While I understand why ardent Union folks want to fob it off on his wife, the truth is that legal title was held by the husband under law of the time, so they were Grant’s regardless of how they came to him.
There is no evidence Julia Grant ever held title to any slaves. It is possible, to be sure, but it is at least equally possible her papa “gave” her one or more slaves without transferring legal title.
I’m also not entirely sure that a married woman’s property all became vested in her husband at this time. This was the case at the Founding, and by 1900 it wasn’t. Things changed gradually in this regard over the 19th century and differently by state. I don’t know about Missouri or Illinois.
Looked up some more on the subject of married women owning property. It is pretty complicated and varies a lot by state. But the laws were certainly changing in this regard during mid-century, with some of the earliest states changing the laws being in the South.
Incorrect. Fredrick Dent retained title to the several slaves that tended to Julia, his daughter. They were never her or Ulysses Grants property. However, Dent did gave Grant ownership of a male slave in late 1857, to help him on the farm Grant was working. Grant gave the slave his freedom in 1859.