through a contribution from Google.
Case No. 16,152.
UNITED STATES v. RHODES.
[1 Cranch, C. C. 447.]1
Circuit Court, District of Columbia.
Nov. Term, 1807.
COMPETENCY OF WITNESSES—LARCENY BY SLAVE.
The owner of goods stolen by a slave is not a competent witness for the prosecution, because he is entitled to one half of the fine which the court must impose under the act of congress.
Indictment [against Milly Rhodes, a slave] for stealing a piece of Russia linen, the property of Mr. Vowell.
Mr. Jones contends that “Vowell is a competent witness, because as a slave can have no property, there ought not to be a fine, and if no fine, no interest.
But THE COURT said, the act of congress under which she is indicted makes the fine a necessary part of the punishment, and Mr. Vowell will be entitled to one half of the fine.
DUCKETT, Circuit Judge, absent.
1 [Reported by Hon. William Cranch, Chief Judge.]
This volume of American Law was transcribed for use on the Internet
through a contribution from Google.