Viewing page 117 of 204

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

230

Bureau RF & AL
Head Qrs Asst Comr Ste Va
Richmond Mar 5th/66
Respt'y referred to Capt C. B. Wilder A.Q.M. & Supt 9th Dist Va who will restore to Mr Wm. H. Curtis all personal property belonging to him. upon satisfactory proof that it is his. now in possession of the Bureau.
By order of Col O Brown
James A. Bates AAAG

Peter Ainslie
Mem. F. Court

L.R. A. 35.
Endorsement on letter of Peter Ainslie "Mem of F. Court as to whether col'd men should work on the public roads like white men.

Bureau RF & AL
Head Qrs Asst Comr Ste Va
Richmond Mar 5th/66
Respty returned to Mr Peter Ainslie.
The same laws which apply to white citizens are applicable to the freedmen.
By order of Col O Brown
James A. Bates AAAG

C. B. Wilder
Capt AQM &c
H H Curtis

L.R. C. 197. 2. Vol 1866. 
Endorsement on letter of H. H. Curtis applying for the restoration of his personal property situated in Warwick Co

Bureau RF & AL
Head Qrs Asst Comr Ste Va
Richmond Mar 5th/66
Respty referred to Capt C. B. Wilder A.Q.M. & Supt 9th Dist Va. who will restore to Mr H. H. Curtis all personal property belonging to him, upon satisfactory proof that it is his, now in possession of the Bureau. 
By order of Col O Brown
James A. Bates AAAG

231

H. S. Merrell
Lieut & Supt
Rhoda Christian
Maura & Co
R. W. Hughes
107/305

Continuation of Endorsements on papers in the case of Rhoda Christian (col'd) Vs Maury & Co & R.W. Hughes on Estate of John Parkhurst (dec'd) 
See L.R. G. 8. & M. 112.)

War Dept 
Bureau RF & AL
Washington Mar 1st/66
Respty returned to Col. O. Brown Asst Comr &c. Richmond Va.
The opinion of the Freedmens Court in this case asserts that the claim of the plaintiff "is clear, whether regarded as a gift inter vivos donatio causa mortis. nuncupative will, or payment to a creditor, it is not material which."
A decree founded upon such an assertion cannot but be regarded with suspicion.
Each of these methods of gaining title to property is essentially distinct from and inconsistent with the others, and must be supported by essentially different evidence.
An opinion which declares a claim good upon any or all of them, cannot be correct, and is prima facia evidence of the incorrectness of the decree founded upon it.
It is possible, however, that a decree may be just, although based upon false reasoning.
The plaintiffs claim may be good upon some one of he grounds mentioned, and if the decree accords with the claim as proved, it will not be improper to approve it, and disregard the opinion.
It is unnecessary to inquire whether the decree was justifiable on the ground that the plaintiff was legatee by a nuncupative will, for no evidence exists to prove such a will. Nothing to show that it was ever reduced to writing, ever admitted to probate, that there was ever an animus testandi on the part of the deceased, or that any of the necessary formalities required in such a transaction were complied with.
The evidence relied upon to prove a gift consists in the fact that the key to a box of bonds

Transcription Notes:
---------- Reopened for Editing 2024-04-10 17:36:38 added some spacing, i.e., L.R. G. 8., the L.R. is for 'Letters Received', the 'G.' is the section where the letter is noted and the '8'. is the page in the letter book, not L.R.G.8, separate things