222 MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS

there being no Circumstance to induce a beliefe thereof (but Some oaths
that another Man (who as this the Defendant is pretty well Informed, was
of Suspected fame and Credit) took (before whom and by what authority
the Defendant knows not) That the tree Stood the which is an Evidence
(as the Defendant is well advised) that ought not in law and Equity, to be
allowed and more especially against Such clear Demonstrations as were
brought before the Court and Jury by this Defendant who allows that the
Tract called Enfield Chase is later in date then Amptill Grange, but denies
any part of the first, to be within the Second, and as to this Defendants be-
ing urged by any Body, to Seek for his right does not rember, but has Sev-
erall times been told by his over Seers and others that the Complainant had
Seated within the Defendants tract called Enfield Chase and that then Self
reservation and the Support of his right, were Sufficient to induce him to re-
cover the Same Yet that before he Commenced his Suit he sent in a friendly

mamici tu die CuiiijjlL tu fuibcdi fuitlici Ltcapass 01 clearing More ground,

and as to what he had done before the defendant wou'd be Easy and Suffer
him to make a years Cropp upon the whole matter the defendant believes
the Complainants pretensions to be unjust and Very ill grounded and So farr
from being Concurrent wth the Certificates of the Surveys of the adjacent
lands that they are Very opposite that the Tryall and Evidences Confirm
his Conscience of the Justice of his cause that he believes the Jury gave [348]
a Very Just Verdict agreeable to the truth and the oaths they took he be-
lieves that if any were Surprized at the Verdict it coul be for no other reason
then Some prejudice, very unjustly conceived agt this defendant, without
that, that any other matter or thing material for this Deft to make answer
unto and not herein before answered Confessed, traverssed or Denyed is true,
Wherefore he humbly prays to be hence dismissed with his reasonable Costs
and charges in this behalf most wrongfully Sustained

Tho Macnemara

May 31 1717 Then came Charles Carroll Esq^r the Deft and Swore that
what is alledged in this answer to relate to the knowledge of any other per-
son he believes to be true and what is alleadged to relate to his own knowl-
edge he Swears to be true. Sworne before me

Tho Brooke

The Replication of Thomas Wells to the answer of Charles Carroll Esq^r
Defendant to the bill of Comp" of the said Wells Complainant

The said Complainant for replication unto the said Defendants Said
answer Sayth That the said Bill of Complaint by him exhibited into this
Hon^rble Court ag^t the said defendant is Very true certain and Sufficient in
the law to be by him the s^d Defendant answered unto and that all and every
the matters and allegations in the said Bill of Complt contained are by him
therein Set forth upon good cause and just ground and occasion of Suit And