Appendix. 441

"Mr. Bordley (being sent for) appears and being asked by his
Honour, whether he conceived and insisted on it, that by virtue of
his Honour's letter of the fifteenth of September last, he was dis-
charged from being a Member of the Council ? Answered, that when
he received the said letter, he did think so, and that he was of the
same opinion still; and then withdrew. — After Mr. Bordley had
withdrawn, his Honour expressed himself as follows."
Gentlemen of the Upper House,
"As the Lord Proprietor has an undoubted right to discharge, as
well as make a Counsellor, and that his appointment of one is the
only qualification by which he is a Member of your House; I am of
your opinion, that Mr. Bordley's being discharged from the Council,
of course discharges him from the Upper House of Assembly. And
as to the legality of what is done, I have particular instructions from
his Lordship relating to Mr. Bordley, with a full power of dismissing
him."
Charles Calvert.

Contempo-
rary Printed
Pamphlet
Md.Hist.Soc.
p. 118

An Address of the Upper House of Assembly, presented to his
Honour the Governor, by Colonel William Holland, one of their
Members, viz.
To the Honourable Charles Calvert Esq. Governor of the Prov-
ince of Maryland, The humble Address of the Upper House of
Assembly.
May it please your Honour,
"Your Honour's asserting his Lordship's undoubted right of dis-
charging any Members of his Lordship's Honourable Council from
acting as such (of which we never in the least doubted) together
with your acquainting us, that you had a particular instruction from
his Lordship in relation to Mr. Bordley, and a full power to dismiss
him, thereby to convince us of the legality of his discharge, induces
us to apprehend, that your Honour resents our making it a question,
in our answer to your speech at the opening of this session, whether
he was legally discharged or not? And therefore, in the humblest

p. 119

manner, we think it our duty to represent to your Honour, that we
could not well answer the question proposed to us, without that
reserve. For as your Honour had never been pleased to communi-
cate to us your reason for discharging Mr. Bordley, the manner of
doing it, or the power his Lordship had given for that purpose,
and for that his being a Member of the Upper House of Assembly
depended upon that of his being at the same time of the Council,
we could not give an answer to the one, without making it conditional
with respect to the other. So that we hope you will not interpret that
sentence, as questioning his Lordship's power, &c."
The Remarker says, "This case is so fully in point, that I shall
only observe upon it, in general, that the right of the Proprietor to

p. 120