Charles County Court Proceedings, 1666—1668.     109

     if no such Assignmt had been would have acrued to his Master                  Liber C
     Robinson, and as by an Act of Assemblie is in such case provided,

       Hereupon for Proofe of the Plaintifes absenting himselfe from
     his Master Robbertson, and how long the Defendt produceth a note
     under the hand of the said Robbertson certifleing the same together
     wth what Damage he Susteined thereby as followeth vizt
       These may Certifie whom it may Concerne That David Ralston
     was ranne away from me two Monthes and Seaven dayes before
     I bound him over to Daniel Johnson, and further I will take my
     Corporall oath that I Lost my Croppe by him in Corne, and tobaccoe
     as Witnes my hand this 25th of October 1667. Henrie
                                  The marke X of
                                        Robbertson
       Allsoe the Defendt for further proofe of the said Ralston the
     Plaintifes absenting himselfe from the said Robertson Subpaenad
     Edmund Lyndsey into the Court who Deposed as followeth
       Edmund Lyndsey Sworne in open Crt saith That the Plaintife
     came to his house in August last was twelvemonth & there remained
     3 weeks or thereabout, and this Deponent saith he hired him, but                 [p.247]
     yet Suspected him to be a runnaway after his hiring of him because
     upon his this Deponents questioning of him where he had lived,
     and whom he Served he replied first about Akamack, and after-
     wards at the Clifts, and this Deponent further saith That so soone
     as he understood tht he had lived about the Clifts, he desired Mt
     Sprigge to give notice at Patuxen tht There was such a man in such
     a habite describing him as well as he could, and that if anie person
     Claimed him he was at the Deponents house, and Mr Sprigge did
     give notice of the same accordinglie and found out his master
     Robertson who thereupon sent to this Deponents house, and Carried
     him the Plaintife home, and further he Saith not
       Hereupon the Plaintifes Attorney and the Defendt agree to put
     the Busines to a Jurie, and accordinglie there issued a writt of
     venire facias to the Sherrife to Sumon a jurie of twelve honest
     men to trie whether the said Ralston were free or no whose Names
     were as followeth vizt Stephen Montague foreman, John Worland,
     Thomas Allanson Thomas Henshall, William Baker, Henrie Neale,
     John Mun, Owen Jones, Thomas King John Hackister Bennet
     Marchagay, John Walton, who upon Serious Consideracon had, of
     the Depositions aforesaid, and the Allegacons on both sides retorne
     their verdict as followeth vizt
       The Jurie findeth for the Plaintife against the Defendt, and that
     the Plaintife is free and hath Served his time according to his In-
     denture because the Defendt did not Commence Suite against the
     Plaintife for the time he was absent, the Plaintife having Served
     since the Indenture was expired as long time as he had absented
     himselfe, And the Defendt did not Comence suite to have the Benefit