400 Assembly Proceedings, October 6-November 6, 1725.

L. H. J

Benjamin Tasker Esq^r from the Upper House delivers M^r
Speaker the Journall of the Committee of Accounts, with the
following Message viz :

By the Upper House of Assembly
Novem^r the 4^th 1725
Gentlemen.
Whether our Message of Novem^r the 2^d Concerning the
Bill Relating to the Imprisoned Servants be foreign to the
Subject under Consideration betwixt us or not, we shall not
at this time enter into any further debate with you but if you
believe us to be of Opinion that Servants in this Province, tho
Suspected of some misdeamenours are not in prudence and
Discretion to be lookt upon as persons of Ill fame, within the
meaning of the Statutes, and to be proceeded ag^t accordingly,
you are in the Right, for we are so, for the following Reasons
I^st persons of Ill fame in Generall, are such Who are at their
own disposall, and have no place of Residence, nor Can give
a good Account how they Subsist; against those the Laws do
well provide, but Servants here are not such, for they have a
being, and are not at their own disposing, but are the property
of their Masters, and if their Masters should be obliged to
be Security for the behaviour of their Servants, no man
would be Secure of his property, in such Servants, for either
thro the Inclinations of the Servant to Change his Master,
or the Designs of an Ill Neighbour or the Resentments of a
Prejudiced Magistrate (for such there may be) they might
be taken up as persons of Ill fame, and then the Master must
Change Circumstances, with his Servant or lose him, for if he
becomes bound for his good behaviour, he must not Disoblige
him, and if he does not the Consequence is obvious. 2^dly Per-
sons of Ill fame in particular are such as have Committed

p. 98

some Crime for which they may be prosecuted, and in this
Case Servants are not Exempt, but may be Imprisoned,
prosecuted, Convicted, and punished, and in such Cases we
have an Act of Assembly that particularly provides for their
Inlargement, and sure it is worthy our Consideration that
that act has so great a Regard to the property of the Master,
that it does not Require Security for his Servant (even after
Conviction) Much less Reason is there, that they should be
Obliged to give it upon Common fame nor Can we foresee of
what pernicious Consequence our Coming into the Measures
by the Bill proposed would be, since it Remains a Doubt with
this House, whether the peace and property of his Lordships
Tenants would not Rather thereby be Infringed, than pro-