
    Sprigg vs. Negro Marx.
    Appeal from Frederick County Court. The present was a petition for freedom. Plea, the general issue. t
    I. At the trial the petitioner, (now appellee,) gave in evidence, that she was the slave of T. Sprigg, of Frederick county, in this state. That Sprigg, during all his life, was a citizen of this state, and died in the state in July 1810. That Esther, the mother of the petitioner, Was born in the state the slave of Sprigg, and was held by him in slavery in the state until 1804, in the fall of which year he suffered her to be carried to Washington county,, in the District of Columbia, by one C. Herstons, and that she continued there, employed by and residing with Versions, for two years, when she was sent back to Frederick county by Versions to Sprigg, and continued to reside and. be employed in Frederick county by Sprigg until his death. That Esther never was hired or otherwise employed in the District of Columbia, until the year 1804, That Mary, the petitioner, was the child of Esther, and was born in the District of Columbia,, wlhle her mother was there as is herein before stated, and returned with her mother, and continued with her ever since in Frederick county, On these facts the defendant prayed the opinion of the court to the jury, that the petitioner was not entitled to hew freedom. The Court [Shrive* and Nelson, A. J.} refused: to give this opinion j but were of opinion, that if the jury found the said facts to be true, the petitioner was. entitled] to her freedom. The defendant excepted. ‘ > i ; \ J ¡ i
    2. The petitioner (hen produced a mulatto man named! i?. Shorter as a witness, whose mother was a black woman,! To the swearing of this witness, the defendant objected..! It teas then proved to the court by the evidence of 11. Brooke, esquire, (an attorney of the court,) that Shorter was sworn as a witness in Frederick county court, in a cause of Nelly Shorter against Jason Phillips, a white Christian man,' The record of that cause was also produced, by which it appeared that Shorter was sworn in the said cause on the part of the said N. Shorter. Brooke .also proved, that the mother of II. Shorter was a black woman, but that she was free, having been one of the Shorter family who had claimed their freedom, and obtained it, on $he ground of their being descended from a white woman,. He also proved, that R. Shorter was at liberty and free, and that it was generally reputed that be was descended, from the said Shorter family, and from a free white ancestor on the female side. The petitioner also produced to the court a certificate-given by the clerk of Frederick county court to the said R. Shorter, certifying that he had recovered his freedom, in that court, of T. Sprigg. She also produced the docket entries of that court, showing that a petition for freedom was filed by R. Shorter against T. Sprigg, and that on the trial thereof, a verdict that he was free, was given for the petitioner, on which a judgment ■was entered on the 2d of December 1795. The original petition of the said R. Shorter was then searched for by the clerk ot the court, but could not be found, being either lost or mislaid, and no record made of it. The defendant Still objected to the competency, as a witness, of R. Shorter. The defendant Was a free white Christian man. But the court overruled the objection, and R. Shorter was examined as a witness. The defendant excepted.
    
      Where the mother of a petilionev lor freedom was horn in this state the slave of T S9 and was held by him in slavery un< til 1804, -when he suffesed her to be carried to the county of Washington, in the District of Columbia* C H, where she continued eat p loy« ed by, and resid» ntS with C H, for iqvo years, when. she was sent back' to this state to T S« The petition» er was horn in the "'county of WashIngtoih in the District of Columbia9 .whileher mother was there, and brought with her mother into this state, and buscón» tinned here — Held that the petitioner was entitled tc» freedom
    A free mulatto man, whose mother was a free black woman, but descended in the female line from white woman, was permitted io> give evidence, in the case ofanc» gro petitioning- for Ins freedom, a-g-ainst a free white Christian
    , ] { A negi-Q slave belonging; to aum* fautundc-i Ojeare cd lb,and brought into this state subsequent to the act of 179b, ch 67, by the father and natural guardian of such infant, is not entitled td- free* dom
    
      3. The defendant then offered in evidence, that in the year 180.4, and before the mother of the petitioner was carried to the district of Columbia, T. Sprigg came to the house of C. Herstons in Frederick town, and said to hint, I have given Esther, and her children, to 31. Herstons, •who was then an infant of about five years of age. That Esther, and her children, were then at the bouse of the' said C. Hers.tons, the father and natural guardian of the said M• Herstons, and were then left in his possession by the stiid Sprigg as the property of M. Herstons. That Cl Herstons held and possessed the said negro woman, and her children, for 31. Herstons, as her guardian, from the time of the said gift, and as her guardian carried the said Esther, and her children, to George town, in the district of Columbia, and continued to hold her there for M. Hers-tons, for about two years, when he returned her, and her child, the petitioner, to the said Sprigg, in Frederick county in this state, where Esther, and her child have continued ever since. That the petitioner was born after the aforesaid gift, and while her mother was so possessed for. M. Herstons. That M. Herstons is still an infant under the age of 1-6 years. The petitioner then prayed the court to direct the jury, that if they were, of opinion' from the evidence, tljat the petitioner was born out of this stale,, and brought into the state subsequent to the passage of the act of 1796, ch. 67, that she was entitled to her freedom, even if they found Cue facts last above stated to be true. This opinion and direction the Court, £Nelson, A. J.] gave tp the jury. The defendant excepted; and the verdict and judgment being fur the petitioner, he appealed to this court.
    The cause was argued before Chase, Ch. J. and Buchanan, Nicholson, Eaiile, and Johnson, J,
    
      Shaaff, for the Appellant,
    referred to the acts of 1802, ch. 68; 1813, ch. 56; and 1796, ch. 67, s. 7; and De Kerlegand vs. Negro Hector, 3 Harr. & M‘Hen. 185.
    
      Magruder, for the Appellee,
   The Court

concurred in the opinions of the County Court in the first and second bills of exceptions, but dissented from that in the third bill of exceptions.

.TUDGMENT REVERSED, AND PROCEDENDO AWARDED.  