
    GENERAL COURT,
    
    OCTOBER, TERM, 1799.
    Negro Plato vs. Bainbridge.
    Arrear from the county court of Frederick, from a judgment in that court, dismissing the petition filed therein for freedom, by the present appellant.
    A case, embracing the following facts, was submitted to the county court for their opinion, viz. That a certain Peter Bainbridge, a citizen of the United States, was a resident' of the state of South Carolina, long before, and until the month of April 1791, and did rightfully during his said x*esidence, hold and possess, as his own proper slave, negro Plato, the petitioner, now ,of the age of sixteen years, who was born in the said state, and therein resided from his birth until the month of April aforesaid. That in the month of April 1791, the said Bainbridge removed from the said state of S. C» into this state, with a bona Jide intention of settling here; and upon his said removal he brought with him the said negro Plato, claiming and holding him as a slave. That upon his removal into this state as aforesaid, the first county into which the said Bainbridge brought the said negro Plata was the county of Montgomery. That the said Bainbridge resided in Frederick county, in this state, for two years after Ins said removal into this state as aforesaid; and in the month of November 1791, sold the said negro Plato to the defendant, who then resided tunl still resides in Frederick county aforesaid, and who holds and claims the said negro Piafo as a slave. That the said Bainbridge, on the 17th of February ] 795, and mot before, did by bis own .oath, fully prove to the satisfact ion of James Maceabbin Lingan, who was then and at the time of the removal of the said negro Plato into till's state as aforesaid, collector and naval officer under the government of the United States for the district and port of George-Town, in Montgomery county aforesaid? the residence, of the said negro Plato in some one of the United States for the space of three whole years next preceding and antecedent to his conning into this state» That the said Peter Bainbridge, on the Sd of August 1796, and not before, did fully prove to the satisfaction of John Ritchie, being then and at the time of the importation as aforesaid, collector of the tax for Frederick, county aforesaid, by the oath of one credible witness? the residence of the said negro Plato in some one of the United States for the space of three whole years next preceding and antecedent to his coming into this state.
    The County Court, upon the preceding statement? gave judgment that the petitioner was not entitled to bis freedom, and dismissed the petition; from which judgment this appeal was prosecuted.
    
      Mason, for the Appellant,
    Ckacjjr? for .the- Appellee;
   Tjm General Court affirmed the judgment of the County Court»

The act of assembly of this state in force at the time? and operating upon ibis case, was the sict of April session 1783, clu 23, by which it was enacted, «‘that it shall not be lawful, after the passing of this act, to import or bring into this state, by land or water, any negro, mulatto, or other slave, for sale, or to reside within this state; and any person brought into this state as a slave contrary to this act, .i? a slave before, shall thereupon immediately cease to be a slave, and shall be free; provided that this act shall not prohibit any person, being a citisen of some one of the United States, coming Into this state with a bona fule intention of settling therein, and who shall actually reside within tills state for one year at least? to be computed from and next succeéding his coming into the state, to import or bring in any slave or slaves which belonged to such person, and sjavCi or slaves. had been an inhabitant of some one of the United States for the space of three whole years preceding such importation* and the residence of such slave in some one of the United States for three years as aforesaid, antecedent to his coming into this state, shall be fully proved to the satisfaction of the naval officer or collector of the tax, by the oath of the owner, or some one or more credible witness or witness*es; provided always, that nothing herein contained shall he construed or taken to sot any slave free, who is brought into this state by any person travelling through this state, or sojourning therein for a short time, such slave not being sold or otherwise disposed of in this state, but carried by tlie owner out of this state.”

Other acts passed since April, 1791 — November 1791, ch. 57* 1794, ch. 43* 66* 1796, ch. 67* 1797, ch. 15* and 5798, ch. 76.  