Fanny v. State

Decision Date31 October 1839
Citation6 Mo. 122
PartiesFANNY (A SLAVE) v. THE STATE.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WARREN COUNTY.

This is an indictment for the murder of William Florence, against Fanny, a slave of Wm. Prewitt. The indictment was found in Lincoln Circuit Court, the county in which the murder is charged to have been committed, at the November term of said court, 1838. The defendant was arraigned and pleaded not guilty. At the same time, on the petition of William C. Prewitt, the master, the court ordered a change of venue to the county of Warren. At the April term of the Warren Circuit Court, 1839, the prisoner was tried, found guilty of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to death. From that judgment the defendant has appealed to this court. After verdict a motion was made for a new trial and overruled by the court. A bill of exceptions was filed, excepting to that decision by which all the evidence in the case was saved; the order for a change of venue is as follows: “Now, at this day, William C. Prewitt, the master and owner of said slave Fanny, personally appears in open court and files his motion and affidavit for a change of venue in this cause. It is, thereupon, ordered by this court that the venue in this cause be changed to the county of Warren, in this State, and that the clerk of this court make out and transmit to the clerk of the Circuit Court of said county of Warren, a full transcript of the record and proceedings in said cause, with all the original papers filed in said cause, and forming a parf the record thereof.”

Ellick, a witness, stated that he was acquainted with William Florence, son of Mr. Wm. Florence; that William, the younger, was about 9 or 10 years old, as he supposes; that on Saturday, sometime in September last, he thinks, William, and Thomas (another younger son of Mr. Florence) were missing; that Mr. Florence told him so that evening at his master's house; that he saw the children no more until the next Tuesday, when he saw their dead bodies after they were found; that he does not know how they came by their death, and does not know who killed them; that on the day they were missing he was in his master's orchard several times, and about the house; that he did not see Mr. Florence's children that day nor for several days previous; that his mother never told him that she had killed the children; that his mother did not tell him that she had seen them that day; that Fanny, the prisoner at the bar, is his mother; that he knew nothing of either the killing or hiding of the children. He also swore that, on the day the children were found, he and his mother Fanny and his father Ben and his uncle Green were all arrested and taken into custody, and that on the next day he was taken out from the rest by Mr. Sitton, the sheriff, and by Mr. Hammond, and they told him if he did not tell who killed the children, they would hang him; that if he would tell they would let him off; that he told them he knew nothing about it; that they then put a rope around his neck and hung him; that he then told them that his mother had told him that she had killed the children in the orchard, when they came for peaches; that after this, on the same day, the prisoners were taken to Mr. Lawrence Sitton's, and he and Green were set at liberty; that a few days after he was taken up and sent to Troy to jail; that after he got there, Mr. Chandler, the jailor, told him that he knew more about killing the children than he had told, that he had helped to kill them himself; that Mr. Chandler then told him that Judge Hunt had hung his father Ben at Bowling Green, and had come by his master's, and hung Green, and had then just taken his mother out to hang her, and that if he did not tell all about killing the children, Judge Hunt would be there directly and hang him; that if he told they would let him off; that Mr. Chandler then put a rope on his neck, and that a man came in with a cloak on, who, Mr. Chandler said, was Judge Hunt. He says the man they called Judge did not say anything. He also says that he then told Chandler that he helped his mother to kill the children; that he and his mother carried them off into the woods. He says he also told the same story before the grand jury, after he had been sworn on the book; that the reason why he told the grand jury so was, that he had once said it, and he thought he was bound to stick to it; that neither the story he told Sitton and Hammond, nor the one which he told Chandler and the grand jury, was at all true; that he told both in consequence of the threats and hanging above mentioned, and states that he knows nothing about the killing of the children.

Mrs. Florence states, that about half past two o'clock in the evening on Saturday, the 1st day of September, 1838, William and Thomas Florence, sons of hers, left the house to go to William C. Prewitt's peach orchard, for the purpose of getting peaches; that they, before they started, made several requests to her for permission to go before she consented to permit them to go; that Prewitt's peach orchard was about one quarter of a mile from her husband's residence from whence her aforesaid sons started; that she noticed them some distance on the way to the orchard, as far as she could see them, at least one hundred yards from the house; that her husband William Florence, had left home on the same day to go to Auburn about two miles distant, about two o'clock, and did not return until about one hour by sun; that by this time she had become uneasy about her children, and told her husband of it, and the circumstances and facts of her children leaving; that her husband immediately started to Prewitt's orchard to see about the children, and returned without having found them. She stated that a short time before Mr. M'Mahill, in the evening, passed for a load of bark, the children left for the orchard; that she never saw them afterward. She states, upon cross-examination, that Aaron, a negro boy belonging to her husband, was never at any time, from the time her husband left home for Auburn on that day until he returned, out of her sight more than fifteen minutes; that her husband owned a horse mill, and that some time after the children had left for the orchard, about three o'clock, not particular as to the time, Mark, a negro boy belonging to Dr. McClure, came to said mill; that he hallooed for Aaron, and that Aaron came in about 10 or 15 minutes from that time and went to the mill; that she was unwell that day and, as soon as her husband had left for Auburn, and her children had left for the orchard, she called said Aaron to the house from a field where he was taking care of fodder, under his master's direction, and directed him to make a fire and bring her water, which he did accordingly; that she then sent him to the field again, and, after he had been gone some 10 or 15 minutes into the field, it was that Mark came to the mill and soon after he hallooed; that Aaron was at the mill; that William was about eight or nine years of age; went off without hats on.

William Sitton states, that on the 4th day of September, 1836, a warrant was put into my hands to apprehend Prewitt's negroes. The negroes, to wit, Ben, Green, Ellick and Fanny, the prisoner, were then under guard at Prewitt's house. I took charge of them and they were guarded that night. Next morning (Wednesday) I went over to Prewitt's and took Ellick out, and set down with him under a shade, about 60 yards from the house. Mr. Hammond came up and asked him a few questions, he said he could show us the club. [Here the counsel for the defendant objected to any conversation of Ellick's being given in evidence. The court decided that no statement of Ellick's as to what the prisoner told him were to be given as evidence of her, the prisoner's, admission, but that anything stated by Ellick, which led to the discovery of facts, might be given by the way of inducement to lead to their further search into circumstances and facts.] The witness proceeded: Ellick said he could show us where they were killed, the club they were killed with; that it was a piece of a horse yoke, that he had seen it in the orchard on Sunday. We went on where he said the club was but could not find it. Ellick said he could show us where they were taken out of the orchard; he said three rails were laid down where they were taken out. We went on and he showed us a gap on the western side of the orchard, there the rails appeared to be recently moved; he said he could show us blood where he saw it on Sunday. We went on but saw none. I then told him to go right on the way the children were carried over, and as he went, I broke the hazel bushes, intending to take another look; when he got through the hazel patch, west of the orchard, the boy Ellick then said he knew nothing further, but that his mother said she had laid them in a sink hole. We then took him back to where he said the children were taken over the fence, and then left him. I then went to the house where there were fifty or sixty men. As I went on to the house, I went by the places where Ellick said he had seen the children, and on a close examination I found on the under side of a blade of grass, one drop of blood about as large as a pinhead, under the peach tree where the boy said they were killed, and where he said the club was. I took it up, wetted it, and found it was blood. I told the men at the house, that the children were, or I believed they were, murdered in the orchard; that I had found blood. I formed the men in a column. I did not tell them where the blood was. As soon as they got to the place where I found the drop of blood, several of the men cried out, “here is blood,” “here is blood.” Mr. Sanford first cried out. I went and looked at what they called blood, and did not think it was blood; it looked red, but I did not take it to be blood. Hans Smith cried out, “there was blood on the fence.” On the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • State v. Schwartzmann Service
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • July 3, 1931
    ...... criminal statute should be construed liberally in favor of. the defendant and strictly against the State yet the courts. will always give to a criminal statute a reasonable. construction. State v. Billing, 100 Mo. 92;. State v. Combs, 273 S.W. 1039; State v. Duckworth, 297 S.W. 151; Fanny (a slave) v. State, 6 Mo. 122; Hanna v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., 217 Mo.App. 671, 263 S.W. 526; Stark v. General Baking Co., 283. Mo. 346, 223 S.W. 89; Bassen v. Monckton, 308 Mo. 641, 649, 274 S.W. 407; State ex rel. v. St. Louis,. 241 Mo. 231. (b) The construction of the 1925 Weight Law. ......
  • State v. Schwartzman Service, Inc., 21670.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • July 3, 1931
    ...State v. Billing, 100 Mo. l.c. 92; State v. Combs, 273 S.W. (Mo.) l.c. 1039; State v. Duckworth, 297 S.W. (Mo.) l.c. 151; Fanny (a slave) v. State, 6 Mo. 122; Hanna v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., 217 Mo. App. 671, 263 S.W. 526; Stark v. General Baking Co., 283 Mo. 346, 223 S.W. 89; Bassen v. ......
  • State v. Brown
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 30, 1877
    ...Respondent, cited: Wagn. State. 1081, § 2; State vs. Bleckly, 18 Mo. 428; State vs. Welch, 33 Mo. 33; State vs Cornell, 49 Mo. 282; Fanny vs. State, 6 Mo. 122; Wood vs. Hicks, 36 Mo. 326; Langsdorf vs. Field, 36 Mo. 440; State vs. Starr, 38 Mo. and cases cited; State vs. Linney, 52 Mo. 40; ......
  • St. Louis County ex rel. Scott v. Marvin Planing Mill Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • April 4, 1933
    ...l. c. 68.] "The rule of reason is quite firmly rooted in the jurisprudence of our State and can be traced back to the early case of Fanny v. State, 6 Mo. 122, l. 142. In the case of State ex rel. v. Railroad, 105 Mo.App. 207, 213, 79 S.W. 714, SMITH, J., in speaking for the Kansas City Cour......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Black Female Executions in Historical Context
    • United States
    • Criminal Justice Review No. 33-1, March 2008
    • March 1, 2008
    ...7). The Planter (Rockport, IN). Retrieved March 6, 2006, fromhttp://www.rootsweb.com/~inspence/THEPLANTERone.htmFanny (a slave) v. State, 6 Mo. 122 (1839).Farmer, S. (1890). History of Detroit and Wayne County and early Michigan: A chronological encylopedia ofthe past and present. New York:......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT