Introduction.              xv

        Trial juries, petty juries, petit juries or juries of life and death were sum
      moned fifty times or more. The sheriff of each county was under obligation to
      summon three good and lawful men to serve on the jury for the Provincial
      Court, every time the Court sat, but three good and lawful citizens could be and
      often were of most limited intelligence and education. Not so many at this
      time were marksmen, though unless they had to sign something, the fact that
      they could not write their name might not come out. When they were sum
      moned to appear, they were fined according to an Act of Assembly (Archives I,
      411-412) if they did not show up. Of the four who did not appear and were
      thereupon fined, one man, Henry Smith of St. Mary's County, “happened to
      come after the Jury was called . . . and was fyned though he made his appear
      ance and offered himself to serv before the Jury went from the barr”. Upon
      his humble petition to his Lordship, to whom the fines went, he was relieved
      (post, p. 346).
        Trial juries had to consist of twelve men, as they still do, but more than
      once in these sessions, juries of eleven or even of ten men were summoned, and
      the verdicts they rendered were accepted (post, pp. 72, 160) Even the careless
      Nicholas Painter could hardly have done this without at least the tacit support
      of the Court. There were also juries of the neighborhood: these were sum
      moned when the case involved land. The county surveyor was ordered to
      survey the lines and the sheriff had to impanel a jury of twelve good and honest
      men of the neighborhood, who had to go onto the land and to summon and
      examine witnesses, so that the truth of the matter might be fully discovered.
      The twelve good and honest men were summoned eighteen times now. They
      did not always agree (post, pp. 352, 354). When they did not, another order
      of resurvey issued, and so on, until a unanimous verdict was had.

                          THE SHERIFF

        The sheriff of the county was as important as English history shows him and
      vastly more important than he is now. He had to be a gentleman, as his under
      lings and many of the other provincial officers need not be. He was the execu
      tive officer of the county, but his duties before the Court took up most of his
      time and his energy. As always he served all writs, collected all taxes and had
      the paying out of all appropriations. He had the custody of all prisoners,
      though custody did not usually mean jailing. But if the sheriff told the Court
      or the county court that he had taken a man—or a woman—and could not
      produce him later when his case came up, he was fined to the Lord Proprietary.
      Sometimes he was only threatened with amerciament. The sheriffs were
      wealthy and important, and often they were well aware of their importance.
      Major William Boareman, or Boarman, then sheriff of Saint Mary's County,
      “being called to attend the Court and not appearing by him self nor any of his
      Deputyes the same sheriffe is fyned to his Lopp the Lord Propry the Sume of
      one thousand pounds of tobacco :“. (post, p. 172). Another time, Sheriff
      William Smithson, of Dorchester County, refused to bring into court a de
      fendant of whom he had the custody, and compounded his offense by giving
      uncivil language to the Court. For the disobedience and the discourtesy he was