Proceedings of the Council of Maryland, 1752. 553

of Land, at the time of making the Royal Order, possessed by,
or under his late Ancestor
As your Claim now, appears founded on the Right of M^r
John Digges, and the Possession of him, his Tenant or Tenants
under that Right I presume clear Proofs ought to be made
1^st That M^r Digges had Right to Land under Lord Baltimore
2^dly That the Place where the Act was done, lyes within the
Limits of that Land
3^dly That M^r Digges, his Tenant, or Tenants were possessed
of such Place at the time of the Royal Order

Lib. C. B.

I have perused the Papers inclosed to me as Evidence, &
with regard to the first Point, cannot find the Authority by
which M^r Digges made his Surveys so much as mentioned
As to the second — Whether the Place where the Act was
done, lyes within the Limits held by M^r Digges — It seems to
me, highly improper to rely on the Memory of M^r Owings,
concerning a Transaction so many years ago; when the Matter
is capable of Demonstration, by now surveying the Land of
M^r Digges according to his Certificate of survey & Patent
which I conclude, from the Assertions in your Letter, must be
registered in your Land Office. If you please to furnish me
with Copies of them, they will not only enable me to satisfy
myself on this Point, but the first, by shewing M^r Digges held
under the Proprietor of Maryland
As to the third Point. I am at present inclined to think
that It is not the manner of dispossessing M^r Digges, before
the Royal Order, but his, or his Tenants under him, being in
actual Possession, at the time of making it, that can give a
Jurisdiction to your Proprietor. It is very probable Art
Fraud and Violence were too frequently used amongst the
Borderers, concerning their Possessions, and I wish M^r Digges,
considering his Misfortune, may be less culpable than the rest
of his Neighbours, but to avoid these, and establish future
Peace and Tranquility, were the Articles and Order made, by
which the Possession of Lands then held under Either Pro-
prietor, however obtained, and their Jurisdiction over such
Lands, respectively, were granted and confirmed
Seeing, the Question before Us,is in a Criminal Case, wherein
the Life of One of his Majestys Subjects seems immediately
concerned (for possibly upon the Jurisdiction, the Nature of
the Crime may depend) I must offer it to your Consideration,
whether I ought to admit as sufficient Proof, ex parte Deposi-
tions taken in your Province, and One of them many years ago
upon some other Occasion, or whether Law and Reason do
not require, that the Witnesses should appear and depose in

p. 491

this Province, in order to give the Prisoner the Benefit of
cross examining and counter proving them if he can. I do

36

p. 492