Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 189
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1875.] SnRREL v. CLAYTON. 189
Statement of the case.
Clayton, on the 14th November, 1871, sued Mrs. Sorrel.
His petition charged, that in May, 1864, she borrowed of him
two thousand two hundred pounds of ginned cotton, to be
returned out of the crop of 1865: that the cotton belonged to
the estate of W. H. Reeves, of which he was then administrator;
that upon final settlement he accounted for it to the
estate, and thereby became the owner, and prayed judgment
for the amount. To this petition Mrs. Sorrel filed a general
demurrer and a general denial. She answered specially, that
at the time of the loan of the cotton she was the wife of R.
H. D. Sorrel; that the cotton never was Clayton's, but Mrs.
Reeves', and Clayton her overseer; that R. IH. D. Sorrel settled
with Clayton for the cotton by offsets of mutual accounts, and
she annexes the account in the handwriting of Clayton and
Sorrel; that Clayton, in 1867, sued her husband on the
account, and that suit was dismissed.
Clayton filed an amended petition, in which he stated that
when he made a final settlement of the estate of W. I. Reeves,
he paid Mrs. Reeves, his surviving wife, for the cotton, and
that when he loaned the cotton to Mrs. Sorrel, she promised
to pay the same in specie or its value; that at the time R. H.
D. Sorrel was in the confederate army: that Mrs. Sorrel was at
home, having the full management and control of his affairs,
purchasing plantation and family supplies, etc.; that she
obtained the cotton to barter it for family supplies, for herself
and her husband's children, for his and her slaves, for their
household and plantation supplies, and that said supplies were
necessary. He denied that it was ever settled for, and said he
returned the corn, etc.
There was much more to the same effect, which it is not
material to notice. Clayton again amended, alleging that
Sorrel died insolvent.
The defendant replied, alleging that Sorrel had ample
property at the time of the loan of the cotton, and denying
that there was any necessity or design to bind her separate
estate; that his income was at least twenty thousand dollars a
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/197/: accessed June 25, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .