clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e
  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search search for:
clear space
white space
Somerset County Judicial Records, 1740-1742
Volume 861, Page 45b   View pdf image
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
    November Court               1740                   45   B

the matter in the same Contained is not sufficient in Law to preclude the Court here from having cognizance of the plea of the
af.d Giles and that he the same Giles to the plea of the af.d James in manner and form af.d Pleaded he hath no need nor by the Law
of the Land is in any Sort held to answer and this he is ready to Verifie wherefore for want of a sufficient Plea by the af.d James
in this part the same Giles prays Judgment and that the Court hereof the plea af.d will take further Cognizance and that the
af.d James to the writ af.d may further answer &c  And for Causes of Demurrer to the plea af.d the same Giles according the form
of the statute in the like case lately and provided shews to the Court here that the said James should ^have^ concluded his plea his plea
with a Hoc paratus et verificare that the af.d James (his plea being a foreign plea) he ought to have made affidavit or have shewn
some probably Cause of the truth of the plea before the filing thereof that the af.d plea is altogether in certain insufficient and
wants form
                            Whereupon the said James Peterkin and Elizabeth pray Leave thereof to Imparle here untill next Court to be held
att dividing Creek the third Tuesday of August then next following and they have it and the same day is given to the aforesaid
Giles here &c         Att which day here Came againe as well the aforesaid James Peterkin and Elizabeth his wife as the
afd Giles Bashaw in their proper persons and whereupon the said James says that the plea af.d of him the said James and
the matter therein Contained are Sufficient in Law to preclude the Court here from ^having^ cognizance of the plea af.d of the said Giles which
matter the said Giles hath not gainsayed or the same in any sort answered but the verification of the same James to admit
altogether hath refused and this he is ready to verify  Wherefore as before the said James intends not that the Court here of the
plea af.d cognizance further to take will &c                     Whereupon all and singular ^the premisses^ being seen and by the Court here
fully understood as well to the writt afd as the aforesaid plea of the aforesaid defend.ts in quashing of the writt aforesaid above
pleaded it seemeth to the Court here that the same plea is not Sufficient in Law to the aforesaid Writt of the afd plantiffe to
quash and that the same writt be adjudged good not withstanding the said plea of the aforesaid defend.ts in quashing the
same writt in form afd pleaded.   Therefore it is Considered that the afd deft to the afd plantife to the action aforesaid
further answer                                 And the said Giles Bashaw Complained against the afd James Peterkin & Eliz.a his wife in the
plea afd in form following
                                              Somerset ss    James Peterkin late of Somerset County planter and Elizabeth his wife were attached
to answer unto Giles Bashaw of a plea of trespass upon the Case &c

                            And Whereupon the same Giles by William Arbuckle his attorney Complains that whereas on the
day of                     seventeen hundred and thirty at Somerset County af.d a Certain discourse was had and moved between the said
Elizabeth when she was sole and the said Giles of and concerning the sale of a Negroe Caled Sampson to the same Giles by the said
Elizabeth upon which discourse then and there had the said Elizabeth for and in Consideration of twelve pounds Current money of
Maryland by the same Giles to the said Elizabeth then and there agreed to be paid did bargain and sell to the same Giles and to
his proper use the af.d Negroe and then and there by Bargain warranted and affirmed the Negroe af.d to be but eight years of age
and also that he was sound and free from any distemper and the same Giles in fact saith that at the time of the sale warranty and
affirmation af.d the said Negroe was a Lunatick and troubled ^with^ Epeliptick fits and also above the age of Eight Years and so the
Same Giles putting Confidence in the Warranty and affirmation of the said Elizabeth against the form of the Warranty and
                                                                                                                                                                   affirmation


  		clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Somerset County Judicial Records, 1740-1742
Volume 861, Page 45b   View pdf image
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.

Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!

An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact msa.helpdesk@maryland.gov.

©Copyright  August 17, 2024
Maryland State Archives