James B. T. Thornton & John S. Mason, Physicians
vs
Mrs. Elizabeth W. Dade
Mrs. Elizabeth W. Dade to Thornton & Mason – Account$
1838 Dec 1stNight visit to Alcinda 12/- Ven--- 6/- Meds 3/-3.50
1838 Dec 2ndVisit to Alcinda & Medicine1.50
1838 Dec 3rdVisit to Alcinda & Medicine1.50
1839 May 18thVisit to Wallace & meds for ------1.50
1839 May 21stVisit to Wallace at Clover Hill2.50
1839 May 21stVenenrtor? 6/- Puto Cath ------1.50
1839 May 21stPutp Hydragoyur? ------6/-1.00
1839 May 22ndVisit to Wallace 15-Ven------6/-3.50
1839 May 22nd Pulo: 1/6 (23) visit to Wallace 15/-2.75
1839 May 23rdPulo: Av------(24th ) Vent to Do 15/-3.00
1839 May 24thVeni------6/- Pule: Hydr. No.----- 3/-1.50
1839 May 25thVisit to Wallace 15/- Dra------3.50
1839 May 27thVisit to Wallace 15/- Pulo: ------3.50
1839 Jun 1stVisit to Wallace 15/- Pulo: ------3.50
1839 Jun 1stVisit to Wallace 15/- Pulo: ------2.50
$36.00
Prince William County to Wit:
James B. T. Thornton & John S. Mason physicians practicing under the firm and style of Thornton & Mason complains of Elizabeth W. Dade being in custody &c of a plea of trespass on the case for that whereas the defendant, on the (blank) day of (blank) 1839 in the county aforesaid was indebted to the plaintiffs in the sum of $36.00 for advice, prescriptions & visits to & for attendance upon & medicines prepared for and administered to, the said Elizabeth W. Dade & her apprentices, servants and family, for, and towards their cure, whilst they from time to time before respectively labored under various diseases and infirmities, by the said plaintiffs as physicians, at the special instance and request of the said Elizabeth W. Dade and whereas the said defendants to wit on the day (blank) and the year of 18 in consideration of the promises respectively, then and there promised to pay the plaintiffs the said sum of $36.00 on request, yet she hath disregarded her promises and hath not paid the said sum of money of $36.00 or any part thereof, to the plaintiffs, damages of $50.00, and thereupon they bring suit &c.
Gibson & Jasper p.g.
Thornton and Mason vs Dade
Leave being first obtained from the court to examine the defendant on oath in the suit James B. T. Thornton the plaintiff propounded the following interrogatories: Interrogatory 1st was the slave Wallace which I hired of you for the year 1839 removed to your house during his sickness. - Interrogatory 2nd was I not sent for as physician to attend said slave after his removal to your house. – Interrogatory 3rd was not said slave considered so ill as to require the most undivided attention of his attending physician for a considerable time. – Interrogatory 4th during his illness and while I was attending on him as physician did you, or did you not, say to me, while there attending, that he was a favorite servant and that you desired me to spare no pains or attention on him as you disregarded the expense.
The answer of Elizabeth W. Dade to interrogatories filed by James B. T. Thornton in a suit depending in the County Court of Prince William where Thornton & Mason are plaintiffs and Elizabeth W. Dade is defendant, in answer to the 1st interrogatory defendant says that slave Wallace was not removed by her to her house but that he came to her house sick and too sick to be sent back to Dr. Thornton without running the risk of losing his life.- The answer to the 2nd she says that he was sent for to attend the said servant pursuant to the contract of hiring by which the said Thornton was to attend the servant gratis. – The answer to 3rd interrogatory she says yes. In answer to the 4th the defendant says she might have used the co helping mentioned in the interrogatory but if she did they were ___ of course & never intended to convey the idea that she was to pay Dr. Thornton for his medical services.
Prince William County to Wit – Elizabeth W. Dade this day personally appeared before me and made oath the foregoing answers containing the truth to the best of her knowledge & belief. Given under my hand & seal the 8th of November 1842
Geo. G. Tyler (seal)
DEPOSITION of GWYNETTA DADE
The deposition of Gwynetta Dade by consent of parties to be used as witness in a suit now pending in the County Court of Prince William when Thornton & Mason are plaintiffs and Elizabeth W. Dade defendant. The deponent being first sworn in answer to the following interrogatory deposeth and sayeth. Question by defendant’s counsel – were you present when Dr. J. B. T. Thornton hired a slave named Wallace of Mrs. Elizabeth W. Dade for the year 1839 and if so will you state what were the items of hiring to the best of your recollection.
Answer – The hiring of the Slave named in this interrogatory for the year 1839 took place in my presence – the amount of the hire agreed upon I do not precisely remember, but I do recollect reminding my Aunt that she ought to require Doctor Thornton to attend the servant without charge in case of his sickness, which he at first objected to but afterwards agreed to.
Question by Plaintiffs attorney – Do you or do you not recollect when the bargain took place, of which you speak in your answer to the above interrogatory – if so please state.
Answer – it was in my chamber by my bed side when Doctor Thornton was attending me as a physician during an attack of Bilious Pleurisy.
Question by same – Was any bargain confirmed or satisfied in your presence in relation to the hire of said boy Wallace.
Answer – I have no recollection of the amount of hire agreed upon as I have before stated, but I understood the bargain for the hire of the servant, as confirmed upon the occasion before mentioned – And further said deponent saith not.
G. W. Dade
Prince William County
The foregoing deposition was taken, subscribed & sworn to before me agreeable to the caption thereof on this 8th day of November 1842. J. H. Reid commissioner of Prince William County Court.
Jury Verdict
“We the Jury find for the plaintiffs the sum of twelve dollars, the difference on eight visits between plaintiff’s farm and Clover Hill. – William A. Weaver jury foreman