Appendix. 455

passed in that Province the 3d October, 1728, whereby one fourth
part granted for their support by an action in 1702, was entirely
cut off, and the remaining three parts of their subsistence was ren-
dered precarious, &c. — The Lords of the Council took the petition
into consideration, together with a representation of a friend, on
behalf of Lord Baltimore the Lord-Proprietor, setting forth, amongst
other matters, that as the said petition greatly affected his Lordship's

Contempo-
rary Printed
Pamphlet
Md.Hist.Soc.

rights and priviledges, as Lord and Proprietor of Maryland, par-
ticularly his right of approving or repealing the laws passed in that
Province, and that his Lordship was absent from the kingdom, and
an entire stranger to such application, &c. he therefore prayed, that
the said petition might not be taken into consideration, until his
Lordship's return, who was daily expected in England: Whereupon
their Lordships were pleased to put off the consideration of the
said petition to this day; when the Lord Baltimore's Sollicitor at-
tended their Lordships, and acquainted them, that he was arrived
in England, and prayed, that in regard his Lordship, as Proprietor,
had constantly enjoyed and exercised the power of approving and
repealing laws of the Province, his Lordship might hear and de-
termine this complaint, and which his Lordship had engaged to do
with all expedition, upon the petitioner's application to him, and to
grant him proper relief. The Lords of the committee, upon con-
sideration thereof, and hearing what the petitioner had to object
thereunto, were pleased for the present to suspend all further pro-
ceedings upon the said complaint.

p. 156

Thereupon, the said Jacob Henderson, clerk, in behalf of himself,
and the rest of the clergy of Maryland, did present a petition to the
then Lord Baltimore, Proprietor of Maryland, to this effect, viz.
That the clergy of Maryland are exceedingly aggrieved by an
act passed by the Assembly on the 3d October, 1728, entitled, An act
for improving the staple of tobacco; which act (as your petitioner
apprehends) is not only unreasonable in itself, but also deprives
the clergy of the maintenance lawfully and solemnly provided for
their support by the act of 1702, &c.
His Lordship, upon the clergy's petition being presented to him,
took the same into consideration, together with another petition
from the traders to Maryland, in behalf of themselves and others
trading thither, praying a continuance of the act of 1728, as the
said act would occasion the improvement of the staple of tobacco,
and the said law limiting a certain number of plants, is of the same
nature with one which has been in force many years in the Province
of Virginia, &c.

p. 157

Upon the petitions being read, his Lordship heard the complaint,
it being fully argued on both sides, by council learned in the law;
atter which his Lordship dismissed the parties, and upon due con-
sideration of the act of 1728, it appeared to him too unjust and

34

p. 158