Council of Maryland, 1781-1782. 277

Wednesday 9^th October 1782

Ordered that the western shore Treasurer pay to John Oneal, five
Pounds, eighteen shillings and four pence specie agreeable to the
Act to adjust the Debts due from this State per Account passed.
It appears to the Board from a Certificate given by Thomas B.
Hodgkin Clerk of the General Court for the western shore, that
John Fowler recognized in the Sum of fifty Pounds Current Money
before James Calhoun then one of the Magistrates of Baltimore
County for his appearance in May Term 1778 to testify against a
certain John Hunt and that at the said Term, the Recognizance was
forfeited and Execution renewed returnable to the present Term.
From the representation of Alexander C. Hanson Esq^r one of the
Judges of the said Court, that the said Fowler is a man in low Cir-
cumstances and did not forfeit his recognizance from contumacy and
his recommendation to remit the whole of the said forfeited recog-
nizance, this Board are induced to comply therewith and do direct
and order that the said forfeited recognizance for fifty Pounds be
remitted and that no further Proceedings be had thereon, on his the
said Fowler's paying the fees. —

October 9
Liber C. B.
No. 24
p. 343

[Council to the Honble Intendant]

The Arguments contained in your last Letter, to prove that we
have neither a Right of calling on you for Information, nor directing
you in any Case in the Execution of your Office, are really plausible
and ingenious, and we should give you high Credit for them, was
there not too much Reason to believe, from the total Dissimilarity
between this, and your former Addresses that they must have been
dictated by a Genius not your own.
To enter into a Refutation of all those Arguments, or to shew that
the greater Part of them cannot apply in the present Case, would be
to dwell upon a Subject, which has already taken up too much of
our Time. We shall therefore in this our concluding Letter, only
attempt to prove the Legality, and the Propriety of our own Conduct
in the Instances which produced the present Controversy; and in doing
this, we shall have Occasion to remark upon some of your leading
Principles.
A Sense of Duty, and not a mere Desire of exercising Power over
you, induced us to call upon you for Information, respecting a Settle-
ment you made with Col^o Rawlings for Flour he received under a
Contract made with us. We had Reason to believe, that under a

October 9
Liber No. 78
p. 381

Power given to you, of compounding on Contracts in particular
Cases, you had conceived you had a Right of doing it in all Cases,
and we were willing to put a Stop to the Mischiefs this mistaken
Notion of Power might Occasion, by setting you right in the first
Instance of your Exercise of it. You gave the Information required,

p. 382