Introduction.



           land matters are entered here because a separate record for land did not begin
           to be kept until 1679. Although land transfers were often recorded, it was not
           imperative that they be, and many were noted only by an assignment on the
           backside of the original indenture. Of the land cases on the docket, most were
           ejectment to try title, or trespass and ejectment. Richard Rawlins brought an
           action of ejectment against Robert Parnepley. Parnepley had entered onto a
           piece of land which Rawlins had leased from Henry Peirpont, had cut down
           timber, and had ejected Rawlins from the land. Hubbert Lambert, the tenant
           in possession, was notified that unless he or the person from whom he claimed
           appeared and made themselves defendants in Rawlins's suit, confessed the lease,
           entry and ejectment and insisted only on the title, the defendant in the declara
           tion would confess judgment and the plaintiff, Rawlins, would be restored. to
           possession. When, on May 8, 1675, the case came up for decision, Lambert
           did not appear, either in person or by attorney, although John Carpenter of
           Anne Arundel swore before one of the justices of the Court that he had served
           him with proper notice. Thereupon, Peirpont, the person who had leased the
           land to Rawlins, prayed and got a writ of habere facias possessionem, and 590
           pounds of tobacco for costs as well (post, 583-584).
            Besides this case of Rawlins v. Parnepley, several other cases of trespass and
           ejectment turned upon the admission of defendants to take the places of casual
           ejectors. The case that began as Francis Holland v. Hugh Connell (post, 79-
           81) became Francis Holland v. Henry Beedle et uz. (ibid., pp. 107, 151-153),
           when Connell, the casual ejector, was replaced by Henry Beedle and Sophia his
           wife, from whom Connell held. The case was tried before a jury, which came
           quickly to agreement on a verdict. But when Holland was called to appear and
           hear the verdict, he did not come, and a nonsuit was awarded against him.
           The Beedles even recovered, their costs against him.
            The case that began as Edmund Lister v. Thomas Momford (post, pp. 77,
           102, 162-163) became first Lister v. Philip Shapleigh (ibid., p. 203) and ended
           up as Edward Williams v. Philip Shapleigh (ibid., pp. 287). When, after
           two continuances, the case came to trial, Philip Shapleigh was admitted defend
           ant, to acknowledge demise, ejectment and expulsion or suffer judgment by
           default. Before that trial, Lister died and Edward Williams took his place as
           plaintiff. The case of Williams v. Shapleigh came to trial in May 1674, but
           the new plaintiff did not appear to prosecute, and the Court ordered a nonsuit
           against him, with costs and charges to Shapleigh.
            In the case of John Shanks v. John Blackiston (post, pp. 180-181), Blackiston
           had ejected Shanks from Langworth Point and “Thomas Donnes Neck”, which
           Nehemiah and Elizabeth Blackiston had demised to him. John Blackiston
           acknowledged the service of the declaration, and, by permission of the Court,
           with the assent of both attorneys, Edward Connery was admitted defendant in
           his place. Connery was ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs, and Nehemiah and
           Elizabeth Blackiston, the lessor plaintiffs were ordered to pay those of the
           defendant. At that point the Court adjourned, and when it reconvened on
           February io, 1673/4, John Shanks, who had been ejected from the land in
           question by Connery's John Blackiston, had become himself the casual ejector