xii Preface.

During his administration the question of Maryland's jurisdiction
over the Potomac came up, on the occasion of two vessels seized in that
river by a British man-of-war, whose case it was proposed to try before
a Virginia court. Upon proper representation, Governor Botetourt
and the Virginia authorities recognized Maryland's rights at once, and
the vessels were released.

Some references will also be found to the third great spoliation of
Maryland, which, begun by Lord Fairfax in 1733 by locating his east-
ern line far within the charter boundaries of Maryland, without any
notification to that Province, and protested against by Maryland for
nearly 180 years, has lately received final judicial approval.

In the Minutes of the Board of Revenue, beside much interesting
information in regard to the financial system of the Province, will be
found some account of the proceedings of the Rev. Bennett Allen, a
greedy, brawling and blustering parson, a sort of parasite of Frederick,
Lord Baltimore, who—probably to get rid of him—sent him to Mary-
land, gave him two fat benefices, and made him his Receiver General, in
both which capacities, spiritual and temporal, he made more trouble
than his head was worth. After a brief but stormy sojourn he returned
to England, carrying his grudges with him, and in London he shot and
killed Lloyd Dulany.

The opinions of eminent English lawyers on the regulation of officers'
fees are appended because they throw light on a question which greatly
agitated the Province in 1770, and which seems to be imperfectly under-
stood.

In England the King had the unquestioned right to settle the fees of
his own officers, and this right in Maryland was one of the jura regalia
conferred upon the Proprietary by his charter. The Governor and
Council, who represented the Proprietary, exercised the right of draw-
ing up a tariff of fees, which was submitted to the Assembly for con-
firmation as a matter of grace rather than of right; while the Assembly
claimed the right of preventing these fees from being excessive. Hence
the Acts passed at various sessions establishing fees usually bore the
title " An Act for the limitation of officers' fees."

The Council being also the Upper House of Assembly, there were
occasionally disputes between the two Houses on this subject. As the
fees were payable in tobacco, and the value of that commodity fluctuated
considerably, the acts were drawn for a short term of years, and were
revived or modified at their expiration. At times, as in 1642 and 1733