6 Ala. 259 | Ala. | 1844
We think the charge of the circuit court, so far as it asserts that the possession of the slaves by Adams, in Georgia, had nothing to do with the case, cannot be sustained.
Independent of our statute of frauds, the question before the jury was, whether Duke parted with the possession of the slave sent home with his daughter after her marriage, as a loan, or as a gift. In this aspect, there could be few facts of more weight than the long continued possession of the husband. It is certainly correct, that the presumption which arises when a father sends slaves home with a daughter upon or after her marriage, may be rebutted or explained; but this must be done by clear and satisfactory proof that it was notoriously and expressly understood
We forbear to express any opinion upon the charge requested, further than that it seems to have considered the case as a question of law upon the facts proved, when it was only one as to the intention of the supposed donor at the time when he parted with the slave, or at some subsequent time.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.