division was returned at Oct Court 1846 as follows Betty Ellis wife of Alfred Ellis drew Lot No 1 viz Ben valued at $400 Charity valued at $400 Mary valued at $300 Total of $1100 Mary Rouse wife of Richard Rouse drew Lot No 2 Ava & Scevis ?? valued at $500 Grant valued at $400 Sylvia valued at $225 Total of $1125 Winifred Barwick wife of Joshua Barwick drew Lot #3 Simon & wife valued at $250 Allen valued at $400 Betty valued at $400 Total of $1050 Nancy Sutton drew Lot #4 Ava valued at $400 Grace valued at $200 Sarah valued at $350 Lettress valued at $175 Total $1125 The distribution share was $1100 so Richard Rouse and Nancy Sutton will each have to pay to Winifred Barwick wife of Joshua $25 to make the shares equal END OF DOCUMENT COURT DECISION Benjamin Sutton by his will gave a number of slaves to his wife Sarah Sutton for her life and at her death to be divided among his four daughters, one of whom was Winifred the wife of Joshua Barwick one of the defendants. Joshua Barwick and his wife sold the interest in said slaves to the plt who took four of them into his possession. Afterwards the said Joshua sold the two slaves sued for to Wood, one of the defendants - defendants marked through - who with the assistance of the other defendant Brown took them from the possession of the plff and sent them out of the state whereupon this action was brought. The case made up by his Honor states that it was not proven that Sarah Sutton was dead. The plf insisted that he was entitled to recover on two grounds – 1st because he had the title and 2nd because he had the possession and could recover against wrong doers. His Honor charged that the plt could not recover on the first ground because it was not proven that Sarah Sutton was dead but he charged on the 2nd ground that if the plt was in possession of the slaves and the defts took them and sent them out of the country he was entitled to recover their value with interest from the time of the conversion as the defts were wrong doers. The defts excepted the 2nd charge. A slave possession is sufficient to maintain an action of trespass against a wrong doer. The Supreme Court reversed the original decision. Copy of Will of Benjamin Sutton attached. ___________________________________________________________________ Copyright. All rights reserved. http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm This file was contributed for use in the USGenWeb Archives by Martha Mewborn Marble ___________________________________________________________________