being the day of the returne of the aforesaid Writt the Record and process
and rendring of Judgm^t in the plea aforesaid to our said president of our
Councill and the same Councill sitting in A Court for hearing appeals and
regulating Writts of Error at the City of Annapolis being sent come William
Bladen Esqr her Majestys said Attorney Gen^ll who for her said Majesty in
this behalfe appears and pray leave to Imparle hereunto untill next Court
and its Granted and the same day is given the Plantiff alsoe.

Att Which said next Court to witt on the twelfth day of May Annoque
Domini Seaventeen hundred and thirteen Come again as well the said Wil-
liam Bladen Esqr her Majestys said Attorney Generall as the said Arthur
Miller Executor of the last Will and Testament of Michaell Miller deed by
Thom^s Bordley his Attorney aforesaid And the said William Bladen Attor-
ney Generall for her said Majesty prayeth further leave to Imparle hereunto
untill next Court and he hath it and the same day is given the plantiff alsoe.

Att Which said next Court to witt on the Twenty Seaventh day of
October Anno Domini 1713 comes againe as well the said William Bladen
Esqr her Maj^tys said Att^ry Generall as the said Arthur Miller Executor etc. of
Michaell Miller by Thomas Bordley his Attorney aforesaid and day is fur-
ther given the said partys untill next Court. Att which said next Court to witt
the Fifteenth day of Aprill 1714 come Againe the said Wm Bladen Esqr Att^ry
Gen^ll for her Majesty as likewise the said Arthur Miller Exec^r of Michaell
Miller by Thomas Bordley and Wornell Hunt his Attorneys who say that
in the Record and process aforesaid as also in rendring the Judgm^t afore-
said it is manifestly Erred Viz^t.

[274] Imprimis. Tis Erred in that it doth not appear that the defendant
Michaell Miller deceased had any addition of his Mistery trade or calling
before the alias Dictus in the writt.

2^dly. It is Erred in that Judgment was given against the defend^t Miller
at the prayer of the Attorney Gen^ll without any day given him to answer
to the suite.

3^dly. That the placita quod reddat was to King William and Queen
Mary whereas it should have been to their Attorney.

4^thly. That there is no Averment of the death of the Queen in the
Declaration nor that King William Survived her to entitle him to the Action.

5^thly. That the Court was to be held the twelfth day of May Sixteen
hundred Ninety Six and the Judgment rendred the Fifteenth day of May
and yet no day Continuance or Imparlance appears on Record to be given
to the defendant from the said twelfth to the Fifteenth day of May nor does
the Record make it appear to be one and the same Court in Which the decla-
ration was filed and the Judgment thereon rendred.

For Which and many other Errors the aforesaid Arthur prays that the
Judgment aforesaid may be Annulled and he to all which he hath hereby
Lost may be restored that her Maj^ts Attorney Generall may answer the Errors
aforesaid and that the Court of our Lady the Queen now here may proceed