Case Name: John Somervell against Henry Hunt
Court: General Court of Maryland
Jurisdiction: Maryland
Decision Date: 1792-10
Citations: 3 Md. 113
Docket Number: 
Parties: John Somervell against Henry Hunt.
Judges: 
Reporter: Maryland reports, being a series of the most important law cases argued and determined in the Provincial Court and Court of Appeals of the then province of Maryland, from the year 1700 [i.e. 1658] down to the [end of 1799]
Volume: 3
Pages: 113–115

Head Matter:
GENERAL COURT,
OCTOBER TERM, 1792.
John Somervell against Henry Hunt.
THIS was an appeal from Calvert county court. It was an action on the case for the escape of a runaway negro.
By the bills of exceptions taken at the trial at September term, it appears:
1. The plaintiff offered in evidence an advertisement in the Maryland Gazette, which advertisement is as follows: '■'■May 6, 1784. Committed to Calvert county gaol, as a runaway, on the 1st instant, Negro Tom, who says he belongs to John Somervell, of St. Mary's county. The owner is desired to take him away and pay charges.
“ Henry Hunt, Sheriff.”
The plaintiff offered to prove that Francis Williams, at the time when the advertisement and gazette were published, and when the escape is supposed to have happened, was the deputy and gaoler of the defendant, and that the said Williams confessed that he had advertised the said negro. The defendant objected to the said advertisement being admitted as evidence to the jury.
The Court were of opinion that the advertisement should not be read in evidence. To this the plaintiff excepted.
2. The plaintiff then offered in evidence, that the Negro Tom belonged to him; that the said negro ran away, and was apprehended and brought before Leven Mackall, Esquire, one of the justices of the state for Calvert, county, who, on examination, finding good cause to commit the said runaway, wrote the following instrument of writing, purporting to be a warrant to commit the said negro to the sheriff of Calvert county, to be safely kept in the gaol of the said county, to wit:
“ To the sheriff of Calvert county, or his deputy. I send you herewithal the body of Negro Tom, the property of Mr. *fohn Somervel', of St. Mary’s county, (as the said negro informs me,) brought before me this day, (on suspicion of his being runaway.) You will therefore receive the said Negro Tom into your custody, in our county gaol, and him safely keep till he be delivered thence by the order of law. Given under, my hand this 1st day of May, IPS4.
“ Leven MackallN
In consequence of which the said negro, together with the said writing, was taken to a certain Francis Williams, then gaoler and deputy for the defendant, being at the time sheriff of Ca'vert county. That the said deputy received said negro into his custody, and put him into the gaol of the county, from whence he made his escape.
The defendant prayed the court to direct the jury that the paper purporting to be a commitment was void, and that the said negro was not lawfully in the custody of the defendant, and that the defendant is not liable for damages in this action.

Opinion:
The Court
were of opinion, and So directed the jury, that the paper purporting to be a commitment was void, and that the said negro was not lawfully in the custody of the defendant; and that the defendant is not liable to this action, or any damages to the plaintiff, in the manner and form as the said action is prosecuted.
The plaintiff excepted to this opinion and direction of the court.
The objection in this case was, that the warrant of commitment by the justice was not under seal, and the county court determined, that on that account, the action would not lie.
Martin, (Attorney-General,) for the appellant.
Pinkney, for the appellee.
The general court affirmed the judgment.