Introduction.           xxxix

     blood in the room & great wounds in her back”; another witness that he had
     seen her whipped and put in irons. The jury found for Elizabeth, and the
     court gave judgment for freedom and costs of 420 pounds of tobacco to be
     paid by Emanson (pp. 234-235). The legal point seems to have been that had
     she been whipped for running away, the time in which she was absent would
     not have been added to her original term of service, but if she had been
     whipped for other offences, runaway time might have been added. In another
     case involving cruelty to a maid servant, Jonathan Marler, the master, sued
     a neighbor, Thomas Hays. Marler declared that Hays, at the plaintiff's planta-
     tion “with one how [hoe] helve did Strike and beat a Servt of him the said
     Jonathan named Eliza Thompson. . . . down to the Ground wth his foote and
     Shoe did kick her Soe tht he lamed her and Caused her legg the Bruise to
     Swell and afterwards break out into a Soare.” Marler asked damages of 500
     pounds of tobacco and payment to a “Chyrurgeon for the Cure of the said legg”
     as Elizabeth had become incapable of service. The court, doubtless because the
     chirurgeon, John Lemaire, testified that Elizabeth had told him “that the sore
     bread of it Selfe”, ordered a nonsuit with costs to the plaintiff (pp. 432-433).
       At the June, 1669, court, two servants, unnamed, were presented to the
     court as having run away, and were ordered, respectively, twelve and ten lashes.
     One of these was presented by Nicholas Emanson, the innkeeper, who figured
     in the case of cruelty towards a servant, as just narrated; the other was pre-
     sented by John Caen. No details are given; they were doubtless both runaways
     (p. 196). They were perhaps brought before the court for sentence, so that,
     if ordered by the court to be whipped as runaways, their lost time might
     later be added to their specified indenture time of service.
       Instances are recorded where very young children were bound out until they
     became of age. At the June, 1673, court, Peter Macknemillion (Mackmillion),
     the young son of George Macknemillion who had married Grace Carr (p. 221),
     was bound out to Peter Carr, his “godfather,” until he came of age, and pro-
     vision was made for the care of the father's estate (p. 497). It is of interest
     that Peter Carr, who died in 1683, left a legacy to Peter. In two instances
     land was exchanged for a servant. John Lambert, a planter, on March io,
     1667/8, deeded to another planter, John Godshall, one hundred acres called
     “Hog Quarter” on the east side of Nangemy Creek, the consideration being a
     servant named Thomas Porch, for which consideration Lambert “doth Ac-
     knowledge hirnselfe Satisfied Contented” (pp. 147-148). Thomas Stone and
     his brother, John Stone on August 8, 1668, conveyed to Thomas King 500
     acres on Nangemy Creek, the consideration being two servants and 7000
     pounds of tobacco (p. 169).
                            LAND

       Deeds f or land in the several counties might be recorded, according to the
     choice of the purchaser, either in the Provincial Court at St. Mary's, or in the
     court of the county in which the land was located. Nonresidents usually made
     use of the Provincial Court, while residents of a county nearly always had their
     deeds enrolled in that county. A very large proportion of all deeds and other
     land records were recorded in the counties.