Thurmond v. Trammell

• Decision Date: 01 January 1858
• Citation: 22 Tex. 257
• Parties: THOMAS J. THURMOND v. HENRY TRAMMELL AND WIFE.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

22 Tex. 257

THOMAS J. THURMOND

v.HENRY TRAMMELL AND WIFE.

Supreme Court of Texas.

1858.

In a suit to recover a slave, the declarations of a third party, through whom the plaintiff does not derive title of possession, and who does not appear ever to have had title to or possession of the said slave, are not admissible in evidence.

Where illegal testimony has been improperly received, which in connection with the charge of the court, may have influenced the minds of the jury, the judgment will be reversed.

ERROR from Gonzales.Tried below before the Hon. Fielding Jones.

Suit by plaintiff in error, to recover a slave, alleged to have been hired from him, by the defendants in error, jointly; and also to recover a balance due for the hire of the said slave, after allowing credit for an amount paid to the plaintiff's agent, and for which a credit had been given to them by the plaintiff, on account of the said hire.

Defendants answered, that the plaintiff was not, and never had been, the owner of the slave sued for; but that said slave was the separate property of the defendant, Julia Ann Trammell, by virtue of a verbal deed of gift from her grandfather, Richard Thurmond, made in the state of Arkansas, in the year 1832 or 1833; that the plaintiff never claimed said slave, until after his marriage to his second wife (who was not the mother of the defendant, Julia), and a short time before the commencement of the suit; that they had never paid hire for the said slave, but that the plaintiff had wrongfully mortgaged her, a short time before defendants' marriage, after which the defendant, Julia, paid the mortgage, and since that time the said slave has been in their possession.

It appeared, from the statement of facts, that the plaintiff was the father of the defendant, Julia Ann Trammell.Upon the trial, a witness (Pennington) for the defendant, was permitted, notwithstanding the plaintiff's objection, to testify, that “he...