Elkey Daughters Kidnapped into Slavery

Date: 10 Sep 1786 to 1 May 1793
Location: Stockbridge, Berkshire, Massachusetts, United States
Surnames/tags: Elkey, Ives, Moss Slavery

This information is from Stanton D. Krauss's 2007 paper ["New Evidence that Dred Scott was Wrong About Whether Free Blacks Could Count for the Purposes of Federal Diversity Jurisdiction"].

10 Sep 1786 - John Ives III and Joel Moss, both of Wallingford, Connecticut, went to Stockbridge, Massachusetts, where they kidnapped Amy Elkey (age 11) and Minty Elkey (age 8), two free-born daughters of Peter Elkay, a "free Negro of Stockbridge".

The girls were taken to Wallingford, Connecticut. On 30 Sep 1786, Amy was sold as a "Slave for life" to Titus Hotchkiss for 22 lbs 10 shillings. Minty was also sold, but no more information is known.

The 1790 Census shows one slave in the Hotchkiss household in Watertown CT.^[1]

1791 May 19 - Hotchkiss reports that Anna, the 16-year-old colored girl in his household, has died. Amy, whom he purchased in 1786 at age 11, would have been 15 or 16 in 1791. In1790, he had only 1 slave in his household. If Anna and Amy are the same person, then it may be that Amy faked her death (drowning?) and ran away.

1791 Sep 10 - Amy returned to her family. This may have been when Peter first found out who had taken his daughters.

1793 - Invoking the court’s diversity jurisdiction, Elkay brought two actions of trespass on the case against Ives and Moss in the Federal Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut shortly before the commencement of its April, 1793, term. His complaint in each case complained of one daughter’s seizure and demanded $1,000 in damages for the loss of her services:

• For Minty: on the tenth day of September seventeen hundred & eighty six the Defts (defendants) did at said Stockbridge eloign, withdraw & carry away from the service and employment of the Plf one Minty Elkay of said Stockbridge a daughter & servant of the Plf and then & there in his the Plf’s actual service and employment being & living a servant to the Plf the said Minty being at that time of the age of about eight years, & her the said Minty they the Defts from that time to this, hitherto have withholden eloigned, & kept out of the service of the Plf & from the time that they the Defts did as aforesaid withdraw, eloign & carry her the said Minty from the service of the Plf as aforesaid untill this time, they the Defts have withholden and detained her the said Minty in service & bondage."
• For Amy: at said Stockbridge on the tenth day of Sepr AD 1786, the Defts did eloign withdraw & carry away from the service of the Plf one Amy Elkay of said Stockbridge, a daughter & servant of the Plf, then of the age of about eleven years & then & there in the actual service & employment of the Plf being, & being a servant to the Plf & her the said Amy did detain withhold & eloign_ from the service & employment of the Plf from the time that the Defts did as aforesaid on said tenth day of said Sepr first eloign, withhold and carry away the said Amy from the service of the Plf. untill the tenth day of Sepr of 1791_ & her the said Amy they the Defts did thro’ the whole of said term of time hold in slavery & her withhold from the service of the Plf.

1793 April Court records: now the Plaintiff by Pierpont Edwards Esqr his Atty appears to prosecute his said action, and the Defendants by James Hillhouse Esqr their Atty_ also appear & severally plead & say, they are not guilty in manner & form as the Plf. in his declaration hath alledged & thereof put themselves on the Country, & the Plaintiff likewise. Therefore let a Jury of Freeholders from the body of the District aforesaid come before this Court to recognize whether the Defts are severally guilty in manner & form &c

Jurors: Jury summoned to attend this Court being called, Timothy Skinner, Richard Wallace, Roger N. Whittlesey, Aaron Sherman, Gideon Judson, Dan Blakslee, Richard Hubbell, John Hide Ezekiel Hull, Job Perrit & Henry Daggett Jun

Verdict: The jurors "do say that the Defendants are guilty in manner & form as the Plf in his declaration has alledged. therefore they find for the Plf the sum of two hundred & fifty Dollars Damages & his Costs.

1793 May 1 - Ives and Moss filed a petition for a New Trial, claiming

1. Inadequate time to procure the testimony of Oliver Stanley Esqr
2. that Titus Hotchkiss was an incompetent witness, since he stood to benefit from the defendants being declared guilty
3. that the witnesses who testified that the girls were Peter's free-born daughters (namely, Caesar Camp, Solomon Moss, William Jones, and Amasa Moss) were "all to say no more of extremely doubtful reputation as to truth& veracity and not equal to mankind in general"
4. That "they applied to Timothy Edwards Esqr & others in authority in sd Stockbridge to advise with them respecting sd matter who advised the Plt to let sd Children come away & that the Plt did thereupon consent thereto & that they were brought away with the consent of the sd Plt sd Peter and with their own consent" and they belonged as slaves to Joel Ives, and that "the Defts can otherwise prove that from the first they treated sd Children with the utmost kindness & tenderness & refused to sell them to one Robert Walker of St Croix in the West Indies who would have given three times the price at which they were finally sold by the Defts."

1793 May 2 - Petition denied. Execution was accordingly granted Dated the second Day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred & ninety three

1793 May (newspaper article) - "Joel Moss and John Ives, 3d, were lately fined by the Circuit Court of the United States, sitting in New-Haven [Connecticut], 250 Dollars Damages each, in two Cases, brought against them by Peter Elkay, a free Negro, of Stockbridge, in this State, for kidnapping two of his Children, who were free.

1793 May 8, New Haven, Connecticut Journal On Wednesday the 28th ult. came on before the Circuit Court of the United States sitting in this place, two actions in favour of Peter Elkay, a free Negro, of Stockbridge, in theCommonwealth of Massachusetts, against Joel Moss andJohn Ives, 3d. of Wallingford, for taking away and holding inservitude two of his children who were free. Upon anelaborate investigation and discussion of these causes, theJury were convinced that the children were, in truth, free; andthat the conduct of the defendants was very reprehensible,and gave a verdict against them, with two hundred and fiftydollars damages in each case. These verdicts appearedsatisfactory to the Court and to all the friends of humanity. Itis hoped that such an exemplary punishment of kidnapping Negroes, will deter others from this crime, and happily tend to abolish it.

1793 - Minty (age 15) may have been returned to her family after the court verdict, since her free status had been verified.

1793 November 11 - Titus Hotchkiss sued Joel Moss, John Ives 3d, and Edmond Field, late of sd Wallingford, now residing in Catskill in Albany County, because "at the time the Defendants sold said Girl [Amy] to the Plf she was a free person, and the Defts had no right to sell her to the Plf as aforesaid, all of which the Defts well knew, and the Plf hath totally lost sd Amy & her services all of which is in direct Violation of the Defendants promise & Covenant as aforesd__ Which is to the Plaintiffs damage the Sum of ,35.. 0.. 0. Lawful Money, to recover which with costs the Plf brings this Suit."

1794 March 4 - Defendants (Moss and Ives) defend plead & say they are not guilty in manner and form. This Court adjudge sd Plea etc to be sufficient & therefore that the Defts shall recover of the Plf their cost... The Plf moves for an appeal from the Judgmt of this Court to the Hon: Superior Court to be holden at New Haven, on the last Tuesday of July

1795 Dec 10 - Supreme Court - By appeal of the Plf this Case Comes legally to this Court The Plf being three times publickly Called failed to appear and the Deft apprd and prayed Judgment for Cost Whereupon it is Considered by that the Plf Recover of the Deft his Costs Taxed at Seven pounds

Sources

• volume one of the Final Record Book (Law) of the U.S. Circuit Court for Connecticut (which covers 1790-1796)
• the Circuit Court Docket Book for Connecticut for the years 1791-1799
• the defendants’ “Petition for New Trial,” a motion for a stay of execution.

All three are housed in the National Archives and Records Administration’s Federal Records Center for the Northeast Region, which is located in Waltham, Massachusetts.