Introduction.            xxxv

     ministrator, rendered the estate immune to suit (p. 326). Had more than 2999
     pounds of tobacco been claimed by Chafe, action could not have been brought
     in a county court, the Provincial Court having jurisdiction where the sum
     involved was 3000 pounds of tobacco and upwards. There were three other
     litigants who sued to collect payment for varying amounts of physick, without
     indication as to whether or not medical attention was also involved. One of
     these was entered by no less a person than James Lindsay, one of the justices
     (p. 110). The administrator of the estate of Samuel Burford successfully
     sued Henry Moore, who was a carpenter, for 1280 pounds of tobacco for
     physick administered by Burford to Moore (p. 264). As the result of a petition
     to the Upper House of Assembly by Alexander Howell, a former servant of
     Mrs. Elizabeth Weeks, who had been disabled “by a distemper of the numbe
     Paulsy and shaking of his Joynts, and a lameness in his backe and knees and
     leggs”, the Charles County commissioners were ordered by the Assembly to
     provide for him (Arch. Md. II; 14). The county court record shows that
     Thomas Gibson agreed to provide for Howell with “sufficient meate, drinke,
     and Cloaths washing and Lodging at 1400 lbs. [of tobacco] per annum” (pp.
     20-21). The Charles County court finally relieved itself of the care of Gibson,
     when at the March, 1667/8, session, it agreed to pay Absolem Covent, a Bristol
     merchant, 1000 pounds of tobacco to transport him to England (p. 123). The
     suit of John Barker against Nicholas Grosse for accommodation “in the tyme
     of the Defts Sickness” perhaps was only a boarding bill (p. 547).

                        VITAL RECORDS

       Charles County was one of the few Maryland counties which lived up to the
     provisions of the act of the Assembly requiring that records of births, mar-
     riages, and deaths, be filed with the county clerk and recorded. Or perhaps it
     would be better to say one of the few counties in which vital records have
     been preserved, perhaps because they were entered in the body of the court
     proceedings, and not kept in separate libers which have since been lost. It will
     be seen from the dates of the court sessions at which the vital records were en-
     tered, that the events recorded had often long preceded the date of their entry
     in the record book. The births of a number of children in one family were not
     infrequently entered at the same time. For the nine year period there were
     recorded 6o births, 7 marriages, and 16 deaths. This is obviously a very incom-
     plete record over a nine year period for a community having an average popula-
     tion of about 1800 persons. It is evident that the majority of births, marriages,
     and deaths were not recorded at all. Perhaps the Anglican ministers in Charles
     county and the Jesuits at Portobacco kept registers which have been lost.

                     INDENTURED SERVANTS

       Difficulties between indentured servants and their masters occupied more of
     the attention of the county courts than did any other civil cases except actions
     for debt. One of the frequent causes of trouble was the attempt of masters to
     extend the period of service beyond the provisions of the indenture; or, if there