
    The Inhabitants of Milford versus the Inhabitants of Bellingham.
    Where, before the revolution, the possession of a slave had been transferred to a grandchild of the owner, the declarations of the parties to such transfer at the time were held to be part of the res gestes, and so admissible evidence in a suit respecting the settlement of the slave.
    Assumpsit to recover the expense of supporting Bess Corbett, a negro woman, alleged to have had her legal settlement in Bellingham.
    
    At the trial of the cause, which was had before Parker, C. J., at the last April term in this county, nothing Was in controversy bul the settlement of the pauper. It was in evidence that she was born m the family of the late Dr. Corbett, of Bellingham, long before the revolution, and was his slave. The defendants contended that the said Corbett had given her to his granddaughter' Esther Messenger, who, in the year 1778, married a Col. Frost of Milford, and that she was taken into his family, and remained there until some years after she became manumitted by the adoption of the constitution of the commonwealth. It was testified *by a Mr. [ * 199 ] Craggin and his wife, that when Bess was six or seven years old, Dr. Corbett requested them to take her and bring her up, so that she might be useful to his said granddaughter when she should be married, to whom he said he intended to give her. And Mr. Craggin testified that Dr. Corbett also said that he had given each of his daughters one slave, that the one which he had given to Esther’s mother he had taken back upon her death, and that he in tended this negro girl for Esther in lieu of that which he had so given to her mother and taken back. He also testified that Col. Frost, who married Esther, came for Bess soon after the marriage, and took her home with him, saying she had been given to his wife by her grandfather. There was other testimony of the same kind, and also of the declarations of Esther, afterwards Mrs. Frost, that the girl had been given to her by her grandfather. There was some evidence contradictory of the foregoing, particularly the deposition of Col. Frost, who denied that Bess ever belonged to him or his wife as a slave.
    The evidence being all left to the jury, they returned a verdict for the defendants; the question being reserved, whether the declarations of Dr. Corbett and Mrs. Frost were legally admissible in evidence ; and whether the evidence was sufficient in law, to prove a transfer of property in the slave. The Court were to render judgment on the verdict, order a new trial, or otherwise dispose of the action as to law and justice should appertain.
    
      Hastings, for the plaintiffs,
    cited 3 D. & E. 55. —2 East, 27, 54, 63. -8 East, 539. -3 D. & E. 707.
   The Court

stopped Lincoln, who was to have argued for the defendants, and observed that the declarations objected to were in the nature of facts, tending to show the intentions of the parties in certain transactions, which were substantiated by other evidence; and so may be considered as constituting a part of the res gesta. The fact to be proved was the transfer of the slave. The change of possession was established. The declarations of the parties * went to show the intent, with which that change [ * 110 ] had been made. This is not within the notion of hearsay evidence. The master of a young slave delivers her to anothei person, declaring his purpose, viz. to give her to his granddaughter; the husband of the granddaughter afterwards takes the slave, and says she had been given to his wife. These declarations were proper evidence to show the nature of the possession in the granddaughter.

A bill of sale, or other formal instrument, was not necessary to transfer the property in a slave, which was a mere personal chattel, and might pass, as other chattels, by delivery.

Judgment on the verdict.  