O Say Can You See

That if the Jury shall believe from the evidence that by the agreement under which Mrs. Wallingford took possession of the petitioners, she was only to have the possession of them during her life upon the expiriation of which they were to belong to Mr Wallingford the deft in this cause, then the deed of manumission offered in evidence by Petitioners cannot operate against the deft in this cause if the Jury shall also find that Mrs Wallingford is dead.

(agreed by counsel)

2

That if the Jury should believe from the evidence aforesaid that Mrs. Wallingsford held the petitioners by virtue of an agreement made between her & her husband without the intervention of a Trustee, that said agreement s null & void & could give no power to Mrs Wallingsford to manumit the slaves held by virtue of such an agreement.

refused 3d June 1835 (J. S. M contra)

3

That should the Jury believe from the evidence aforesaid that an agreement was entered into between Defendant and Rachael Wallingsford, by which said Rachael was to have said Petitioners in lieu of being supported by him as his wife, yet if there was no covenant on the part of a trustee or some other one capable of contracting with said Husband, that he should not be liable for the maintenance of said Rachael as his said wife, the [illegible] is null

refused (J. S. M contra) 3 June 1835.

4

That if the Jury should believe from the evidence aforesaid that an agreement existed between the defendant & Mrs Wallingsford that he should transfer the Petitioners to her on condition that she would relinquish all claim to alimony against him. That then should the Jury believe from the said evidence. That she did not comply with this condition, and that she did profess[?] against him a subsequent claim for alimony[?] that then the said agreement cannot be enforced against the defendant nor can he be deprived of any of his rights by virtue of said agreement

Refused (J. S. M contra) 3 June 1835

5.

That if the Jury should believe from the evidence aforesaid that the Petitioner or any of them at the time of the date execution of the deed of manumission aforesaid, were not able in consequence of their tender age or from any other cause [illegible] to procure for themselves sufficient food or raiment with other necessary requisites of life, then the said deed of manumission, as to them, or any such of them was is null & void inoperative.

(Given - nem con)

Whereupon But at the prayer of the Counsel for the Petitioners further instructed the Jury that if they believe from the sd. Evidence. (See & insert the residue[?] of the paper mark it A.

5. But if the Jury believe from the evidence that the said children in the said Deed mentioned were of healthy constitutions and sound in mind and body, and that their mother was capable by labour to procure to them sufficient food and raiment with other requisite necessaries of life, and did maintain them, then such Children are not under the incapacity intended by the Maryland law.