88 Assembly Proceedings, April — May 1666.

L. H.

Journal
original

sume their debate anew Concerning the Act Prohibiting the
Imploying Indians, as allso Prohibiting all Masters for suffering
their seruants to keepe or rayse any hoggs or piggs to their
proper use in this Prouince They thinking it very needfull that
that Act should passe.
Will^mBretton Clk

Vppon the Reading of the Act agst hogstealers this howse
obserues there is not in the Paragraphs expressing the first &
second offence of hogstealers, the satisfaction prouided to the

p. 42

Owner of as was by this howse intended to bee pro-
uided, would proue very iniurious to the Owners of
aine end for w^ch that Act was intended Vpper
howses further debate thereon, reasons, why those fines
prouided howse, & sent to the Vpper howse may not
Will^m Bretton Clk

ame from the Vpper howse & delivered That is
to say.)
Concerning Pet^ns from Balte- &c: Aprill
last on the
[One line missing]
The Vpper
[One line missing]
of Hydes &c: & all other w^ch was thus under-
writt.
This howse doth iudge this Act as yett inconuenient 'till such
time are there bee sufficient number of Tanners, Curryers, &
shoomakers to Tan & worke up the hydes of the Prouince.
And by consequence keepe meny hundred of shooes from
being imported.
John Gittings Clr.

An Act prohibiting fforreigne Ingrossers. Thus under-
writt.
The Vpper howse doe Judge That this Act may cause a Con-
test betweene the Colony of Virginia & us, about puchasing
goods in Patowmeck Riuer from ships ryding on eyther side.
Hauing hitherto indifferently traded for supplying Our respec-
tiue necessities. Besides th^t it can neuer well be proued th^t the
very individuall goods bought from any Merchant are those
same hee sells att excessiue rates.
John Gittings Clr

p. 43

As allso the Petⁿ of Robert Clerke pressed uppon the last
Indian designe being out Eleauen weekes on that designe.
In Order thereunto the Vpper howse have thought fitt That
the Commis^rs of S^t Maries County satisfaction.
And the Lower howse haue