Eburnethy won distinction in the criminal annals of this county by carrying off both "red" and "blue." Hannah Jonson had anticipated him, however, for two badges without specification of color had been awarded her in May, 1706, with only ten stripes as the price in each case as against Eburnethy's twenty-one.

Notwithstanding this fact the Court showed greater consideration to Eburnethy, by graciously inquiring whether he "did approve of the jury as he was tryed by," and he, making a virtue of necessity, replied most courteously "that he did approve of them very well."

This incident shows a refinement of manners on the part of the Justices that did not manifest itself in 1700, when George Oldfield, who had been charged with the illegal sale of liquor, was called to the Bar and told to produce his license. The record reads: "He having none, the Court ordered him to get one if he can forthwith."

Like Court, like Clerks. A few years after the exchange of courtesies between the Court and Eburnethy, a Clerk did his best to transform an ugly indictment into an affair of gallantry by endorsing on its back the following lines:

Old Kerwend Luftfull Jo: with trembling air the old win fin alt forendly to the ffair

From 1682 to 1718, there are few indictments now on file, and some of them will never again be read. One in

particular, that

looked historic

Billa: Vera

ally inviting, I attempted to open, but no sooner did I touch it than it crumbled into dust-an old Billa Vera-or as some ancient and

Kill averey

unlettered

foreman

would occasionally call it, "Bill averey."

Whom did it accuse? I do not know, nor will you; the only words I could decipher, and those but dimly, were "Quarter Sessions.'

What was the jurisdiction of the County Court on its criminal side?

Generally speaking, it had jurisdiction of all breaches of the peace, misdemeanors, and other offences except heinous and enormous crimes, such as witchcraft, treason, murder, and manslaughter, and, after 1693, burglary,

rape, and arson, which were reserved for the Judges of the Provincial Court.

Among the various offences that were tried in the Court of Quarter Sessions from 1682 to 1710, I note the following: Taking a wife contrary to the good and wholesome laws of the Province; having a child too soon after marriage; stealing; "harboring doggs that worries the neighbors Hoggs;" speaking slanderous words; selling beer without license; fornication; adultery; incontinency; incest; keeping disorders in a house on the first day of the week; drunkenness; swearing; extortion; assault and battery; detaining swine; marking a horse that had been marked before; divining by a stick; geomancy; abusing the magistrates generally and particularly for calling Governor Penn a rogue and Justice Blundstone a knave; burglary (concerning which the Provincial Court will have something to say); neglect of roads; remaining in the government contrary to an order of banishment and "importing into the Province of Pennsylvania sundry commodities of the growth, production and manufacture of Europe, which were not bona fide laden or shipped in England, Wales, or the Town of Barewick on the Tweed."

Those who turn to the Common Pleas side of the Old County Court, unless they be lawyers, or unless-what is most unlikely-they be interested in scandal and defamation, will not linger long over its record. Such actions as, unjustly detaining lands, disparaging a title to land and illegally cutting timber thereon, are not specially inviting. It is true there is also a liberal sprinkling of "debt upon a bond" and "debt upon an account. With these actions a book-keeper might be concerned, and it is not inconceivable that one or more members of our Historical Society, upon examining a certain action of ejectment, might be induced profitably to employ their leisure in locating the Island of Tynnacum; but for myself, I am resolved not to enter. Four scandal and defamation suits at one sitting of the Court are too many for a peace-loving citizen who has lived for more than half a century in the non-gossiping town of West Chester.

I prefer to pause on the Equitable threshold of this Court. In 1687, among the several queries propounded by the Assembly to the Provincial Council, was the following: "How far the County Quarter Sessions may be

judges of Equity as well as Law; and if after a judgment at law, whether the same Court hath power to resolve itself into a Court of Equity and to mitigate, alter, or reverse the said judgment?"

This question was answered with Delphic ambiguity:

Penn reckoned it among the happy features of Indian life that it was "not perplexed with Chancery suits." He also hoped to prevent lawsuits through three Peacemakers chosen by the County Court.

Three years shattered his dreams and blasted his hopes. Three years demonstrated the inability of the Peacemakers to "end the differences between man and man," and on the 5th day of the 1st week of the 10th month, 1686, a Court of Equity for Chester County was held at Chester by the Justices of the Common Pleas, under the title of Commissioners.

In 1690, an Act was passed providing that the "County Courts shall be Courts of Equity for the hearing and determining of all causes cognizable in the said Court under the value of ten pounds."

In 1701, the "Act for establishing Courts