Introduction.            xiii

         A while back he went from page 297 to page 398 (Archives LXV, p. x). The
         case of John Thompson v. John Atkey came up from Calvert County on appeal
         “And the defendt appeareing by Robert Carvile his Attorney And the said
         John Atkey not appearing to prosecute his writt of Error & Supersedeas a
         Procedendo is granted” (post, p. 178). But since it was Atkey who had ob
         tained the writ of error, it was he who should have been named plaintiff in
         error before the Provincial Court. Sometimes he makes mistakes in names. In
         the first mention of Gittings's Administratrix v. Rhodes (post, p. 38), her
         name is given as Mary. Folio 332 of Liber NN shows that, unmistakably.
         But the administratrix of John Gittings was named Margaret; the record when
         the case came to trial (post, pp. 55-56 shows that, just as clearly, and the name
         is repeated five times. Again, the text on pages 24 and 99, post says plainly
         that Amiah Eagle was the administratix of William Burges, William, not John,
         That use of William is the clerk's error. The case comes first to attention on
         page 433 of volume LXVI, where the dead Burges is John. When the case
         comes before the Court and is disposed of, John is the only Burges mentioned,
         so that it is reasonable to conclude that John is correct. Amiah's later husband
         is William Eagle: perhaps Clerk Painter confused him with the dead man and
         called Burges William too. Again, in the case of Robert Carvile v. Abigail
         Wright, administratrix of Arthur, she is ordered to show cause why execution
         should not issue against the estate of Abigail Wright. Abigail, not Arthur
         (post, p. 223).
           Many men appeared before the Court as attorneys, although only three were
         sworn in at this time: they were Nehemiah Blackiston, John Blomfeild who
         had been clerk of the Court, and William Crosse (post, pp. 1, 144). Twenty-
         two different attorneys appeared for clients or for themselves, but some of
         them had no more than one or two cases. Five or six attorneys took care of the
         bulk of the legal business. Attorney General Kenelm Cheseldyn appeared in
         some ninety cases for private clients, in addition to the ten or so in which he
         was a party, and to those he handled as attorney general. Robert Carvile and
         Robert Ridgely each had more than a hundred cases, and each was a party in
         others. One attorney, George Parker of Calvert County, seems to have tried
         to collect the same judgment twice, but the Court stopped him. In April 1674,
         according to Sheriff Thomas Taillor of Dorchester County, Parker, during a
         session of the Court, said loudly and audibly that the sheriff had refused to
         serve some writs given him to serve. Such a charge as this, whether true or
         not, could bring the sheriff into disrepute and could lead to the forfeiture of
         his bond of office. Accordingly, Taillor sued Parker for 200,000 pounds of
         tobacco. When the case came to trial, Taillor did not appear to prosecute his
         case, and he was therefore nonsuited and Parker was given a judgment for
         642 pounds of tobacco for his costs (Archives LXV, pp. 335-388). To collect
         his judgment, Parker got a capias ad satisfaciendum on which Taillor was duly
         brought into Court and had on execution issued against him. This was in 1674,
         but in December 1677, Parker again tried to get an execution for the same 642
         pounds of tobacco. When his writ of scire facias came to trial, his opponent
         Taillor told the Court that both writs concerned the same judgment, and that