Dranguet v. Rost
This text of 21 La. Ann. 538 (Dranguet v. Rost) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This appeal is from a judgment rejecting plaintiff’s demand, which is based on a note given for a slave. It is urged that, as the defendant promised to pay the note after the emancipation of slavery, he became- legally liable for the debt, for which ho v-as already hound, in foro conscientiw. This is contrary to the principles decided in the case of Wainwright v. Bridges. It is also contended that the article of the Constitution of this State, which declares contracts for the sale of persons null and void, and prohibits the courts from enforcing them, is violative of the . Constitution of the United States. The decision in the Wainwright case is predicated upon the theory that the sovereign power had abrogated slavery, and all contracts based on slavery. If this he true (and we have reaffirmed it toe often to question its correctness now), the State Constitution did not affect the obligation of these contracts by prohibiting courts from enforcing them, or by declaring a fact, that they were null.
It is therefore adjudged that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed with costs of appeal.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
21 La. Ann. 538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dranguet-v-rost-la-1869.