ART. 75] FORMS OF PLEADINGS—DECLARATIONS. 1643

30. That the defendant debauched and carnally knew the
plaintiffs wife; or that the defendant debauched and carnally
knew the plaintiff's daughter and servant, whereby he lost her
service.

Mercer v. Walmsley, 5 H. & J. 27. Keller v. Donnelly, 5 Md. 211. Green-
wood v. Greenwood, 28 Md. 369. Lamb v. Taylor, 67 Md. 85.

31. That the defendant converted to his own use, or wrong-
fully deprived the plaintiff of the use and possession of the
plaintiffs goods; that is to say, wheat, rye, household furniture
(or as the case may be).

Meixsell v. Carr, 25 Md. 46. Streeks v. Dyer, 39 Md. 427. Manning v.
Brown, 47 Md. 507. Crocker v. Hopps, 78 Md. 260.

32. That the plaintiff was possessed of a mill, called "Linga-
nore mill," in ——— county, and as such possessor was entitled
to the flow of a stream for working the same, and the defend-
ant, by cutting the bank of said stream, diverted the water
thereof away from the said mill.

Addison v. Hack, 2 Gill, 221. McTavish v, Carroll, 7 Md. 352. Ibid., 13
Md. 429. Ibid., 17 Md. 1 Brooke v. Winters, 39 Md. 505. Lawson v.
Price, 45 Md. 123. Price v. Lawson, 74 Md. 499. Kay v. Kirk, 76 Md. 41.
N. Y., Phil. & Norfolk R. R. Co. v. Jones, 94 Md. 30.

33. That the plaintiff was possessed of land, called " Idle-
wild," in ——— county, and was entitled to a way from said
land, over the land of the defendant, to a public highway, for
himself and his servants, with horses and wagons, to go and
return at all times, at his and their free will, for the more con-
venient occupation of the said land of the plaintiff; and that
the defendant deprived him of the use of said way.

McTavish v. Carroll, 7 Md. 352. Dowling v. Bennings, 20 Md. 179.
Brown v. Trustees, etc., 37 Md. 108. Baker v. Frick, 45 Md. 337 Maenner
v Carroll, 46 Md. 193. Oliver v. Hook, 47 Md. 301. Sapp v. N. C. R. W.
Co , 51 Md. 115. Cox v Forrest, 60 Md. 74. Schaldt v. Blaul, 66 Md. 141.
Albert v. Thomas, 73 Md. 181. DuVal v. Becker, 81 Md. 537. Offut v.
Montgomery Co., 94 Md. 120.

34. That the defendant falsely and maliciously spoke and
published of the plaintiff the words following, that is to say :
"he is a thief;" (if there be any special damage, here state it
with such reasonable particularity as to give notice to the
defendant of the particular injury complained of, for instance,)
whereby the plaintiff lost his situation of bookkeeper in the
bank of Washington.