Search

This collection contains documents related to a lawsuit between James Gibbs and Joseph E. Embertz of Caroline County, Maryland. Gibbs, a free African American, sued Embertz to regain possession of a "spotted sow."

This collection contains 6 documents related to a lawsuit between James Gibbs and Joseph E. Embertz of Caroline County, Maryland. Gibbs, a free African American, sued Embertz to regain possession of a "spotted sow" worth $5, which Embertz had allegedly stolen and retained illegally. The material documents most of the case's history and includes an affidavit and summons. Constable Alexander Ridegway is frequently mentioned in the documents.

This collection is made up of legal documents pertaining to a lawsuit filed by John Molson and George Davies against Jesse Hawley in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York in 1834.

This collection is made up of 8 legal documents pertaining to a lawsuit filed by John Molson and George Davies against Jesse Hawley in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York in 1834. Depositions and other court records pertain to the plaintiffs' attempts to recover payment from two promissory notes that had been executed by Hawley. The documents concern the history of the notes in question, witnesses' testimonies, the case's eventual postponement, and the issues the court sought to settle. Several items are signed by the defendants' attorney, Orlando Hastings.

This collection consists of 8 affidavits recorded in Lincoln County, Kentucky, in 1808. The statements, all provided by slaves, concern events leading up to the stabbing of a slave named Moses in May 1808.

This collection consists of 8 affidavits (16 pages) recorded in Lincoln County, Kentucky, in 1808. The statements, provided by slaves named Ben, Peter, Caleb, Martin, Frank, David, Lew, and Jim, concern events leading up to the stabbing of a slave named Moses in May 1808. According to their testimony, Ben and Lew had a financial dispute after a card game, which later led to an altercation between a slave named Surry, who was a relative of Ben, and Moses, who was acquainted with Lew. The slaves who were involved in and who witnessed the incident belonged to several different masters. The affidavits provide detailed information about the men's activities before and during the fight between Surry and Moses.

Additional research about the collection and the context of Surry's murder trial is available in the Manuscripts Division.

The Matthias papers are a small, miscellaneous collection of letters and documents relating to Robert Matthias (a.k.a. Robert Matthews), the leader of the Kingdom of Matthias cult. They touch upon the lives and circumstances of Matthias; his wife, Margaret Matthias; cult follower Benjamin Folger; and Matthias’ legal counsel, Henry Western and N. Nye Hall.

The Matthias papers include seven miscellaneous items: three letters from Robert Matthias’ wife, Margaret, to his legal counsel, Henry Western; two letters to Robert Matthias while he was living in Sing Sing, New York; and two legal documents. A full description of each item is located in the Detailed Box and Folder Listing.

This collection is made up of briefs, arguments, lists of precedents, manuscript form affidavits, and other documents related to the trial of William S. Bergin for the murder of Thomas J. McBride, barkeeper and proprietor of the Bergin House hotel in Mount Vernon, Ohio, on June 15, 1877. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity (i.e. he was intoxicated when committing the murder), but the jury convicted him and he was sentenced to death. These papers appear to have been compiled by Bergin's defense counsel during the process of seeking a retrial in August 1877.

This collection is made up of briefs, arguments, lists of precedents, manuscript form affidavits, and other documents related to the trial of William S. Bergin for the murder of barkeeper and proprietor of the Bergin House hotel in Mount Vernon, Ohio, on June 15, 1877. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity (i.e. he was intoxicated when committing the murder), but the jury convicted him and he was sentenced to death. These papers appear to have been compiled by Bergin's defense counsel during the process of seeking a retrial in August 1877.

The collection includes two briefs; witnesses' statements about the language used in the confrontation, a 14-page document with statutes on first degree murder and evidence in the Bergin case; a 9-page argument; a list of points made by the plaintiff; and an organized list of precedent cases for drunkenness, homicidal impulse, homicidal mania, insanity with apparent sanity, hereditary insanity, sane today--insane tomorrow, murder in the 2nd degree, and the number of the insane in Ohio.

The collection's 18 affidavits appear to be manuscript forms for Bergin's defense to use in arguing for a retrial. They include several different handwritten forms produced by a clerk. With only three exceptions, the affidavits do not identify a particular individual, leaving blanks for their name and for the date of the sworn statement. Despite their incomplete state, some of these were still signed and stamped by a notary. The incomplete forms include duplicate text focused on different arguments for a retrial. For example, six of the affidavits discredit Sarah Rose as a witness; several of them are sworn statements by jurors that they had already formed their opinions of the case before the trial; and others claim the jurors were allowed to separate into their own boarding houses or mingle with crowds of people without police supervision.