Thomas Ringgold, Letter to Benjamin Chew, 1743

Thomas Ringgold, Letter to Benjamin Chew, 1743 Kent County Maryland Octr 29th 1743 Dr Sr I embrace this Opportunity by Captn Loyd to convince you that my Friendship extends even to distant Climes when you are there; and very sincerely assure you that neither Time, Space, or Accident shall ever prevent my good Wishes for your Welfare. I likewise inform you that I have lately entered into that State which the Divines say is honourable amongst all Men & hope to enjoy a good deal of Satisfaction therein, for [?] that depends altogether upon the Goodness of the Choice I think I have a fair Prospect, & hope shall have Philosophy enough to think that best which must necessarily Happen. I was complaisant enough however to let me Master be married before me, your Uncle John Galloway is like to conclude a Match with the Widows Fishbourne in Philadelphia. The Quakers in Pensylvania have carried their Election, without Opposition. I saw Uncle Peter, & Sammy Johns not long since, who acquainted me with the agreeable Miss N—ys Welfare, which perhaps may be News not ungrateful to you; but Peter’s opposing your Father in the Election by which means he says yr Father miss’d getting in to the Assembly has made an open Rupture between them in so much that they don’t speak to each other. Uncle Peter, I think, seems, by his Conversation, to be inclined to change Sides, and if I can Prophecy, with the help of this Difference, in a few Years he’l be a profess’d an Enemy to the Pensylvania Government as ever he was to that of Maryland. As I shall always have Dependance enough on your Friendship to have Discourse to you in any Difficulties that I may meet with in the Books, hope you’l give me an Answer in these two Points, as you may take an Opportunity of hearing them controverted, I suppose by able Judges where you reside. One is, suppose a Man is barr’d of his Right of Entry by the 21 of Iac. 1 Chap. 16 for not prosecuting his Claim within twenty years after his Right of Entry accrues & should have a Right of Action remaining, whether he could not be relieved by a Real Action allowed by the 32 of Hen 8 Chap. 2 for I cant sees but that Stat. is still in Force, tho Real Writs are now much disused; there is two Cases you’ll find in Salh. 421 Stokes versus Berry, & 341 Hunt versus Burn. one of which seems to be for, & the other against it. Tho other is Tenant in Tail aliens his land to A in Fee & covenants that he has, good Right, true Title & lawful Authority to sell & further covenants that he will make do & execute any such other Act or Acts Conveyances or Assurances in Law, at the proper Covt & charge of the said A as A. or his Council shall advise or require. whether by such a Deed Tenant in Tail can be compelled to suffer a Common Recovery to A. These are Points that I should be glad to be satisfied in, & kindly acknowledge yr Favour in advising concerning them the first Opportunity, I should with Pleasure hear of yr Welfare & hope yr Voyage worth communicating. I believe all yr Friends both in Maryland & else where are well as you left them. Writer Thomas Ringgold Date written 1743 Paper x in x x in Pen Penmanship Style Collection Historical Society of Pennsylvania Chew family papers Collection 2050 Chew, Benjamin (1722-1810) Correspondence Thomas Ringgold to Benjamin Chew (1773) File name Thomas Ringgold 1xxx-00x-00x-00x