¶1(nem. con.) refused to discharge the boy, being of opinion that the orphans’ court had jurisdiction to bind out orphan children; and that the binding was in the usual form in which that court exercised its jurisdiction. See Hines v. Hewitt, [Case No. 6,520.]
3 F. Cas. 102
Bell v. English
U.S. District Court
Decided October 15, 1834
U.S. District Court · decided 1834-10-15
[At law. Application for a writ of habeas corpus to compel James English to bring up Andrew Bell. The return of a writ of habeas corpus, to bring up a colored boy, was, that he was bound as apprentice to Mr. English, by the orphans’ court of Alexandria county, to learn the business of a house-servant. The evidence of this binding was a copy of the record of the orphans’ court, in these words:— “Orphans’ Court, Alexandria County, October Term, 1S32.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Writ dismissed · Decided 1834-10-15
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 1914
1 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →