In a petition for freedom filed in June 1805, Charles reported having been “imported” in spring 1801 from Maryland to Alexandria, where he was imprisoned and sold to a man who transported him to South Carolina. Charles escaped back to Maryland but was again “imported” to Alexandria and jailed. Henry Nicholson, a local soap manufacturer who would later be a member of the town council, purchased him for the cost of the jailer’s fees and paid an additional $300 to the South Carolina buyer. Nicholson then manumitted Charles, and on 26 Aug. 1801, the two entered an agreement whereby Charles, described in their contract as a “free Man” previously “the property of Henry Nicholson,” became Nicholson’s indentured servant for 10 years. Possibly by a mistake in his indictment for burglary or by an intentional deception on the part of Nicholson, Charles was tried as a slave. Had he been tried as a free person, he would have been subject to Virginia’s penal reform statute of 1796, which eliminated capital punishment for all crimes committed by free persons other than first-degree murder. Slaves remained subject to older statutes that made burglary a capital offense, a punishment that was not pursued in all such cases. Subsequent to the pardon, Nicholson sold Charles to two North Carolina men for $222, prompting Charles’s freedom suit, which he pursued from the Alexandria jail. In late May 1805, Charles marshaled evidence in service of two claims. First, his petition argued that his importation to Alexandria had violated the Virginia state ban on slave importation, under which any slaves found to have been illegally imported were emancipated. Second, he presented evidence of his manumission by and indenture to Nicholson. On 19 June, Charles was released to Nicholson’s custody upon payment of the jailer’s fees. A summons issued by William Kilty on 29 June characterized the case between Charles and Nicholson as “depending and undetermined” (MSS in Vi: Local Government Records Collection, Arlington County Court Records, Judgments [Freedom Suits], 1795-1858, box 1; Alexandria Gazette, 8 July 1811; William Waller Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large; Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia, 13 vols. [Richmond, 1809-23], 4:326; 9:471-2; Samuel Shepherd, ed., The Statutes at Large of Virginia, from October Session 1792, to December Session 1806, 3 vols. [Richmond, 1835-36], 2:5-6; Miller, Alexandria Artisans description begins T. Michael Miller, comp., Artisans and Merchants of Alexandria, Virginia, 1780-1820, Bowie, Md., 1991-92, 2 vols. description ends , 2:7; Philip J. Schwarz, Twice Condemned: Slaves and the Criminal Law of Virginia, 1705-1865 [Baton Rouge, 1988], 19, 122-3, 216).

fit and proper object of pardon: on 20 Apr. Summers, the deputy marshal, wrote from Alexandria to an unidentified recipient (perhaps Jacob Wagner). Referring to the petition for clemency, “which I trust will have the desired effect,” Summers stated that Daniel C. Brent, who was away, “has requested me to desire of you to send the Pardon (shold one be granted) to me at this place.” The recipient would “add to the obligation by informing me of the probable success of the applycation, shold it have come to your knowledge, and apprizing me of any additional documents that may be deemed necessary” (RC in DNA: RG 59, GPR). TJ pardoned Charles on 23 Apr., staying all legal actions against him stemming from the burglary charges (FC in Lb in same).