Washburn v. Humphreys, 35 N.C. 88, 13 Ired. 88 (1851)

Dec. 1851 · Supreme Court of North Carolina

35 N.C. 88, 13 Ired. 88

JOSEPH WASHBURN & AL. vs. HENRY HUMPHREYS.

Assumpsit for the reward offered by the Mowing advertisement for the apprehension of a stolen negro and the felon: “A reward of $100 fbr tha apprehension of both, or $50 for the negro out of the State ; $25 for the apprehension of the uegro within the State, and his delivery to the subscriber, or for keeping him so that his owner gets him again.” Héld, thfflf'the' reward of $100 was offered only for the apprehension of the felon and the negro, if taken without the State, and $25 for the negro if taken within the State.

• Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Guilford County, at a Special Term in July, 1851, his Honor Judge Caldwell presiding.

The case is stated in the opinion of this Court.

Kerr, for the plaintiff.

Morekead, Gilmer and Miller, for the defendants.

Pearson, J.

The defendant had a negro stolen from him, and offered a reward in these words, for the apprehension of the felon, one Moore, and the negro : !i A reward of $100 for the apprehension of both, or $50 for the negro out of the State, $25 for the apprehension of the negro within the State, and his delivery to the subscriber, or for keeping him so' that his owner gets him again.”

The plaintiffs apprehended both Moore and the negro within this State, and put Moore in Rockingham jail, and delivered the negro to the defendant, who paid them $25, but refused to pay the other $75, for which the plaintiffs bring this suit. His Honor thought the plaintiffs were entitled to the reward of $100, and they had judgment for $75, and the defendant appealed.

It is unnecessary to notice the other question made in the case. We differ with his Honor, as to the construction of the advertisement. The meaning of the defendant is this : if the felon succeeds in getting the negro out of the State, when the risk of losing the property will be imminent, to stimulate exertion, I will give $100, provided both are apprehended, or $50 for the negro. If he does not succeed in getting the negro out of the State, I will give $25 for the apprehension of the negro. I-Iis object was to secure the negro ; he offers nothing for the apprehension of the felon, either out of, or in the State, unless the negro is apprehended, and, if the negro should be secured, before getting out of the State, then he leaves the felon to the vigilance of the citizens. This is a moi’e reasonable construction, than that he meant, if the negro was apprehended within the State, he would give $25 for him, and the additional sum of $75 for the apprehension of the felon.

Our conclusion is aided by the grammatical construction. The words “out of the State” refer as well to the $100 for both as to the $50 for the negro, these two propositions-being connected by the disjunctive conjunctive “ or.” It is further aided by the punctuation, for which purpose the original was sent, The only stop in the whole clause, except a comma, is after the words “ out of the State,” when there is a semicolon, indicating that the sentence is there divided.

Per Curiam. Venire de novo awarded.