za from Fort Snelling to the State of Missouri,
where they have ever since resided.

Before the commencement of the suit, Dr. Emerson sold and conveyed the
plaintiff, Harriet, Eliza, and Lizzie, to the defendant, as slaves,
and he has ever since claimed to hold them as slaves.

At the times mentioned in the plaintiff's declaration, the defendant,
claiming to be the owner, laid his hands upon said plaintiff, Harriet,
Eliza, and Lizzie, and imprisoned them; doing in this respect,
however, no more than he might lawfully do, if they were of right his
slaves at such times.

In the first place, the plea to the jurisdiction is not before us, on
this writ of error. A demurrer to the plea was sustained, which ruled
the plea bad, and the defendant, on leave, pleaded over.

The decision on the demurrer was in favor of the plaintiff; and as the
plaintiff prosecutes this writ of error, he does not complain of the
decision on the demurrer. The defendant might have complained of this
decision, as against him, and have prosecuted a writ of error, to
reverse it. But as the case, under the instruction of the court to the
jury, was decided in his favor, of course he had no ground of
complaint.

But it is said, if the court, on looking at the record, shall clearly
perceive that the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction, it is a ground
for the dismissal of the case. This may be characterized as rather a
sharp practice, and one which seldom, if ever, occurs. No case was
cited in the argument as authority, and not a single case precisely in
point is recollected in our reports. The pleadings do not show a want
of jurisdiction. This want of jurisdiction can only be ascertained by
a judgment on the demurrer to the special plea. No such case, it is
believed, can be cited. But if this rule of practice is to be applied
in this case, and the plaintiff in error is required to answer and
maintain as well the points ruled in his favor, as to show the error
of those ruled against him, he has more than an ordinary duty to
perform. Under such circumstances, the want of jurisdiction in the
Circuit Court must be so clear as not to admit of doubt. Now, the plea
which raises the question of jurisdiction, in my judgment, is
radically defective. The gravamen of the plea is this: "That the
plaintiff is a negro of African descent, his ancestors being of pure
African blood, and were brought into this country, and sold as negro
slaves."

There is no averment in