Let a capias issue against the Defen-fendant Grumpier, to hold him in custody until ho give security in the sum of §2500, conditioned to abide by, and perform the final decree of the Court in this case.
Coleman v. Coleman, 10 N.C. 200, 3 Hawks 200 (1824)
June 1824
·
Supreme Court of North Carolina
10 N.C. 200, 3 Hawks 200
Coleman v. Coleman & Crumpler.
j From Lenoir.
The Court, on a bill filed for' that purpose, will protect the rights of those who are entitled to slaves after the determination of a life estate, by compelling the owner for life, or those claiming under him, to give bond to abide'by and perform the final decree, which may be made in the cause.
The bill stated, that Thomas Coleman died in 1791, leaving a last will by which lie bequeathed certain *201groes, Jasper and Doll to his wife, one of the Defendants, during her life, and after her death to his two daughters ,• the negroes went into the wife’s possession, and since the death of Thomas Coleman, Doll has had numerous issue; that the wife had sold, or caused to be sold, three of the children of Doll, to the Defendant Crumplcr, of Sampson County, or to some other person who has sold fo Grumpier; that the wife has in her possession nine other children of Doll, and the bill stated, that the Complainant (who was the legal representative of the children) feared that Grumpier would cause the negroes which he held, to be conveyed out of the State, and that the wife would dispose of those in her possession, and prayed that the Defendants might be compelled to give bond for the forthcoming of the negroes in their possession respectively, on the death of the wife, and that they should not in the mean while be removed out of the State,’ and further writs of subpoena and also of capias ne exeant, or other proper process, compelling the Defendants to give security for their appearance.
The wife, by her answer, admitted Complainant’s claim under the will, but denied any intention to dispose of the property so as to injure the future interest of others, and stated, that she had conveyed her interest only in three of the children of Doll to one Loftin.
The Defendant Grumpier, stated, that he purchased absolutely of Loftin three negroes, which he had since sold ; that this purchase was fair, Iona fide, for a valuable consideration, without notice of Complainant’s claim or title.
The cause having been set for hearing, was removed, into this Court by affidavit, and now,