Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Derivatives must be credited to O Say Can You See, made available non-commercially, and distributed under the same terms. Requests for permission for commercial publication or other use should be emailed to the project team.
Mima Queen &c
v
Hepburn
On the trial of this Cause the Counsel for the Petitioners having read in
Evidence the following Depositions (Here insert them) And the Counsel for the
Defendant having also read in Evidence the following Depositions (here insert them)
& the former instructions of the Court (here insert 1. & 2.)
having been admitted by the Petitioners Counsel, Defendants Counsel prayed
the Court to instruct the Jury that if they should believe from the Evidence
aforesaid that the Existence of such a noise and report in the neighbourhood
respecting the Circumstances of the said Mary
Queen's importation as is stated in
Disneys Deposition produced & read as Evidence on
the part of the Petitioners were not stated from the knowledge of the said
Disney but what had been communicated to him respecting
the Existence of such a report and noise, many years after the importation of the said
Mary Queen without its appearing from whom or in what
manner the same had been communicated to him, then the said Evidence of the
said Disney is incompetent to prove either the
Existence of such a Report & Noise, or the truth of them. And if
the Jury should believe from the Evidence that the Declaration of Captain
John Iams as stated in Warfields
Deposition also produced & read as Evidence by the Petitioner were not
derived from
his Jim's own knowledge but were founded on hearsay or report communicated
to him many years after said importation and Sale of the said Mary
Queen without its appearing by whom or in what manner such
communication was made to him then his said Declarations are not competent
Evidence in this Cause which Instructions the Court gave as prayed, to which
opinion and Instruction the Petitioners by his Counsel excepts
and prays that this their Bill may be signed sealed & enrolled which is
accordingly done.
And the Petitioners further offered evidence to prove that they are lineally descended from the Mary Queen in the said Depositions mentioned, who is claimed to have been the great grandmother of the Petitioner Mima;
Whereupon the the Deft's Counsel prayed the court to instruct the Jury
as follows;
Instructions & opinions of the Court as prayed by the Deft.
1. That the Petitioners must be presumed to be legally held in bondage untill competent proof is produced of their being entitled to freedom; and the burthen of proving the same is on the Petitioners. (admitted by the Petitioner's Counsel)
2. That Mary Queen, the great grandmother of the Petitioners, from whom they claim descent in the lineal female line, if found by the Jury to have been of a yellow or Tawney colour and to have been held & treated as a slave from the time of her importation & sale till her death, must be presumed to have been imported as a slave & to have been rightfully held & treated as such, untill the contrary is proved by the Petitioners. (admitted by the Petitioner's Counsel)
3d. If the Jury find from the evidence that the existence of such a report & noise in the
neighborhood, respecting the circumstances of the said Mary
Queen's importation, as is stated in
Disney's deposition produced & read as evidence on the
part of the Petrs, was not stated from the knowledge of the
witness, but from what had been communicated to him, respecting the
existence of such a report & noise, many years after her importation without
its appearing by whom or in what manner the same was communicated to him; then
the said evidence of the said Disney is not incompetent to
prove either the existence of such a reporte & noise at the time of
such importation or the truth of it; and if the Jury find from
the evidence that the declarations of Capt John Iims, as
stated in Warfield's deposition also produced & read as
evidence on the part of the Petitrs, were not derived from his
(Iims's) own knowledge, but were founded upon hearsay or
report, communicated to him many years after the said importation & sale of
the said Mary Queen without its appearing by whom or in
what manner such communication was made to him; then his said declarations are
not competent evidence to which in this cause. (granted
by the Court & excepted to by Petitioners) to be preceeded by the same
statement as the last excn To which last instruction the Deft Petitioners by their
counsel excepted but the court enrolled the same
To which last instruction so given by the court to the Jury the Deft Petrs by
their counsel except and pray that this their bill of exceptions be sealed
&c. and it is done accordingly
N. Fitzhugh (seal)
B. Thurston (Seal)
7
No. 6.