West v. . Hall

64 N.C. 43
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJanuary 5, 1870
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 64 N.C. 43 (West v. . Hall) 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
West v. . Hall, 64 N.C. 43 (N.C. 1870).

Opinion

Peabsoe, C. J.

It is settled that a contract for the purchase of a slave is not illegal, even when made after the Proclamation of the President, the slave not being under the control of the military forces of the United States: Harrell v. Watson, 63 N. C. R., 454.

In our case the contract, was made in 1859, so the matter is too plain for discussion.

The evidence in regard to the warranty of title, was properly rejected. It did not tend to support any of the pleas. Indeed there was no breach of the warranty. The negro was a “ slave for life,” and the contract could not, in any way *44 be affected by the event of the late war, and the abolition of the institution of slavery.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.

Note. — In another ease at this term, between the same parties, in. ■which N. F. Hall was the principal defendant, the facts and questions were the same; and the same judgment was rendered.

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

Related

State v. . Norris
94 S.E. 950 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
64 N.C. 43, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-hall-nc-1870.