Volume 191, Page 66 View pdf image (33K) |
March 10th: 1690/1 ( 66 ) Richard: Tull. brings his Servant boy viz Philip Bready before the Justices in Court Sitting, complaining that his sd Servant without any occasion given, had Run away from his Servitude eight dayes, the sd Bready being by their worps examined did Confess to the same. whereupon the Court Ordered that the sd Bready should made satisfaction to his sd Master according to Law in Such cases made & provided &c. To their Maties Justices of y Peace for Somerset County The humble Petion of Robert Stett. Sheweth that whereas your Petioner by your worps Order in June Court Last past was Sett free from John: Starrett, and hath been at liberty by the sd Order till the 19th. day of ffebruary last past, was taken by vertue of a Hue and Cry from under the hands and Seals of mr Thomas Newbold and mr Samuel: Hopkins, and carryed away by Anthony Bell Constable to the sd John Starrett, Contrary to your worps Order so your petioner humbly prayes your worps would be pleased to lett your Petioner know whether he is a freeman or not. And your Petioner as in duty shall ever pray The above sd Petion being Read and Considered, this Court has Confermed the verdict of the Jury as appears upon Record. Vide Verd. Lib. B:W. fo: 114. - - - - - - - - - - Whereupon mr. James: Sangster in Open Court Ordered that these two following papers should be recorded. he being Attorney for Jno. Starret Contr. Stett. - - - - - - - - - - - - Somerset County Ss. Stitt plt Reasons why judgmt ought not to be entered agt y deft. Startrett deft. Whereas the plt by his Petion to their Maties Justices of this County last Court did show that ye said Stitt plt did complain that he the sd Stitt had Served the sd Starret his Master. the full term & time of five years and then and there did demand his freedome according to Custome.the sd Starret by his Attorney James: Sangster comes and sayes that the sd Stett from the deft is not free, 1st because the said Stett was put an aprentice with his owne consent by the sd.Stitts ffather 2dly till he should be of the years of one and twenty to the sd Starrett then in the Kingdome of Ireland, and there did Serve some part of his said time before he was to this Province transported. Quere whether an agreement made in their Maties European: King dominion may not be good in his plantations in America, if good then the deft hath a double right to the plt, first by the Parents Guift, and then secondly by the Servants full consent as will more plainly appear (if not good) 3dly then the said Stitt at the expiration of his transported time was free according to the Customs of the Country, to transact and bind him Self without his Parents consent, and if he was free to act he may as well nay more freely act with his Master then any other per man espetialy being a tradesman and where the sd Stitt had had his upbringing 4thly. And whereas the sd Stitt upon hearing of his sd petion, did alleadge that the sd Starrett his Master,did force and Compell the sd Stitt to set his hand to an Indenture, which was the Issue joynd between y plt & deft, which Indenture was here in Court produced, and under the hand and Seal of him the sd Stitt acknowledged to be his Act and deed before mr Edmund: Howard one of their Maties.Justices of the Peace for this County and by him attested in Open Court upon Oath to be the voluntary act and deed of the sd Stitt, without any threat, force or compulsion, now the law sayes volentia fit injuria: also Quere whether the bare & false allegation without proof or shadow of Circumstance be more effective Law, then the positive Evidence of a worll Magistrate in the face of Court & Jury, and fifthly the sd Stitt was free from the 23d. of January until the 24th. of ffebry, before he did bind himselfe anew, and if had not been free by the Masters |
||||
Volume 191, Page 66 View pdf image (33K) |
Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!
|
An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact
mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.