![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
wrested the possession the infant from its mother's breast or from her possession until it had passed its tender age of [[strikethrough]]helpness[[/strikethrough]] helplesness. In this case, this has been done, and the child of 9 years & its labor for it can do much towards supporting its own parents has been bound over to their former owner whom they alike fear and despise. Like [[strikethrough]] disposition [[/strikethrough]] decrees have been made in every case that has come to my knowledge and because of this great wrong perpetrated under the form & sanction of [[strikethrough]] laws [[/strikethrough]] law and as the parties are wholy remediless I have thought it my duty to bring this subject to your attention. There is no appeal from the private court in cases involving conflict of facts, or jurisdiction arising under applications from letters of indenture. See Code page 367 S 1888 &c Judges of Probate may hear motions to revoke letters of Indenture for cause but can go no farther. Of course it is rare that they revoke their own decisions. What then is the effect of these decisions, and I presume they are of like character [[strikethrough]] throg [[/strikethrough]] throughout the State & South? It is nothing less than remanding parent and child back to slavery. He who reads the book of nature aright & a mothers heart is its holiest page Must know that the possession of the offspring is the possession of the child. Is then there no way to redress these wrongs. Shall this collusion between the Courts & former Masters be suffered to continue under the application [[strikethrough]] of [[/strikethrough]] and operation of laws that were not made in reference to the new Status of the Negro. In all cases the poor ignorant & moneyless negro encounters two insuperable difficulties,
Transcription Notes:
* double-S symbol for Section is not on my keyboard