Thomas Butler v. Gabriel Duvall. Defendant's Plea to the Jurisdiction of the Court
Thomas Butler & Sarah his wife, Matilda, Airy, Reason & Sally children of said Thomas & Sarah and Liddy & Eliza grandchildren of said Thomas & Mary &c.
vs
Gabriel Duval
Petition for freedom, in the circt. court of the District of Columbia, for the County of Washington
And the said Gabriel Duval, in his proper person, comes and says that the circuit court of the District of Columbia here ought not, as he humbly conceives, to have cognizance of the petition aforesaid, because he says, that ever since the first institution of the said court here, by the statute in such case provided & passed by the legislature of the State of Maryland, at the November session in 1796 of the general Assembly of the said State, and ever since the said session remaining unreeled and in full force & operation within the said State, and ever since the 27th day of February 1801, adopted & in full force & operation within the county of Washington aforesaid, by
force of the act of Congress in such case provided, no petition for freedom can be commenced or tried in any place or jurisdiction but in the county where the petitioner or petitioners, bringing such petition, shall reside at the time of bringing such petition reside under the direction of his, her or their master, mistress or owner; that the said Gabriel Duval, at the time of the commencement of the said petition, always before and ever since was and yet is a citizen of the said State of Maryland, and actually settled & resident in the county of Prince George's in the said State and not in the county of Washington aforesaid or elsewhere in the District of Columbia aforesaid; and that during all the time & times aforesaid, the said petitioners, and each & every of them do & does were & was did and yet are and so do & does reside in the said county of Prince Georges and State aforesaid, under the direction of the said Gabriel Duval, then & during all the time & times aforesaid being the master & owner of the said petitioners and of each & every of them and holding then and each & every of them there as his servants & slaves that the said petitioners in the manner as all other petitions of the like natures during and not in the county of Washington aforesaid or elsewhere in the District of Columbia aforesaid under the direction of and that the said petitions during all the time & times aforesaid, have has been &
yet are is pleadable, and might & ought to have been brought, commanded & tried before the court of the said county of Prince Georges only, and not here in the circuit court of the District aforesaid or elsewhere in the said District. And this he is ready to verify. Wherefore, since the said petition is brought for recovery of the freedom of the said petitioners, so residing in the county of Prince Georges aforesaid, under the direction of their said master & owner, the said Gabriel Duval prays Judgment if the said Circuit Court of the District of Columbia ere will or ought to have further cognizance of the petition aforesaid.
G. Duvall in propria persona
80
May 1831
Done
Tho: Butler & als
v
Gab: Duval
Petition for freedom
Plea, to the Jurisdiction of the Court.
That the Petrs were at the time &c residing in P.G. Co. in Md. under the direction of their master, and not in the Co. of W. in the D. of Co. afd. or elsewhere in the sd. D. of Cola. under the direction of the sd. Gabriel.
Repn.[?] That at the time of filing their Petn. they were here present residing within the jurisdiction of their Ct. in their own proper persons in Washn. Co. aforesd. without this, that they were residing in P.G. Co. in Md. under the direction of the sd. Gabl. as alleged in the plea, and of this they put them reloc.[?] on the Country.
Demr. because the issue tender'd is immaterial, in as much as this Ct. has not jurisdiction unless the Petr. at the time of filing their Petn. were residing here under the direction of their master.
[illegible]
May 30 - 4
Decr 30 4
May - 3
