TOWNSHEND v. DUNCAN. 59

tion of the state, the two tribunals have been organized as totally
distinct courts. While the Court of Chancery, under the provin-
cial government was constituted of a plurality of judges, it trans-
acted business only from term to term, and was not always open,
as it now is. (r) About, or soon after the year 1714, the constitu-
tion of the court seems to have undergone some changes, of which
there is no clear or satisfactory explanation to be found among its
own records, or in the legislative enactments of the times. But
some short time after the year 1719, it seems to have been finally
settled, that the High Court of Chancery of Maryland, like that of
England, should be considered as always open, (s)

It appears, that there were a number of officers called assistants,
masters in chancery, examiners or auditors, appointed to assist the
court in the discharge of its various functions. And, for some
time, two of those masters were appointed, as in England, to sit,
by turns, in court with the Chancellor as his assistants, during
each term, (t) But, as it is said, in a case brought before the
court, when the Chancellor was sitting with two of those assist-
ants, that he had then no lawyers to aid him with their advice : it
would seem, that those assistants or masters in chancery, were
mere clerks; or persons unlearned in the law, as a profession, and
whose knowledge extended to nothing more than to matters of
practice, connected with the ministerial affairs of the court, (u) In

(r) Chancellor's Case. 1 Bland. 624.—(s) Chancellor's Case, 1 Bland, 624.

(t) «19th January, 1715.—Then his Excellency the Governor proceeded to settle
and appoint the times for the sitting of the Chancery Court, as follows, viz: March
the 10th, when Col. Coursey and Esquire Hall are appointed to sit as assistants.
May the 18th when Col. Lloyd and Col. Greenfield are appointed assistants. Sep-
tember the 1st, Col. Tilghman and Esquire Dorsey appointed assistants. December
the 1st, Col. Young and Col. Addison assistants. And ordered that the said gentle-
men have a month's notice given them before it be their turn to sit at the several
courts as above appointed.'—Chancery Proceedings, lib. P, L. fol. 85.

GRIFFITH v. VERNON, 1716.—In this cause the report of the auditor is approved
of, and Decreed, that the defendant account and pay to the complainants their jnst
proportions of the sum found in arrear, with costs; and as to the mesne profits, he
is referred to his proper remedy; and that the amendment in the former decree be
to those of whom it of right belongs by the deceased Lewis Evan's will,—Chancery
Proceedings, lib. P. L. fol. 291.

(u) BIRCHFIELD v. MILLER.—September 3, 1717.—JOHN HART, Chancellor.—
William Holland and Samuel Young, assistants. The Governor and Keeper of the
Great Seal declares, that being doubtful of his own judgment in determining the
point of law now in debate between the complainant and defendant, and having
no lawyers to aid him with their advice, but what are already concerned in this
cause, he humbly desires the opinion of some of his majesty's judges in the courts