586 THE CHANCELLOR'S CASE.—1 BLAND.

A salary, just in amount, shall be secured to the Chancellor
during the continuance of his commission, it is said, "in such

pending of public laws, which orders or resolves are not sent home for the
royal assent."—(Pown. Adm. Colo. 110; See Constitution of New Jersey, art.
8.|

Upon a complaint made, on the 6th of November, 1735, to the General As-
sembly of New York, they, among other things, resolved, "that a Court of
Chancery, in this Province, in the hands or under the exercise of a Governor,
without consent in General Assembly, is contrary to law, unwarrantable,
and of dangerous consequence to the liberties and properties of the people."
(1 Smith's His. N. York, 386.)

Under the Proprietary Government of Maryland the Chancellor of the
Province was sometimes constituted by a formal commission from the Lord
Proprietary; (Chan. Proc. lib. P. L. fol. 488, 717,) but most usually, as it
would seem, by a delivery of the great seal by the Lord Proprietary in per-
son, or by, or in the presence of the Council. The Governor for the time
being was, in several instances, by the same commission also constituted
Chancellor and keeper of the great seal of the Province. The first Provin-
cial Governor by his commission bearing date on the 15th of April, 1637, was
constituted Governor, Lieutenant General. Chief Captain, and Commander,
as well by sea as by land, and also Chancellor, Chief Justice, and Chief
Magistrate within the Province, (1 Boz. His. Mary. 291.) A similar commis-
sion was granted by the Lord Proprietary on the 18th of September, 1644.
(Land Records, lib. 1, folio 195.)

But although for some time after the settlement of the country, the Gov-
ernor was invested with a variety of military and civil offices, yet he was
not permitted to act of himself in all respects and alone in any one of them.
As Groveruor there were few powers which he could exercise without the
advice and consent of the Council who were placed about him; and as Chan-
cellor he could do no act but as a Court sitting with his assistants. (1 H.
& McH. 6 & 165; 4 H. & McH. 477.) In a petition in the case of Nicholas
Painter and wife against Samuel Lane in Chancery addressed to the Lord
Proprietary in June, 1681, it is said, "that the Court of Chancery is and
ought to be always open as to the proceedings therein; but your lordship hav-
ing not yet empowered your Chancellor or Chief Justice of your said Court
to answer petitions or make orders touching the proceedings, as is used in
England, without a full Court of four at the least: your petitioners are
therefore necessitated to apply themselves to your lordship and humbly
pray, that your lordship would please to order that the defendant may put
in his answer by a certain day," &c. Which was accordingly ordered by
the Lord Proprietary himself. (Chan. Proc. lib. C. D. fol. 306.) But it ap-
pears, that William Holland was by a commission from the Lord Proprietary,
under his great seal at arms, bearing date on the 27th of February, 1719, at-
tested by his Governor, constituted Chancellor of the Province, with full
power to do, perform, hear and herein, determine all such matters and things
as to the office of Chancellor of right belonged or appertained. After which
the Chancellor of Maryland always sat as sole Judge, without assistants: and
this Court was thenceforward in all respects as accessible for all persons as
the Chancery Court of England.—(Chan. Proc. lib. P. L. fol. 488, 717.)

During the short time that the Government of the Province was taken
immediately into the hands of the King, it does not appear how the Chan-
cellor was appointed. Although it seems to have been most usual to consti-
tute the same person both Governor and Chancellor, ae in the case of John