xxx PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY

be restored to his practice as an attorney, affirming that he had never acted through
the affair "Contrary to the known and Common practice of this Province in Such
like matters." His application opportunely following closely upon the conclusion
of peace with France, he was restored and admitted to practice as an attorney as
formerly. 26

This was not, however, the end of l'affaire Cranford. On the very day that Cran-
ford was restored to practice the "Committee of Agrievances" of the House of
Delegates, Cranford being a member of the House, represented it a "great agriev-
ance" that "Severall Attorneys by orders of Councill without being Legally con-
victed of any crime have been dismissed from theire practice as attorneys much to
the dissatisfaction of the court and country where they practice." Characterizing
the opinion of George Plater, William Dent and Robert Goldsborough, as "the
King's Councill att Law," as justifying the Council's orders "to the Generall disatis-
faction of the Inhabitants of this province, the Government never pretending to
any such power before from the first seating of the province," it desired that the
House move the governor that the opinion be publicly burned by the sheriff of
Anne Arundel County. The House thereupon ordered the counsel taken into cus-
tody and brought before the House where they were examined on their opinion.
The House also unsuccessfully demanded of the clerk of the Council copies of the
severall proceedings of the Council relating to Cranford; the governor, however,
did make available a copy of the opinion. Counsel were then again called before
the House and, appearing to justify their opinion, were ordered to produce their
authorities in support thereof. When the authorities were produced, the House
conceived them as against the opinion. 27

The House thereupon sent an address to the Governor and Council forwarding
its resolution that it was "a very dangerous opinion giving liberty to the de-
priving and forejudging his Majesty's Subjects of theire freehold and livelyhood
upon bare suggestions without any presentment of theire peers and to the Ex-
asperating your Excellency against his Majestys Justices of this Province for pro-
tecting people in theire Rights according to theire oaths to the great vexation of
his Majestys Subjects and dishonor of his Majesty." The address, however, offered
as settlement terms payment of ten shillings each by the counsel to the "sergeant at
arms" of the House, the burning of the opinion and the receiving of Cranford into
the governor's favor. To this the Governor and Council replied that if the House
could make it out that counsel had in any particular infringed or broken the law,
the governor "would in no ways protect or shelter them, but leave them open to
Justice." As to laying a fine, this was a thing of dangerous consequence without a
known law. As to Cranford, he was already restored to his practice. Finally, if the
House did not believe it within the King's prerogative to suspend attorneys in the
province, it could lay the case before the Committee for Trade and Foreign Planta-
tions "from whom they need not fear any other than a Just and Legall determina-
tion, both in this and all other matters of a like nature." The House regretted that
it had not received a more satisfactory answer upon "so great an infringement upon
our rights and Libertyes" but would proceed no further than to leave its vote
upon its journal "to assert that Right and Liberty which before this time was never
Questioned from the very first seating and Inhabiting of this Province." 28

The controversy was climaxed by a stiff and bitter message from the Governor

26. 23 id. 275, 380, 394-95.

27. 22 id. 87-93. See also the comments of Kilty on 15 Ed. II, c.l and 4 Hen. IV, c.18.
Report on English Statutes 215, 225.

28. 22 MA 93-94, 106-07.