528 Assembly Proceedings, September 1664.

U. H.
Journal
1659-65
p. 216

p^rtendeth Right or power, and therefore that Error is humbly
supposed to be vshered in, Rather to amuse this Assembly w^th
fallasy and vncertainty then vpon any ground of truth Lawe,
or Reason for the Court gave Judgem^t as well vpon the view
of Abell Snowes booke of acd as severall other papers.
To the second Error the s^d Gerrard doth positively deney that
the hono^ble Chancellor now being was att the tyme of the
judgem^t or the dismiss of the Court of Chancery in the s^d Case
before menconed, Cheife Judge of the Court of Chancery for
th^t before that tyme or att any tyme since he never was by
authority proclaymed as cheife Judge of the Chancery Court
or was he reputed or taken soe to be or ever admitted soe to
sitt or did he ever that he knoweth thereof assume that place
or power as Cheife Judge of that Court But that the Leiv-
tenn^t Generall that now is hath from tyme to tyme by vertue of
his Com^on as he supposeth satt as Judge of that Courte since
his Arrivall into this Province, for other ways if itt should be
granted that the hono^ble Leiutenn^t Generall in Judgem^t of lawe
sitting in the Courte of Chancery be inferiour in place or pre-
cedency to the Chancellor were to render the person whome
he Representeth, to say the R^t hono^ble the Lord Prop^ry inferior
to those w^dl are subjects vnder his dominion which would
seeme strange and incongruous both to lawe & reason. And
the s^d Gerrard doth suppose that the Chancellor is. not consti-
tuted here in this Province according to the full & ample
authority & regulacon of the lawes and Customes of engld.
But by vertue of a com^on from the Lord Prop^r of this Province
and soe hath not such ample authority as is supposed, but
grant itt were soe yett nevertheles the Lord Prop^r hath not as
yett parted with his perticuler authority in that Court for the
s^d Leivtenn^t Generall doth to this day sitt in Chancery as cheife
Judge and all Addresses are made to him & his Councell &
soe was itt in Snowes case therefore the second Error cannot
howld but is as the s^d Gerrard supposeth superfluous & imma-
teriall

p. 217

To the third Error the s^d Gerrard answereth and sayth that
what the s^d Snowe doth principally alledge is false and vntrue
for that the Courte was not surprised nor did they give their
Judgm^ts really vpon any Evidence produced before them but
vpon the view of the Records of this Province And the com-
paracon of Abell Snowes booke of acc^ts & the s^d records &
papers by which itt did plainely truly & clearely apeare That
that Recognizance was sattisfyed in lawe as by the Records of
that Court may more plainly appeare the Coppy of which the
s^d def^t hath heere to produce but grant itt were soe yett never-
theless Snowe by his mutuall consent & submission to the
Arbitracon of the board hath concluded himselfe in poynte of