JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES DURING THE TIME OF THESE REPORTS, WITH THE DATES OF THEIR COMMISSIONS. OF THE Supreme Court of the United States, FEBRUARY TERM, 1816. [Local Law.] importation, and not objecting to it, that such importation was made with his consent. This NEGRESS SALLY HENRY, by William Henry, instruction the court refused to give; but did her father and next friend, V. BALL. The act of assembly of Maryland, prohibiting the Importation of slaves into that state for sale or to reside, does not extend to a temporary residence, nor to an importation by a hirer or person other than the master or owner of such slave. instruct the jury that if they should be of opinion that Mrs. R. was, at the time she brought the petitioner into the city of Washington, a citizen of the United States coming into the city of Washington *with a bona fide inten- [*3 tion of settling therein, then her importation of said slave was lawful, and did not entitle the petitioner to her freedom, whether the said importation were or were not made with the consent of the defendant. An exception was taken to this opinion, and the jury having found a ERROR on judgment, rendered by the for, verdict for the defendant, on which judgment. cuit Court for the county of Washington, in the District of Columbia, against the plaintiff, who was in that court a petitioner for freedom. was was rendered by the court, the cause Marshall, Ch. J., delivered the opinion of the court, and after stating the facts, proceeded as follows: The plaintiff being a child, and the slave of the defendant, who resided in Virginia, was, 2*] some short *time before the month of May, 1810, put to live with Mrs. Rankin, then resid- Law, contra, stated that the domicile of the ing also in Virginia, whose husband was an owner had been in Virginia, and that she was officer in the marine corps, stationed in the city a bona fide emigrant from that state. Being a of Washington. Mrs. R. was to keep the girl hirer of the slave, she was pro hoc vice owner.' for a year, and was to give her victuals and The act of assembly must be construed to refer clothes for her services. Some time in May, to both species of property, qualified and abso1810, Mrs. R. removed to Washington, and lute. He referred to the 6th section of the act brought the petitioner with her, whether with to show that a property may be, in slaves, limor without the permission of Mr. Ball is entire-ited in point of time. ly uncertain. It was probably, though not certainly, with his knowledge. In October, 1810, Mr. Ball married, and soon after took the petitioner into his possession and carried her home, he then residing in Virginia. Mrs. R. gave her up, being of opinion, though the girl had remained with her only seven or eight months, that she was bound to give her up when required by her master. Mr. B. afterwards removed himself into the city, and brought the petitioner with him. Upon this testimony the counsel for the petitioner prayed the court below to instruct the jury that if they believed, from the evidence, that the defendant knew of the intended importation of the petitioner by Mrs. R., and did not object to it, then such importation entitled the petitioner to her freedom; and, further, that it was competent to the jury to infer, from his knowing of the This cause depends on an act of the state of Maryland, which is in force in the county of Washington. The first section of that statute enacts, "that it shall not be lawful to [*4 bring into this state any negro, mulatto, or other slave, for sale, or to reside within this state; and any person brought into this state contrary to this act, if a slave before, shall, thereupon, immediately cease to be the property of the person or persons so importing or bringing such slaves within this state, and shall be free." The 2d section contains a proviso in favor of citizens of the United States coming 1.-2 Black. Com. 254, and the civil law writers there cited. |