SAMUEL SPRIGG, ESQUIRE, GOVERNOR.

1820.

CHAP. CLX.

An Act to confirm and make valid the Acts and Proceedings of Jesse Bodle,
as a Justice of the Peace for Kent County.

WHEREAS Jesse Bodle, of Kent county, was duly commissi-

oned a justice of the peace in and for Kent county for the year
one thousand eight hundred and twenty: And whereas is is sta-
ted that the said Jesse Bodle qualified a justice of the peace
aforesaid, before Philip F. Rasin, Esquire, and that the said
Philip F. Rasin neglected to certify to the clerk of Kent county
court that the said Jesse Bodle had so qualified as a justice of the
peace, which statement appears to be true: And whereas great
inconveniencies will be imposed on sundry persons, unless the said
acts which have been done by the said Jesse Bodle as a justice of
the peace for Kent county, during the year one thousand eight
hundred and twenty, are confirmed and made valid; Therefore,

CHAP. 160.

Passed Feb. 12, 1821.

Preamble.

1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Maryland, That
all acts and proceedings which have been done and made by the
said Jesse Bodle, during the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and twenty, as a justice of the peace for Kent
county, shall be as valid, and shall have the same effect and ope-
ration in law, as if the said Jesse Bodle had been duly qualified
as a justice of the peace of the state of Maryland in and for
Kent county, according to the laws of the state of Maryland.

Acts made valid.

CHAP. CLXI.

An Act for the better regulation of Chancery Proceedings in certain cases.

I. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Maryland, That
wherever a subpoena hath issued or shall hereafter issue from the
chancery court, or from any county court exercising chancery ju-
risdiction, on a bill filed or to be filed in any of the said courts
respectively , and such subpoena hath been or shall hereafter be
duly returned summoned, as to all or any of the defendants there-
in named, and the defendant or defendants, or any of them so re-
turned summoned, shall fail to appear in person or by solicitor,
according to the exigency of the said writ, or having so appeared
shall fail to put in a good and sufficient answer on oath to the said
bill, within the time or times which are or may he prescribed by
the rules of the court from which the said writ issued for answer-
ing to such bill, the said court shall be and hereby is authorised
and required, on the application of the complainant or complain-
ants, or any of them, in person or by solicitor, to enter an inter-
locutory decree in such cause, and to issue a commission or com-
missions, as the case may be, ex parte, to one or more persons, for
the taking of testimony to support the allegations of the said bill,
which commissions shall be issued, proceeded in and returned in
the same manner, and the testimony taken and returned under
them shall have the same effect, as if issued and returned in the
usual way, on answer, general replication and issue, and the court
shall proceed to a final decree in the cause, in the same manner as
if the defendant or defendants had appeared and put in their an-

swer.

Passed Feb. 18, 1821.

Where a subpoena
has issued on a bill
filed, &c. and re-
turned summoned,
court authorised
to enter interlo-
cutory decree, &c.

2. And be it enacted, That whenever any such bill as is men-
tioned in the preceding section, shall charge any matter or thing
as being within the private knowledge of the defendant or defen-

When such bill

shall charge any
matter as being
within the private
knowledge of the
defendant, &c. to
be taken pro con-
fesso, &c.