MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS 73

Then Came the Said Thomas Tench by William Dent his Attorney and
prayed and Appeale to his Excellency the Governo^r and Councill and it is
Granted unto him he having given Security According to Act of Assembly in
Such Case made and provided

Cop^a per H. Wriothesley Clk:

MARYLAND ss. Reasons in Appeal from a Certein Judgment given for
William Hopkins of Ann Arundell County ag^t Thomas Tench of the Said
County Esq^r in a plea there Depending upon a Scire facias between the
Said Tench and Hopkins w^ch Said Judgment was given ag^j the Said Tench
att a Prov^ll Court held the i9^th day of May Anno Dni 1696.

The Said Thomas Tench brings his Scire facias ag^t the Said Hopkins to
Shew Cause why Execution Should not issue against him upon a Certein
Judgment obteined Against him by the S^d Tench att a General Assembly held
att the City of S^t Marys the [111] Second day of July Anno Dni 1692 to which
Scire facias the Said Hopkins pleads That he had fully Agreed w^th the Said
Tench for the Satisfaction of the Judgment aforesaid to which Plea the Said
Tench demurred in Law (as very well he might) and Shewed Severall
Causes of Such his Demurrer as in and by the S^d Demurrer it may Appear
which Demurrer was overruled and Judgment given ag^t the Said Tench, in
giving of w^ch Judgment, it is Manifestly Erred.

1 In this that a bare Averment of Satisfaction and agreem^t if Not Suffi-
cient to discharge a Matter of record Especially a Judgment which is a Rec-
ord of the highest Nature And therefore the Judgment of the Prov^ll Court
that Such a bare averment of an Agreem^t and Satisfaction was Sufficient to
barr the Said Tench's Scire facias upon his Judgment So as aforesaid obteined
is Palpably Erroneous and ag^t Law therefore ought to be reversed.

2 The Said Judgment is Erroneous in this That though the Said Hop-
kins had fully Agreed with the Said Tench for the Satisfaction of the Said
Judgment Yet forasmuch as it is not Sett forth in the Said plea that pursuant
to Such Agreement the Said Hopkins had Actually made the Said Tench full
payment and Satisfaction for the Same and Shewed how and produced a
Record or att Least a Release for Such payment ag^t the Said Judgment the
Said plea was altogether insufficient and Vitious. Consequently the Judg-
ment Overruling the Demurrer thereunto incurably Erroneous.

3 It is Error in this That the Prov^ll Court have Judged in overruling
the Said demurrer directly Contrary to an Express Exception which is Sett
down in the very Instrument w^ch [112] the Said Hopkins produced in Barr
of the Said Tench's Judgment for that in the Said Instrument the ball: of
the Execution upon the Said Tench's Judgment ag^f the Said Hopkins is Ex-
cepted, Consequently the Judgment of the Provinciall Court by which (Not-
withstanding Such Exception) the Said [Instrum¹] was adjudged Sufficient
to barr the Said Tenchs Judgment is palpably Erroneous therefore ought to