Louise Vincent, a woman of color v. Marie P. Ladue
View original image: Page  018
[missing figure]

above set forth by the testimony of Mr. Char
ler D. St Mrain that before applying to
the judge of the St Louis Circuit CourtCircuit Court
for permission to being said said said
counsel called upon said St MrainSt Mrain to state
his knowledge relative to the fact of her
said accidence and that of her aforesaid
Children in the State of IllinoisIllinois and north
of the said River Des Moins as the slaves
and property of said pahlen that said
. St MrainSt Mrain made an affidavit in cetation
to the facts (which affidevit is now on fib
in this Court and which she prays was he
taken and read as a part of this statement
that she was informed by her said counsel
and believes the fact to be so that it was
upon the affidavit of said St MrainSt Mrain that
the judge of said Court made the order
permitting said suits to be brought against
said sedae. This affiant further state,
that said PahlenPahlen died about a year
and that as she has been informed and believes
administration of his Estate was granted
to said sedue by the county court of the
county at St LouisSt Louis and that on the return
of this affiant about Eight months since to St LouisSt Louis
said sedue as administrator of suid Pah-
len took possession of her and her said
children as slave the property of the Estate
of said Pahlem, and has continued to exercise
control and authority over her and them
since that time at slaves belonging to said

View original image: Page  019
[missing figure]
to said Estate. This affiant further states
that she was informed by her said counsel
that the facts set forth in the said affi
davit of said St MrainSt Mrain were sufficient
if not contradicted to establish the claim
of herself and children to freedom and
that it was unnecessary to resort to other
proof. That affiant relied upon the le-
gal knowledge of her said counsel, and
that said St MrainSt Mrain would in giving testi
mony before the court and jury at the held
of said cause prove the same facts for
which he had made dath in his said affi-
davit, and in consequence thereof she did
not endeavor to obtain other evidence to main
tain the issue on her part. That your affi-
ant was wholey surprised to born that
the evidence of said St MrainSt Mrain materially
varied as given at the trial from the
affidavit previously made by him. And
this affiant further states that she verity
believes she can establish the fact of
her residence & that of her children form months coith said
PahlenPahlen as his slaves on said farm in
IllinoisIllinois, by the testimony of sames white
and his wife who than and affiant
believes now reside in the state of IllinoisIllinois
contiguons to said farm of said PahlenPahlen
that said white lived next neighter to said
PahlenPahlen during the time this affiant of her children resided
as his slaves in said state of IllinoisIllinois for