The Commonwealth of Virginia to the Sheriff of Hampshire County, Greeting. You are hereby commanded to summons twelve fit persons being freeholders to meet upon the land proposed for a road on the petition of sundry inhabitants of Hampshire County, leading from the land of John Torrance through the lands of Mary Smoot down right to near the tract of the old lane that formerly passed by the said Mary Smoot’s house, thence nearest and best way to the new road open on the petition of John Patterson and others and that you then and there charge them upon oath to inquire into the damage which Mary Smoot through whose land the said road will pass will sustain in conveyance thereof. A report duly drawn up and executed under your seal and the seal of the said jurors you are to return to the next court to be holden for Hampshire County in November next together with the writ. Witness John B. White, clerk of our said court at the courthouse aforesaid the 19^th day of October 1821 and in the 46^th year of the Commonwealth.

     Executed James Vance D.S. FOR Edward McCarty

     Inquisition indented and taken on the land of Mary Smoot where the road prayed for leading from the lands of the said Mary Smoot through the lands of the track of the old lane that formerly passed by the said Mary Smoot’s house, thence the nearest and best way to the new road opened on the petition of John Patterson and others. In obedience to a Writ of Ad Quod Damnum to the Sheriff for said county, have summoned and impaneled twelve good and lawful freeholders of my bailiwick no way related to either of the parties, which jury is as follows, to wit: James Powell, William Myers, William Hamilton, George Fletcher, Isaac Cunningham, Alexander Patterson, Jacob Shinholt, Asa Everett, Christopher Kurtz, Eli Delaplaine, David Creaps, and Leonard Menser, who being met this 10^th day of November 1821 upon the land of the aforesaid Mary Smoot in the said county through which the said road is to be conducted to intersect the road opened on the petition of John Patterson and others as mentioned in the said writ will necessarily pass, and being duly sworn were charged by me impartially to the best of their skill and judgment to view the land of the aforesaid Mary Smoot in case the road aforesaid should be established taking into estimation as [?] the use of such land so laid upon for such road as the addition of every which will thereby be rendered necessary, and the jurors aforesaid upon their oaths do say that the damages will be to the aforesaid Mary Smoot to the amount of $10 current money of the United States. In witness whereof the said Sheriff as also the jurors aforesaid have hereunto set our hands and seals the day and year and place herein before mentioned.
     Hampshire County Court: At a court held for the said county, be it remembered that on the 19^th day of November 1821 this Writ of Ad Quod Damnum returned with the Inquisition thereto and ordered to be recorded.



Note:
     Ad quod damnum. The name of a writ formerly issuing from the English chancery, commanding the sheriff to make inquiry “to what damage” a specified act, if done, will tend.
     It is a writ which ought to be sued before the king grants certain liberties, as a fair, market or such like, which may be prejudicial to others, and thereby it should be inquired whether it will be a prejudice to grant them, and to whom it will be prejudicial, and what prejudice will come thereby.
     There is also another writ of ad quod damnum, if any one will turn a common highway and lay out another way as beneficial.
     A “writ of ad quod damnum” is of ancient origin, and could be issued as a writ of right when landowner was dissatisfied with assessment of damages by condemnation commission.
     Source: Black’s Law Dictionary  Sixth Edition, West Publishing Company, 1990.