456 MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS

and the patent to the Said Smithson founded yet for that (there being Such
a patent upon Record) your Orators are absolutely without Remedy for the
recovery of their Said Lands Untill the Same Patent be duly Vacated. To
the end therefore that your Orator may be relieved in all and Singular the
premisses and that Thomas Hicks the Assignee of the Said Lands from the
Surviving Thomas Smithson of Talbott County or others the Tere Tennants
thereof Whom when known your Orators pray may be made parties to this
Bill May upon his or their Corporall Oath or Otherwise as this Hon^rble Court
[655] Shall Direct true and perfect answer make to all and Singular the
premisses and that the Same Patent may be Duly Vacated According to
Equity and good Conscience. May it please your Excellency to grant unto
your Orator his Majesty's Most gratious Writt or Writts of Subp^a to be Di-
rected to the Said Thomas Hicks and other the Terre Tennants thereof when
discovered thereby Commanding them at a Certain Day and under a Certain
pain therein to be Limitted personally to be and appear before your Excel-
lency in this Hon^rble Court then and there as well to answer all and Singular
the premisses as to Shew Cause if any he or they have why the Same patent
Should not be Repealed annulled and Vacated and further to Stand to per-
form and abide Such further order directions and Decree therein as to your
Excellency Shall Seem Meet.

And Your Orator as in Duty bound Shall ever pray etc. Th Bordley
The answer of Tho^s Hicks Defend^t to the Bill of Complaint of Mary and
Ann Sewards minors by Benj^a Woodward and Mary his Wife their Next
friends Complains

The Said Defendant now and all times hereafter Saving and reserving
to himself all and all manner of Benefits and advantages of Exception to the
Diverse and Manifold incertainties and Imperfections in the Said Complain-
ants Said Bill of Complaint Contained for answer thereto or So much thereof
as materially Concerneth him this Defendant as he is advised to make answer
unto he answereth and Saith that he does not believe it to be true that the
Said George Seward did purchase of the Lord Propry Such a Warrant as is in
the Bill mentioned But believes and has heard Thomas Pattison in the Bill
mentioned in his Life time Declare that the Warrant Which the Said George
Seward Obtained from his Said Lordship and by W* the Said pretended Sur-
veys in the Bill mentioned were made for him the Said Seward was Condi-
tional (that is to Say) that if the Said George Seward did not in Some Short
Time after the Date of the Said Warrant pay the Condition or right thereof
he was to have no benefitt thereby and this Defendant further answereth and
Saith that the S^d Thomas Pattison told him this Defendant that the Said
Condition was never paid nor Right made good for the Said Warrant and
that if had he never would Survey a Second time the Land in the bill men-
tioned for the S^d George Seward (Contrary to his Oath of Survey or by him
taken which this Defendant believes he had taken; it being usual in those