Introduction.            xxxv

       and, in order that they could the more speedily come to a hearing, the Court
       assigned them counsel, the same four attorneys as before, one or more of
       them to be employed as the petitioners saw fit (post, pp. 244-247). A look
       ahead into the further record of the Provincial Court does not show any at
       tempt by the elder Browne or by Bartholomew to regain title.
         When Cornelius Regan died, in Calvert County some time late in 1673, he
       chose James Humes as his executor, and he left to Humes's daughter Sarah
       “one ifeather bed with Curtaines & Valence & all things to itt belonging” (post,
       p. 381). In due time Humes had Regan's property appraised, and the feather
       bed with its furniture was valued at 1600 pounds of tobacco. On May 16,
       1676, Humes promised Francis Dorrington that, if he would marry Sarah who
       owned the feather bed and its furniture, he would give him a fourth of his
       personal estate. Sarah and Dorrington were married on June 19, 1676 at
       Humes's house on the Clifts in Calvert County. The feather bed and its furni
       ture, and the quarter of his personal estate should have been delivered to Dor
       rington, but Humes did not deliver either of them. Nor did his administra
       tor, John Sunderland, deliver them. Hereupon, husband Francis Dorrington,
       brought two separate suits against the administrator, one for the bed and one
       for the portion of the personal estate. When the case came to trial, June 17,
       1678, Sunderland claimed that he was willing to deliver the bed and had al
       ways been willing to do so, that, in fact, he had tendered it to Dorrington,
       and Dorrington had refused to receive it. Dorrington denied the tender, and
       both parties put themselves upon the country. The jury found for the plaintiff,
       and the Court awarded the Dorringtons the bed, with its curtain and its val
       lances and all its furniture, awarded them also 1050 pounds of tobacco for their
       costs of suit. As to the portion of the personal estate, defendant Sunderland
       pleaded non assumpsit, said, that is, that Humes had made no such promise as
       Dorrington claimed. Again there was a jury trial, and the jury said that
       Humes did assume what Dorrington said. The Court gave the plaintiff his
       damages, and, since they did not know how much he had been injured, ordered
       a writ of inquiry of damages returnable next court. On October 15, 1678, the
       sheriff of St. Mary's County was commanded to summon twelve good and
       lawful men within his bailiwick to enquire what damages Francis Dorrington
       had sustained by reason of the failure of Sunderland to deliver the promised
       personal estate. The jury said Dorrington had sustained 11,8 18 pounds of
       damages, and the Court granted that he recover that sum, and also 3342 pounds
       more for costs, (liber NN, if. 744-745) an unusually high allowance for
       costs.
         Not all of the cases which have in them something interesting can be corn
       mented on here, or the introduction would be as long as the text. Each case,
       however, is entered in the table of cases, under each party, and the contents are
       entered in the index.