United States v. Schooner Emperor

United States v. Schooner Emperor

Lower Court

  • United States Supreme Court


  • 1839


  • 476


  • 864


Between him and Cox on the subject of the Schooner Emperor. Taken in open Court the day aforesaid he being first duly sworn. R. Wellford, Clerk } W.H. Michael

And on the next day to wit on the 24[th] day of Janaury 1839 the following testimony of Samuel H. Duval was taken in open Court viz-

The United States vs. Emperor Schooner } The deposition of Samuel H. Duval taken in open Court this 24[th] day of January 1839.

1[st] he arrested eight negroes in Washington County on the rover Econfins on the First Thursday after the first Monday in May in the year 1837. The negroes were on the plantation of Mr. Joseph Crosky. Mr. Robert C. Adams who lived about half a mile from the plantation and acted as overseer for Mr. Crosky had charge of the negroes, the name of the negroes were Sam, Jim, Crogar, Milo, Larkin, Tony, Harper, Peter (who since died).

The negroes could not speak the English language or understand it when spoken to them and the witness supposed them to be foreign negroes. Two of them are tattooed upon their cheeks and forehead and two of them had their front tenth of the upper jaw filed to a point; one of them whose name is Milo says that he is from Africa that he was brought here from Havana and he is the only one has acquired any knowledge of the English language the said negroes are still in my possession, the negroes appear to be of different African tribes and will not associate or eat together.

Sam H. Duval

Sworn to in open Court this 24[th] day of January 1839- R. Wellford, Clerk

And at another day to wit, on the 24[th] day of January 1839 it appearing to the Court that the record in said case is not sufficiently and properly authenticated. The attorney of the US moved the Court that citorari issue of the Clerk of the Superior Court of the Western District commanding him to certify to this court a true and sufficient record of said case, which motion was overruled by the court.

And on the same day, it appearing that the transcript of the record on this appeal not having been transmitted to this court written two terms thereof after the said appeal was granted. On motion of the appellee by its counsel, it is ordered that the said appeal be dismissed.

And on the next day to wit on the 25[th] day of January 1839 came the Attorney for the US and moved the Court to reinstate the above cases upon the Docket which is ordered to be placed