xxx           Letter of Transmittal.





            overseer. Salisbury failed to appear in court, and judgment was given against
            him by default (pages 325-329).
              Indictments or trials for witchcraft were so unusual in colonial Maryland
            that it is greatly to be regretted that the court record gives us no information
            as to why Elizabeth Bennett was suspected of practising the black art. At a ses
            sion of the Provincial Court held at St. Mary's October 10, 1665, the Chancel
            lor in his charge to the grand jury called to consider indictments against vari
            ous prisoners, spoke “concerning witchcraft, burglary, felony, murder and
            other trespasses, where a penalty or fine is imposed by the law of the
            Province.” The following day the jury returned the bill against Elizabeth Ben
            nett marked as follows, “for Witch etc.—not prsentable." A week later she
            was cleared by proclamation (pages 476, 486, 508). When Philip Calvert, the
            Chancellor, referred to burglary in his charge to the grand jury, he doubtless
            did not foresee that he was soon to be the victim of a house entry. On December
            23, 1665, Robert Dennis of St. Mary's County, saw the key to the Chancellor's
            dwelling house at Wolseley Manor in St. George's Hundred, St. Mary's County,
            left by a servant at the window, and the next day entered and stole a shirt and
            carbine. He was indicted by the grand jury, but escaped before he could be
            brought to trial (pages 538, 541-543). It is of interest that the land on which
            Philip Calvert's house stood is still known by the name of Chancellor's Point.
              Appeals from the decisions of the Provincial Court to the Upper House of
            the Assembly were entered, as we have seen, in five of the cases reported in this
            volume. These cases have already been briefly discussed. in two of the cases,
            Spinke v. Barber and Snow v. Gerard the decisions in the Provincial Court were
            reversed. In the case of Cornwallis v. Nicholds, the Upper House ordered the
            Provincial Court to rehear the case sitting in chancery, and the Provincial Court
            then reversed its own former decision. In the case of Wynne v. Hollingsworth
            the Provincial Court on its own initiative reheard the case sitting in chancery.
            The court divided two to two, and of its own volition referred the case to the
            Upper House, where it does not seem ever to have come up for a hearing. In the
            case of Hudson v. Anderson the case came up on appeal before the Upper
            House but does not appear to have been finally heard there. The case of Spinke
            v. Barber, 1663, is the first which has been found in the Maryland records of
            an appeal from the Provincial Court to the Upper House.
              The dignity of the Provincial Court was upheld when four men who had
            been summoned as jurymen and failed to appear, were fined at the December,
            1664, session (page 319). At the same session the justices of the Calvert
            County Court were reminded of their inferior status, when the Provincial
            Court issued an injunction to stop action on a judgment rendered by the county
            court, notifying them that the case was now before the higher court on appeal
            (page 316). Francis Armstrong, who had made violent resistance when an
            attempt was made to arrest him on some charge, appeared before the court
            and was excused for his behavior, when he swore that he was at the time out
            of his head with a violent fever (page 402). At a session held in October, 1665,
            we have the court fining no less a person than Thomas Sprigg, High Sheriff of
            Calvert, for his failure to produce in the county court a servant arrested for