112 Proceedings of the Council of Maryland, 1696/7-98.

          Lib. H. D.     he had made Oath thereto. It is Demanded of him whether

                the sd Minuitt was truth or not, who does acknowledge it was.

             p.     493 Afterwards was produced a Writt of Error under the Broad

                Seal of the Province dated the 22d of May last past obtained

                by Wm Sharp wch was Read accordingly.

               Mr Jno     His Exncy demands to know of the sd Mr ffree

                ffreemans

                Case in the man whether or no he did not tell him at Mr

                matter of Mr Dentons House the 22d of May in the Evening

                Sharps writ of Error last past that the aforemencon'd Writt of Error,

                Referred to Concerning Mr Sharp was not then issued who

                the Kings        .    .          .         d

                Lawyers,Says he did. he is Orderd to View well the s

                whether he    Writt (wch was given to him) and declare whether

                ought not to be

                psecuted for the Same and Every Word thereof were his hand

                perjury &Ca writing, who acknowledges it is. Mr Sollicitor

                Genll and Mr Robt Gouldesborough his Mats Counsell at Law

                are by Ordr sent for, and Came accordingly, To whom a Copy

                of the foregoing Minuite of Councill and Writ of Error were

                deliver'd for them to make Report whether the sd ffreeman is

                not thereby lyable to be prosecuted on the Statute of Perjury

                who accordingiy bring in the following Report which was

                Read Vizt

               To his Exncy the Governr in Councill &ca

                Kings Law. We have Consider'd of John ffremans Case

                yers Report

                vpon Mr ffree- referred to Us by yor Exncy whether he be Guilty

                mans Case of Perjury in making Oath that the Writ of Error

                was issued on the day mention'd thereon. That if the Writ

                were not gone out of the Office on that day that he Swore it

                was not issued; he swore truth because he swore only to the

                issuing the Writt, But we Conceive the Granting the Writt,

                ought to Availe the party Concerned in it from the date

                thereof therefore we Report that if the Writ was issued

                Out of the Office before the day Sworne to by the Register

                and that Can be proved against him it is Perjury and he

                ought to be put under Baile till he discharge himself by

                due Course of Law, but if that cannot be proved against

                him, tho: it was Signed and Seald, he ought not to be Con

                fined thereon because he might Swear truth and if Soe, is not

                Perjury which is humbly Submitted &ca

                                           Wm Dent

                                           R: Gouldesborough

                  It is Demanded of the Reporters whether the sd Instrumt

                or papr was a legall Writt before the Seal was to it, who