Hannah, a woman of color v. John Pitcher
View original image: Page  023
[missing figure]
HannahHannah , of color
vs
John Pitcher

In St Louis Circuit CourtCircuit Court
November Term 1845

Bill of Exceptions

Be it remembered that on the twenty first day of January eighteen hundred and forty six in this term
of November 1845. this cause came on for trial upon the
issue joined, and the plaintiff to maintain the issue on
her part called as a witness Mrs Page, wife of
Daniel D. Page, who being sworn testified - that in
the month of May thirteen or fourteen years ago, she and
her husband went to the states of MassachusettsMassachusetts and
Maine on a visit to their relations, and took with them
the plaintiff HannahHannah , then their slave as a servant
did not stay long in BostonBoston but proceeded to the state of
Maine and visited there in many places when she left St LouisSt Louis
with plaintiff, it was on a visit to her friends in the east,
expecting within a very short time to return to St LouisSt Louis again - stopped in New YorkYork
a day or two, went from New YorkYork to BostonBoston, [ staid ] there
perhaps one day, went to Parsonsfield in the state of
Maine and remained two weeks at [ connexions ] of Mr
Page, then returned to BostonBoston in MassachusettsMassachusetts, passed
through to the town of Scituate to visit a sister and other
[ connexions ] and [ staied ] among them some two weeks
more or less, thinks she returned to BostonBoston then for a day or
so & then went to New Bedford and [ staied ] there about
two weeks staying among many relations, left there
for BostonBoston and soon after was taken sick & was not able to travel and as soon
as she recovered sufficently started for St. LouisSt Louis her home; she the witness had
many [ connexions ] in BostonBoston to visit. Returned to
St LouisSt Louis in the month of October of same year
and during all the time she was absent as stated,
she had HannahHannah the plaintiff with her as a servant

View original image: Page  024
[missing figure]
The plaintiff, then called SamuelSamuel KnoxKnox esq. who being
that he is a laywer by profession living in St. LouisSt Louis - him never practiced law
in MassachusettsMassachusetts or Maine & not acquainted with the laws of either state
sworn testified to knowledge of witness that slavery does not exist in the state
of MassachusettsMassachusetts or the state of Maine - the plaintiff
then called J. R. Sheply Esq. who being sworn testified
that he is a lawyerliving in St LouisSt Louis - never practiced law in Maine or MassachusettsMassachusetts slavery does not exist in the state of Maine or the
state of MassachusettsMassachusetts to knowledge of witness. The plaintiff also proved
by witness,, that at the time of the bringing of this suit,
the defendant held the plaintiff in possession, claiming
her as his slave, under title derived from Daniel D.
Page - Thereupon the plaintiff closed her
case, and the court instructed the jury as follows
(Here set forth the instructions given by the court)
to which instructions and the giving of the same, plaintiff objected & then excepted - the plaintiff
then prayed the court to give the following instruction.
(Here insert instruction)which the court refused
to give, and the plaintiff therefore excepted to
the opinion of the court in refusing said instruction.
And on the twenty first day of January eighteen hundred & forty six, the plaintiff came and filed
her motion for a new trial, as follows (Here set
forth the motion and reason for new trial) and
the plaintiff at the leaving of said
motion & reasons insisted that a new trial
should be granted for the reasons in said motion
set forth, but the court overruled said motion &
refused to grant the said plaintiff a new trial
to which decision the plaintiff then and there
excepted - the forgoing was all the evidence
and proceedings on the trial and on said motion
in this case, not of record, and the same is made a part of the record. Signed and sealed
this 9th day of April eighteen