Paul Jones v. George W. Jones

Territory of Wisconsin
Grant County ss

In the district court of the United States of America for the County of Grant & Territory of Wisconsin March Term AD 1840

Paul Jones a man of Color plaintiff by D S Anderson his attorney complains of George W Jones defendant in a plea of Trespass on the case on premises.

For that Whereas the said defendant heretofore to wit on the twentieth day of October in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty nine at said County of Grant was indebted unto said plaintiff in the sum of eight hundred dollars for the work and labor, care, and diligence of the said plaintiff by the sd plaintiff before that time done performed and bestowed in and about the business of the said defendant and for the said defendant and at his special instance and request and also in the further sum of two hundred dollars of like lawful money for divers goods, wares, and merchandise by the sd pltff before that time sold and delivered to the said defendant and at his like special instance and request. And also in the further sum of one hundred and twenty six dollars of like lawful money for money by the said plaintiff before that time lent and advanced to and paid, laid out and expended for the said defendant and at his like special instance and request. And Also in the further sum of one hundred and twenty seven dollars of like lawful money for other money by the said defendant before that time had and received to and for the use of the sd plaintiff and being so indebted the said defendant in consideration thereof afterwards to wit on the day aforesaid at the place aforesaid undertook and then and there faithfully promised the said plaintiff to pay him the said several sums of money in this [unclear] mentioned when the said defendant should be thereunto afterwards requested. 

And whereas also said defendant afterwards to wit on the day and year and at the county last aforesaid accounted with said plaintiff of and concerning divers other sums of money from the said defendant to the said plaintiff before that time due and owing and then in arrear and unpaid and upon[?] such accounting the said defendant was then and there found in arrear and indebted to the said plaintiff, in the further sum of six hundred dollars of like lawful money and being so found in arrear and indebted said defendant in consideration thereof afterwards to wit

On the day and year last aforesaid at said county undertook and then and there promised said plaintiff to pay him the said last mentioned sum of money when he said defendant should be thereunto afterwards requested.

Nevertheless said defendant although often requested to do so hath not as yet paid said several sums of money above mentioned or either or any part of either of them but to do so hath refused and still doth refuseth the damage of said plaintiff of twelve hundred dollars and therefore he brings this suit &c.

David S Anderson atto for plaintiff

No 31

Paul Jones Man of Color
vs
Geo W. Jones

[unclear]

Filed in Grant County Clerk's Office Oct 31st 1839

Att Jno S. Fletcher Clk

Verdict Sept 9 1840

The Clerk will please issue his writ in this case.
damage $1200
D S Anderson atto for plaintiff

---

George W Jones
ads
Paul Jones a man of colour

District Court for Grant County Wisconsin Territory
March Term AD 1840

And the said defendant by Hempstead and Dunn his attorneys comes and defends the wrong and injury when &c and says that he did not promise and undertake in manner and form as the said plaintiff above thereof complains against him and therefore he puts himself on the Country.

Hempstead & Dunn
Attys for Deft

---

In the District Court Grant County
March Term 1840

George W Jones
ads
Paul Jones

Said Defendant being duly sworn, says, that on the 18th day of March AD 1829 he purchased from Susan Lecompte Widow & John H Lecompte & Elon Lecompte heirs of Peter Lecompte decd formerly one of the french inhabitants of the village of Prairie Du Rocher in the former North Western Territory, now State of Illinois, the above named Plaintiff, as a slave for life; that the bill of Sale to him said Defendant for said Plaintiff is dated 18 March aforesaid, by the above named vendors executed and attested by Lewis F Linn as a subscribing witness then and now a resident of St Genevieve County and State of Missouri, that he expects to prove by said Linn, the execution of the said bill of sale, and he further states that he expects to prove by Nathaniel Pope, of the County of Randolph and state of Illinois and Francois Valle, and Bartholomew Durocher of the County of St Genevieve and state of Missouri, that the above named Plaintiff was a slave for life at the date of the purchase aforesaid held according to the rights of property secured to the inhabitants of Prairie Due Rocher, in the then North Western Territory now State of Illinois by provisions of the Ordinance of the 13th of July AD 1787 for the Government of the North Western Territory. He further expects to prove by said witnesses that the plaintiff was a slave for life, belonging to the estate of said Peter Lecompte who was on the said 13th day of July AD 1787 an inhabitant of said village of Prairie Du Rocher and as such entitled to hold slaves according to the usages and rights of said French inhabitants of said village of Prairie Du Rocher prior to and on and subsequently the said 13th day of the July AD 1787.

The affiant further states that at the date of the purchase of the Plaintiff aforesaid his residence was then and still is in the said North Western Territory. He further states that he cannot go safely into trial without the testimony of said Lewis F Linn, Nathaniel Pope, Francois Valle, and Bartholomew Durocher whose testimony he expects he can procure by the next term of this court, and this affiant further states that he has had no means of procuring the testimony of said Linn, Pope, Valle, and Durocher since the commencement of this suit, and further that this application is not made for delay but that justice may be done

George Jones

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 26th day of March AD 1840
[unclear signature]

---

Know all men by these presents that we Susan Lecompte, widow & denison of Peter Lecompte deceased, formerly of the State of Illinois, and John H. Lecompte & Eloy Lecompte children, heirs & legal representatives of the said Peter Lecompte deceased, We the grantors being now resident in the County of Ste Genevieve & State of Missouri for and in consideration of the sum of five hundred dollars lawful money of the United States to us in hand paid by George W. Jones of the County of Jo Daviess and State of Illinois have given, granted, bargained, sold & delivered and by these presents do give, grant, bargain, sell & deliver unto the said Geo. W. Jones, his heirs & assigns all our rights, title, claim, interest and property of, in, and to two certain negro slaves to wit a negro woman named Charlotte about twenty five years of age and a certain negro man named Paul about twenty two years of age, being what are usually called Illinois Negroes born and raised therein, and held under the Ordinance of Congress of 1787, unto him the said Geo. W. Jones all our right, title, claim, interest & property of in and to the said Negro slaves to him, his heirs and assigns forever. And we the said Susan Lecompte, John H. Lecompte and Eloy Lecompte do hereby covenant and agree to and with the said Geo. W. Jones that we will forever warrant & defend the title and claim to the said negroes from us, our heirs, executors, administrators and assigns and all and every person or persons whatsoever claiming or to claim the same by, through or under us or either of us and furthermore that they are negroes of good moral habits & healthy & sound.

In testimony whereof we have hereunto set our hands & seals at Ste Genevieve Mo this eighteenth day of March in the year of our Lord 1829.

S. Le Compte (seal)
John H. Le Compte (seal)
Eloy Le Compte (seal)

Witness
Lewis F. Linn

Territory of Wisconsin
Grant County ss

I John S. Fletcher Register of Deeds in and for the County afsd do hereby certify that the within and foregoing Bill of Sale from Susan Le Compte, John H. Le Compte & Eloy Le Compte to Geo. W. Jones was duly. recorded in Grant County Register's Office March 26th 1840 at 3 o'clock P.M. in Book B of Conveyance on Pages 170 & 171.

Attest Jno S. Fletcher Register

---

Paul Jones (a man of colour) 
vs
George W. Jones 

District County for Grant County Wisconsin Territory
September Term 1840

Deposition of Thomas McKnight to be read in the above entitled cause taken on application of the defendant 
 
1st interrogatory. Are you acquainted with the parties in the above cause.

Answer. I am.

2nd interrogatory. are you acquainted with matters in the difference between the parties in this suit.

Answer. I am.

3rd interrogatory. State all you know about it.

Answer. I have always understood from others & Plff also that Plff was an Illinois Slave & belonged to Deft I know Plff's mother & she told me Plff was a Slave. I employed Plff in the Summer of 1836 & winter following. Plff told witness that he owed Deft. two or three hundred dollars & wanted to pay him Plff wanted witness to write to Deft & inform him Deft how much Witness owed him Plff on settlement for work which was about eighty dollars for which amount witness gave Plff an order on Deft. Witness thinks that Plff had not been in the service or employment of Deft since that time. Witness knows that Plff while in the service of Deft was not an industrious or valuable servant Witness thinks that the situation & condition of Plff was better while in the service of deft then since he left Deft's service

Cross interrogatory. How long have you been acquainted with Plff. 

Answer. Since the year 1829

2nd X interrogatory. Has Plff been in the employ of Deft since that time & how long. 

Answer. Plff has been in the employ of Deft since 1829. four or five years 

3rd X interrogatory. When was Plff in the employ of Deft during that time 

Answer. In that part of the Territory of Michigan now called Wisconsin

4th X interrogatory. Did you know Plff in Missouri & was he then in the employ of Deft.

Answer. I know Plff. in Missouri & I do not know whether he was then in the employ of Deft or not but was living with one Mr Scott.

5th X interrogatory. Do you know what was the consideration of Plff's indebtedness to Deft

Answer. Witness does not know exactly but thinks it was for the purchase of his freedom from Deft. Witness came to this conclusion from the fact that he had been a Slave of deft & was at work for himself but never heard it from either party 

6th X interrogatory. was Plff while in the service of Deft as valuable a servant as he was while in your service 

Answer. Witness thinks Plff was not as valuable a servant while in the service of Deft as he was while in the service of witness & he did not earn while in witness's service the amount witness paid him Plff.

7th X interrogatory. Do you know of Plff working at a smelting furnace for Deft if so how long 

Answer. I do know of Plff working in attending to Deft's log[?] furnace but does not know how long 

8th X interrogatory Do you know how Plff's situation & condition was better which in Deft's service than since that time 

Answer. Plff was better fed and better clothed while Deft's service then since he left deft's service & was not under much restraint while in deft's service & appeared to act as he pleased. Witness has known Plff since he left Deft's service two years in what is now called Iowa Territory & while he has lived in this Territory. Plff was working off & on for witness while he Plff lived in sd Iowa Territory & was under witness direction all the time Plff lived in what is now called Iowa Territory

Questions by Deft 

1st interrogatory Do you know of Plff's being indebted to Defts on other accounts than for the purchase of his freedom

Answer. I do know of Plff's being indebted to Deft for goods sold & delivered by Deft to Plff. Exact amount witness does not know. Witness knows of Plff's getting of Deft at one time thirteen or fourteen dollars in goods & a fiddle in addition & Plff told witness he owed Deft for some other things.

2nd interrogatory. Do you know whether Deft has been engaged in business in the State of Missouri since he purchased the Plff as a Slave. 

Answer. Witness thinks that Deft has not been engaged in business, since he purchased Plff in Missouri.

Cross interrogatory. What was the price of labourers while Plff was in your employ & how much did you pay Plff

Answer. I paid Plff twenty dollars per month and I paid some other hands forty five dollars per month. & while Plff was in Deft's service the price of labourers was from twelve to twenty dollars per month. 

Th McKnight

Subscribed & sworn to before me this 3rd day of October 1840 
Nel Dewey Justice of the Peace

Territory of Wisconsin
County of Grant ss 

I Nelson Dewey a Justice of the peace of said county do hereby certify that by the agreement of the parties in the above entitled cause all objections & information in the service of noting & in taking the foregoing depositions of Thomas McKnight are reviewed[?] & they are to be read the same as if all the formalities of law had been complied[?] with in taking & certifying the same & I am to deliver the same to the court unsealed.

Witness my hand this 3rd day of Oct 1840 
Nel Dewey Jus Peace

Paul Jones a man 
of color 
vs 
George W Jones 

deposition of Thomas McKnight

By agreement of parties delivered in open court by Justice Dewey without being sealed up.

Test Jno S Fletcher
Clk

---

[page missing]

Interrogatory 1st. Do you know the parties plaintiff and defendant in the title of these interrogatories named or either of them and how long have you known them respectively?

2nd Interrogatory - Are you acquainted with the hand writing of S. La Compte, John H. Le Compte, and Eloy Le Compte the vendors whose names are signed to the annexed Bill of Sale marked A. if so please state;

3 interrogatory - Were you present when the said Bill of Sale or instrument in writing was executed and delivered to George W. Jones the defendant and did you sign the same as subscribing witnesses?

4th interrogatory - Is the signature of Lewis F. Linn attached to the said instrument of writing as a subscribing witness to the same your own signature, if so state when you signed the same and at whose request?

5th interrogatory - Are you or either of you acquainted with the coloured man named Paul sold and transferred in the said bill of sale and do you or either of you know was his mother whether she was or is a slave so called under the right of property secured to the ancient inhabitants of the village of Kaskaskia and Prairie Du Rocher then North Western Territory now Illinois by the Ordinance of Congress of the thirteenth day of July AD 1787 for the government of the Territory of the United States North West of the Ohio river if so please state all you know in relation to as fully as if particularly interrogated thereto?

6th interrogatory - Do you know where and when the coloured man called Paul mentioned in the said bill of sale and the plaintiff in this suit was born and whether before the sale to the defendant George W Jones as aforesaid he was bound to render service to this former owner for life as a slave so called according to the ancient usages and customs governing French and Canadian inhabitants of said villages?

7th interrogatory - Do you know if the sale of the said coloured man called Paul mentioned in the said bill of sale to the defendant was with or against the wish & request of the said Paul and did or not the said Paul go willingly into the service of the said defendant?

8th interrogatory - Do you know of any other matter or thing further that may tend to the benefit and advantages of the defendant in this cause in the elucidation of this subject if so please state fully & particularly.
    

When Lewis F. Linn who being first duly sworn answers to said interrogatories as follows to the first he answers & says: That he knowns both the parties plaintiff & defendant that he has known the plaintiff about seventeen years and the defendant since he was a small boy.

And to the second interrogatory he answers & says: That he is acquainted with the Handwriting of S. Le Compte, John H. Le Compte & Eloy Le Compte that the signatures of said persons to the bill of sale marked A is in the proper hand writing of said persons. That his knowledge of this handwriting is derived from the fact of having seen them often write & also from having seen them sign & acknowledge said Bill of sale.

And to the third interrogatory he answers & says: That he was present when said instrument of writing was executed & delivered to George W. Jones and that he signed the same as a subscribing witness.

And for answer to the fourth interrogatory he answers & says that the signatures of Lewis F. Linn to said instrument is his proper hand writing & signature and that he subscribed the same on the day and year it purports to be executed and at the request of the parties thereto.

And for answer to the 5th interrogatory he answers and says that he has been acquainted with Paul who was transferred by said bill of sale about seventeen years. That he (Paul) was brot to Missouri from Illinois by the vendors as a slave. That he was by said bill of sale sold to George W. Jones as a slave and that Paul acknowledged to him that he was a slave and that he was born in the family of Le Compte in Illinois at Prairie Du Rocher and that from facts of his own knowledge he believes that said Paul was born in Illinois and that he always understood that Paul was what was called a French slave, held under the ordinance of the 13th July AD 1787. as to the mother of Paul he says he knows nothing.

And for answer to the sixth interrogatory he says That of his own knowledge he does not know when said Paul was born, but has always understood from the family of Lecompte & from others that he was born in Prairie Du Rocher Illinois as a French slave.

And for answer to the the seventh interrogatory & he answers & says that the sale of Paul by the vendors in the Bill of sale named to George W. Jones was made at the request and desire of Paul and that Paul was very anxious that Jones Should purchase him, and that said Paul went willingly into the service of said defendant Jones.

And for answer to the Eighth interrogatory he answers & says that he cannot now remember anything further in relation to said matter except as above stated and further he saith not.

Lewis F. Linn

When John Scott who being first duly sworn answers to said interrogatories as follows: To the first he answers & says: That he knows both plaintiff & Defendant that he has known the defendant from the time he was a small Boy and that he has known Paul about Thirty years that he knew him first as a Slave in the family of John H. Le Compte the father of John H. Le Compte & Eloy Le Compte and the Husband of S. Le Compte the vendors in the bill of sale to George W. Jones. that they then resided in Prairie du Rocher Illinois.

And for answer to the second interrogatory he says that he is not acquainted with the handwriting of S. Le Compte & John H. Le Compte, but that the Hand write of Eloy Le Compte he is well acquainted with having frequently seen him write and that the signature to the bill of sale is in his own proper handwriting. 

And for answer to the third interrogatory he answers and says that he was not present when the bill of sale was executed nor did he sign the same as a subscribing witness.

And for answer to the fourth interrogatory he says that the signature of Lewis F. Linn to the bill of sale is in the proper hand write of said Lewis F. Linn that he has often seen him write

And for answer to the fifth interrogatory he says that he is acquainted with the coloured man named Paul transferred in the said Bill of Sale to George W. Jones and have known him about thirty years. That he knows the woman who was called his mother who lived with John H. Lecompte the elder at Prairie du Rocher in Illinois as his Slave from AD 1805-6, till she left the country some several years ago.

And for answer to the sixth interrogatory he answers & says that his of own knowledge he does not known where Paul the Plft was born but believes he was born at Prairie Du Rocher Illinois for there he first saw him a small Boy at the house of John H. Lecompte the father of two of the vendors, to Jones, the reputed mother of Paul being in the family at that time as a Slave.

And for answer to the seventh interrogatory he answers and says that he knows the said Plaintiff Paul went into the service of Jones willingly and that Jones purchased him with his approbation and consent.

And for answer to the eighth interrogatory he answers and says that he has no recollection of anything that would tend further to illucidate the subject & further he saith not.

John Scott

And the follow interrogatories were propounded to Eloy Le Compte

Interrogatory 1st - Do you know the parties plaintiff and defendant in the title of these interrogatories named as either of them, and which of them and how long have you known them respectively.

2nd interrogatory - Are you or either of you acquainted with a coloured man called Paul who was sold as a Slave by Eloy Le Compte, John H. Lecompte, and S. Le Compte to the defendant George W. Jones if so state all you know about the said sale and at what time it took place.

3 Interog - Do you or either of you know who was the mother of the said colored man Paul where did she reside by what name called whether she was not held as a Slave in the State of Illinois if so by what tenure or right.

4th interog - Do you or either of you know where and when the before named Paul was born if so please state. 

5th interog - Do you or either of you know whether the said Paul was held to service for life as a Slave in Illinois under the Laws & usages in force in the late North Western Territory now State of Illinois in favour of the ancient french and Canadians inhabitants of the villages of Kaskaskia, and Prairie Du Rocher, Cahokia, and other villages in the former North Western Territory now State of Illinois aforesaid if so please state all you know in relation to it as fully as if particularly interrogated thereto 

6th - Do you or either of you know whether the mother of the said colored man Paul was or was not on or before the 13th July AD 1787 held and owned as a slave bound to service to one of the Canadian or French inhabitants mentioned in the fifth interrogatory if so please state what you know in relation to it.

7th - Do you or either of you know whether the said Paul was a Slave in the State of Illinois according to any Law or usage then in force if so state by whom held and by what right & tenure.

8th - Are you or either of you interested directly or indirectly in the event and termination of this suit. 

9th - Do you know of any thing further that may tend to the benefit and advantage of the defendant in the cause or the elucidation of the subject if so please state fully & particularly.

When Eloy Lecompte being first duly sworn answers the said interrogatories as follows to the first he answers & says: That he is acquainted with both plft and defendant in the above named suit that he has known defendant about fifteen years. That he has known the plaintiff Paul since he can remember anything that is to say about Twenty five or thirty years.

To the 2nd interrogatory he answers and says: That the 18th March 1829, his mother S. Lecompte, John H. Lecompte & himself sold said Boy Paul to George W. Jones and executed to him a bill of sale for him without general warranty. that Paul was sold together with his sister, Charlotte, for the sum of five hundred dollars.

And for the answer to the 3d interrogatory he answers & says: That the mother of said Paul was well known to him that she was a Slave in Illinois prior to the year 1787. that she was purchased of one Lasond, resident of Illinois either a Canadian by birth or born of Canadian Parents. that she resided until within a few years in the village of Prairie Du Rocher Illinois. that she was sometimes called Le Mulle alias Cainnin that her right name is Mary. that he always understood from the family and others that she was what was called a French Slave for life. She purchased her freedom of S. Le Compte between the years 1820 and 1824 for the sum of Two hundred dollars as near as he can remember.

And for answer to the 4th interrogatory he says that Paul was born in the Village of Prairie Du Rocher Illinois about the year 1805.
 
And for answer to the 5th interrogatory he says That Paul was held as a Slave to service for life in Illinois under the laws & usages of the late North Western Territory in favor of the ancient French & Canadian inhabitants of the villages of Kaskaskia, Prairie Du Rocher & Cahokia &c that said Paul was born the property of the father of deponent, who always resided in Prairie Du Rocher Illinois, and that he never was considered other than a Slave for life.

And for answer to the 6th interrogatory he says That from the information received from the family and from others who were old enough to know he always understood & believes that the mother of Paul was a slave in Prairie Du Rocher Illinois prior to the 13 July 1787, held & owned as such by one of the Canadian inhabitants mentioned in the 5th interrogatory. 

And for answer to the 7th interrogatory he replies that from information derived from the family, that the mother of Paul was held by the above named Lasond as a slave for life prior to 13th July 1787.

And for answer to the 8th interrogatory he answers & says that he is in no wise directly or indirectly interested in the event of the suit between Plaintiff & defendant above named.

And for answer to the 9th interrogatory he answers & says that he does not now remember anything further that would tend to illucidate the matter in controversy.    

Eloy Le Compte

We the undersigned two of the commissioners to whom the annexed commission was directed do herby certify that Lewis F. Linn, John Scott, & Eloy Le Compte, three of the witnesses in the caption of the interrogatories named on the 9th day of September AD 1840 of the court house in the Town of St Genevieve and State of Missouri appeared before us to answer said interrogatories which were then & there propounded to them in the order in which the same are herein set forth, and were by us first sworn on the Holy Evangely of Almighty God to make true & full answers to the interrogatories and the answers herein given & set forth are the answers given by said witnesses respectively and the signatures of said witnesses to said depositions is the proper hand writing of said witnesses who subscribed the same in our presence on the day and year aforesaid at the place aforesaid, and that said deponents were sworn to the truth of said depositions after the same were reduced to writing & subscribed by them at the time & place aforesaid.

In witness whereof we have hereunto set on hands this 9th day of September 1840 at St Genevieve State of Missouri.

Conrad C. Ziegler for C Grafton

---

The Defendants ask the Court to instruct the Jury 

1st That if they believe from the testimony that the plaintiff is a French Slave or a descendant of a French Slave owned as such under the treaty with the French & other inhabitants of the North Western Territory at the time the North Western Territory was conquered by the United States under Treaty with said inhabitants, then he cannot recover. 

2. If there is not a contract express or implied proven, to pay for services rendered, then the plaintiff cannot recover.

3. If the Jury believe from the testimony that the plaintiff acknowledged himself indebted to the defendant after he had left the defendant's service, then it is necessary that the plaintiff should prove indebtedness from plaintiff to the defendant after such acknowledgment of indebtedness was made.

4th If the Jury believe from the testimony that the plaintiff went into the service of the defendant of his plaintiff's own accord, solicitation, and request, then there must be an express undertaking and promise to pay by the defendant proved before he can recover.

5th To enable the plaintiff to recover under an Indebitatus assumpsit count, there must be a contract proved to pay some amount certain