|
|
286 Provincial Court Proceedings, 1659.
|
|
|
Libei
P. C. R.
|
the Bill, And as for the Remainder being fiue hundd Ninety one
pownd, the sd Wallter Hall in behalfe of himselfe, & John Jarbo
acknowledgeth Judgmt for the same in open Court.
|
|
|
Gerard v,
Evans
|
To the honble the Leiutent & Councell of Maryland &c:
The humble Pet" of Thomas Gerard Sheweth That yor Petr
had an ExequuSn serued uppon his Estate by the appoyntmt of Capt
Willm Euans, who hath charged yor Petr in his writt of Exeqn fiue
hundd fowrty Two pownds of Tob more then is due to him, &
more then yor Petr ought to pay, for the Costs of tht suite.
Hee humbly therefore craueth tht by Order of this honble Court
|
|
|
P. 245
|
the sd Capt Euans repay unto yor Petr, the sd summe soe uniustly
executed; much to yor Petrs dishonor, wth dammage, And &c :
The deft sayth That according to tht former order of Court &
Verdict of the Jury, hee had Costs of suite gyuen & allowed him,
And this Costs, whereon the plf demurreth, was for Sheriffs frees, &
Clerks ffees, expended att Patuxt Court, (before the late surrender of
the Gouermt) & to them payd, as he can make appeare, & further tht
he hath not receiued yett one pownd of Tob Executed, from the
Sheriffe. And the plf affirming tht he profered the deft paymt of
his whole demand, saue only 442l Tob, And Euidencing to the Court,
tht the Sheriffe hath Executed 1362l Tob. for dammages only.
It is Ordered tht fiue hundd & Twelue pownds of Tob, (it being
Costs expended in tht former Patuxt Court) be deducted out of the
foresd sume & repayed back unto the plf, by the deft, wth Costs of
suite. Mr Seer Judgmt is, tht the Sheriffe ought to be resposable for
the Tob deducted, & not the plf, Mr Clearke idem Reliqui res ut
Supra.
|
|
|
Re Chandler
|
Capt Sampson Waring brought in Mr Chandlers Bill for his fine
for 15000l Tob dat 27th day of Aprill 1655 Wch is Cancelled in
Court.
|
|
|
Attorney
General v.
Thurston
3 Md. Arch.
Coun. 353
|
Mr Attorney on the behalfe of the Ld Propr complayneth agst
Thomas Thurstone, & requesteth that hee be brought afore the Board
to answere for himselfe, ffor tht in contempt of his Lps Lawes he
refused formerly to subscribe take the Ingagemt (according to Act
of Assembly prouided) for wch hee hath bene allready banished.
Yett notwithstanding hee hath presumed againe to come into this
prouince, & refuseth still to comply & fullfill the Law, & take oath of
ffidelity to his Lp as is in tht Case prouided, uppon his returne into
the prouince againe. Whereuppon the Prisoner being demanded
what he hath to say in that he hath broken the Law ? & not giuing
notice of his arryuall &c. To wch He sayth, he ought not, & cannot
sweare, & that being pressed wth an Oath, sayth, thereby he is clenyed
his liberty, & the liberty of a Subiect.
|
|
|
|