518 MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS

the Prov^l Court on a Judgment rendered for Thomas Bordley against him
Whereon he is in the Custody of Daniel Mariarte Sherr of Ann^ll County
from Which Judgment there was an appeale to this Court Where the Judg-
ment was Affirmed and Appeale granted to his Majesty in Council Complain-
ing that he had been Executed after the Said Appeale granted to his Majesty
in Council and Security thereon granted and praying to be relieved from
that Execution Alledging it was unduly and Erroneously issued

The Petition of William Rogers in relation to an Execution issued out
of the Prov^l Court on a Judgment rendered for Thomas Bordley Against him
whereon he is in the Custody of Dan^l Mariarte Sherriff of Annarundell
County from which Judgment there was an Appeale to this Court Where
the Judgment was Affirmed and Appeale granted to his Majesty in Council
Complaining that he had been Executed after the Last appeale granted to
his Majesty and Council and Security thereon granted and praying to be
relieved from that Execution alledging it was unduly and Erroneously
issued

Order was this Day given that the Clk of this Court give Notice to M^r
Vachel Denton Clk of the Provincial Court and to Daniel Mariarte Gent
Sherriff of Annarundell County of the af^d Petitions given in to this Court
by Cockey Gordon and Rogers and the Minutes thereon made and hearing
on Friday Next.

The Court Adjourns to Friday Twelve of the Clock.

Friday July the 22^d 1726 The Court meet According to Adjournment Pres-
ent as on Wednesday Except Col Richard Tilghman

This Day Edward Fotterall Came into Court and Qualifyed himself as
an Attorney by Taking the Oaths to the Government and the Oath of
Attorney

The Court Adjourns till to morrow morning 9 of the Clock

Saturday July the 23^d 1726 The Court meet According to Adjournment pres-
ent as Yesterday

This day his Excellencys Opinion in Writing in relation to the three
Severall Petitions of Cockey, Gordon and Rogers is ordered to be entered
[711] Upon the Petitions of Cockey Gordon and Rogers to this Court.

I am of Opinion that the Petitioners Securitys be Approved of by the
Court as Sufficient to Answer the Debt and all Costs already Due or that
Shall Acrue by their Appeal to his Majesty in Council is a Supersedeas to
any Execution Notwithstanding a Day Certain is not mentioned for it is not
Possible to Sett a day to that high Court their Sitting being Uncertain and
I am further of Opinion that the Petitioners are beyond Doubt illegally
imprisoned because the Writt by Which they were taken was issued the
Twenty first Day of May and the Affirmation of the Judgment of the Prov^l
Court in the Court of Appeals was not till the third day of June following for