184 court of appeals of maryland

30 Md. 500, on a question whether a right of action
in trover for conversion of a slave, accrued in
1860, was nullified by the abolition of slavery.
Judge Robinson was re-elected for a second term
in 1882 without opposition.

But while the work of the judges of 1867 so
far considered has been the more frequently
brought into discussion in late years, failure to
recognize ability in other judges of that court
would be an oversight. Examination of their
opinions shows that they were all judges who
would now be considered able and sufficient men,
and their work was good. Judge James A.
Stewart, for example, wrote able opinions. He
probably filed more dissenting opinions than any
other judge in the court's history. And of these
a good example is his opinion in the case of State
v. C. & P. R. R. Co., 40 Md. 22, 53.

It was on November 26, 1867, that the new
court assembled for the first time; and after adopt-
ing the old seal it adjourned to December 10,
1867. On the latter date it passed an order ad-
mitting as attorneys of the court all who were
properly qualified and entitled to practice in the
preceding Court of Appeals; and then proceeded
with its first case, Eliza A. Keerl v. Thomas M.
Keerl, Trustee,⁴ which was argued by Orlando
F. Bump and William Daniel for the appellant,
and Levin Gale for the appellees. And it was
a beginning upon a heavy task set before the new
judges. The court had been in arrears in its
work now since its establishment or reconstruction
under the constitution of 1776; indeed, there had

4. 28 Md., 157.