Eason vs. Edmundson: a dispute over the sale of seven enslaved people.

I have read hundreds, maybe thousands, of records documenting the lives of enslaved African Americans, many in my own family. I am fairly inured to the trauma that reading these documents inflicts — but not always to the trauma they record. The court pleadings I received from The Race and Slavery Petitions Project got under my skin in an unexpected way. They are a rich source for those seeking to reconstruct family history — names, ages, and family relationships, labor assignments. But they also reek of the casual odiousness of chattel slavery — enslavers squabbling over the sale of human beings, speculating on the monetary value of “this species of property,” splitting families.

Below, a summary of the dispute detailed in files 21284116 and 21284312. Read with care.

In 1830, Abner Eason was struggling with debt and feared that his property—specifically, seven enslaved people—would be seized to pay what he owed. In February of that year, he borrowed $500 from Wright Edmundson, signing a promissory note to repay that amount.

In May 1830, according to Eason, Edmundson requested further security for the loan. He proposed that Eason mortgage several enslaved individuals and, in exchange for this lien, Edmundson offered Eason an additional $300, with a twenty percent discount on the repayment. Eason agreed.

On 27 August 1830, Eason executed a deed of sale to Edmundson, transferring five enslaved people for $975.

Received of Wright Edmundson nine hundred dollars and seventy five dollars as payment in full for the following Negroes, slaves, to wit, Sampson a man aged nineteen, Nancy a woman ages twenty four years and her three children to wit Phereby a girl aged five years, Chainey aged four years, Lonon a boy aged three years, and I do by these presents warrant and defend the right and title of the said Negros unto the said Edmondson, his heirs and assigns against the claim or claims of all others, and I do also warrant the said negros to be sound and healthy and slaves for life. I[illegible] which I have here unto set my hand and seal, August 27th, 1830 A. Eason Witness M. Thomas Jas. B. Tartt

In 1841, Eason petitioned the court to enforce his original understanding of his arrangement with Edmundson — that this was a mortgage, not a sale. He asked the court to require Edmundson to return Sampson, Nancy, and her children to him once he repaid the money and to account for any profits Edmundson may have made from their forced labor over the years. Wyatt Moye and A. Speight signed as sureties to pay court costs and judgments if Eason lost his suit.

In the answer filed in court, Wright Edmundson outlined a very different story. He claimed that he purchased the five enslaved people from Eason for $1375, which “in truth was twenty five dollars more than the value of said negroes as valued by a negro speculator James Tart,” then a resident of Alabama, who wanted to purchase them but would not pay more than $1300. The sale, Edmundson claimed, was never meant to be conditional. Rather, it was “absolute and bona fide and intended to convey to [Edmundson] the absolute property in said slaves without any reservation.” There was no agreement that Eason could “redeem” the five upon payment of the purchase price with interest.

Edmundson further countered that several months before his purchase, Eason had borrowed “five or six hundred dollars” and, to secure payment, had conveyed to Edmundson Samson and Sherrod (or Sherrod and Henry.) A few months later, Eason, “of his own accord,” offered to sell Edmundson Samson, Nancy, and her three children. The sale price was offset by the loan amount — $975.

Three days later, Eason told Edmundson that Eason’s wife “wanted a negro girl to wait in the house.” Eason agreed to trade Sherwood [Sherrod],  age 9, and Henry, age 8, to Edmundson for Milly, age 13, plus cash. (The values of the children were assessed by Abner Eason’s “father-in-law” [actually, stepfather] James Scarborough, who had since died.)

In the eleven years since, Edmundson had been “in the peaceable adverse possession of said slaves claiming & using them as his own….” He denied any fraud or deceit.

A postscript on Edmundson’s answer, written in a different hand, further states: “Girl Milly in the valuation was estimated at $175 which price this defendant [Edmundson] had given a few days before at public auction. She was 12 years old & very likely & is now the mother of some children & belongs to J.C. Knight.”

In 1843, in response to an amended pleading filed by Eason, Edmundson answered with additional details. Eason, Edmundson asserted, had been “exceedingly troubled by the idea of a public sale where the slaves might be bought by several persons & separated from each other and carried away by speculators.” Edmundson had agreed to pay a fair price for five people, three of whom were children, and the oldest of them only 5.

Jesse C. Knight bought Milly for about $200 not long after she was swapped for the two boys. Knight still owned her, and she had had several children.

Since 1830, Nancy had given birth to five more children — Alfred, Rose, Calvin, Nanna, Ann, and Howell. Fereby had had a daughter Lucinda, and Chainey, a son Arnold.

Edmundson was not sure Eason had been honest about the ages of the enslaved people. If Sherwood and Henry were actually 9 and 8, “they were very badly grown.” Further, the ages of Fereby and Chainy were “utterly inconsistent with both nature and fact.” Nancy had Fereby, Chainy, and London “after the common and usual intervals of birth,” i.e. every 1-2 years. Before Fereby, Nancy had given birth to Sherwood and Henry, and before them, she had two other children, one then in Asa Daniels’ possession and the other in Garry Simms’. If Fereby were 10 (in 1830) and Nancy were 25, Nancy must have had her first child at age 9 or 10. [Except the bill of sale stated Fereby was 5. Per stated ages in the documents, Sherrod/Sherwood was born about 1821; Henry, about 1822; Fereby, about 1825; Chainy, about 1826; and London, about 1828. The “usual intervals” would place the births of Nancy’s eldest two children circa 1817-1820. This is still terribly young if Nancy were born circa 1805. Note also that Nancy bore at least 10 children who survived into at least early childhood. Neither Eason nor Edmundson mentioned their father or fathers.]

——

I have not been able to identify Samson, Nancy, or any of Nancy’s children and grandchildren after Emancipation.

I can identify, however, the men who exercised control over their lives.

• Abner Eason — Abner Isaac Eason was born about 1808 to Abner Eason and Martha Tartt Eason. He inherited two enslaved men (or boys), Abraham and Samson, from his father, who died in 1819. (The will also provided that young Abner would receive Nance and her child Venus after Martha Eason’s death. Nance is possibly the Nancy above.) Martha Tartt Eason married James Scarborough after her husband’s death. Abner I. Eason lived and operated a store in extreme southeastern Edgecombe County, in the vicinity of today’s Saratoga. He appears in the 1850 slave schedule of Edgecombe County with one enslaved person, a 35 year-old woman.
• Wright Edmundson — Edmundson owned a plantation on what is now Highway 58 between Wilson and Stantonsburg. His house is still standing. More to come on his tangled estate proceedings.
• Wyatt Moye — A former Edgecombe County sheriff, Moye sponsored the legislation that created Wilson County in 1855. He was partner in the slave-trading firm Moye & Adams and appears in the 1850 slave schedule of Edgecombe County with 16 enslaved people.
• A. Speight — Arthur Speight appears in the 1840 census of Greene County, N.C., with 49 enslaved people. After his death in 1848, his sons Abner and Arthur D. Speight sued their kinsman Abner Eason for debts owed their father.
• James Tartt — James B. Tartt, a relative of Eason’s mother, migrated to Alabama in the late 1820s, though he continued to conduct business in lower Edgecombe County for at least a decade — including speculative purchase of enslaved people to sell in the booming markets of the lower South.
• James Scarborough — James Scarborough’s plantation lay just west of Saratoga, and his house, too, stands. He is known to have enslaved at least twenty people.
• J.C. Knight — Jesse Cooper Knight lived near Tarboro in an area that remained Edgecombe County after the creation of Wilson County. He is listed in the 1850 slave schedule of Edgecombe County with 42 enslaved people. His 1856 will distributed among his wife, children, and grandchildren dozens of enslaved people: Little Ned, Hannah, Peter, Dick, Siah, Yellow Jerry, Ralf, Rachel, Handy, Rose, Betsey, Harriett, Winny, Big Henry, Harry, Nat, Glasgow, Little Jerry, Matt, Ann, Jack, George, John, Cato, Toney, Alfred, Bob, Big Ned, Daniel, Dave, Hilliard, Adeline, Milly, Luke, Tom, Alice, Margaret, Little Henry, Cherry, Amanda, and an unnamed and unnumbered group purchased from the estate of Bennet B. Lawrence in Nash County.
• Asa Daniels — probably the Asa Daniel listed in the 1830 census of Greene County with 6 enslaved people.
• Garry Simms — Geraldus Simms, known as Garry. He is listed in the 1830 census of Edgecombe County with 2 enslaved people (and 5 unnamed free people of color in his household); in the 1840 census of Edgecombe with 7; and in the 1850 with 11. He was killed in 1857 at his home in Wilson County by drunk acquaintances.

The court file in Eason vs. Edmundson runs more than 125 pages and includes dozens of depositions and statements from witnesses. These documents suggest that there had already been a judgment executed against Eason’s enslaved people, and Eason struck a deal to “sell” them to Edmundson — at an inflated price — in order to buy them back when his finances improved. They also offer a glimpse of the workings of slavery in what would soon be Wilson County. More to come.