Ralph, a man of colour v. James Coleman and Duncan Coleman
View original image: Page  179
[missing figure]

1. That the constitution of IllinoisIllinois takes date & was obligatory
from the time it was passed unless some
other date is founded in the body of the document

given

2. That althought the plaintiff may have resided in
the state of IllinoisIllinoissince the adoption of the constitution
of that state since the year 1825, or
in the territory of IllinoisIllinois before the adoption
of said constitution still such residence will
not of itselfwork the emancipation of the plaintiff
unless it appear to the satisfaction of the jury,
that such residence in IllinoisIllinois was with the
consent of the then master of the plaintiff

given

3. That the execution of the note by the defendant
to the plaintiff as given in evidence in this case does
not operate a manumission of said plaintiff

given

4. The ordinance of 1787 does not & cannot control the
operation of the constitution of IllinoisIllinois regard to
the subject of slavery.

given

5 AnyNo temporary stay in IllinoisIllinois by RalphRalph
the plaintiff with the consent
of his master, with no view to residence there
and without staying there long enough to
acquire the character of a resident, can
operate the emancipation of the plaintiff.

not given

6. That no residence of RalphRalph in the Territory or state of IllinoisIllinois
or the territory of MichiganMichigan can operate to emancipate
the plaintiff unless it is proved to their satis
faction of jury that the master operated to
such residence

given

View original image: Page  180
[missing figure]

7. That the plaintiff having been found
in the territory or state of IllinoisIllinois or territory
of MichiganMichigan does not alone authorize a
presumption that his master consented
to his being there, but such consent must
be proved

given