Milly v. Stephen Smith
View original image: Page  131
[missing figure]

Instructions asked for by plff & refused

1 If the Jury, find from the evidence in this case that
DavidDavid Shipman was in the legal possession of the plaintiff
at and before the time he left KentuckyKentucky, & that he contin-
ued in the legal possession of her in IndianaIndiana & IllinoisIllinois
& thus having the legal possession of her,he settled in
the State of IllinoisIllinois & resided, there with the intention of making
that State the place of his permanent abode, & the per-
manent abode of said plaintiff, they are bound to find for the
plaintiff in, this action.

2. If the Jury, find that the deed of emancipation read
in evidence in this case, was executed by said DavidDavid
Shipman, & that said Shipman was at the time
of its execution lawfully in possession of said MillyMilly
& was the owner of her except so far as he had conveyed away
his right by his said mortgage to said SmithSmith and in
evidence, they are bound to find for the plaintiff

3. If the Jury find from the evidence, that said Shipman
was the owner of the plaintiff & carried her with
him to the State of IllinoisIllinois & settled there with the
intention of making that State his domicile, & the
domicile, of said MillyMilly , they are bound to find
for the plaintiff.

4. If the Jury believe from the evdience that said DavidDavid Shipman was
the owner of said MillyMilly at the time of the execution
of said mortgage to SmithSmith , & that said MillyMilly never
was in the possession of said SmithSmith , but remained
in possession of said Shipman, & that he carried her
whereupon carried her to IllinoisIllinois & settled there with her
& resided there with her with the intention, of making that state his per-
manent residence & the permanent residence of said MillyMilly
the Jury, are bound to find for plaintiff.