
    GENERAL COURT,
    OCTOBER TERM, 1796.
    Rinaldo Johnson against Richard H. Courts.
    T'HIS was an appeal from Prince George’s county court, from a judgment rendered at September term, 1795.
    It was an action of trespass qudre clausum fregit, brought against Johnson, the defendant, for entering the close of the plaintiff, treading down his grass with horses, &c. arresting, taking and carrying away six negroes, and also declared that the plaintiff “ eight other negroes of the price of, &c. with clubs, &c. forced and drove away from the premises, so that the said R. lost the benefit of their labour, by which his crop, then growing upon the premises, was greatly damaged,” &c.
    At the trial of the cause, the plaintiff offered, among other things, to prove consequential damages done to his crop, by reason of the defendant’s forcing and driving away eight of his negroes from his premises, as alleged in the declaration.
    To this evidence the defendant objected, as being in» competent and improper, either to support the action, or in aggravation of damages.
    The court were of opinion that evidence of consequential damages sustained by the plaintiff in his crop by reason of the driving away of the eight negroes by the defendant, as mentioned in the declaration, is proper evidence in this cause.
    The defendant excepted to this opinion, and appealed.
    
      Key and Killy, for the appellant,
    
      Gantt and T. Buchanan, for the appellee.
   The General Court

affirmed the judgment of the county court.  