192 Assembly Proceedings, October 2-November 30, 1771.

L. H. J.
Liber No. 54
Nov. 22

The Petition of Alexander Symmer was read the first and second
Time and rejected
Benedict Calvert Esq.^r from the Upper House delivers to M.^r
Speaker the Paper Bills N.° 29, 30 severally indorsed "By the Upper
House of Assembly November 22.^d 1771. The ingrossed Bill whereof
this is the Original read and assented to
Signed by Order U Scott Cl. Up. Ho."

And the Bill entitled An Act to impower Jane Ridgely Exx of
Nicholas Greenberry Ridgely late of Ann Arundel County deceased
to convey the Land therein mentioned thus indorsed "By the Upper
House of Assembly Nov.^r 22.^d 1771 Read the first and second Time
by an especial Order and will pass
Signed by Order U Scott Cl Up. Ho"

Which last mentioned Bill was read here and passed for ingrossing
M.^r Paca brings in and delivers to M.^r Speaker the following
ingrossed Address

To his Excellency Robert Eden Esq.^r Governor of Maryland
The humble Address of the House of Delegates

May it please your Excellency,

p. 267

Our indispensible Duty to check the Exercise of such Powers as
are incompatible with the permanent Security of Property, and the
constitutional Liberty of the Subject has constrained us in the Course
of this Session to take into our Consideration your Excellency's
Proclamation of the 26.^th Day of November last relative to Officers
frees and the Instruction of the 24.^th Day of the same Month under
the great Seal ascertaining the ffees of the Land Office and on the
most sedate Reflection we have come into several Resolutions Copies
of which we now beg Leave to lay before you.
The like Proclamation published in the Year 1733 agitated and
disjointed this Province till the Year 1747 and the Evils which were
thereby occasioned ought strongly to have dissuaded from any At-
tempt again to exercise such Power. When from some Proceedings
in the Land Office in the Time of the last Assembly the late Lower
House were apprehensive that Government entertained a Design in
Case the several Branches of the Legislature should not agree in the
Regulation of Officers ffees to attempt establishing them by Procla-
mation, they, in an Address to your Excellency, asserted "the Pro-
prietary has no Right, Sir, either by himself or with the Advice of
his Council to establish or regulate the ffees of Office, and could we
persuade ourselves you could possibly entertain a different Opinion
we should be bold to tell your Excellency that the People of this
Province ever will oppose the Usurpation of such Right"; to which
your Excellency was pleased to answer in your Message of the 20.^th
Day of November "that his Lordship's Authority had not yet inter-