Caffey v. . Rankin

33 N.C. 449
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedDecember 5, 1850
StatusPublished

This text of 33 N.C. 449 (Caffey v. . Rankin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Caffey v. . Rankin, 33 N.C. 449 (N.C. 1850).

Opinion

This was a petition filed at the Spring Term, 1848, of Guilford Superior Court, for permission to emancipate a negro boy named Alvis, and other slaves named. The petition in substance sets forth that some time about 1837 James Davis (450) died, having first made and published his last will and testament, which was afterwards admitted to probate, and his widow, Sophia Davis, who was named therein sole executrix, duly qualified as such; that the said Sophia Davis died about 1848, having duly made and published her last will and testament, which was duly admitted to probate, but of which she appointed no executor; that the petitioner, Robert Caffey, has been duly appointed administrator with the will annexed of the said James Davis, and the other petitioner, Jane Caffey, administratrix, with the will annexed of the said Sophia Davis. The petition further set forth that the said James Davis by his said will, among other things, bequeathed and directed as follows: "One negro girl named Nelly, and one mulatto named Nehemiah, I give them to my wife (said Sophia) during her natural life or widowhood, then to my son, Michael C. Davis, to him and his heirs forever, except Nelly and Nehemiah are to be free, if they can comply with the requisition of the law of this State; and if they cannot comply with the law to be free, and Michael C. Davis should die, without any heirs of his body, Nehemiah and Nelly may choose their own homes, where they like to live, and is to be sold privately at the valuation of two men." That, between the making of the will of the said James Davis and his death, the slave Nelly had one child named Wright, which was sold by the said Sophia as executrix to one M. C. Davis, who afterwards sold and conveyed the same back to the said Sophia; and that after the death of the said James Davis the said Nelly had another son by the name of Alvis. The petition further sets forth that Michael C. Davis, son of the testator, James Davis, is dead, leaving an only child, the defendant James C. Davis, an infant, of whom Robert C. Rankin is guardian. The petition further sets forth that the said Sophia Davis, by her last will, among other things, bequeathed and directed as follows: "I (451) give and bequeath to my grandson, James C. Davis, the only son of my son Michael Caffey Davis, deceased, one negro boy named Wright and one negro boy named Alvis, on condition, if Nehemiah and Nelly, their father and mother, comply with the laws of this State and go free, it is my will they should go with them, and not be kept back on account of their age, and if not, then these negroes, Wright and Alvis, must stay with their father and mother, and not be hired out; *Page 321 and if not, they must have the same chance of their father and mother in choosing homes, and be sold to the same person at the valuation of the same two men that value their father and mother according to my husband's (James Davis) will; and if James C. Davis dies, not leaving no heirs of his own body, and these negroes cannot comply with the requisitions of the laws of this State and choose their homes and is valued, the money, on conditions if James C. Davis leaves no child of his own, if he does it is theirs, if not, it must go to the use of my stepchildren. It is my will they never shall be parted from their parents." The petition further sets forth that Nehemiah is about the age of forty-five, Nelly about forty, Wright about twelve and Alvis about nine years of age, that the petitioners are desirous to emancipate all four of the said slaves, as requested in the said wills, but that Robert C. Rankin, as guardian of the infant, James C. Davis, objects thereto, so far as regards the boy Alvis. The petition further sets forth that the said Sophia willed and bequeathed to the said James C. Davis other property, greater in value than the said boy Alvis, and that the petitioners are advised that the said James C. Davis cannot hold both with and against the will of the said Sophia, and that, if he takes the legacy given him in the said will, he cannot refuse to let the said boy Alvis be emancipated; and the petitioners aver that they are ready and willing to give the bonds and security required by law to emancipate all of the said slaves.

The petitioners then pray that advertisement may be (452) made, according to law, that James C. Davis, by his guardian, Robert C. Rankin, be made a party defendant, and that the court will grant them permission to emancipate the said slaves, according to law, and will make such other orders, decrees, and grant such further relief as the nature of their case may require, etc.

Whereupon advertisements were ordered and made, and a subpoena issued and executed, according to the prayer of the petition.

At the Fall Term, 1848, of the said court, Robert C. Rankin, as guardian of the said James C. Davis, by leave of the court, filed an answer in behalf of his ward, in substance and to the effect following: That he admits the execution and probate of the respective wills of James and Sophia Davis, and that the petitioners are the administrators with the wills annexed of the said testators, respectively; the death of M. C. Davis, leaving an only child, the defendant James C. Davis, of whom the defendant Robert is the guardian; the birth of the negro children Wright and Alvis, at the times stated, and the purchase of *Page 322 Wright by Michael C. Davis, all as set forth in the petition. But he denies that Wright was resold to Sophia Davis, and prays strict proof thereof. He submits that this proceeding is in a court of law, and that a court of law has no power to compel an election; that even a court of equity would not do so in a case like the present, for the reasons he assigns. He avers that he objects to the emancipation of all the slaves named, and prays to be dismissed, etc.

Replication was taken and commissions issued.

At Spring Term, 1850, the following decree was made by the court:

This case coming on to be heard, upon the petition, answer and agreement of the parties, which is in the following words, to wit: "In this case it is agreed that advertisement hath (453) been made according to law; that James Davis made his will at the time it bears date; that Sophia Davis died 9 January, 1848, and made her will at the time it bears date; that James Davis died in April, 1827; that the slaves, Nehemiah and Nelly, are husband and wife, and were so at the date James Davis made his will; that the slave Nelly had one child, to wit, Wright, between the making of the will of James Davis and his death, which said slave, Wright, the said Sophia, as executrix of her husband, James Davis, sold at public auction to Michael C.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
33 N.C. 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/caffey-v-rankin-nc-1850.