Appendix. 357

ENROLLING CONVEYANCES," AFTER THE LOWER CHAMBER
HAD REFUSED TO CONCUR IN AN UPPER HOUSE AMEND-
MENT REQUIRING THAT THE ALIENATION FEE DUE THE
PROPRIETARY BE PAID BEFORE A CONVEYANCE FOR LAND
COULD BE RECORDED. THE PROPRIETARY FELT THAT AL-
THOUGH THE ALIENATION FEE COULD IN ANY EVENT BE
COLLECTED BY HIM IN THE CHANCERY COURT, THE PUR-
POSE OF THE LOWER HOUSE IN REFUSING TO ACCEPT THE

AMENDMENT WAS THE DESIRE TO AROUSE IN THE MINDS
OF THE PEOPLE THE FALSE CONCEPTION THAT THE CHAN-
CELLOR IN SUCH CASES WOULD NOT BE AT LIBERTY TO
GIVE A DECREE AGAINST THE PROPRIETARY, THIS REFLECT-
ING UPON THE GOOD FAITH OF THE CHANCELLOR.]

FREDERICK ABSOLUTE LORD AND PROPRIETOR OF
THE PROVINCE OF MARYLAND AND AVALON IN AMER-
ICA LORD BARON OF BALTIMORE IN THE KINGDOM OF
IRELAND.

Orders and Instructions to be observed and pursued by Our Trusty
and well beloved Horatio Sharpe Esq.^r Our Lieutenant General and
Chief Governor of Our Province of Md.
F Baltimore
'T observe by the Journals of Assembly in 1763 a Bill intitled,
An Additional Supplementary Act, to the Act, intitled, An Act for
Quieting Possessions and enrolling Conveyances, &c. By the Upper
House of Assembly 16^th Nov 1763, Read the second time and will
pass with the amendment after the words some and, in the 2^d line
of the 2^d Page, insert these words, The Alienation Fine being satis-
fied. "I observe the 22^d of Novemb/ the said Bill for Quieting
Possessions &c. which was brought down from the Upper House on
the 16^th of November 1763 with the amendment proposed was read
" (in the Lower House) " with the amendment proposed and to which
this House doth not concur. Upon the Subject Matter of the Bill
I think proper to advise You thereon. To the Upper House of
Assembly, I am thankful for their Honourable and Just regard to
my Property by their short amendment to the Bill, Id, Est, "The
Alienation Fine being satisfied" the Lower House did not concur

to the admendment, and why, "The Amendment was Equitable and

just, and is lawfully my Due, and as such I insist on it by Patent,
Patented to me and my Heirs and Assignees, And further concerning
the Bill, for tho' a Party refusing to Pay the Alienation Fine might
even after such a Bill had passed have been compelled by the Chan-
cery Court, Yet I have real reason to apprehend (from the false
doctrine that has been propagated in the Province) that on determina-
tion of that sort, it might have been easy for an ill-disposed Lawyer
to persuade their dependants, that a Chancellor was not at Liberty
to give a Decree against Me, and so a Spectre might have been raised

MSS Calvert
Papers
No. 689
Md.Hist.Soc.