Vincent Duncan vs. James Duncan
View original image: Page  165
[missing figure]

The defendant moves the Court to instruct the jury

1. That by the constitution of IllinoisIllinois, VincentVincent the plaintiff
might lawfully have hired at the public SalineSaline
in IllinoisIllinois, from year to year, until the end
of the year 1825 without was being removed to another state at the end of every term
without working his emancipation

2. If the Jury are satisfied from the evidence, that
the owner of VincentVincent , residing in KentuckyKentucky,
was desirous of withdrawing said VincentVincent from the Illnois Saline, and attendattempted to Withdraw
him but was prevented by VincentVincent him
self, the plantiff cannot remove

|not given|
3.That if the residence of VincentVincent in IllinoisIllinois
was by his own desire, or free consent
that residence cannot work his freedom

4. That under the ordinance of Congress
of 1787, the have past that VincentVincent
the plantiff brought at the IllinoisIllinois
SalineSaline, , from 1817 to 1825 one not work his emancipation

5. That under the ordinance of Congress, of
1787, VincentVincent the plantiff cannot lawfully
clam his freedom by reson of any residence
in IllinoisIllinois which does not amount to a
went settlement, the acquisition of a regular

View original image: Page  166
[missing figure]
domicil there.

6. That the Constitution of IllinoisIllinois is not &
cannot be controlled by the Ordinance of of 1787, as to the existence
of slavery within the CircuitsCircuit Court of that State.

7. That if the jury shall be of opinion from the evidence
that VincentVincent the plaintiff, constantly down to the
Fall of 1829, when this suit was brought, such
evidence is legal validacknowledged him
=self a slave, such evidence is legal & valid
and they may found their verdict upon it.

8. If VincentVincent the plaintiff is a slave, though not
the slave of James DuncanJames Duncan the defendant he
cannot review in this action.