Delaware County Court of Quarter Sessions, 1796

State v. Smith

State v. Smith
Delaware County Court of Quarter Sessions · Decided November 17, 1796 · Bassett
1 Del. Cas. 107; 1796 Del. LEXIS 14

Counsel

Miller and Wilson for defendant. Ridgely for the State., State’s attorney.

State v. Smith

Opinion of the Court

Bassett, C. J.

There are two points for your consideration: first, whether there was a general or special property in Burton Cannon; second, whether Job Smith took the property out of the possession of B. Cannon with a mind to steal it. In order to convict this defendant you should be convinced Burton Cannon had either a general or special property in the Negro. It is true a man may be guilty of stealing the goods of a person unknown, but then it should be so laid. I apprehend that wherever a man has lost the possession of goods, and another has possession tortiously, the owner may take the possession if he does not commit a breach of the peace. But you are to consider whether B. Cannon had a genéral or a special property in the Negro, secondly whether defendant took the property feloniously.

Verdict, not guilty.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.