James, a person of color v. Hiram Cordell
View original image: Page  011
[missing figure]
JamesJames a person of Colour
vsHiramHiram Cordell CordellHiram Cordell

Circuit CourtCircuit Court
of St Louis County
November Term 1844
Suit for Freedom

Be it remembered that judgement by default
was taken against the defendant in
this cause at the present Term for want of
appearance- And the defendant having filed
his affidavit which was mislaid by the Clerk
the following is agreed to be the substance
thereof by the Counsel for the parties, To wit
that at the time of the service of the summons
in this case a summons was also served
upon the defendant in behalf of the mother
of the Defendant plaintiff who was also
suing for her freedom; and the defendant
believing that they werebothsuing in the
same action [ imployed ] Counsel to defend
in the case of the mother only- That defendant
Could not make affidavit that there
was a good defence on the merits because
the plaintiff is in the defendants possession as
administrator- and that the grounds upon
which the plaintiff claims his freedom have relation
to facts which are alleged to have occurred
long before the death of the intstate â not
without the defendants knowledge
The Defendant moved to setaside the
judgement by default upon the grounds
disclosed as agreed upon in the affidavit

View original image: Page  012
[missing figure]
and upon the further ground that the
judgment was irregular in this that it
was a final judgement of liberation rendered
by default without the introduction of
any testimony except the facts stated in his petition
on the part of the plaintiff except the facts stated in his petition.

The Court upon hearing of argument
having overruled the defendants motion
the defendant by his counsel excepts to
the judgement of the Court in overruling said
motion and tenders this his Bill of exceptions
and prays that it may be signed and sealed by
the Court &c.

John M KrumJohn M Krum