Glass_J Fi% Rnnk ,• - v!, BRIEF SKETCH, OF MARYLAND, ITS etEOGRAPHY, BOUNDARIES, HISTORY GOVERNMENT, LEGISLATION, INTER- NAL IMPROVEMENTS, &C, [j PRINTED FOR THE PUBLISHER. CONTENTS* GEOGRAPHY. Ch ApTE R 1— Name — Situation — Boundary— Extent — Population, pp. 1 Chapter II — Natural Divisions — Bays— Riv- ers Mountains — Islands Swamps — Face oi the Country Mineralogy &c. PP-S BOUNDARIES. Chapter I— Of the grant of the Charter and Controversies as to the Limits of the State. pp.^5 THE proprietary GOVERNMENT* Chapter I— Of the Nature of the Proprietary Government and Right of the Proprietary of Maryland, pp. 4S Chapter Il--Of the Personal Rights and Revenue of the Proprietary pp. 60 Chapter lll—Of the Pigprietaries o f Mary- . land, p p. 69 IV Oeneral Uiatoryc Chapter 1— A sketch of the History of the State. pp. 76 First Era — From the Coloniaation to the Expulsion of James IJ. pp77 Second Era— From this expulsion to the restoration of the Pro- prietary Government in 1715. Third Era— From 1715 to the trea- ty of Paris in 1763. pp. 87 Revolutionary Era — Containing the proceedings during the A- inerican Revolution. pp. 89 And also the same continued, together with the formation OF THE STATE GOVERN- MENT. pp 95 LEGISLATION. Chapter I— The Common and Statute Laws, pp. 104 Chapter II— Legislation in Maryland pp. Ill united states government. Chapter 1— Formation of the United Statei Government, and connexion ot iVlary land therewith, pp.119 state covernment. Chapter 1— The Laws — Declaiation of Rights — Constitution— Origin of the Law-mnkfng power-Na- ture of the Charter— Origin of the Declaration ot Rights, and its connexion with and relation to the Constitution. pp. 127 [Note Books. "l pp, 148 Chaptek II— Right of Suffrage— Eligibility to office — Declaration of Reli- giou9 Belief— Oaths of Office, pp. 154 IVIZSCELLANEOtrs Chapter I— The Revolution of 1S36.— Its causes.and history. — The eight million £111. pp. 188 II— The Reform Bill ofl836-7-— The nature and substance of this bill. pp. 199 The first Election under the Reform Bill and the arrange- ment of the Districts, Guber- natorial & Senatorial, pp 267 III— History of the Internal Im- provement System- — Length & cost of construction, pp 210 IV— The Maryland Judiciary, pp. 228 V— Education and its support.— VI The Academical Fund— Thf [Free School Fund— Colleges Schoola&c. ; pp. 234 VI— Statistics— Census of the State pp. 241 VII— Colored Population — Their numbers and increase— Ulti- mate object and the progress of Colonization. pp, 244 VllI— Trades and emplojmentg — number engaged in the differ- ent, pp. 254 IX— Assessments— Valuation of the whole property of the State. pp, 255 IHARYLAND. CHAPTER I. NAMEj SITUATION, BOUNDARY, EXTENT, POPULATION. wVame. — Crescentia, was the name Lord Baltimore intended to have given to the Territory granted to him by King Charles I. but upon presenting the patent for the royal signature, by way of compliment, the king was as- ked to name the new province; where- upon, he had the blanks left for the pur- pose, filled with Terra Maria, or Ma- ryland, in honor of his wife Henrietta Maria, daughter of Henry the Greats King of France and Navarre. Previ- ous to this grant it was considered as ^art of Virginia. , Situation.— The State of Maryland is situated between 38 degrees, and 39 ^ decrees 44 minutes North latitude, and 75 deg. 10 ram. and 79 deg. 20 min. West longitude from Greenwich. Boundary — It is bounded on the north by Pennsylvania and Delart^are— on the west, soulh-west and south by Virginia — on the east by the Atlantic ocean and the state of Delaware. ExTENT.-^It is 196 miles in length from east to west upon its north boun- dary line; but from the north west to the south eastern extremities of the state, is 240 miles, Iits greatest width is near the eastern boundary of the state, where it is 120 miles and dimin- ishes to its narrowest near Hancock, where the state is but three miles wide; it then again increases so as to be 40 miles on. its western boundary. The superficies of the state is 13,950 square miles, of: which nearly one fifth is es- timated to be water. Let us here take a general and com- pendious glance at the population of the State:— Population— The first emigration to Maryland from Europe was in 1634, 3 In 1665 j the population had reached' aearly 16,000. In 1734, there were about 36,000 •'taxables." In 1755, there were 55,- 319 free white males, 49,908 free whits females, 1,574 male convicts, 407 te- male convicts, 3,592 mulattoes, 42,764 negro slaves — ^I'otal 153,564. In 1790, there were 208,649 whites, 103,036 slaves, 8,043 , free blacks— To- tal 319,728. In 1800, there were 221,998 whites, 107,707 slaves, 19,987 free blacUs— Total 349,692. In 1810, there were 235,117 whites, 111,502 slaves, 33,927 free blacks-r-To- tal 380,546. In 1820, there were 131,743 males, 128,479 females, 260,222 vhites, 107- 398 slaves, 39,730 free blacks— Total 407,350 Of the latter number, there were 79,- 135 represented to be engaged in agri- culture; 18,640 in manufactures and 4,- 771 in commercial pursuits. In 1830 there were 291,108 whites, 102.994 slaves, 52.938 free blacks- Total 447,040. In 1840 there were 316,544 whites?, 89 736 slaves, 61,837 free blacks^- Total 468,117. The increase of population from 1791? to 1820, was, during the ten years, from 1790 to 1800, 13,349J whites, 16,615 ? blacks, free blacks 11,944, slaves 4.671— Total 29,964. During the second ten years 13,119 whites, free blacks 3,795, slaves 13,940; together 17,735 blacks— Total 30,654. During the third ten years 25,105 whites, free blacks^ 5,803. Deduct number of slaves diminished the first ten years 4,204; 1,599— Total 26,704. The increase of the whites during this fifty years was 112,595; of free colored 51,794, while slaves diminish- ed 12,900. : CHAPTER IL Natural divisions — bays — rivers — mountains— islands — swamps — face of the country — mineral- OGY. JVaiural Divisions. — The great Ches- apeake Bay making up througli the middle of the state from north to south, elongated by the Susquehanna river, divides it into two parts, familiarly terraed the Eastern Shore and the Western Shore, The Eastern Shore contains about one third of the superfi- cies of the state. The relative popu- lation of the (wo shores, were, W, Shore. E. Shore, In 1790 212,089 107.638 1800 237,156 112,536 } 1810 263,435 117,121 1820 291,711 115,639 1830 327,548 119,492 1840 350,745 117,382 Within the above period, the princi- pal increase of the population of the ; state has been concentrated in the city i of Baltimore, which swelled in the fifty years, frona a population of 13.- '^503 to 102,313 souls. By abstracting this number from the population of the counties it will be found that the Eas-* tern Shore counties were for some time not very far short of the same ratio ol in- crease with the counties of the Wes- tern Shore. The increase of the form- er amounting to B,289, and the latter only to 30,386 between the years 1790 and 1820;' but from 1820 to 1840 the Eastern Shore increased only 1,743, and tlie western, without Baltimore, 19,459. From 1820 to 1840 Baltimore in- creased 39,575 swelling its population to 102,313 by the census oi 1840. Bays and Rivers.- — The natural ad- vantages of Maryland, for commercial purposes, are of the first order. Her own sea coast indeed is of inconsidera- ble extent, and possesses no inlet invi- ting the entrance ot shipping for trade. The Smepuxen bay,stretching between the capes of Delaware and those of Virginia, is merely a channel between the eastern coast and a succession of Sands and islands. The sea coast of Vir- ginia andMaryland,takentogether,being open the whole year, having regular soundings, all its length, with good anchorage outside of the capes,ha8 justly been pronounced one of "the sufesf, evenest and boldest coasts in the uni- verse." The Chesapeake Bay, which makes in of 61 leagues South the Maryland, line, affords an entrance between Cape Charles and Cape Henry, familiarly called the capes of Virginia, nearly five leagues across, which width is increased within as the bay takes a northernly di- rection, extending two hundred miles up the country — seventy-five of which is in the state of Virginia, and the re- mainder divides the state of Maryand near its centre. This bay affords a good anchorage every where, and many ex- cellent harbors where shipping may ride in safety, protected from every wind that blows. Innumerable stream's of fine navigable waters branch cut on either side, penetrating the country in every direction, besides several noble rivers taking their rise at the base of the Alleghany ridge, or near the north- ern lakes, and flowing from those ele- vated countries, through many a fertile valley, to this great reservoir which might almost be termed an inland Sea, which varies from 7 to 18 miles in breadth, and covers about 2600 square 8 miles, or 1,700,000 acres. It is gener- ally as much as nine fathoms deep. — For fifty miles up the Potomac, that river is but an arm of the Chesapeake. The mouths of all the rivers making from the bay into either shore, are of the same character. The Patapsco, Maggothy, Severn, South River, West River, St. Mary's and York Rivers, on the Western Shore. The Poka- moke, Wycomoco, Chester, Sasafrass, Elk, and North-East Rivers, on the Eastern Shore, have comparatively tri- fling streams making in at their heads. Their tide and depth is from the Ches- apeake, of which al] ot them are but inlets. The Smquelianna River furnishes a greater tribute of fresh water to the ocean than any Atlantic river within the United States. The distance from its source to its mouth, is about 400 miles. Its most remote sources are in the lakes Otsego and Otego, in the western part of New York, iitteen counties of which state are intersected by its branches. Thit enterprising state has already made surveys with a view of connecting these waters by ca- nals with their great commercial empo- 9 rium. To the north, the sources of the Susquehanna approach very near the waters of Lake Ontario, with which, and through it, with all the great nor« thern Lakes, they might be easily con- nected. Westward, its sources are iu the Allegany mountains, and approach, very near the Allegany river, to whicli Pennsylvania, with steady and certain march of improvement, has constructed communications reaching to the great western valley of the Slississippi on one hand, and to her capitol, by the Union Canal and Schuylkill river, on the other. The Susquehanna may be pronounced the great artery of the populous and fertile state of Penn- sylvania, from two thirds of the sur- face, and twenty eight of the counties of which, its waters descend and con- centrating before they reach Maryland flow into the head of the Chesapeake bay, 16 miles within the boundaries of the state, with so ample a volumn of water, that some topographers have contended that the Bay itself was but a continuation of the river Susquehan- na. Much of the products of the exten» sive country watered by this river ar^ brought on its floods or by canal t the' emporium of Maryland; but the difficulties presented by its rapids ob- struct a return of trade. Artificial courses have been made to some extent but the state of Maryland, it is feared, is looking on with too much indifference^ whilst her more industrious neighbors are cutting off, by turnpikes, canals,and rail- roads, the vast advantages which nature iiad so kindly directed into her bosom. Tide water ascends the Susquehanna only a few miles above the mouth of the river, and terminates at Port Deposit, ten miles below the Maryland line.-— Here a succession of rapids commence which continue to interrupt the ascend- ing navigation for nearly fifty miles to Columbia. The descent in that dis- tance is estimated at one hundred and forty feet, and the navigation is practi* cable only during high freshets. Twen- ty miles above Columbia are the Cona- wago Falls, around which, a canal has been dug, one mile in length. From these Falls the ascending navigation improves and meets no serious obstacle for batteaux, up to the Otsego and Ote- ^0 Lakes in New York. The value of the descending trade of the Susquehanna in 1822, was estima- 11 xd at one million, one hundred and sixty-eight thousand, nine hundred and Sfty four dollars. During the months of March and A- pril, 1826, there passed Mar'etta, a vil- lage four miles above Columbia, 65 keel boats, 895 rafts, and 813 arks, which at a moderate estimate was valued at 1,100,000 dollars. The Tide Water Canal which got into operation in 1840 now gives the State of Maryland a share of the trade of this region. The Pctomac River, rising at the eas- tern base, and rushing between ridges of the Alleghany mountains, thence as it were, breaking through the blue rid^e and South mountains, flows in a rapid stream into the Chesapeake, 105 miles below the head of that bay. This river, from its source to the mouth, is the south west boundary of Maryland, dividing it from the state of Virginia^ interrupted however, for the space of a few miles by the District of Co- lumbia, in which, upon the Maryland side, is situated the city of Washing- ton, the seat of the NatiolQl Govern- ment. This part of the territory, as well as Georgetown, situate within the 12 limitsjof the District, was ceded by the State of Maryland to the nation, in the year 1790 for the purpose of erecting a Federal City. It is the characteris- tic of the Potomac that its head waters approach much nearer, and furnish a shorter and better course,for connecting with the waters of the great western valley, and communicating to the Mis* sissippi, than any other of the Atlantic streams. Surveys have been made under the direction of the states of Maryland and Virginia, and also by a corps of Engineers under directions from the United States authorities, to ascertain the practicabilit) of uniting the western with the eastern waters, through this channel. The practicability of the task has been clearly determined, as well as the facility with which connec- tions can be continued from the Poto- mac to the Patapsco on one hand, and from the Ohio to the Lakes on the oth- er, thereby eftecting much the shortest water communication between the sea ports of the Atlantic, and the vast ter- ritories of the west. No one who con- siders the advantages, political as well as comraWcial, which would result from such a connection, can doubt for 13 a moment its ultimate^accomplishinenL The course of the Potoniac, from its source to Cumberland, a distance of 140 miles, is North-East. It here reaches within four or five miles of the Pennsylvania line, to which width the territory of Maryland is reduced for soMe distance. Thence the Potomac taking a S. E. direction, and receiving m its course the south or larger branch, of that river, and the Shenandoah, from the Virginia side, and the Antietam and Monocacy Irom the Maryland side reaches tide water at Georgetown, three miles aEove Washington, and 188 miles below Cumberland. In this distance there are five falls. 1st, Lit- tle Falls 37 feet, six miles above Wash- ington — 2d, nine miles higher up is the Great falls, of 76 feet — 3d, six miles further up, is the Seneca Falls, a rapid descending about 10 feet — 4th^ the Shenandoah Falls of 15 feet high, is sixty miles further up — five miles above the Shenandoah,is Hoar's Falls, Canals iiave been constructed round all these falls, to facilitate navigation. The dis- tance from Washington to the mouth of the Potomac is 300 miles, which is aa, ^jgable for large vessels. The souDd« 14 ings are 7 fathoms at the mouth; 5 at St. George's Island, diminish to three fathoms at Alexandria, and to ten feet from thence to the little falls. This ri- ver is 1 1-4 miles wide at Alexandria, and 7 J-2 miles wide where it enters . the Chesapeake bay. The Patuxentj the Patapsco, the Monocacy; and many other ^fivers of considerable extent, rising in the ele- vated grounds of the Western Shore. and the numerous creeks leading into them, afford by their fall, an immense aggregate of water power, which is em- ployed in propelling machinery for the most useful manufactures, which more than compensates their neighborhood for the want of the conveyance of that navigation which is so singularly enjoy- ed by those resident on the Eastern Shore and the Western borders of the Chesapeake. The Patapsco, heads near the north- ern boundary of the state, and runs south and southeast to ElkRidge Land- ding, eight miles from Baltimore, where it falls down a moderate precipice, and turning eastwardly, spreads by degrees into a broad stream, like a bay. It is navigable as far as Elk Ridge landings 15 a few miles below which, it receives a, stream called Gwinn's Falls. At Whet' stone Point, on which stands Fort Mc° Henrj-, it connects with the basin of water upon which the city of Baltimore is situated, and which receives at its head, a fine mill-stream, called Jones* Falls. Fifteen miles below Baltimore, the Patapsco flows into the Chesa- peake. The Magothy, Severn, South, and West rivers, are navigable waters, pen- etrating a few miles from the west side of the. Chesapeake into Anne- Arundel county. The Paiuxtnt, takes its rise in two branches near the point where Freder- ick. Baltimore, Montgomery and Anne- Arundel Counties intei-sect each other; the branches unite a few miles above the village of Queen-Ann, thence it runs nearly parallel, with the Potomac and has a fine harbor for shipping with- in its mouth. The river is navigable for 50 miiesj its entire length is about 100 miles. It is the dividing line be- tween Saint Mary's, Charles, and= Prince George's Counties, which lay on its south side, and Calvert and Ann^ Arundel, on iti north 16 On the Eastern Shore, the Pocomoke 1 ises in the Cyprus Swamps, and runs south and south-west, forty miles tc J*ocomoke bay, which joins the Chesa- peake at the Virginia line. The Wycomoco runs south west, a- boat twenty miles. The JYanticoke rises in the ridge of the peninsula in Delaware, and runs south and south west, twenty five miles in that state and thirty miles in Mary- land. It is the largest river between the Delaware and Chesapeake bays. The Choptanh, rises in the borders of the same state, in the same ridge, and runs south by west, thirty miles, and west by north, fifteen miles. It is a broad navigable stream and has Cam* bridge situate upon its bank. Qhestcr nre7',risiug in the"stateof Del- aware, divides Kent from Queen Ann's county, in Maryland, and enters the Chesapeake at the head of Kent Island. Sassafras river, running in the same direction, divides Kent from Cecil coun- ty — above this is the Bohemia river. Elk river, rises in Chester county, Pennsylvania^ and runs east and south, twenty-two miles to Elkton, where it receives the Little Elk from the north- 1/ west. Thence it runs south-west, thir° teen miles to the Chesapeake. Navi- gable for vessels drawing twelve feet water to Elkton. The Hudson river makes up from the bay into Dorchester county. Wye river, in like manner, penetrates Talbot county. Besides these, there are many consid- erable creeks, some of which take the name of rivers as they increase in size. Of these on the western shore are; The Monocacy, rising in Pennsylva- nia, and running through a rich valley in Frederick county, receiving in its course the little and tiie larger Pipe creeks, empties into the Potomac at the Montgomery line The Cotoctin, runs at the base of the mountain of that name. The Antietam, rising also ir. Pennsylvania, flowing through Wash- ing county, empties into the Potomac, at Williamsport. Deer creek, in like manner watering Harford county, flows into the Susquehanna above Port De- posit. The neck of land between the Susquehanna aad the Patapsco is inter- sected by several rivers, the Bush, the little Gunpowder, the big Gunpowder, Middle river, &c. most of which are 18 ^.avigable for some miles above where they empty into the Chesapeake. Islands . — KevJ, the largest Island in the Chesapeake bay, is situated op- posite to Annapolis, and constitutes a part of Queen Anne's county. It is twelve miles in length; and about half that in bread tb,havino' a number of good farms and a population of some hun- dred souls. This Island was resorted to by the British, during the late war. Admiral Warner landed and encamped several liundred men upon it, ui the summer of the year 1813, where they remained for six w^eeks. Spesutl island, formed at the mouth of tlie Susquehannah; Black island, a lew miles below; Pool's island at the mouth of Gunpowder; Poplar island, below Kent, and Sharp's island, at the mouth of Choptank rivei; James* island and Hooper's island are all situated in the Chesapeake bay, in this state, as well as two or three of the range of Tan* gier islands^ which are formed opposite and below the mouth of Potomac river. Mountains. — In the western extre- mity, where the state is very narrow, it is very mountainous; being crrsseil 19 by the various ridges of the Alleghany. The Blue mountain, and the South mountain, the most eastern of the range cross the state some distance above Frederick. Swamps. — Maryland divides the Cy- prus Swamp with the state of Delaware, It is twelve miles long from north to south, and six miles wide, containing nearly an area of 50,000 acres. It is a high level basin situate upon the ridg<^, between the Chesapeike and | Atlantic, and contains a great variety of plants, trees, wild beasts and reptiles. jMineralogy. — Iron ore of excellent quality, is plenty in many parts of the state, furnishing materials for a number ot iron works. Copperas and Alum are manufactured on th« Magothy river, near the Chesapeake bay j coal abounds in the western district. Especially ii. Allegany County, which has been just- ly called the Wales of America, is there an immense abundance of Coal, esteem- ed the best in the world, and of Iron in great quantity. The State Geologist has presented some interesting Reports as to the Geological features of the country. Pace of the Couniry. — The jandv 20 upon the Eastern Shore of the Chesa^ peake, are low and level, and in some places covered with stagnant water^- — On the Western Shore, the largest pro- portion of the land between the bay and the first falls of the rivers, has been pronounced level and free from stones; but it is intersected in many directions by hills of considerable elevation. From the first falls to the Blue Ridge, the country becomes more uneven, then hilly, and finally mountainous. Pro- ceeding westward, it continues of the latter description; the South mountain, is the first of the range, then the Blue Ridge, and further on, the Allega- ny mountains, beyond which, we reach the western limits of the state. There are several fine rich vallies west of the Alleghany mountain, particularly along the courses of the Youhiogany. Upon the mountain regions, are situated con- siderable tracts of level country, deno- minated glades^ which afford excellent pasture for herds of cattle, which are merely marked by their owners and driven here to subsist until they are fit for market. Between the Allegany and the Blue Ridge, lies a rich fertile limestone vallev. 21 Turning to speak of the United States, Malta Brun, in his excellent modern geography says: **\Ve now approach a raore genial climate, where the foiest puts forth a vigorous vegetation and the fields are covered with abundant harvests. In this region, man is every where occu- pied in building houses, in founding cities, in opening new lands, and in subjugating nature. >Ve hear, on all sides, theblow.s of the hatchet, and the blasts of the forge: we see the ancient forests delivered to the flames, and the plough passing over their ashes. We observe smiling cities, temples, and palaces, rise up within a short distance of cabins inhabited by Indian savages. We now tread the soil of federal Am- erica, that land of liberty, peopled by numerous colonies whom oppression and intolerance forced to leave the Bii- tish isles, and the other parts of Eu- rope." Our countrymen would be apt to consider this picture of improvement as only applicable to the new states of the Union. Already Virginia, Maryland, Delaware and the eastern states are looked upon, and spoken of as ancient 22 . domhiions in regard to the other states. But the portrait is true when reviewed fiom Europe. What vast resources* what fields for cultivation still remain untouched in Maryland! May we not hope that the spirit of improvement, now '^abroad in the land,'' will not on- ly tend to develope, tut also insure the improvement of these resources? 21 n © S^ 2) IB ^ Q MARYLAND- CHAPTER I. Of the grant of the Charter anp controversies as to the limits of THE State. By the discovery and exploration of the continent of North America, by Sebastian Cabot, in the year 1498, the crown of Great Britain was considered as entitled to dispose of that part of the country which is now comprehended within the bounds of the State of Mary- land. Accordingly, in 163^2, a charter v;as granted by Charles I, to Cecilius, Baron of Baltimore, for a grant of land which seems to be much more exten- sive than that which now constitates the limits of the State. How the restriction of these original limits took place will be seen in ths course of our remarks. In the yea? 24 16'20, previous to the granting ol Mary- land to Lord Baltimore, a charter had been granted to the ''Council of Ply- mouth for the planting and governing of that country called A'etu England'^ and which invested that company with the riglit of soil and government over all the country, lying between the 40th and 48th degrees oi" north latitude. — The grant to Lord Baltimore extended on the North to the "40th degree of latitude, where New England is termin- ated;" so that the line of demarcation on the north was sufficiently distinct, one might suppose, to prevent all al- tercation. The settlements of this com- ])any were at that time confined within the present limits of Massachusetts. In the year 1606, a j^rant had been made to a company, called the London Company ,\\'h\c\\ had the right of making settlements between the 38th and 45t'i degrees and which in 1609 obtained a new grant under the name of the ''Treasurer and Co. of .-Adventurers of the oily of London for the first colony of Virginia," and to whom was granted the rigliis to the land north and south of Cape Comf'jrt two hundred miles in both directions; and ia 1611, a third 25 chaiter was granted to the same extent. The colony of Virginia remained under these charters till 1623, when in con- sequence of the refusal of the company to accept in place of the charter which they had, another charter, such as the king should grant, a quo tvarrunto was issued, and the charter annulled, the rights of the company re-vested in the crown, and Virginia rendered what was termed a ''Royal Government." Thus, before the charter was granted to Lord Baltimore, the king had again the right to grant to him the land, which was comprehended in the first Virginia grants, as he did. And in fact previous to the grant of this charter, no settlements had been made within the limits of Maryland, with the exception of a small colony on Kent Island under William Clayborne, who in the years 1626, '27, and '28, ob- tained licenses from the government of Virginia to trade in and to discover the sources of the Chesapeake. He also received a license from Charles 1 in 1631 to trade in all those seas and coasts &/C., in those parts where there had been no previous grant from the crown. This was the only settlement in Marj* 26 land at the time of the grant to Lor^ Baltimore. Notwithstanding this however, and the perfect right whicli the king had to i[;rant the country within the limits of Maryland at that time^ to Lord Bal- timore, still there was great opposition on the part of Virginia to a grant which included a part of what had formerly belonged to her limits. In 1633 she complained of this to the Privy Codneil,, which adjudged however, that Lord Baltimore should be left in possession^ of his grant and the petitioners to their remedy at law, if they had any such* In 1634 Clayborne requested the advice of the Government of Viiginia as to the course he should pursue in his difficulties with Lord Baltimore, when they expressed their surprise at such a fjuestion, and remarked that they saw no reason for surrendering their right to the Island of Kent, or to any other territory formally granted to their colony by his majesty's patent. They were desirous of having the old charters con- sidered as being still in force, notwith- standing the judgment of forfeiture against them by quo warranto in 16'24. Accordingly the Assembly of Virgini& 2T presented a petition to the House of Commons in which they prayed the restoration ot the ancient patents. — This prayer was, however, soon dis- avowed by the Governor and Council and the question put to rest by the Kinds' reply in 164:2. Thus did the claims of Virginia to the territory of Maryland cease until the assumption of the government of Maryland by the commissioners of Crom well, when some of them urged him to take it out of the hands of the Propiietary and attach it again to Virginia. This was not done however, and in 1658 the Proprietary's Governor, Fendall, again took posses-, sion of the State, since which time all claim of jurisdiction on the part of Virginia has entirely ceased. Claims of Claybonie. — Clayborne, as statsd above, claimed his right as subordinate to Virginia, and in 1634 applied to the government of that State lor advice as to his couiseand recei vino- countenance in his pretensions from them, refused submission to Lord Baltimore. In the latter part of 1634, Lord Balti- more gave orders to seize him, and he ivas, after considerable resistance, oo 28 llged to fly to Virginia. Tlie vessei which he had fitted out against the colony was captured and he himself compelled to seek lefuge in Virginia. He was demanded of the goveinor of that State, who did not surrender him up, under pretence of respect for the King' license to him to trade, but sent him to England, to await the decision of the King. He then petitioned the king for a confirmation of his grant and a restoration of his possessions. But in 1638, the commissioners finally ad- judicated upon it, giving the title to J./Ord Baltmiore znd asserting that no settlements ought to be made or com- merce canied on witliout his license. Clayborne then became a petitioner to the Governor and Council of Maryland ior the restoiation of his confiscated property. The rejection of this peti- tion induced iiim to join with a certain Richard Ingle, who had been proclaim- ed a Traitor to the king, and, \vho to- gether with Clayborne, excited a for- midable rebellion in the province, even compelling the Governor to fly to Vir- ginia for protection in 16 i5, after whicli Clayborne assumed the powers of government together with Ingle: and 29 indeed remained in possession until 1646, during which time many of the records of the government were de- stroyed. In 1651, the parliament having ob- tained the supremacy in England, a commission was issued to Clay borne, Fuller and others, to reduce and govern the colonies within the Chesapeake Bay. Virginia soon yielded, and in 1652 Stone, the proprietary's governor submitted and was permitted to retain and administer the government in the name of the Keepers of the liberty of England. It remained in his hands until July 1654, when, during the time of Cromwell's usurpation, he endeavor- ed to maintain his power by force of arms, but was defeated, and taken prisoner, and Clayborne and his asso- ciates assumed the rule ot the Province, and appointed commissioners to ad- minister it. In 1658, the province was again restored to the proprietary by treaty and thus ended the claims of Clay- borne, as well as of Virginia, to any jurisdiction over the territor} of Mary- land. South Eastern Boundary.— Some con- troversy having arisen relating to the 30 location of Watkins' vpoint, the point which the charter of Maryland called for to the south east cf the State, in the year 16G8, a commissioner was appoint- ed for Maryland and another for Virginia', who settled the point as that made by th.^ "North side of Pocomoke Bay and the Sualh side of Annamessex Bay," and tiius tnded the diiiiculty which existed as to that point. JVorthern and Eastern Boundaries.-^- The charter of Maryland called for "the 40th degree of latitude on the north, where New England is termina- ted." This wns sufficiently distinct of itself, but a settlement had been made by the Swedes on the Delaware, which settlement was reduced by the Dutch West India Company in 1655, when the vSwedish colonists became the sub- jects of the States General and submit- ted to the government of New Nether- lands. The settlement being small seems to have attracted but little atten- tion, until 1G59; when the Governor and Council of Maryland appointed a commissioner 'Ho repair to the pretend- ed Governor of a people seated in Delaware Bay, and inform him that ihev were seated within his lord ' * Bi province without notice," and ah® to offer them protection, if they would submit to his authority. Laying claim to the country, they refused to do this, when an agent was appointed to pro* ceed to Holland to enforce upon the West India Company the claims of the proprietary to the territory in question and to require its abandonment. This requisition was not complied with, though orders were given by the com- pany to the settlers to withdraw from the territory about Cape Henlopen; but New Castle and the adjacent coun- try was still retained in their posses- sion. In 1664, Charles II, granted to his brother James Duke of York, all that tract of country extending from the west banks of Connecticut, to the eas- tern shore of Delaware, and conferred upon him the power to govern the same. An armament was despatched under Colonel Nicholls for the reduc- tion of this New Netherlands, and in the same year, the settlements upon the Delawar2 were surrendered to these forces, and were by them admitted to all the privileges of English subjects. — From this period until the grant of 32 Penn, these settlements, embracing a small extent of country along the Dela- ware, continued as the dependencies of the government of New York, although clearly within the limits of Maryland, as granted to Lord Baltimoreo In 1680 Penn petitioned Charles 11 for a grant of lands westward of Dela- ware and north of Maryland. In 1681, after consultation with the Secretary of the Duke of York and with Lord Baltimore's agents, the grant was made to him in which the boundary called for on the south was "a circle of twelve miles drawn around New Castle to the beginningofthe 40th degree of latitude.' This of course left it doubtful whether the twelve miles were to be the diameter or the radius of the circle, and gave origin to some of the numerous controversies between Penn and Lord Baltimore. In 1681 an interview took place between Lord Baltimore and Penn, at Chester, in which Penn presented the king's letter to Baltimore requiring the two proprietaries to adjust the bound- aries between the provinces according to the calls ot the charters. At this interview it was discovered 3a that Chester itself was at least twelve miles south of the 40th degree, and therefore within the boundaries of Maryland, which would extend to the Schuylkill. This ended the confer- ence, and in I6S2, Penn obtained from the Duke of York, another grant of the town of New Castle, with all the territory twelve miles around it, and aSso all the territory south of the arm tO' cape Henlopen, and also got from him a release of all claims which he had to Pennsylvania. Pena bein^ thus in the possession of the original grant from Charles II, the grant and release *from the Duke of York, and the letter from Charles II to the proprietary of Maryland, directing Itici to assent to a speedy adjustment of his northern boundaries, and to deter- laii^ie them by measuring from his southern boundaries two degrees to the north reckoning sixty miles to the de- gree, again sought another interview with Lord Baltimore. This accord ing- Ij took place in 1682 in Maryland when Lord Baltimore declined complying with the letter of Charles and stated to hfm that his charter ''called for na speci^c number of degrees, but for the 34 fortieth degree of latitude and that no royal mandate could deprive him of his right." In 1683 another interview took place which also ended without an amicable adjustment. Accounts of these negotiations were transmitted to the commissioners of trade and plan- tations from each party, and Penn now fuulinu; that his grant would not bear him out in rightly obtaining the pos- session of the territory of which he was desirous, commenced his objections to the charter to Baltimore, on the ground that the Delaware settlements had been purchased and planted by the Dutch before the charter was granted; and that evei? if ]jaltimore had acquir- ed a right to them under the charter, he had forfeited them by suffering others to retain possession of them for foity years. This was the objection which ultimately, in 1685, by the decision of the comniissioners of trade and plantations, deprived Baltimore of what now constitutes the State of Dela» ware. In 1684 Penn proceeded to ^England, in person to have the matter settled, whilst in the meantime and throughout the controversy, efforts were made bv lialtimore to have settlements 35 made in the disputed territory. In 1685, Penn succeeded in having a decision made by the commissioners of plantations, in which they derided that Lord Baltimore's grant only i ^eluded "iands uncultivated and inir/i>ited by savages and that the territo y along the Delaware had been geUled bv christians antecedently to tliis granr, and therefore was not included in it.'* Thus did the commissioners of planta- tions, by this decision, coniirm the grant of king James to Pehn. This decision, however, owing to the troubles both in England and in the provinces during the reign of Jame?, and the Protestant Revolution which succeeded was not carried into effect, but the liniih of the province thus con- tinued unsettled until 1718. In 1689 the governme^it of the province of Maryland passed from the hands of the proprietors into those of the Protest* ant Association, where it continued until 1691, when it was again taken out of their hands and became and con- tinued a "royal government," that is, in the hands of ihe king, until 1716. during all of which time the proprie- tary, being a Catholic, was stripped q( 36 all his rights. In 1718 Penn died leaving his province to his sons Johr Thomas, and Richard Penn. From tlie decree of 1685 up to the agreement of 173*2, frequent contro versies were had between the Mary- landers and Pennsylvanians as to the boundaries which sometimes ended in battles. During all this time, the peace was kept only by temporary ex- pedients, till, in that year, an agree- ment was entered into between Lord Baltimore and the Penns, in which the former with too facile a disposition conceded to the latter nearly all that they claimed. Seeing the extent to which he had gone, he now sought from king George II a confirmation of his charter, which was opposed by the Penns on the ground of the voluntary agreement and surrender of the terri- tory by Baltimore to them. The result was, that in 1735, the Penns were directed by an order of the king in council, to institute proceedings in Chance! y to test the validity of this agreement which had been made be- tween them. About this time an attack being made upon the house of Thomas pres^ap and some fearful excesses com- 37 mitted, the Proprietaries were coai- mantled to put a stop to them, and in 1738 a provisional line was run to effect this object. In 1750 Lord Hardwicke pronounced the decision of the court upon the agreement between Baltimore and the Penns, in which tiie agree- ment was ordered to be carried into specitic execution, and commissioners were appointed to fkx the' boundaries according to the agieemeiit. . In 1751, Charles Lord Baltimore, with whom the agreement of 1732 had been entered into, died, which opened anew the difficulties, as two convey- ances of the province of Maryland had been made in strict selthmeni^- by which Fred(Mick,the present propri etary, contended that he was protected from the operation of the agreement of 173:2 and t'e decreee of 1750 and therefore resisted them. An- other bill was therefore filed in Chancery by the Penns to compel him to submit, but before a decree was had, another agreement was made, in 1760, between Lord Baltimore and the Penns, which confirmed the agreement of 1732, and the decree of 1750, and thus final- ly settled this protracted controversy. According to this agreement, comniis- 38 sioners were appointed to settle the exact boundaries between them. They assembled in New Castle and commen- ced their labors in 1760, and ::lose(l them in 1768 by a final report to the proprietaries; during all of which period they kept a daily journal of the trans- actions, authenticated each day by the signiture of each commissioner present. The boundary line between Pennsylvania and Maryland was thus definitively located, the surveys being made by Messrs. Mason and Dixon, and hence this boundary is frequently referred to as Mason's and Dixon's line-" It was laid oft' with boundary stones, with the greatest care and disinterested- ness throughout its whole extent. The Journal of Surveyors is still presented. Southern and Western Boundary. — - The grant to Lord Baltimore on the south and west extended to the "first fountain of the river Potomac," and of course depended upon the exact location of that fountain, whether at the head of the north branch or of the south branch of that river. A grant for the territory south of this had been made by king James II to Thomas Lord Culpepper, 39 from whom it descended to Lord Fair- fax, vviio ill 1748 opened a Land OfHce, which he kept open until his death in i78L The line between the State of Vir- ginia and Fairfax's grant, Mas settled, and confirmed by the king in council and the legislature of Virginia in 1748, in which the northern branch of the Potomac was assumed by them as the first head of that river. But it does not seem that the Proprietary of Maryland was in any way connected with, or consulted as to that settlement, nor could he be precluded by any such ex parte proceeding. After the Revo- lution, the State of Virginia assumed the jurisdiction over the territory which bad been granted to Fairfax. It has always been contended by Maryland that the south branch oi the Potomac was the longest stream, and, in 1753, the Proprietary of Maryland in his instrutions to the governor directs him to prohibit ''settlements under Fairfax in the country north of the south branch;" and, though the difficul- ties and troubles which ensued in the colonies from the Indian Wars and the excitement of the Revolutiouj prevent- 40 ed an adjustment of tliese limits down to that time, yet, the Proprietary had never relaxed that claim, and the con- stitution of Virginia adopted in 1776, fully recognised the right uf Maryland "to all the territory contained within its charter &c." In 1777 commission- ers were appointed from both the States of Virginia and Maryland to settle the question as to the jurisdiction over the waters of tlie State &,c. and a compact was entered into between them for the punishment of oliences &c. which has, however, been superseded by the adop- tion of the U. S. Constitution and the jurisdiction of the Federal Government. But by this compact, no settlement was made as to tlie south western boundary, which still remained in the same con- dition until 1795., In this year com- missioners were appointed by the State of Marylajid to meet those who should be appoiiited on the part of Virginia, to adjust this boundary; — various delays ensued, and when commissioners were finally appointed upon the part of Virginia, ihey v»ere so restiicted in their powers as to render negotiation with them usclef^s, and thus the matter rested until 1810, when resolutions were again passed by the legislatuie of 41 Maryland under wiiich nothing was done; and agftin in 1818 resolutions were passed for the appointment oi commissioners, and proposing to Vir- ginia to adopt the most ivestein source of the northern hrdinch as the point from which the western boundary should commence as a matter of compromise. In conformity with the propositions of this act, Virginia appointed commis- siouers, but again restricted them to commence the western boundary ''at a stone planted by Lord Fairfax on the head waters ot the Potomac;" — this of course rendered useless the iippoint- ment ol commissioners on the part of Maryland as the very question at issue was precluded and closed. Commission- ers, however, were appointed, but those from Virginia, declining to throw open the matter in controversy and in- sisting upon designating the boundary to commence according to their instruc- tions, at the stone planted by Lord Fairfex, the negotiation of course end- ed. in much the same condition the con- troversy still remain^?, up to the present time, and although soon after the report of the commissioners, there was a con*- «iderable disposition manifested to bav^ 42 the case decided by the federal courts, yet no steps have, up to the present time, been taken to effect that object- CHAPTER 1. Of the nature of the Proprietary Government and Rights of the Proprietary of Maryland. There were three different kinds of colonial government adopted for the reajulation of the provinces, known as ''Royal Governments^-' "^Charter Gov^ ernments," ''-Fropnelary Governments,''^ The Rojal Government was where the colony was immediately under the rule of the crown, such as Virginia and North Carolina, <^c. — the Charier Go- ve;nment was where the government of the colony was in the hands of the colo- nists themselves, who governed in con- formitv to a charter from the king:_such 44 ■^vere Connecticut, Rliode Island, and Massachusetts;— the J^roprieiary gov- e^-nment was where the charter grant- ing the Territv)ry also granted the ju- risdiction to eithtr one or more persons as Proprietaries of the Territory granted and with the right to govern the peo- ple. These proprietaries were either single individuals or more frequently companies-, — the colonies oi the former Avere generally belter governed and less liable to difficulties and controversies than those of the latter. The Proprietary government of Ma- ayland was considered as one of the most favorable kind. It is supposed that the charter which granted the Territory to Lord Baltimore was drawn \ip by himself, and contained such ex- tensive and favorable powers, that Ma- ryland was almost the only proprietary government wiiich, though suspended twice, once from about 1650 (Crom- well's time,) to 1658, and once again Irom 1689, (the time of Ihe^expulsion of James 11) to 1715 when it passed into the hands ot the Protestant Associators, jet, when again restored, continued in fall operation to the time of the Revolu- tion; — while in the meantime the pro- prietary government of Virginia, which 45 had been granted to the London Conr- paoy, as well as those of Ne^ Jersey and of Carolina which had been grant- ed -subsequently to that of Maryland, were changed from proprietary govern- ments to Royal Governments. The charter of Maryland which was granted to Lord Baltimore and which contains 23 sections may be found in the introduction to Kilty's Laws of Ma- ryland and in this we must seek for the origin of the powers and of the rights of the Proprietary. L*^t us here briefly consider those powers, and see how near the Pro- prietary ot Maryland was to being a King of the State. Proprietary's Power as to making Law^. — The charter provided that ttie proprietary was to enact laws "by and with the advice, assent and approbation of the majority of the freemen of the province, or ot the delegates or depu- ties." 1i however prescribed no mode of assemWing the people, which was left to the p^prfetary. And he seems to have held that |he power of origina- ting and promulgating laws, resided in hirii no less than the power of rejecting' 4^ jaus passed by the Legislature. Hence he rejected in mass the laws passed by the first assembly of the province, and as a substitute for them, sent a body of laws Irom England for their adoption, 'which they on the other hand, as prompt- ly rejected (in 1637) for him, assserting with spirit their right of "advising, as- sentiiig to and approving the lews." From that time (he right ot the assembly to originate laws does not seem to have been contested, and the proprietary's authority was in the general confined to the exercise of the power of rejecting such as he did not approve of, which power was generally delegated to the governors in the instructions given to them, but not so as to exclude the] proprietary from the exercise ot the tinal power of still rejecting them, if he pleased, although assent- ed to by the Governor. The gov- ernor's assent only gave effect to the laws, till the dissent of the proprietary, when they ceased to operate. .Assembling of the Legislature. — The proprietary also had the power of con- ■vening, adjourning or proroguing the assemblies as he pleased, and also the power which he a longtime exercised, 47 of determining how they should be con^ stituted. Up to the time that the gov- ernment passed into the hands of Crom* ^veil's commissioners there was no uni* form mode of convening th* assemblies: tiie warrants sometimes calling for them in person, or by proxy, or by deputy^ or without prescribing the mode of ap- pearance. After the restoration from the Protector's commissioners to the proprietary in 1650, lherie;ht of appear- ing by person or proxy wholy ceased, and from this period the distinct estab- lishment of thetrro houses, which had first been separated in 1650, became permanently established. The upper house consisted of coun-^-iilors to the governor and the lower house of dele- gates from the people. Thus from 165S to 1681 the elections for counties instead of for hundreds as heretofore, were re- gulated by warrants oj election issued for|each assembly,each county electing two, three or four delegates who were then summoned to attend by special tLTit. In 169"2 (during the suspension of the proprietary's government,) the or- ganization of the lower house, was set- tled by the act of 1692, (chapter 76) and so continued to be regulated by 48 kw, (1704 chapter 35, 1T08 chapter 5, 1715 chapter 42, 1716 chapter li) until the adoption of our present government. These acts gave to each county four delegates and established uniform modes of election . By this constitution of the Legislature, although the" upper house was rather too dependant on the proprietary for encouragement of liber- ty of feeling; and although his power of assembling and proroguing the Legis- lature, gave him great authority, yet the House of Delegates seem to have aK ways watched with vigilance and suc- cess over the rights of the people. Ordinances, — The power of the Pro- prietary to pass ordinance.s does not seem to have ever been much exercised by him, and when attempted was gen- erally resisted by the people, by whom it was regarded as a mere police pow- er or power of legislating in very emer- gent cases. On two occasions, (one in 1733 and one in 1770,) when the fet bill had been suffered to expire, it was continued by proclamations; hut still the exercise of this power was always re- sisted by the Lower House as violating the provision of the charter, which exempted the colonists from all taxes 49 and impositions whatever, except those which were H^ed by acts of Assembly. The Proprietary, however, does not seem to have ever attempted the abuse of this power, else, doubtless, he would have been resisted. Y\^hen lie did attempt the exercise of it, the excite- ment which it created in the province, showed the jealousy with which the people regarded it. ExecuiivQ Poivers. — Tlie proprietary liad all the powers that were exerciae A in the Palatinate of Durham, m Eng- land, which were almost as great a? those of Royalty itself. Not only this, but the charter also granted further special jurisdiction, rendering it the mosf ftmple and sovereign in its character or any grant ever emanating from tlie crown of England. The powers thus granted to the proprietary may be classed for our consideration, under the heads of civit mi'itary,ccleslasiical, or commerciaL Civil poivers ^v^'ppomlriunts. — The Proprietary had the sole right as well from the 7th sec. of the charter as from the Palatinate jurisdiction, of creating all offices, determining the duties of of- ficers, appointing all judges,justices and other functionaries, state or countv. DV whatsoever, in the province; and of (5 'iabllshing all courts and determining, their jurisdiction, and mode of proceed- inii; Sfc. During the suspension of the jiroprietary government, in 1604. (ch. 92.) some salutary restrictions were imposed upon t!iis unlimited power, as to residence 6fc of th'e otncers, wliich v/ere considered to continue in opera - tion also after the resiimptior. bv il.. Proprietary. The only limit or restriction whicr tiie people had upon the exercise oL tiiis power of appointment, was in the r'egu'.ntion of the fees and perquisite- of ofiice, which were deterniined by the acts of Assembly and which there - tore enabled them to exercise the reai ^.ontrol over the functionaries, inasmucl-. t-s the laws regulating them were al- ■•'ays temporary, bein-i" passed fur sho:' periods. It was Ly holding the purse strings tiiat ^hey held a check over the proprietary 'Ud hence they always made vigorouo 'lid steady opposition to his continu- :>nce of the (ee bills by proclamation, under his oidinance power, knowing the usurpations to which it might lead' Titks — Pardoning Offences— Dr^fe?. » 3ive JVar, — The Proprietary further isac the power of conferring titles, (wu;. the restriction that they should not b- i-uch as were then used m Englaiul;) o: pardoning ofiences, ar-d of defendin:^ ihe province by the erection of castle- and by carrying on of defensive \var, and trie like powers, the exercise of \v h i c h n e V e r see m s to h a v e f;i v e n m u c \ trouble to the people. Military FGwers.—The Proprieiat • power of carrvinfir on war was of smfw consequence unless the assembly shoui v grant the means so as to make it eBectui. and no subsidies, aids, custcnis, taxe> or impositions could be levied on th'^ |Tovince for any purpose wha^socvc: without the consent and approbation c the General Assembly. (1650 ch 25. >.jany acts were passed on the suhjec^ defining the ex'ent to which the I'ret^- laen of the province could be require ( io"go. and modifying the powers of tue pipjn'ietarvj by prescribing the mannc o-f or^L'^nizii^g armies, and discipiiniL... the militia. Under the Charter of Maryland Li^ nominal military authority was indet^: nuite extensive, beins; clothed with a; the powers of a Captain General, ar-'.: Oil 52 ^i waLTin^ defensive war. But the Le • i:;ialature soon cuioccl this power by the I estrictior.s imposed and the regulations for the disciplining &c. of the raililia. Though he had the powei\. thev had the supplying of the means. For no subsidies or taxes could be imposed without their aid (act of IGD^ ch 65., mfide perpetual 1676 ch 2). Accord- ingly various acts have been passed re- ^^lating the disciplining the militia; such as 1661 ch 8; 1G7G eh S: 1673, oi 2; 16S1 ch 1; 169:3 ch 83, 1699 ch 47; J7C4 ch S7; 1715 ch 43 with its supple- ments 1722 ch 15; 1733 ch;7; 174S ch 1 which was the militia law of the province until the Revolutioii. CoviYiurc'ial Pqivcvs. — The charter ol laryland, conferred the most extensive (. urnraerciul privileges on the "colony. allovv^ing all commodities, except such as were specially prohibited, to be im- poited into the province upon the ordinary customs (art 11;) and all articles whatsoever of its growth or produce to be exported, to any of the ports of England or Ireland, subject- only to the impositions and duties paid in similar cases by the inhabitants oi England (art 15.) And, (20th art) the 53 kings of England were prohibueu rruu-- imposing any taxes or impositions wi^at- ever ''upon the persons or propertj" o'' the inhcibitants being within the prti vince," a prohibition, \vhich the people of Maryland sooner resorted to the Revolution than allow to be violated or infringed upon as far as regarded the laying of taxes. As to the en- croachments upon her commerce, how- ever, Maryland, together with ti^e other colonies, was obliged to yield :r the navigation acts, although the Pro- prietary eydeavored to maintain that his colonists v/ere not bound to expc'- their tobacco to England or Ireland, o' give bond for that pur pose, if tliey paki the duty. But shortly after this, be- ing himself stripped of his province. tlie restrictions of the chaiter were violatec and I\Iarvland together with the othe:- colonies was obliged to submit to th' navigation acts, which place tlie carry ing trade in the hands of the niothi: country. Ecchslasltcal Poi'jcrs.— The Pio- prietary was entitled (fith art. ch.) to the patronage and advowson of all churches within the province and to ia.E^. churches, :hapels and places c^ 54 .vorship. The established religion ^vas first introduced into the colony diinn^ the suspension of the Pioprietary's rights in 169:2, and the right of appoint^ ns; the incunibents were in the Pro- j)rietary though pluralities were for- bidden (1701 ch 1.) Religious toleration existed, and all hurches were allowed but none estah- li-hed. Tne oath of offi''e prescribed by th^.' Pto^jrietary to lii^s goverriors from 1(>'>G to 1619 bound them to complete religious toieraticu of believers In ( hiist. In IG49, ch 2, the same pnn- ^ples were engrafted into the law. In •:G54, during the ascendency of Crom- well's conimisi-ituierK, an ordinance was Daj^sed prohibiting the profps'-ion and xercise of the Roman Catholic religion ■It on the restoruion of the proprie- aty, toleration was again established .Mid:Continutd until the accession cf the ^Protestant Association. In 1653, during the usurpation of Fendall, a •ecree of banishnent was pas?ed against !:ie Quakers, because they refused i^ rake tlie test oath; — thougii the govern- ):ient proper can scarcely be held accountable for this. hi IGTG compiaints were tiia.le to be Crown, on the authority of a letter oi* the Rev. Mr. Yeo of Patuxent in Maryland, by the Arch. Bishop ci" Canterbury, representing the Province ' f Maryland as in a deplorable condi- tio-n for want of an established ministry; there bein^ but three Protestant Minis- ters to 20.000 souls, ^'Chalmers 375.) The Proprietary was then in England, D.nd was enjoined to enforce the law^ 'i.'j-ainst immoraliry, and (allhough a Catho'ic) to endeavor to procure ^i iTiaintenance for t'r;e support cf the ,Ciergy of the Chiirc!) cf England, in •687 a qiw ivarranfo was issued against The charter of Mary by James 11, although the Proprietary vvias like him- self, a Catholic. The accession of a Protestant saved the Proprieiary fcr a while from the loss of his province. In 16S9 the Protestant Association got possess'cn of the government; — and 111 169"2 Maryland became a Royal Government under King William. — Although the Protestar.t Association 'hanked bis majesty for redeeming them from the arbitrary will and pleasure of a tyrannical popish governmenr, under which they had so long groane'i:'' 56 et there seems to have been no real ause ot just complaint against tht^ • " a 1. 1 i o I i c Govern m e n t . in 1692, immediately after the arrival vf the Royal Governor, an Assembly v.'Rr^ called and the first act passed after that for the recognition of Vriiiiam and Mary, was one "forllic service of Al- mighty God, and the establishment of the Protestant Religion in the Pro- vince." Thus was t'ae Church of Eng- hnd first intfodiiced bylaw into jMary- [and, and so continued the Established Church until the Revolution.. In iG9i Nicholson became Governor rind being a great promoter and en- t'ourager of the clergy, the erthodos Churches became crowded as full as tiiey could hold* Not sitisiied with the act above r.liuded to the next act was.that of 1704. Oil 59, to prevent 'Hhe growth of Popery," by which mass ^vas prohibi- ted, Catholics v.'cre prohibiied from engaging in the instruction of youths, and the protestant children of Papists might compel their parents to atibrd them a subsistence. Though this act was not to apply to priests exercisins these functions in r^i^^t? i^MJ^lii^^^ - 0/ Successive acts v/ere passed upon the subject in 1704, ch 95; 1706 ch 9: IT07 ch 6, which seems to have been l-^^ssed at the instance of the crown and .:spended all prosecutions in the cases '.xcepted. In 1718, eh 4, this act was repealed, because, as it asserts, bj the 11th ^^'^^'■ U- William 3rd, ch 4, sufficient pro- vision is made to prevent the growth ' f Poperv, in this province, as well as (iiroughout all his majesty's domin:ons. As to protestant dissenters, immedia- tely after the Revolution they were j-;ersecuted almost as much as rovisions of the English toleration act vv-ere expressly extended to the pro- testants of the province; — and the quakers v/ere allowed to make their affii'mation as by 7lh V/illiam HI, and again in 1706, ch 8, the law was afiirraed, and thus the Catholics alone wtie left subject to persecution, in a. ?^ate founded by them, and in which all religions had been toleiated by them- Charles Calvert died in 1714, leav» ins bis rights to his son, Benedict L^cr^^rd Ci''v'ir-.. v.!-o wc^ the ^vrt 58 Proiostant Proprietor, but \^•ho died in a short time, leavins; his title in 171 J, to his infant son Charles Calvert, who. lieing also a Protestant, was allowed t > take pcssessioii of his inheritance, a!'tv. an interruption ot the claims cf !:;• Taniily because of their Cati'.olic rcli'j^^o for twenty six years. Soon alter his accession the test oati • were int:oauced so as more eiTect' :.;. to guard against the Caliiolics. In ITO-i, ch 11, a test oath had be. lequired.but on the accession of Georu • 1, to guard against the Pretenrler, nev/ test oaths weie established in England - which paved the way for the introduc tion of the same in Slaryland; in 17 lo ch 30, test oatl.s were required from ali ofiicers, which required the acknov.- ledgenient of the disbelief of tlse doc- trine of transub5tanliati;)n, and whicn also rendei-ed necessary the oaths o allegiance, abhorrency and abjuratio:) These disqualifications were still furtiie: extended by act of tilS, ch Jjwhicii tendered Catholics incapable of votin.->; unless they took the prescribed te^: oaths &cj— hence, they continued to be deprived not only of the ptiviles; cf holdinz office, but also ' of votix'v 59 .own to the time of the Revolution; ,'jst previous to which, the political essays of the clay reproached Charles Carroll of Carrolltoii with his dis- anehisement, as being "one who do'h lOt enjoy the privilege of oiTering his' 'jny vote at an election," but this dis- . race the 33rd section of the bill of i'ights wipetl clean out by declarinp; ■hat it is the duty of e^^■eIy man- to "orship God, in such manner as be hiuks mas': acceptable to him." After .:e adoption of that bill, all Christians oelieving in a future state of reward? and punishm.ents v/ere admitted egvialij T of5ce. CHAPTER II. Personal High IS ajs'd Revenue -; THE Proprietary. — Let us now adve; briefly to the Personal Rights a'u Revenues of the Propuefary. Ownership of the Soil. — The Fi prietary not only had jurisdiction ov; the Province as its governor, but v.-, filso the owner of the soil: and hene< when stripped of his government froi 16S9 to 1716, he still remained ' . possession of his rights as owner of t' soil. The whole of the land of the pro- vince was granted to him to be held in free and common socage, and of course he had the right to d'spose the same, as he saw proper, and accor-.: ing to his own conditions; aright whicii he continued to excrc-ise down to the time of the Revolution, granting out the lands,as he deemed most expedient, according to his ''Conditions of Planta- tion," "Proclamations*' and "Instruc- tions,-' — a right v/hich he still exer- cised, when stripped of the jurisdictio- 61 <)f the Provirxce. His Revenue from the Lands. — The - proprietarj's revenue from lands con- sisted of quit rents, caution money. paid at the time of the grant, alienatlor tines, including fines upon devise.s. - Quit Money. — The quit rents v.ere ^the annual rents which the Proprie- tary reserved in his grants, to be paic him by the tenants, and v/ere regula- ted from time to time by his prociama tions and instructions, according tj the value of the lands. At first these rent?" v;ere payable in wheat, but after lG3u Ihey v.'-ere paid in money or the pro- ducts of the country at the option of the Proprietary. The payment of quit rents v/as attended v»'ilh much incoU' venience and oppression to the people, and in 1671 (ch 11) was commuted for payment in tobacco, by imposing a duty of tv;o shillings on all exported tobacco, one half to be paid to the proprietary and one half for ^^aq defence of the province;— this was to be paid to the proprietary la consideration of his agreeing to receive tobacco lor his quit rents and alienation fines. This con- tinued till 1717, vvhen the assembly bought out the Proprietaiy's right by 62 allowing as a compcnsatioi: t'liereiore and in lieu of it, a duty on all exported t:obacco "in full discharge of all hi^ quit rents and alienation fines." This net expired in J733, after v/hich, dowii- to the Revolution, the quit rents coi.- t.nued payable to the proprietary a. cording to the giants. The aSsemb • frequently endeavored to renew tl. commutation, but without success,— The nett revenue from them was esti- mated in 1770 to be about £7,500, Caution Money. — At the first settl. - ment of the Province, to encouragt emigration to itj every seitler w"as allowed a certain quantify of land, and only had to pay whatever quit rent, the "conditicn of plantations"' called for.—- But as the land became n^iOre valuali . in the year 16S3, a new system was adopted, under vvhich whosoever wish- ed to sue out a warrant for lands, was obliged first to pay a portion of money R5 caution money, the amount ol which was regulated by the proprietary's- in- structions, And this system of grant- ing lands has continued down to the present day. ^illitnal'ion Fines. — These fines, orisi- r \d in the feudal system, and w^eit 63 paid by tiie tenant for the right of alien- ing his land, as an incident toconimoM socage lenuje. The first noti :e of them ui the colony is in llie conditions of plantation of 2-2nd Sep, 165S, which directed"! hat in all future grants there ghoiild be reserved upon the patent one year's rent for a fine, to be paid upon every alienation of the. bind granted, such rent being estimated by tLfee rent reserved as quit rents, — tlie alienation to be entered upon the re- cords of the provincial court, or those of- tlie county vvhere the land lay, and t^i\e' ir.ii paid before the alienation, or el'^e t'liC alienation voi^l. The coniinutation for alienations was included in act of 1671 (ch 11) and 1717 (ch 7,) widely having expired in 1733, the alienation fknes became again payable to the pro=- prietary, and so continued to the time o^f the Revolution. Alienation tines were also payable on demises, but.being considered a great greivance, Were olteily abolished with the consent of tfee Proprietary in 1742. Revenue from other sources. — Other saurces of Revenue to the proprietarv Vv-ere principally the port or iorniage d'di>j-\hQ t0!)acco duties and fines, fo?- 54 feitures and amercements. The Port or tonnage tiwf^/.was a duty, imposed by act ot" 1640 (ch ]) on tocacco, wines, &c exported, to enable the proprietary to defray the expenses incident to Clayborne and Inglis' re- bellion. In 1661 (ch 7) this act was repealed and in place of it, a duty o\ ' 1 i-2 Hjs powder and Slbs of shot laid for the proprietary ''on ail vessels trading to the province not owned m It, having a deck flush fore and aft,'' which duty v/as soon commuted for a money duty at 14d per ton. .r\t the Protestant revolution, the crown de- ided that this duty was a part of the proprietary s private revenue and as such did not pass from him with the government; — he therefore continued to collect it till his restoration in 17 !5, and so on v/ithout difficulty till 1739, from v.'hich time the assembly began to dispute his right to it and continued to wage against it an unceasing; war, until the Revolution, without however being able to deprive him of it. It was esti- mated in 1765 at from 900 to i21,20O '-er annum. Tobacco Duty.^lw 1671 (ch 11,) a dutv of 2s sterling perlihd-, was im^ 65 posed upon all tobacco exported, one half to be given for the defence of the province, and the other half for the proprietary's own use, — in considera- tion of his agreeinj^ to receive toba^Cco for his quit rents and alienation fines, at the rate of 2d per lb. During the time of the royal government his title to it was sustained and he continued to collect it for his o'vn use. Finally, in 1717 (ch. 7.) it was bought out by the assembly, by allowing in lieu of it a duty on tobacco exported, which continued till the act expired in 173'2. During the Royal Government, in 1704 (ch 42,) It was given to the Queen for the sup- port of the government over the pro- vince, and principally applied to the support of the royal governor. In^l739 the propriety of the tax began to be questioned, and from that time to the Kevolution, the assembly waged a con- tinual war against the proprietary's right to it; but he continued to collect it. From 1759 to 1765 the annual amount ot it was about ^£1543. Fines, Forfniures and ^Amerciaments. The common law fines, forfeitures and amerciaments belonged to the proprie^ 5 66 tary, as the head of the government of the province, and whenever h< i»asi'd to act as such, they ceased to ! « iorg to him. The amerciaments v^e? :■■- gulated by the act ot 17'23 ch i:^. u;.utr which act those in the counly touits were applied to county charges; -am] those in the provincial courts were diS° posed of, as the governor and c ini il might direct. At first the ameu la- ments Sfc. were applied as a proprie- tary fund in which the public had no interest; but in 1745 the assembly solemnly determined that they were a public fund and to be apprepriated to the support of the government. It then became a standing cause of com- plaint which never ceased in the colony until the time of the revolution. From 1659 to 1765 they yielded an annual average amount of 7130lbs of tobacco. His Personal Rights. — One of the personal rights of the proprietary was, a preference ra the payment of all debts due to him. He also exercised the right of suing in his own courts, (2nd H. & Mc H. 345,359.) Since the Hevolution,it has been decided that he was within the operation of the statutes of limitation, although not expressly iiamed (2 Har and Mc H. 138; 1 Har and J- 71) though before the Rev- olution a contrary opinion was main- tained (1 H. and Mc. H. 151; 2nd Har and Mc H. 279; 1 Har. and J. 82,96.) l- Proprietary's Revenue. — His quit rents in 1770 were estimated at say iB7,500j caution money considerable, though amount not known; alienation fines (abolished in 1742), amount not known; tonnage dutyjn 1766,estimated at from ^£900 to ^£1200 per annum; tobacco duty, in 1765, say ^£1543, fines forfeitures and amerciaments, in 1765, say 7130 lbs tobacco; all of which taxes have been gotten rid of by the Revolu- tion^of 4th July 1776.; (During the first two or three years of establishing the colony, the Proprie, tary spent ^640 000 in its support and maintenance.) • Currency. — In 1661 (ch 4) a mint was established in Maryland for the coining of shillings. This was an assumption of royal powers by the Proprietary. In 1676 the law esta- blishing it was made perpetual. It probably did not go into operation ex- tensively, for in 1686 an act was passed 68 entitled "an act for the advancement oi coins." This act established the pro- vincial currenc) instead of the sterling. Under this act New England shillings and six pences were to be taken as sterling at their denominated value. CHAPTER in. PROPRIETARIES OF MARYLAND, George Calvert, with whom the : design of obtaining and colonizing the province originated, first applied for the charter of Maryland. He lived only to see the difficulties removed, and to leave to his heii* a title to the grant, perfected in all but its legal forms. We find the following account of him in McMahon's Maryland. — Calvert who was then the f< under of the title and the fortunes of his family was born in Yorkshire in 1582. At an early age he became the Secretary of Sir Robert Cecil, thi'ohgh whose influence and patronage he was made Clerk to the privy council, and ul- timately became Secretary of State to James I. The latter office he resigned in 1642, because of his conversion to file principles of the Roman Catholic I^eligibn. Notwithstanding his avowal of these, and his resignation, he seems to have lost none ot* the royal favor ^vhich he previously enjoyed, inasmuch 70 fts he was continued in the Piiry Coun- cil, and received in the succeeding year the honors of knighthood, with the ti- tle of Baron of Baltimore, in the king- dom of Ireland. He had represented Yorkshire in Parliament, and was at the time of receiving knighthood, the representative of the University of Ox- ford. During his Secretaryship he ob- tained a g;rant of the province of Ava- lon, in Newfoundland, uhere he made some efforts at a settlement, which, al- though thy did not answer his expecta- tions, instead of repressing his ardor for projects of colonization, had only the effect of directing his enterprising spir- it in search of some more favorable loca- tion. Animated by this desire, he vis- ited Virginia, and his sagacity at once perceived the advantages which were likely to result from settlements upon the Chesapeake Bay, and the facilities for their establishment presented by the adjacent country, of which the colonists of Virginia had availed themselves only, by the establishment of a few trading houses. On his return to England, he proffered his application for the grant of the province of Mary- land, and sustained, as it was, by t^e. 71 consideration of distinguished service?, untiring enterprise, and great moral worth, it was readily acceded to by the pliant king Charles, who never knew how to refuse the requests of favorites. It has been inferred by some, from the tenor of the charter itself, and the ex- treme care with which the rights of the proprietary are guarded by it,whilst the prerogatives of the crown and the eminent dominion of the mother coun- try, are almost as cautiously excluded from view, that it was the work of Calvert himself: but, be that as it may, there is but little doubt that the facile Charles permitted him to dictate its terms. Early in 1633, and when his charter was just ready for its passage under the great seal, he died, leaving fruition of his grant to his son and heir, Cecilius Ciiiverf, to whom the charter of Marylatid was finally granted ou the 20th of Juns, 1632." Cecilius Calvert, Id Lord Baltimore, the first Proprietary of Maryland, re- ceived the charter in 1632, died on 30th November 1675,and was succeed- ded in his titles and estate by his son and heir, Charles Calvert, who was at the time Governor of Maryland. He n did not himself come over to the Pro* vince. In 1645, Clayborne and Inglis' rebellion was successful against him for a year or two. From about 1653 to 1656 or 1660 l^is government was usur- ped by Jhe Commonwealth's commis- sioners. His character, says the his- torian, has come down to us indentified in his acts and in the lansjuage of his- 'lorians, "witli religious liberty and re- spect^for the rights of the people." — "Never," sajs Dr. Ramse3s"*-'id a- peo- ply enjoy more happiness, than the people of Maryland, under Cecilius, the father of the Province." Charles Calverl, son of Cecilius^ 3d Lord Balfimore,c?imQ out to the Colony as Governor in 166:i, and remained until the death of his father in 1675. — He became the Proprietary in 1676, but died stripped of his government because of being a Catholic. On be- coming proprietor in 1676^ he went to England and returned to the Province in 1680; in 1681 he again returned to England, where he died soon after the accession of James II. In 1687 a quo warranto was issued by King James agsinst his charter, but the dethron- meut ot that monarch prevented its 73 less. la 1<589 ths deputies of the Province surrendered, at the garrison, of Mattapony, to the "Protestant Asso- ciation," an association formed in the Province tor asserting the r^ght of. William and Mar}- to tha Province of ■ Maryland, and all the Enj^jlish domia- ions, and of which John Coode was the. leader. King William sanctioned the revolution, and thus Maryland contin- 'led under the convention till 169-2, when it became a Royal Government, and remained under the crown till 1716, and was administered by Gover- nors appoirited by the crown. Charles Calvert died on the 20th February 1711, a,f^ed 84. Continuin'^ a. Catholic to the time of his death, he remained in the possession of his private property, but was deprived of the jurisdiction over the colony, which devolved to his son Benedict. Benedict Leonard Ccdvert, at the in- stance of his father, and to prevent his disfranchisement, embraced the doc- trines of the established church. He thereupon became the Proprietary, but died almost as soon as recognized. Charles Calvert, Lord Baltimore (the Efth of that titJeJ the son of Benedict 74 Ijecame the proprietor in 1715, wh\'i€ y(t an infant. He was educated in the Protestant church and the established religion and therefore his claims to the Province were fully sustained by George I. He visited the Province in 1732, and returned in 1733. For 36 years he governed the Province, with a spirit that acquired for his adminis- tration, the general character of virtue and moderation. Frederick. — By the death of Charles Lord Baltimore, the government t fell into the hands of his infant son Fred- erick, in 1751, who continued to enjoy it till his death in 1771. He never visited the Province and did not possess the same hold on the affections of the colonists as his ancestors. — During his time the Colony was violent- ly agitated by the numerous political questions then discussed, and the peo- ple maintained their rights with great vigor. Henry Harford, nenthccBme {he pro- prietor by devise, but his govern- ment had a short duration, as itteimina- ted with the American Revolution in 1777. He was an illegitimate, at the time of his succession, a minor, and ^ 75 stranger, and without any' personU daims on the affections of the coliJJDy, A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF MARY- LAND. The history of Maryland, from its settlement in 1634 to the Revolution in 1776, embracing a period of two hun- dred and forty two years, ha?, for the sake ot perspicuity, been divided into three prominent periods or eras. The first era, commencing with the colonization, extends down to the ex- pulsion of King James II from the throne of England and the commence- ment of the protestant dynasty in that countiy, in the year I6S8, soon after which time the'Protestant Association' commenced to rule in the Province. The second era extends from this period, to the ovei throw of the ^'Protes- tant Association" in the Province^ and 77 the restoration of tke proprietary g^otr- ernment in 1715. , The third era extends from 17 lo to the treaty of Paris in 1763; after which commences the Revolutionary period. FIRST ERA. ' Ft'dm the Colonization in 1632 to the expuhionof James, 1688.—The death ^f George Calvert, the Baron of Balti- more, just about the time that the grant to him of the province of Maryland was about being perfected, frustrated the plan which he, no doubt, had m vieW of himself settling the colony of Maryland, n a region where he might enjoy, m its full liberty, the exercise of the Catholic religion, to which he had become a con- cert. The grant was then issued to Ceciliiis Calvert, his son, who ori- . ginally intended to accompany the expedition himself, but abandoTiing this intention, confided the conduct of the settlers, consisting of about two hun- dred Roman Catholic families, to his btolhar^l Leonard Calvert. On the %2d November il633, the colony em- bark^^d trom the Isle ol Wight, and 78^ jcached Point Comfort, in Virginia, o^ the 24th February following. Continu- ing up the Potomae, the colony dis- embarked at the town of Yaocomoco, on the 27th March 1634 and took pos- session of it, by the name of St. Mary's, and founded the city of St. Mary's. — It is stated that during the first two or three years of the settlement of the colony, the proprietor, Cecilius, spent upwards of i£40,000 upon it. The con- veniences which were thus procured, the wise regulations which were adop- ted for the government of the colony, the humanity of the settlers towards the natives, and the freedom of religious opinion tolerated, all conduced to place the settlers soon in a flourishing con* dition. One of the earliest evils that the colony had to contend with was, on the one*^ hand, the dissatisfaction of Viiginia, the settlers of which consider- ed the grant to Lord Baltimore as a kind of encroachment upon their do- minion, and, on the other, the hostility of Clayborne, who had already, under the partial jurisdiction of Virginia,made a settlement on Kent Island. This man continued his hostility to the proprie- tary during the first tweny fire yean 79 oi the settlement; iu 1642, exciting an Indian War, against it, and iu 1644, raising the rebellion at present known as Claybcrnes and Ingh^s rebellion, the latter of whom had been sometime before procli\iQied a traitor to the King* It IS supposed that they advocated the parliament cause. In 1645 the rebels bucceeded in driving Leonard Calvert, the governor into Virginia; but the government of the proprietary was again restored in 1646, the early re- cords of the province having been en- tirely destroyed during the rule of the usurpers. The colony did not take any part in the dissentions of the motlier country, though from the im- mature proclamation of Charles II, by Gov. Greene, on tlie death of Charles the first, it may be susposed that their feelings were with the loyalists. They however took no further part in the controversy and did nothing to disturb the dominant party. In 1651 a com- mission was issued from parliament to four persons among whom was Clay- borne to reduce all the planiations within the Chesapeake Bay to their due obedience to ths parliament of the ^oQimonwealth of England. They de- 80 manded ot Stone, then governor of Maryland, a recognition of the authority of parliament. He at first refused, but finding opposition vain, at length effect- ed an arrangement with the commis- sioners, by which he and those of his council were permitted to exercise their powers, saving his oath of fealty to the proprietary until the pleasure of the commonwealth should be known. As soon as Stone received intelligence of the elevation of Cromwell to the pro- tectorate, he ordered him to be pro- claimed but Clayborne still acting m the name of the commonwealth, alleged an intention on his part to avail himself of the earliest opportunity for a relapse and hence claimed for himself and his coadjutors, the privilege of remodelling the government. Stone was obliged to submit, was divested of his government, and its administration was confided to the commissioners deriving their ap- pointment from Clayborne and his associates. Stone then made resist- ance, and a battle took place near the Patuxent, in which he was utterly de- feated, taken prisoner, and condemned to death, but was net extcuted, the soldiers refusing to perforin the service* 81 He, however, remained in prison during the greater part oi the protectorate.-^ At this time, Virginia, assisted by some of the adherents of the parliament, who were in power in Maryland, en- deavored to revive her old claims against the colony, and thus to deprive Baltimore of his charter, on the ground that it was obtained through mis- representation as to the earliest settle- ments and relying, to sustain hei claim^ on rights obtained by such settle- ments. But, the matter being referred to the committee on trade and planta- tions, a report was mode in favor of Baltimore's claim in 1656, and he again gX)t possession of his province in 1658. For the purpose of regaining this pos- session, Josias Feudal, who seems to have been a treacherous and turbulent spirit, was commissioned as governor in 1656; and soon after in 1658, he suc- ceeded in obtaining possession of the power, the protectorate commissioners surrendering the province by agree- meiit into his hands. Having thus re- stored the proprietary government, in i659, he attempted to usurp possession of the government by surrendering to the assembly his commission from the 8S proprietary and receiving another in lieu of it from them. But the proprie- tary commissioned is brother, Philip Calvert as governor, who soon succeed- ed in wrestinsj the government from the hands of Fendall, and then, as one of his first acts, proclaimed Charles the 11 as lawful King. In 1662, Charles Calvert^ the son of the proprie- tor, was sent out as the governor; and remained in the province nntil the death ot his father Ceeilius in 1675, when he became the proprietary and immediate- ly went to England. In 1676, a gen- eral revision of the laws, which had been much needed, took place, and those which were in force were de- finitely ascertained. In 1680 the proprietary returned from England, having successfully answered some of the objections urged against his government, and remained here until 1684, when the prerogative power ot the crown began to threaten the charter, and, the opposition of the pro- prietary to the oppressions of the mother country relative to the regula- tions of trade, which were made in defiance of his charter, rendered him obnoxious to the reigning sover- 8a eign. During his absence he left the government in coraraission, to be ad- ministered in the name of his infant son Benedict Leonard Calvert. He never returned to the province, having arrived in the old country in time to witness the accession of James II, and, though himself a catholic, to encounter serious designs on his rights from a Catholic monarch which however were frustrated by the Protestant Revolu- tion. In 1677, a quo warranto was issued against his charter, but it was saved by the Protestant revolution which took place in 1688 and which arrested the course of the monarch in his stretch of Prerogative, and thus saved the charter. But in 1689, the Proprietary was divested of his govern- ment by the "Protestant Association," in the colony, which usurped and re- tained the power till 1715, and whose history we shall briefly detail in the next chapter. SECOND ERA* History of the Royal Governmer}:i from (1686) to the restoration of the Proprietary (17 15) — in 1689 an as- sociation was formed in the colony called *'j3?i association in arms for the defence of the Protestant religion, and for assisting the right of King Wi/liam and Queen Mary to the Province of Maryland and all the English domin- ions.^' It does not seem that there were many grievances to complain of at this time, though as there is a chasm in the records ot the province from 1688 to 1693, the history of the times is not so full as to enable us to form our opin- ion upon the subject. The absence of the Proprietary from the colony, and the imprudent deputies in whose hands he had left the government during his absence, seem to have given the asso- ciation an opportunity to easily reduce it into their possession. The deputies made a resistance, but were captured in a garrison at Mattapony in 1689,and the administration was taken into the hands of JolmCoode and his confeder- ates. After the overthrow of the pro- 85 prietary governraentj the association called a convention, and transmitted to the king an account of their proceed- ings,in which they bring various charges against the proprietary as to his filling all his offices with Catholics, and appro- priating the churches to the. uses of idolatry, &c., charges which seem not to have been borne out by the facts. King William gave countenance to the revoJution, and the provinces re- mained under dominion of the conven- tion ti 1 169*2, when, in conformity to the wishes of the convention, he took the province under the Royal govern- ment, and placed at its head Sir Lionel Copley, as governor, who dissolved the convention. It was at this time that the church of England was established by law, and in 1704 (chapter 59) an act was passed to prevent the growth of popery in the province, and about 1706 toleration was extended to all dissenters. During this deposition of the proprietary, although he was de- prived of his rights of government, yet he still continued in possession of his private rights, such as his right to the soil, and to the duties due him which, although sometimes encroached upoft, 86 yet where in the general lett in his hands. In 1694 ihe seat of government was removed trom Saint Mary's to Annapolis, which soon became a place of some consequence, while the former place fell into decay. In 1695 a Post office was established by Governor Nicholson, which ran from a point on the Potomac through Annapolis to Philadelphia, eight times a year. Early in the eighteenth century a project was set on foot in the mother country for the union of the colonies under one goveniment, but it met with great opposition in Maryland and was afterwards abandoned. In 1715, im- mediately after the restoration of the government to Lord Baltimore an attempt was again made in Parliament to destroy the charter, but it was re- monstrated against by the guardians of Lord Baltimore and was afterwards abandoned, and the proprietary of Maryland then remained in possessioti of the government until finally expelled by the Revolution. THIRD ERA. From the Rtstoraticn of the Proprie- tary (1716) to the Treaty of Parii (1763.) Charles Calvert died in 1714, and his son Benedict Leonard Calvert, who had embraced the doctrines of the Reformed Church, also died in 1715, leaving his title to his infant son Charles Calvert, who was educated in the doctrines of the Reformed Church. — Thus the causes of the suspension of the Proprietary goveinment ceasing to exist, the claims of the Baltimore family, vt^eie duly recognised by the new monarch, George I, and a commission issued ^rom the Proprietor and his guardian to John Hart, the late Royal Governor ^.of the province. From this period down to the treaty of Paris, there were few occurrences ot much interest trans- pi ring in the colony, — the disputes relative to the extension of the English statutes and the measures of the pro- prietary occupying a large place in the attention of the assembly. In 1751 Charles Lord |Baltimore, (the fifth of that title) died, by which the government of Maryland devolved 88 upon his infant son Frederick. In 1742 commissioners were appoint- ed to treat with the six Nations of In- dians to extinguish their claims to lands lying along the Susquehanna and the Potomac, by treaty, and in 1744 the treaty was signed at Lancaster by which their claims to the country were entirely and forever extinguished. During the French war of 1754, M, the crown upon their ex- port to ofit-r parts of the English do- minions; liitended to regulate the trade between the co'ionies themselves. — Thus did she strive to become the sole carrier, mawu/acfurer, 'and engrosser of the trade of the colonies. Independent of the general principles, which weie acted upon in the colonies that taxation and representation should go hand in hand, the charter of Mary- land expressly exempted that colony from taxation. The course of Mar}-land in opposi- tion to the stamp act was such as at first to make it appear that she did not 98 feel the same strength of hostility against it as the other colonies. This resulted from the fact that the power of assemb- ling and proroguing the assemblies re- sided in the governor, and he probably wishing to prevent the exhibition of the popular feeling, continually kept the assembly prorogued from November 1763 to September 1765. When, how- ever, it did get together, they indignant- ly remonstrated with the governor as to his conduct, and showed their feelings upon the subject by unanimously pas- sing resolutions, of the strongest and most decisive character against the stamp act. They also soon indicated their feelings by the publications which appeared in the Maryland Gazette, a paper whicb had been established at Annapolis in 1745, and by the treat- ment with which they received Hood, the person who had been appointed as stamp distributor, whom they soan compelled to take refuge in flight. The assembly ot Maryland also, immediately after its session, appointed commissioners to a general congress, which was called according to a cir- cular from the State of Massachusetts, to assemble at New York, to make' a 94 representation to his majesty and the parliament ol the condition, &c. of the colonies. This congress accordingly assembled and remonstrated, and their proceed- ings were unanimously approved by the assembly at its next session. The stamp paper having arrived in Maryland after being detained for a while far the sake of safety in the vessel, was landed, but not used in Maryland. True it did for a time prevent the operation of some of the offices of Maryland which were required to use it; but the county courts declared the act requiring its use un^ constitutional and void, and in 1766 a society was formed in Baltimore under the name of the "sons of Liberty^' which soon spread through the State, & which attending in body at the seat of govern^ ment requested the oflScers to proceed without the stamping paper; — a request which was complied with, and thus ended the operation of the stamp act in Maryland. Shortly afterwards, on the 18th of March 1766, it was fully re- pealed by Great Britain, on the grounds that **its further continuance might be productive of consequences greatly de- trimental to the commercial interests of 95 Great Britain." The unanimity ot t]:=^ people of Maryland against the stamp act was perhaps greater than that in any other colony, and the disregard that they had been in the habit of paying to the requisitions of the authorities of the mother country, well prepared them to resist any attempts to impose taxes ypon them, in defiance of their eharter^ without tlieir assent. The Revolutionary period continu«- ED. Formation of State Government* From the Repeal of the Stamp j9ci (17fi6) to the Revolution and Formation of State Government (1776-7) Although the stamp act had been re- pealed in 1766, and a more favorable feeling evinced towards the colonies by the new administration in England on the defeat of Grenville and the accession ot Townsend, yet the favorite scheme of taxing the colonies had not been abandoned. In 1767, Parliament passed a new act imposing duties on paper, glass, tea, &,c., supposing that if the colonies would not submit to diiect taxation they might yet be willing to allow the regulation of commerce,which would result in effecting the aanao 9B object. In this however, they were mistaken; for the object was at once perceived,and the remonstraoces against it were strong and loud. Massachusetts tood the lead in this opposition by her circulars and by arousing the other colonies to concerted opposition. At- tempts were made by the Ministry, in their cotomnnications with Governor Sharpe, to discountenance any "un- warrantable combinations" on the part of Maryland with the other colonies, by directing him to prorogue the assem- bly if it should manifest any such dis- |)Osition. The House however indig- nantly repelled the att?mpt to prohibit such combinations and when called together in 1768, the first thing after the passage of the act for laying this duty, they failed not to vindicate their rights, by appointing a committee to draft a petition to the king, by second- ing the Massachusetts Circular, and by insisting on their riglUs.with the great- est unanimity. In 1769 a meeting was called at Annapolis which was fully attended from the different counties, at which it was resolved to form non-im- portation Associations, and which was carried into operation with much strict- 97 iies» for a while, but gradually in course of the ensuing year was rendered in- effectual by tlv^ want of a ^ene»al co- operation, and was therefore shortly after, abandoned. About this time Maryland was much agitated by two questions relating to its own inteinal concerns, which filled the colony with excitement and were debated with more warmth and fervor and with more intelligence and skill from the talents of the ])arties who engaged in the controvei sy,thau perhaps any question had before called forth in the State. These questions were what were known by the names of the t'Pro' clamation AcV and the '^Vestry Ques- tion.^' The colony complained of the exorbitance of the fees of some of the offices of the colony, the abuses in their collection, and the uncertainty of the commutation, (that is, ^ here the fees payable in tobacco, were commuted for money.) The assembly had usually regulated the fees by temporary acts and thus held the power over the office- holders, who held their appointments frcm the proprietary. These acts were now allowed to expire, and in con- sequence, the governor issued h;s pro- 98 clamation, declaring that the fees should be regulated according to the expired acts. This excited the most intense opposition on the part of the people and gave place to warm discussions and essays from the most distinguished and learned raea of the province. Among those, who advocated the act were Mr. Daniel Dulany, one of the most talented and eminent lawyers in the colonies, and Mr. Hammond and others; while on the other side were arrayed Me«;srs. Samuel Chase, Charles Carroll, Paca, &c. The question continued to be 4he main topic of consideration until en- grossed in the still more exciting themes arising at the outbreak of the Revolu- tion. The people of course in their elections decided against the Procla- mation. The "Vestry act" was one of a kindred character. When the church of England became the established church in 1692, a tax of 40 lbs. of tobacco had been laid on each taxable for the support of the established clergy which was still further regulated in 1702. In 1763 this tax was reduced to 30 lbs of tobacco. But when the fee hill wassufiFered to exp're, the procU 99 tnation of the governor established again the more odious tax of 1702, which therefore created the greatest opposition. In 1773 by a kind of compromise, the poll tax was regulated at 30 lbs of tobacco or 4s. in money, — and thus the controversy was ended until the Revolu% tion finally cut off this tax entirely, rendering the clergy always afterwards dependant on the voluntary contribit- tions of the people for their support, the poll tax^being prohibited at the adoption of the new government. The attempt to tax the colonies by the imposition of duties, had now been abandoned by Great Britain, with the exception of the article of Tea, the duty on which was still maintained as a pledge of the supremacy of the mother country. The resolutions of the non- importation associations not to use it, still continuing in force, the trade in the article was diminished, and the attempts of the East India company, under the allowance of a drawback, to introduce it into Boston and other porti is too generally known to need further mention here. After the burning of the tea in that harbor, Boston was de- prived of its privileges as a port of 100 eatr}', and the rest ot the colonies, see- ing the tendency which this would have made common cause with her in this time of oppression. In all directions, the greatest excitement prevailed. At Annapolis, the like attempt to bring tea into the province created so much opposition that the people came together and compelled the person who had dared thus to insult the public feelings to make atonement, by himself applying the torch to the vessel in which it was brought. Public meetings were at onct called in all the counties of Maryland, ii)e deputies from which met at Anna- polis on the 22nd June 1774, in a con- venfiou whic[i continued in session to the 25th. By this convention, resolu- tions dignified and manly, expressive of their rights, and determination to maintain them, were passed, and five persons named to attend a general con- j;ress of the deputies of the colonies. This continental Congress according- ly assembled on the 6th September 1774, at Philadelphia. A non-importa- tion association was recommended to be formed throughout the colonies, which was accordingly done. On the return of the Maryland Representatives, the lOi Maryland ConvenHon was again con- vened by their call, on the 21st November 1774, and an account of their proceedings given, which were approved of. The non-importation asso- ciation was approved of and measures taken by the appointment of committees- of Inspection and of Observation to render them effectual. In July 1775 the state convention finding that all efforts at reconciliation would prove unavailing, established a *'2)rovisional government," {ov the ad« ministration of affairs in the colony, until some more permanent system should be formed. The chief Execu- tive power was conaded to a committee of safety, consisting of sixteen members elected by the convention. The supreme power was reposed in the Provincial Convention, oi five delegates from each county; and the county authorities were comnutted to committees of observatior, elected annually in each county. This government with some modifica- tions continued in force until the estab- lishment of the present form of govern- ment in 1776. When the proposition came distinct- ly forward and was presented to the lOS consideration of the convention as to the Declaration of Independence, Marj - land soon agreed to it, although for a long time desirous of conciliation. On the 6th of July 1775, a state Declaration of Independence was made, and formally proclaimed. The old convention, after the calling of a new convention for the establish- ment of a permanent government dissol- ved itselt on the 1st. August 1776. The new convention being formed, its members assembled at Annapolis on the 14th August 1776; and on the 10th September, the special committee re- ported the new form of government and charter of rights, which were published. The convention adjourned to the 2nd October, when they again met, and adopted the constitution on the 8th and the Declaration of R^-ghts on the 3d November, and finally adjourned. The first assembly of Md. under the new constitution then met on the 5th February 1777, and the new govern- ment was fully organized on the 13th and 14th of that month, by the election oj^horaas Johnson, as the first governor and of five councilmen. And thus was the government of Maryland started. into full operation. Having thus run briefly through with the history of the state up to the period of the Revolution let us next glance over the Introduction of the Common and Statute law into the state and then at the leading objects of Legislation in the state st various times; and also sketch out the history of the conneclion of the state with the General Govern- went, and the formation ol the U. S, Constitution. mm^^u^mA^m^i CHAPTER I. TTIE COMMON AND STATUTE LAWS. Histoi^y of the IrJTQduclion of the English Common Law into Maryland. In the first assembly of v.hose p!0- ceedings, we have any record, com- menced the discussion of the question *'By tihat laivs the colony should he governed." The proprietary trans- mitted a body of laws from England for adoption by the assembly, but they were rejected by that body. In the early settlement of the colony, the com- mon law was considered as in fort e, ej?- cept where its operation extended to life^ member, or freehold which by the charter, could not be taken away e3?cept by some expreas law of the province. — Several acts were passed upon the sub- je#, and that of 1062, chapter 3, direct, ed that justice should be administered accordins; to the laws and statutes of 105 England if pleaded and produced, ^-and that all courts should judge of the right pleading and inconsistency of the said laws with the good of the province, according to the best of their judgment skill and cunning.'- This act engrafted the common law into the jurisdiction of the province, and although it soon ceased in its operation, yet the com- missions issued to the judges sanctioned it as a rule of jurisdiction, and the com- mon la\y then became in fact a part of the law of the province. Nor does this right cf the people to the privilege of the common law seem to have ever come into question— for in the address of the lower house to th^ proprietary in 1725, they say ''but since we men- tion the common law, we beg leave to observe concerning it, tliat we do not apprehend your lordship denies us the benefit of it, as being (by the common received opinion of the best Judges) allowed to be our right; but 'tis the statutes oi\ly you deny us." This right ho\?ever, was fully established at the adoption of the 3d Article of the Bill of Rii^hcs, which states ^'that the inhabitants ot Maryland were entitled to the com- mon law of England and the trial by 106 jury, according to the course oi that law." In the case of Slate vs. Buchanan^ prosecuted for a conspiracy, (5 H. ^ J. 357,8) and in which the prosecution was sustained, the question as to the extent of the application of the English common law to our state is decided on and the principle laid down as follows; **It is a mistake to suppose that the decisions, subsequent to the charter, are expansions ot the common law, which is a system of principles not capable of expansion, but always existing and attaching to whatever particular cir- cumstances may arise and come within one or th^^ier ot them;" and in ad- verting to the argummt from non-user, ihey reply ^ "that as to the common law, unlike a positive or statute law, (the occasion or necessity for which may have long since passed by,) if there has been no necessity before for instituting such a prosecution as the present, no argument can be drawn from the non- user, for resting on principles whicii cannot become obsolete, it has always potentially existed, to be applied as occasion should arise;" and, in conclu- sion, they pronounce the existing rule 107 ©^f application under the bill of rights, which cannot be better stated than in the words of the opinion. "The lan- guage ot the 3d section of the Bill of Rights, (says the opinion, in declaring the people of Maryland entitled to the common law,) has no reference to ad» judications in England anterior to the colonization, or to judicial adoptions here ot any part of the common law during the continuance of the colonial government: but to the common law in mass, as it existed here either poten- tially or practically, and as it prevailed in England at the time; except such portions of it as are inconsistent with the spirit of our present government, and the nature of our own present political institutions." ^d. History of the introduction and opetaiionof the English Statute Laws in Maryland.^The nice distinctions which often exist between the siatute and common law do not se^m to have been always referred to in the broad discussion of the question, as to whether the English law was to be considered as in force in the province. The general rule which prevailed was, that in Criminal cases, not affecting life. 108 member, or freehold, the express 3awj of the province, if there were any[such governed; if there were none, then the laws or usages of England, in like cases. In civil cases, the decision was accord- iug to the acts and most general usage of the province; and if there were none such then according to the usages cf the English law, so far as they were applicable. The act of 1662 (chapter 3) directed that where the laws of the province were silent, that justice should be adniinisteredj according ta the laws ot England, if pleaded and produced. And although, this act was subsequent- ly repealed yet, from the commissions o^ the judges, the exercise of the power seems to have been kept up and de- cisions given in conformity to the laws of England in cases where the statute* were made after the emigration as well as before, whenever the laws of the province were silent. Much legislation and controversy was had upon the sub- ject; the people of the province desiring to have the whole mass of the English statute law introduced at once, and the Proprietary contending that this was unreasonable, and that he wonld not consent to such a ";eneral introduction, 109 onless the jiidges were permitted to decide upon their consistency with the constitution of the Province. This opposition of the people arose from the repugnancy that existed on their part to giving him the exercise of the Veto power whicli he had over their legisla* tion; for they contended in such case '*they would "^then hold them (the right to the statutes) by the precarious tenure oi the Proprietary's pleasure, in yield- ing or withholding his assent/' About the year 17'2'2 the controversy as to the extension of the. statutes commenced to rage more warmly, dividing the colony into the "Court Party" and ''The Country Party, ' the latter of which contended for the introduction of all the statutes in a lump. After various discussions and disputes between the proprietar} and the House of Delegates, in which the iprm of the oath of the judges was brought into controversy, it svas finally compromised by the act of 173'2 chapter 5, which received the proprietary's assent, and in which it was prescribed that* the acts and usasjes of the province should be the primary guide; and when these were silent, the decision should 110 be according to the laws, statutes and •reasonable customs of England as used and ]^racHsed within the province. — This allowed the future introduction ot English statutes, and thus it continued down to the Revolution, at which time the 3d section of the Bill of Rights, declared, "that the inhabitants of Mary* l*nd were entitled to the benefit of such English statutes as existed at the time of the first emigration, and were found applicable to their local and other circumstances; and of such others as have been since introduced, i>sed and practised upon in courts ot law and equity." In 1809 the legislature em- powered the Chancellor and Court of Appeals to report which statutes came under this definition, in conformity to which the Chancellor made the report spoken of in another place. When by English Parliament a statute was expressly declared to extend to the Province, it was of course held to be binding on the colony. CHAPTER 11/ LEGISLATION IN MARYLAND. It is sometimes useful to recur back to the past, and to note the various sub- jects of interest which have from time to time agitated the public mind, and see how one questioa gives piac*^ to an- other, and the violent disputes and con- troversies of oue ge«neration,upoa which, according to the controversialists, would seem to hang the fate of all posterity, are almost forgotten in the succeeding age. Still, however, their influence is felt in moulding the character and forming the habits of the people, who are affected by ihem. In Maryland, many of these questions,which at timei have threatened to convulse the state to its very foundation, are now only known to the antiquarian or the his* torian.and many subjects of the warmest and most angry controversy, once much debated, have b-een swept away with the Revoltition. Let us take a glance at some of the subjects which have occupied the minds of the people of 112 Maryland, and herein let us consider these changes in their chronological Older, noting the centuries in which they have taken place and their relation to either the Proprietary or colonial goverr.nient or to tke state Govern- In the first Assembly which conven- ed in the Province of Maryland in the year 1637. a question arose, as to the Utivs by uhich the colony should be governed, and this was tor a long time a leading subject of discussion and of violent controversy in the Legislature and among the people, and, there are few, we should suppose, who would b@ disposed to question its importance. — In the year 1638, tlie body of laws, transmitted by the Proprietary for the government of the Province were re- jected by the Legislature, which pre- ferred the making of their own laws.— In the year 1644 Clayborne and Ingle got possession of the colony and held it until 1646, during which time all the early records of the Province were lost, v,hich leaves a considerable hiatus in the legislative history of Maryland.^ In 1646, the port or tonnagt duty originated; and subsequently atibrded 113 some most acrid and violent con- troversies in the province, in 1649 they were exchanged for a duty upon to- bacco exported in Dutch vessels; in 1661,1676. and 169-2 the subject of these duties were again and again dis- cussed, and in 1739 the complaints against them as oppressive and onerous, arose to a high pitch and no doubt con- tributed much to the dissatisfaction which prevailed against the system of government which thtii existed. About the year 1671, the amount of the Proprietary's quit rents and commu- tation money began to occupy much at- tention, which was again directed to the same subje<:t in 1717 and 1735, at which time great efforts were made to have it commuted; — The same subject also continued to be discussed in 1737, 174-2 and 1744. In 1671, ch. 11, commenced the To- bacco duly for the support of the pro- prietary and defence ot the province, continued in 1674 and 1676; legislation on it was continued in J704, 1716,-17; it expired in 1732; in 1739 it began to be loudly complained of, and in 1750 the coutroversy revived with much 8 114 warmth. The Revolution put an end to this controversy. In the year 1676 on the death of Ce- cilius, Lord Baltimore, and the acces- sion of Charles Calvert, and just before his departure for England, a revision of the Laws of the Colony took place. — "At this assembly (says McMahon 215) the legislation of the province was res- cued from t'iC confusion and osbcurity which had characterized it for some years from the want of a regular ex- pression of the Proprietary will upon the acts from tirae to time passed, and from the enactment during that period of various acts upon the same subject, and tending to the same purpose. A general revision of the Laws then took place, under which those then in exis- tence and proper to be continued, were definitively ascertained" 1676 ch. I 4-2. In the year 1683 the seat of govern' ment was removed from St. Mary's to the Ridge in Anne Arundel, but was again changed back to St. Mary's. — In 1694, it was removed to Annapolis; which was erected into a city in 1708. In the year 1696 a board of "Lord Commissioners for trade and Planta- 115 tions" were established in England uhosedutj it was to obtain full infor- mation as to the trade and general coti' di/ion of the colonies. In 1697 inqui- ries as to the statistics of Maryland were answered by the government ^rom which is derived the bi>dy of the statistics of the State during this period. In 1715 the La^v ot altachments was first introduced into the Md. system. From 17*22 to 173*2, a very warm contest was carried on between the Assembly and the Proprietary as to what English statutes were in torce in Maryland, which daring this period occupied much of the public attention (see McMahon 283). In 1722 also an important act for the regulation o^ fines and 'amercemm/s was passed; in 1745 it was determined that these were a public fund and not the property of the Proprietary; — an im- portant matter to the people of the Province. In the year 1739, the alienation fines (that is a fine paid the Proprietary at every transfer of property) were much complained of in the province and in 1742 they were abolished. Indeed a- bout this period, the dissentions in the 116 Province as to llie Proprietary's Reve« nue became quite aggravated and his right to levy tonnage duties and other duties was discussed before the Assem- hly. In 1742, fines upon alienations and duties were relinquished by the Propri- etary; in 1747 Officer's fees were estab- lished by law; but the tobacco and tonnage duties were continued down to the time of the Revolution. In 1751-5 preparations were making in the province for the cnnimon defence and controversy ran high as to the mode of levying a tax for the defraying of the expenses of the war, and the dis- putes continued as to tlie right ot the Proprietor to the revenue of the colony. In the year 1756 the pas-sage of the starap act and tlie right of taxation oc» cupied the attention of the assembly; — resolutions were passed;- — members to the Congress were appointed, and the papers abounded with essays on the subject. In 1766, the Association of the Sons of Liberty was formed in the province against the stamp act. lu 1767-8, the Duty act and the jSoa-importation Associations occupied 117 the public attention. Ill 1770 came up the question as to Fees and the Vestry Bill, arising on the Proclamation of Governor Eden con- tinuing the old acts in force. These subjects engrossed the public attention until the Revolution superceded them. In 1774 the Maryland Convention met at Annapolis and the Association was adopted by it and encouraged,and in the next year, 1775, the Provisional Government was formed. In 1786, ch. 45, the mode of descent of property was regulated, and the pri- mogeniture lawsabolisljcd in Maryhna. In 1798 the present Testamentary system was est;'.b!i-hed in Maryland, and systematised. In the beginning of this century (1800) there seems to have been a singular usage to merely re-enact, in almost the same words a previous act (Evans' Prac. 245.) In 1801, ch. 90. white persons alone %vere allowed to vote, and in 1809 the property qualification was removed. In 1805 the present system of Coun- ty Courts, &c., was established, and in 1609 the Penitentiary system was in- troduced and the criminal laws passed. 118 In 1814 the county Courfs were en- dowed with full equity jurisdiction. From 1811 to IS'lS the war with Great Biitain and the defence of the State occupied the public attention. — After the war, the difficulties of the times and the suspension of specie pay- ments by the Banks gave rise to some legislation. In 1820, ch. 191, the act to direct descents was newly arranged and sys- temalised. In 1827, ch. 104, the first appropri- ation was made towards the Internal Improvemtnt system, which had been much discussed for some years before. This subject contiiiued to occupy much of the public attention for some years, and in 1835-6 the gieat eight millinn oill was passed for the perfectino of the whole system; but direct taxation bad at last to be resorted to. In 1836 a radical change was made in the Constitution by a new organiza- tion of the Senate and an election of the Governor by the people; and by the abolition ofthe Council to the Governor. estallIsiied. CHAPTER I. fORMATION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. Frequent unions of the separate colonies which now compose the United States, had taken piace previous to the Revolution, and seemed to prepare the country for the more perfect union which took place subsequent to the Declaration of Independence and under which we now live. As early as 1G43 there v. as a union cf the colonies of Massachusetts, Pi) - mouth, Connecticut and New Havei), and two cosnmisjjioners were delegated from each colony to meet annually to deliberate en matters of common concern, and provide fu' the general defence. This confederacy existeJ for upwards of f >rty years and waa finally dissolved in 1G6G, about the 120 time that James II vacated all the New England chatter. Leagues were also sometimes entered int*") between the colonics for the pro • tection of the interior from the attacks of the Indians: — thu?, in 17*2-2, a Con- gress was held at Albany, and in 1754, at the instance of the board of (rade and plantations, commissioners assem- bled from all the New England States, as also from Pennsylvania and Alary- land, to con«.ider the bfst means el defending the country in case of a war with France. The Congress, however, when assemb'ed very naturally took a niore enlarged view of their duties, and entered into measures and projects (or the general welfare of the colonies in peace as well as war. The result of this was, that the j)eople became habit- uated to plans for concert of actio]^ and to tliat kind of self reliance which wns more fully developed at the time of the Revolution. This convention proposed a more intimate union of the colonies for defence and mutual aid and with power to levy import duties and taxes; but the people were not yet quite pre- pared for so bold a measure, and it was then rejected both by the crown and 121 every pro\incial assembly. The jealousy of the mother coimtry on the one hand, and the rivalship esistmg between the separate colonies, each one of which had always here* tofore looked to its own individual in- terests, may probably account for this general rejection of the proposition at this time. In 1765, when the first attempt was made by Great Britain on the rig;hts of the colonies, at the instance of Massa- chusetts, a congress assembled at New York, delegated from nine of the colonies, which published a bill of rights in which they declared the sole power of taxation to reside in the colo- nial legislatures. But in 1774 (September) a more general Congress, in which the twelve colonies were represented, took place at Philadelphia, and then boldly set forth their grievances and the oppres- sions that they had suffered in the un- just attempt made by the mother coun- try to tax them without their consent. They had no power or authority further than to recommend and advise, but, *'by their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honors,'' th°y nobly bound 122 themselves to resist oppression and tyranny and to deliver down to their f)osterity the light to those blessings of iberty which they had enjoyed from their ancestors. In May 1775 Congress convened again at Philadelphia, and Georgia being now represented also, the ''old thirteen" stood boldly forward to I reast the Revolutionaiy storm, which was then commencing to rage ii\ Massachu- setts. This congress, being authorised by those who had sent them together to conceit and agree Ufon such mea- sures as might be proper to preserve the liberties of the country, proceeded to levy and organise an aimy, to con- tract debts, to prescribe rules for the government of the laud and naval forces, and to exercise a'l the other powers of sovereignty, and (o complete their des-ign?, on the 4th of July 1776, they marked a new epoch in the liistory ot the colonies by declaring their in- dependence of tlie Molhe'- country — In this declaration tliev set forth the grievances under which they labored and the reasons which induced tliem to take a separate stand among tlie naticns of the earth. 123 As early as June 1776 Congress undertook to propose articles of con- rederation and from the intrinsic difficul- ties of ihe subject and the conflicting interests whicli had to be reconciled it was nut until the I5th of ^November 1777 tliat they succeeded in coming to an agreement on these articles ot con- federation. These articles had then to be submitted to the State?, and altho* most of the states proceeded to ratify them immediately, yet Dela'vare did not accede to them until 1779 and Maryland at first explicitly rejected them. She refused to assent to the ar- ticles of agreement until there should be an additional agreement to appro- priate the Western lands as a common iund to defray the expenses of the war. Tiiis, however, gave such encourage- ment to the common enenjy that she afterwards abandoned these pretensions and in March 1781 the articles of con- federation were unanimously ratiiled by all the states. Previous to the adoption of these articles of confederation the authority of Congress had been undefined and discretionary; such authority as springs from the immediate wants and pressing 124 necessities of Ihe times, which bint! into unity of action, those who are borne clown by common oppressions and general cah\mities. These articles of confederation uere not found however to answer the pur- poses for which they were adopted. — Operating as the derision of the Con- gress did upon the States themselves instead of upon the people of the States tbere were no adequate means of en- forcing their penalties. Having no power to add a sanction or a penalty to iheir laws, they were neither enforced nor observed. * Nor were they able to decide controversies which might arise amonjj; the States, or to protect them from internal violence or rebellion. — Requisitions upon the States for the supplying of the wants of the country were entirely disregarded, and by de- grees the States, one by one, fell off from the confederatiun,neglecting even, to send members to Congress. ^Vith the peace of 1783 came a general apathy and relaxation from eftbrt.and the confederation soon crum- bled into ruin. To remedy the evils under which the country soon began to languish, it 125 was necessary that some further efforts shouhl be made. Accordingly a proposi- tion was started by Virginia fi)r a con- vention to regulate our commerce and relations with foreign Nations. There- upon, a convention of delegates from several of the States met at Annapolis in September J786, butfrc^i the small- ness of their number, they did not think it expedient to proceed to remedy the evils which existed, and satisfied them- selves with calling a general convention v.hich should adopt suitable measures for the formation of an efficient govern- ment for the control ol the ountry and which might obviate the defects exist- ing in the old confederation. All the States, except Rhode Island, acceded to the suggestion, and sent delegates who met in gerteial conven- tion in Philadelphia, May 1787. This convention, composed of the most influential, experienced and able men of the country.after several months deliberation, and a compromise of the difficulties which seemed to oppose almost insuperable barriers to the ac- complishment of their plans, succeeded in agreeing upon our present form of government, and submitted it to the 126 decision of a convention of tlie people to be held in each State for their ratification or rejection. It was also agreed that so soon as nine States should agree to it, that the Constitution should become the govern- ment of the States so adopting. New Hampshire was the ninth state to adopt it; soon atler which, New York and Virginia also agreed to it and upon (he 4(h March 1789, it went into operation. North Carolina and Rhode Island con- tinued for some time to withhold their assent and it was not till June 1790 that it received the unanimous assent of all the states of the old confederacy. Bj this adoption by the people, after full deliberation and dispassionate con- sideration of i(s merits, of the Cons(i(u. tion, the government under wliich we now live acquired that vigor and stability which was necessary to render its action efficient and salutary for the benefit ot the people. Let us next briefly recur, even at the hazard of some repetition, to the intro- duction of the laws of England into our State, and to the adoption o/ the Biil of Rights and the Constitution. ^^i^^m dS-^'^iiiBSJSciiss'iP HARYLAND Relative to the Laws, Declara- tion of TJights and Constitution, For the purpose ot properly under- standing the origin of our laws in Ma- ryland and their growth out of, their connection with, and their dependence on the English law, it is necessary to take into view the early iiistory of the colony, the character of the persons by whom, and the circumstances under which, the settlements were made, and how the government was adminis- tered. In England, the lawyers trace the connection of their law with the fceudal system, the civil law, the can- on, or the ecclesiastical law. and the old saxon custom?; — but in America, the foeudal system never obtained root in its strict military vigor, and the laws were only so affected by i^, as they had grown up in the mother country and been imported into the colonies, modi- fied by Its influence; and the canou, or 123 ecclesiastical law, bad but a slight hold if any, in a countrv. which had been resorted to purposely as a refuge from religious requisitions and persecutions. The institution, however, of a Propri- etary Governmert and the novel rights growing out of such an establishment, the dependence of tlie colonies on the government of the country fioni which Jhey emanated, and the enacting and the administering of laws by newly es. tablished tribunals, often proceeding without prccerent, or previously esiab- lished forms, all give the laws of the colony a certain peculiarity of form and character even before its separation from the niothcr country; — but after this even^ the revolution itself, the es- tablishment of the Federal Government, and the connection cf li.e State and the Federal tevernments, all involve ques- tions cf importanresnd interes' requir- ing deep attention and an accurate investigation for their solution. To show the origin of the law. to trace it back to its source, to inc,uire whether it sprung from the necessities and the in- ▼enlicn of the colonists themselves; cr whether, it originated in the curamcn or statute law cf England; cr whether 129 it niay claim the more venerable parerr-' tage of the fcEudal system; and also t& inqriire the manner in whicli it may have been altered or modified by its application to the province or the state, are all questions requiring investiga- tion as serving no less to throw light on the dark points of the law as it is at present, tlian being calculated to gratify the laudable curiosity of the mind of the antiquarian. The Westminister Review (in an article copied into the Museum No. 1-20, p. 611,) says: <'It was a principle with our ancestors, who four.ded the ojd colonies, to carry along with them such parts only of ihe usages of the mo- tiier country, as should be suitable to their new circumstances abroad, a prin- ciple recently neglected, but capable c-t being applied to all the arrangements of society, and calculated to promote the well being, b) encouraging the individ- ual energies of the people. In ecclesi- astical affairs, this saved the colonists from tithes and ecclesiastical courts; in civil affairs generally, it led to the esta- blishment of local and popular govern- ment, divesled oi those privileges and pretentions which had been suffered to 130 acrumulate at home; and in the prac'ice of the law, it banished from the coloni- al courts n srreat part of the technicali- ties of Westminister Hall, inasmuch as it was at home only that ancient offices and exclusive ranks existed, to whose interests those technicalities were subservient, and by uho?e agency they were exercised. The last instance regarding the law, is familiar to those acquainted wiih the progress of our colonial possessions, and was put in a strong light by Sir Math- ew Hale two centuries a^o, in the fol lowing terms; "Concerning the planta- tion of Virginia, New England, Ber- muda and other islands and continents towards the West Indies, and also our plantations in Africa and the East Indies, the course of their acquisition was, that the king issued » commission to seize them; thus Virginia, and New England were seized, 4 Jac. I; Green- land and X\\e northern plantations, 1 Phil, and Mary pat. 3, and divers oth- ers. Presently upon the acquest, the English laws are not settled there, or at least only temporarily, till a settlement is n^.ade; and, therefore we see their ad- a>i9tration of justice and law. much dif» 181 fering from the Enslisl> law, but the people carry with them those English, liberties wliich are incident to their per- sonsl" — Loi'd Hale's Prerogaiiva Rt- gis. Origin of the law maki'g power. — J^alure of the Chatter; — The Origin oj the Declaration of Rio his and its con- nection loith and relation to the Constitw^ ilon. — The first settlement of Mai viand was made on Keist Island, in the year 1631, hy Clayborne; ar.d in the year I83'2, Charles the first granted a patent to Lord Baltimore. This charter, after defining the limits of the State, declared the colony to be entirely separated from Virginia and to be immediately sub- ject to the crown ot England. Lord Baltimore was created absolute Lord and Proprietary of the Province, and invested with all the riglits which any Bishop of Durham in the county Pala* tine of Durham, in the kingdom of En- gland, had ever enjoyed. He was t> hold this of the king of England, "in free and common socage hy lea'ty oniy for ail services, and aot in capite, < r 132 by knights service; yielding 'therefor two Indian arrows of those parts, to be delivereJ at the said Castle of Wind- sor, every year on Tuesday ot Easter "Week; and also the fifth part of aH gold and silver ore, which should hap- pen from time to ti;ne to be found with- in the aforesaid limits."' — (Land hold- ers A. V2.) The seventh s- ction of the same charter grants unto the said baron and his heirs, for the good and happy government of the said province, free full and absolute power, to ordain, make and enact laws ot what kind so- ever, according to their sonnd discre- tion, whether relating to the public state nf the said province, or the private util- ity of individuals of and with the advice and assent and approbation of the free men of the same province, or of the greater part of them, or of their dele- gates or deputies ichum we will, shall be called together for the framing of laws, when and as often as need shall require, bj the aforesaid Baron of Baltimore and his heirs, and in the form which shall seem best to him or them, and the same to be published and duly to exe- cute." Thus early do we find provis- ion made for representative legislation* iSB !n the next section, however, this proprietary, himself or by hisreprenta- tives, is authorized "to make and con* stitute fit and wholesome ordinances^to be kept and observed for the better scoverument of the people inhabiting in the province, provided the said ordi- nances do not extend to oblige, bind, charge,or lake away the right or interest of any person or persons of or in mem- ber, life, freehold, goods, or ch&ttles*" It will thus be seen tliat the proprie- tary alone might pass ordinances, though. he was to call together the people or their deputies, to make laws. The charter also gave to the proprie^ tary the powers ot a captain genera], authorized him to repel invasions, to pursue, captivate, and put to death his enemie', to exercise martial laws, to impose taxes and subsidies on articles imported and exported, the product of which taxes was given to the proprie- tary forever, and it was covenanted on the part of the king, that he nor his successors should ever impose customs, taxes, quotas, or contributions whatso- ever upon the people, their property or their merchantable commodities ladeu within the provinc^. 134 It may be remarked of the grant to Lord Baltimore, not only that the powers authority and pri\iStges, extent! beyond all former graiits, but that h contained no clause, obliging the pro- prietary to submit the laws, which might be *^nacted, to t e king for his approbation or dissent; nor any reser- vation of the right of the crown to in- terfere in the government of tlie pro- vince. The grant by stipulating that ih.e proprietor should enjoy all the prerogatives which the Lords Palatine t)l Durham ever had enjoyed, com- prehended all the original powers of the counties Palatine in England, the owners of which had in their counties ji^7'a regalia as fully &s the king had in his palace; they had the power of par- doning treasons, murders and felonies, of appointing ail judges and justices of ihe peace; all writs and indictments run in their names, as in other counties, in the name of the king, and ail offences were said to be done against their, and not, as in ether places, against the peace of the king.— (L. A. 12.) Declaration of Rights and Constitution. It was in accordance with this char- iS5 !er that Maryland was governed, with the exception of the time when viol- ence prevailed and of the short period during the Commonwealth, between the years 1654 and 1658, (L. A. 20) to the time of the American Revolution, when the people assumed the power into their own hands, exercising it through the means ol delegates, who first met in convention at Annapolis in the year 1774. From this time the pcwer of the liOrd Propiietary may be considered as having been transferred to, and subsist- ing in the State Conventions, for the 41st. Art. in the Bill of Rights declares that the subsisting resolves of the several conventions held for this colony, ought to be in force as laws, unless altered by this convention, or the legislature of this State. There was a convention, which assembled in 1776, in Maryland, and which instructed the delegates whom they had sent to the general convention to vote for the Declaration of Independ- ence which accordingly was proclaim- ed on the 4lh of July of that year. And at a convention elected for the express purpose and which assembled Qu the 14th August 1776, the Declara- 136 \jon of Rights for Maryland was assent- ed to and passed by the delegates of the freemen ol Maryland, and was agreed to by them on the 3d of Novem- ber 1776, — and the Constituiion,wh\ch filled as it were the outlines laid down by the declaration of rights for the formation of government, was adopted in accordance with the Declaration of Uighls ol Maryland. These may be considered as lying at the foundation of the exi.-tence of the present form of government, because the people, when they first e?eparated frojn and laid off their allegiance to Great Britain, as the people of an independent State put loith these documents as showing the rights which thoy claimed, and the maxims of government tor which they contended and bj which they would be regulated. A declaration of rights is merely in. tended to set forth and insist upon the prominent principle^, the unalterable; and fundamental laws and maxims, the incontestible rights, wiiich arc contend- ed for, assumed, and enforced, and wliich are supposed to constitute the essence of a free government. Theso papers appear to be an invention oj 13T modeTi States, and in England we find nothing similar. Their Magna Charta may be considered as most nearly approaching those documents which constitute the outlines of our govern- ment. (See Kent Com.) The Declaration of Rights in Mary- land, starts out with the assertion that, "the Parliament of Great Britain by a declaratory act, having assumed a right to make laws to bind the colonies in all cases whatsoever, and in pur- suance of such claims endeavored by force of arms to subjugate the United Colonies to an unconditional submission to their will and having at length con- strained them to declare ^themselves Independent States, and to assume government under the authority of the people; Therefore, we, *he delegates of Maryland in free and^fuU convention assembled, taking into our most serious consideration, the best means of estab- lishing a good Constitution in this State, for the surer foundation and more permanent security thereof, declare^ that all government of right originates from the people, is founded in compact only, and instituted solely for the goo^ 4/1* the whole " 1S8 The third Article declares, "that the inhabitants of Maryland are entitled to the comraon law of England, and the trial by jury according to the course of that law, and to the benefit of such of the English statutes as existed at the time of their first emigration and which by experience have been found applica- ble to their local and otlier circum- stances, and of such others as have been since made in England or Great Britain, and have been introduced used and practised by the courts of law or equity; and also, to all acts of Assembly in torce on the first of June, 1774, ex- cept such as may have expired, or have been or may be altered by acts of con- vention or this declaration of rights; subject, nevertheless, to the revision of and amendment or repeal by, the legislature of the State; and the in- habitants of Maryland are also entitled to all property derived to tliera from or under the charter granted by his majes- ty Charles the first, to Cecilius Calvert, Baron of Baltimore." This article of the Declaration of Rights may be called the conneciino; linli which binds the l&ws of Maryland to their original sources in the mother iS9 ^-'/e under them; but in civil case?, it wTas different, and the record bo()ks,the nature of the subjects and the law au- thorities thereon, and the usage and practice of the Provini^e, had to be re- ferred to in proof of t-he extension of many of the statutes, (K. R. S.) It seems, says the same work, that the question as to the application and extension of the English statutes, was taken up at the first session of assembly of which we have any record, and con- tinued in various ways to be agitated to a period so late as the year 1771.— 144 The views of the proprietors and then adherents, tended to discourage the extension of those statutes, in order that their power of assenting to laws might become more important, while on the other hand the people of the province were unwilling that the stat- utes should be particularly declared as applicable, and were desirous ol leaving it entirely to the courts to determine whether the adoption of the statutes would be in accordance with the good of the country and the wants of the people. There are then Ihree distinct modes by which the English statutes may ha\e been in force in the Province, 1st. By the express declaration of the par- liament; Sid. By declarations contain- ed in the Provincial acts of assembly: 3d. By having been introduced and practiced under by the courts of law and equity; which is the most import- ant in judging ol those that are to be retained under the provisions in the declaration ot rights. Many statutes relating to rights and rules of property have been tacitly acquiesced in, and many have been used and prec- ticed under, without any express de- 145 clsion of the courts. See K, R. S. Intro. It may also be remarked that the acts cf the Legislature have in many cases, by operating on the same subject,super- seded the English statutes, sometimes partially, sometimes wholly. Having said thus much in relation to the statute law, which is sometimes called the "lex scripta," let us merely advert for a moment to what is usually known by the name of the common law, or ''lexnon scripta," because such law originates not from written enact? ments of the Parliament or Legislature but from the decision of the judges upon such questions as may have been pre- sented to them in the numberless causes of litigation which arise in the diver- sified intercourse of human society, and which the statutes hare not provided for, but left to the judgment and the exer." cise of sound discretion in the courts of law. It seems to be but reasonable that when the judges once decide a case that in subsequent cases which may arise of a similar character, they should preserve a uniformity of decision and an adherence to established principles. But as there may exist an endlesi 10 146 diversity in the circumstances and particulars of human transactions, so there is continual occasion for the ex- ercise of the judgement of the courts, not only properly to adjudicate every case which may come before them ac-* cording to its own intrinsic merits, but also to preserve an uniformity in their decisions and a consistency with princi- ples, which may have been before laid down by them, as governing them in all their decisions. These decisions being collecled together in print, form the books of Reports, which constitute 4he common law,' and which are con- sidered as the perfection of human reason and the highest improvement of the human judgment. In cases of litigation coming before the courts, it is usual to appeal to these books to ascer- taui what have the been decisions of the same court, or of other courts,in similar cases, or in analogous cases, which may have been presented to them, and thus to decide new cases in conformity with' such prior decisions. It is the collec- tion and arrangement of these decisions which constitute the great body of most of the law Libraries, and which far surpasses in magnitude and extent the 147 ]ex scripta or statute law, and it is this too which occupies principally the hours of devotion of th^ student, and con- stitute those precedents which com- mand and govern the decision of the judges. It is evident from observations al- ready made, that the common law of England was not excluded from adop- tion by the Province of Maryland, and that it has always been considered one of the proudest inheritances of the country. Yet in Fer.nsylvania an act was at one time passed forbidding the quoting of any book ot the English common law.. The decisions at the English common law, may then also be considered as of binding authority, as precedents, down to the time of the declaration of rights, subsequently to which time, the Eng- lish precedents are quoted in the Mary- land courts not as absolutely binding, but merely as of weight and authority and as commanding the respect and highest attention from our courts, (5 Har. & J. 35S.) Note — Books: There has never been m the courts of Mar^'land any legally appointed or established Re- porter, but the reports of the arguments of the cases, and the judgments of the court have been made by private persons whose undertakings the State encour- ages by subscribing for a number of copies, so as to remunerate them for their expense and trouble. The first Reports in Maryland were of the cases in the General Court of the State, the old Court of Appeals &c. and extended trom the year 1658 to the Revolution. They were then continued by Harris and Johnson, from 1800 to 1826, after which they were continued, by Harris and Gill, and subsequently by Gill and Johnson. This collection of the adjudications of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, is a work calculated to do credit not only to the eminent counsel and judges, but to elevate the character of the State itself in the eyes of the world, for the profound learning, the d.eep research, the accurate discrimination, perspicuous statement of principles, and the correct deductions and inferences, which ar§ l4S eoDtained in them. The clearness an^ the distinctness with which the litigated points have been settled and established, will go far to settle on a firm basis,many of the vexed questions, which have been the source of contention and con- troversy. It is the foundation of a fabric worthy of an infant State, and which will continue to reflect credit upon her character. In addition to this we may add the Chancery Reports by Chancellor Bland, containing cases adjudicated in the Chancery Court. "While we are upon the subject of the law books of Maryland^ we would also take this occasion to mention some others of the law books which hare been published from time to time in relation to Md. Laws, &c. as enabling some who have not the books before them, to form a more accurate judgment of them. The statute laws of Maryland, were in the early years of the Province merely recorded in the public offices. Subsequently to this, a book of the acts p pealed so much of the 37th article ot the Constitution as provides that no Senator or Delegate to the General As- sembly, if be shall qualify as such, shall bold or execute any office of profit during the time for which he shall be elected. Though the bib section still provides that no Senator or Delegate, during tbe time for which he was elec- ted, be appointed to any civil office, whicb shall have been created or the emoluments of whicb shall have been increased during such-time. No member of Congress or peison holding an office of trust or profit UR' !64 der the United States^ shall be capable of havingf a seat in the General Assem- bly, or bein^ an elector of the Senate, or holding any office of trust or profit "juder this State; and if any member of the General Assembly, elector of the senate or person holding an office of trust or profit under this state shall take his seat in congress, or accept of an office of trust or profit under the United States, or being elected to Congress or appointed to any office of trust or profit iinder the United States, not make his resignation ot his seat in Congress, or of his office as the case may be, within thirty'days after notice ot his election or appointment to office as aforesaid. bis seat in the Legislature of this State, or as an elector of the Senate, or of his office held under this State as aforesaid shall be void (1791 ch 80 conf 1792 ch22).^ All civil officers for the several coun- ties ot this State, shall have been resi- dents of the county for which they shall be appointed, six months next before their appointment, and shall continue residents of the county while the) re- main in office. (Art 46). No member of the General Assem- 165 bly or Council if he shall qualify, shall hold any office ot profit diirino; the time for which he shall be eiectfd (this is repealed by 1836 ch 197 sec 7); and if any member of the Geiierai Assembly or Conncil, after (jualifyi;ig, and du- ring the time for which he shall act as such, or if any Governor, Cii:inceIlor, judge, register of wills, register of the land office, commissioner of the loan office, re<2;ister of the Chancery Court, or any clerk of the comiimn law courts; treasury, naval officer, surveyor or au- ditor of the public accounts, or sheriff, while acting in the office which hft holds, ^shall receive directly or indirect- ly or at any time, the prnfifs or any part of the profits of any office held by any other person, his election, appoint- nientand commission, on conviction in a court of law, by the oath of tvo credible witnesses, shall he void, and he shall suffer the punishment for wil- ful and corrupt perjury or ' e banished from the state forever or disqualified forever from holding any office or place of trust or profit as the court may ad- judge (cons, arts 37,39,53) — a justice of the peace may however be eligible us a Senator, delegate or member of 166 the council, and may continue to act as a justice of the Peace (con. art 44). It is thought however that the pen* alties in tlicse articles may be repealeil partly hy a repeal of the 38th Article of the constituiion respecting oaths and by the act regulating oaths of office. Formerly it required a property qual- ification in Maryland not only to ena- ble a person to hold office but also to vote; it will be seen above that the ne- cessity of a property qualification in the voter was repealed by the amendment of the constitution in 1801 (ch 90^ conf. 1802 ch 20), and in the office holder by Nov. J809 (ch 198; conf 181.0 ch 18). Thus have the property qualifications gradually been laid aside and all the citizens of the State, whether rich or poor, put upon the same footing. DECLARATION OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF In regard to the to'eralion of all religious creeds iiuder tlie Colonial Government we have spoken above. — In al'v'!ing to the subject of rtiigious tolcritt>> I ill Maryland, and the early spirit of hbeiality witli which our laus were characterised, and particularly to the charter ntiHiud to Cecilius, the son and !i ii' of George Calvert, on the 20th June 163-2, a pubh'c speaker lately le- niarktd as follows: — **The mild, liberal, and mor.'J spirit of the father was characti^isticaliy im- pressed upon the charter thus granted to the son: wfiich strongly corroborates the oiiiriion, that he himself was its autlior. Although, very naturally, im- bued to a considerable extent, with the arist.icratic and loyal spirit of an Eng- lish subject, siiil, he made ample pro- vision for ihe rights and liberties of the colonists. Altl>ough, too, he had felt the sting of religious intolerance, and had been numbered araorgst the ''fro- scribed," on his conversion to the faith o( the Catholic religion, itill, he insured 168 to all christian men the most pei feci exercise of the rights of conscience. — Nor was it a mtre parchment guarantee. Never, from the first settlement of Maryland, down to the perrod when her^Proprietary government w^as sus- pended, could she blush (or the com- mission of one act of authorizerl intoler- ance against any denomination of christians. To be sure, Christianity was made ihe law of the land; and was, in some measure, the boundary -line of political franchise. The unhappy cliild of the Synagogue was still doomed to bear the marH of an outcast, and was unjustly debarred the privileges of a freeman. Even so; Calvert, and his colonists after him, made giant strides in advance of the age. Maryland established the principle, and, above all, ihe practice of christian toleration, in the new hemisphere, and laid the ground-woik for the complete super- structure, which was, afterwards, rear- ed by the hands of Jefferson, and his illustrious co-laborers in the cause of truth. She was the first to give "re- ligious liberty a home, its only home in the wide world:*'* where "ihe disfran^ * Bancroll's Hist. U. S , vol I, p. 247. 169 chised/riends of pi'elacy from Massa» chusetls, and the Puritans from Virginia were ivelcome to equal liberty of coii- science and political rights,^'} Such is a sttiuple, only, of the honoral)le and impartial testimony of Bancroft; who is more than sustained by the eloquent historian of Maryland. I say it not in tiiuinph. It is a recorded truth. In- deed the. contrast is too mournful for tri- umph' It was, truly, most lamentable, to see men who had fled from the old world, to secure a peaceful enjoyment of civil and religious freedom, them- selves, and their children after them, persecuting^ their fellow^men for a difference in creed! Maryland did not, and could not rejoice in the contrast. — She only endeavored to teach a beHer lesson, and to exemplify her teaching by her practice " It was indeed honorable to the first Proprietary of Maryland, that ashy the charter he, "had taken from himself and his successors, all arbitrary power, by establishing the legislative franchise of the people; so he took from them the means of being intolerant in religion by securing to all present and future tibid, p. 257. Ilbid, p. 242. 170 liege people of the English king, with* out distinction of sect or party, free leave to transport themselves and their families to Maryland." (Banc. vol. Ipp243). This toleration of all religious sects in Maryland, without persecution, is especially honora'ule to the founders of the state and cannot but be creditable to them, when in several of the other colonies great bigoiry prevailed. This liberality of sentiment mav be attribu- ted to two cause?; first, the enliglitened views and the sagacity of the Proprie- tors-; and secondly, to the peculiar circumstances, under which the colony was settled. It is well known to the reader of history that at the time that the charter of Maryland was granted the feelings of intolerance towards the Catholics in the mother country, ran hig[h,and indeed the violent pursecution of them in consequence of their re- ligious opinions induced them to seek an asylum in a foreign land. It is not then to be supposed that, at the very sametime that they were asking and in- deed enjoying for themselves toleration of their own religious opinions from the mother country, that they would attempt 171 to persecute those who differed from them in the colony, and wlio would have of course, resorted to the higher tribunal for an appeal, if their rights had been infringed upon. 'J'he proprietaries of Marylard tlierefore, rejoicing in the free and uninterrupted exercise of their own religio js sentiments, felt no disposition to provoke attacks upon themselves, by crusading against the rights of others. They were themselves tolerated not only in the possession of their religious rights, but also in the enjoyment of important political powers granted to them by Protestant Sover» t?igns in a nation where a permanent religion was established by law. — Happy had it been for the reputation of our state, if this toleration not only leiigioiis, but also politicaJ, had been allowed to continue. But it was not. Even in the province of Maryland, first settled by Catholics, and established, as it were, as an asylum for them, from religious persecution in the old coun- tries, in a short time the Protestants, doubtless looking for their aid and succor to their more lofty ally accross the waters, became the more powerful, znd obtained the ascendencj. So that, il2 in a short time, so far from visiting persecution on others, even, if he had been so disposer' the Proprietary !^ was compelled to look to his own safety.^- We quote from the nervous language of the same writer again, when he states: the fact;— ''Such was Maryland, in the first ppoch of her career. But, alas! ihe hour of her prevarication was approach- ing! Turbulent and unscrupulous men were meditating 'iideous ruin. Civil comn ion lifted its viper-head from amidst the flowers of peace. Tiie rep- tile of religious bigotry, fresh from the den of English persecution, envenomed the public mindo Demagogues, court- ly sycophants, and saintly hypocrites all combined, in one unholy effort, to feed the cancerous disease, which corroded th.e loveliest feature of human liberty. Maryland forgot her ancient glory! What cared intriguing men for the memory of olden times? What cared :hey for the rcmembi-ance of Cal- vert's liberality, and the practical tolerance of the Pilgrims? Not a jot. The honor and the happiness of Mary- land were but as a grain of dust in the scale, when wei",hed with Iheir s^lfisU 173 purposes. I speak it plainly, fellow- titizens, for it is true; and it is time that the present ojenerationshould know it, and think well on it: for if there be one lesson more dear to Maryland than another, it is the one taught by the history of this period. And, I would rather never breathe again, than be guilty of the cowardly concealment of a single unpalatable truth. I repeat j,t, Maryland forgot her ancient glory! Hence the odious appeals to popular passion; hence the utter con- tempt tor the religious rights of man; hence the Catholic was disfranchised in the very colony, which had been settled by the toil of his forefathers! — As there is a Heaven above me, I speak it not in bitterness, but in deep, deep sorrow. It is the one blot upon the honor of Maryland," And again, he alludes to the superior power of the Protestants in the colony from which it will be seen that those of the Protestant denomination who were tolerated in the full and entire exercise of all their religious views in the Colony, were in fact the stronger party,and therefore that the establishers of the colony would but consult their 174 owu interests and the peculiar circum- stances ill which they themselves were placed, by extending the rights to the tree exercise of tlieir religious opinions to all ctiier sects of the Chrisliaa de- nomination* ^'Fanatical men had poisoned the public nnnd;a groundless revolution had hurled tiie Proprietary from his ancient dominion; and, at -the express solicita- tion of the rebellious ''Associators," Maryland was placed in the huiniliat- ius5 attitude of a royal province. King William assumed the Executive power: and, on the 9th of April, 1692, Sir Lionel Copley, by royal appointment, dissolved the revolutionary convention, and undertook the government of the province. The first act of the new Assembly was "the act of recognition of William and Mary;" by the second, *''the Church of England was formally established." "Thus, (continues McMa- hon.) was intioduced, for the first time in Maryland,a church estallishmeut sus- tained by law, and fed by general tax- ation." t The Catholic," tiie Puritan, the Quaker, and every other Non-con- formist, was taxed to support a form of worship, which they repudiated. Un- 175 der the old system, every man had paid his own preacher. Upon the improved pLm, the whole people now paid the ministers of the dominant party. It is hardly necessary for me, fellow-citizens, to'oomment upon such a state of things. The union of church and state s a curse to both. Fortunately, it is becoming an obsolete idea. It is loudly condemned by all liberal political economists of the age, as dangerous to the liberties ot the people, and injurious to the true in- terests of religion itself. However such an union might have aided, in the ear- lier ages of Christianity, to check the rude power of semi-baibarous kings, and to curb the tumultuous passions of the multitude — all agree ihai it is wholly inconsistent with the spirit and progress of modern civilization. The Church is for the spirilual guidance of men; the S{aie for the temporal gov- ernment» Both are distinct and inde- j)endent in their respective spheres of action, Neither is as sound and effec- tive, as when disconnected from the other : and neither can undertake to regulate the other, without endanger- ing the harmony of both." \Yhile then we must attribute some 176 of the religious freedom enjoyed in the colony of Maryland, as we have said above, to the peculiar circumstances m which the colony was placed, let us not deny to the Proprietary, the absence so far as ive can judge, of any disposition to infringe Upon the rights of others, and acquit him of giving any grounds for the loud out cry wiiicK seems sonietiraes to have been raised in the Province of ''No Popery." Let us not deny that under the Catholic govern- ment in Maryland, no encroachments were made upon Protestant rights, while on the contrary, under the Protestant government, various acts were passed "to prevent the growth of Popery." Let us not then deny to them the credit for so much toleration of other religions as under the circum- stances they are justly entitled to. To others, such as the worshipper at the Synagogue, and to those who pro- fessed no christian religion, the same toleration was not extended till many years after the Revolution, if indeed it may be said even yet to be fully guar- anteed to them. Let us refer for a moment to the changes ^jnder the laws and Constitution of 177 oar state. The Declaration of Rights (art 83) in fact abolished the support of the church of England by law in Maryland and gave to all persons professing the christian religion equal protection in religious liberty, — the article runs in these words: "33. That it is the duty of every man to worship God in such manner as he thinks most acceptable to him; all persons professing the Christian Reli- gion are equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty, vvherefore, no person ought by any law to be moles- ted in his person or estate, on account of his religious persuasion, or profession, or for his religious practice, unless, under color of religion, any man shall disturb the good order, peace or safety of the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality, or injure others in their natural, civil or religious rights: nor ought any person to be compelled to frequent or maintain, or contribute unless on contract, to maintain any particular place ot worship, or any par-' ticular ministry, yet the legislature may, in their discretion^ lay a general and equal tax Jar the support of the chri2t- 178 ian religion; leaving to each individual the power of appointing the payment over of the money collected from him, to the support of any particular place of wot ship or minister^ or for the benefit of the poor of his own denomination, or the poor in general of any particular county, but the churches, chapels, glebes and all other property, now belonging to the church of England, ought to re- main to the church of England forever. And all acts of assembly lately passed, for collecting monies for building or re- pairing particular churches or chapels of ease, shall continue in force, and be executed, unless the legislature shall, by act, supersede or repeal the same: but no county court shall assess any quantity of tobacco, or sum of money, hereafter, on the application of any vestrymen or church wardens; and every incumbent of the church of Eng- land, who hath remained in his parish, and performed hi« duty, shall be enti- tled to receive the provisions and sup- port established by the act entitled "an act for the support of the clergy of the church of England in this province," till the November court of this present year, to be held for the county in which 179 his parish shall lie, or for such time as he hath remained in his parish, aod performed his duty." The part of the above article in Italics has been repealed and the power of the Legislature of levying a tax for the support of the Christian religion or any other tax for the support of religion was taken away by 1809 ch 167, conf 1810 ch 24. The 35th art. of the Decla- ration of Rights as we shall presently show required a Declaration of belief in the Christian religion. In confor- mity with the Declaiation of Rights the 55 Art. of the Constitution also re- qnired of every person appointed to any office of profit or trust to subscribe a declaration of his belief in the chris- tian religion. As this act however excluded Jews from oflBce and was regarded by many as a want of that religious toleration which the enlightened age and the progress of a liberal spirit demanded, it was a continual subject of invective and debate until finally an act amend- ing the constitution was passed in 1834 (ch 205; conf 1835 ch 33). It enac ted that every citizen ot the State, pro- fessing the Jewish religion, who should 180 thereafter be appointed to any office of public trust under the State of Mary*- land, in addition to the oaths or affir- mations required to be taken by the constitution and laws of this State or of the United States should make and subscribe a declaration of his belief in a future state of rewards and punish-» ments, instead of a declaration of a be- lief in the Christian religion. (1624 ^h 205; conf 1825 ch 33.) The constitution repugnant to the above act however was only repealed so far as respects the Jews and not as to others (ib sec 2). Thus it will be perceived^ that Mahometans, Infidels and the like are still excludftd from office in our State, and all who do not believe in a State of future rewards and punish- ments- (This it has been thought by some would also exclude some universalists.) AS TO THE OATHS OF OFFICE TO EE TA- KEN BY OFFICERS. In the previous article, it is shown, that it is necessary for any person ex- cept a Jew, appointed to any office tf profit or trust to subscribe a declaration «f his belief in the Christian religion.-—^ isi But there has been much legislation ort the subject and repealing and alteiiog' of old acts. The 36th Art. of the Der. Rights says: — The manner of administering an oath to any person, ought to be sucb as those of the religious persuasion, or denomination, of winch such person is one esteem the most effectual confirma- tion by the attestation of the Divine Eeing'. And also that the affirmation ofquakers &/C. ought to be received as an oath. And the 35th Art of the DeclaratioB ol Rights says: that "no other test or qualification ouorht to be required, on admission to any office of trust or pro- fit, than such oath of support and fidel- ity to this State, and such oalh of office as shall be directed by this eonvention or the Legislature of this State and a declaration of belief in the christian religion.''' The latter clause as we hav<^ just shown has now been altered. And the Constitution (43rd Art) pre- f.cribed that every person who shall of- fer to vote for delegates, or for electors of the Senate, or for Sheriff, shall, [ii required by any of the persons qualified to vote) before he be admitted to poU 182 t&ke such oath or affirmation of support and fidelity to this State as this conven- tion or the Legislature shall direct. At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, it was deemed important to guard the fidelit) and the allegiance of the office holders and others by fre* quent and multiplied oaths, that their obligations to the State might he too strong to admit of any breach of alle- giance; hence we find that in the Con- st tution were found the oaths to be taken by the electors of the Senate (Art 10), by the clerk of the council (art ^), by the senators and delegates at their annual meeting (art 28), and again before an election oi Governor and members of council (ib). and also by several of the higher officers, that they would not receive the profits of any other office, or for the supply of cloth- ing or provisions for the army (art 38) or ihftt they would not vote for any ro office through favor &c. but that they would vote for the persoft most fit and best qualified for the office (art 50), that they would not receive any fee or reward for doing their office but what the laws aU(.wed, or receive the profits o! any other office (art 52); and that 18B tbey did not hold tlxemselves bound in allegiance to the King of Great Britain^ but would be faithful and bear true al* legiancc to the State of Maryland (art 55). But after the revolution had passed and distrust had ceased to exist, it was found that the frequent recurrence ol the use of the oath detracted from its solemnity, and caused it to degenerate into a mere matter of form, without possessing that obligation on the con- science, which it should possess, and hence the whole of the above oaths have been abolished, and the following amendments of the constitution have taken their place. The amendment of 1797 (ch 18 conf 1798 ch 83) gives to certain religious sects, to Quakers, Nicolites, Tunkers, Memnonists, the right to affirm instead of taking an oath; but the court must be satisfied that they are conscientious- ly scrupulous of taking an oath; and af- terwardsby 1817 (ch 61 conf 'Jfech 163) all persons professing tije Chsisnan religion who hold it unlawful to lake an oath on any occasion, shall be allow- ed to make a solemn affimiilion in the same manner that Quakers have hereto 184 fore been allowed to affirm, which affirmation shall be of the same avail as an oath to all intents and purposes whatever; and (sen 2) before any such person shall be admitted as a witness or jujor in any court ot justice in this State, the court shall be satisfied by competent testimony, that such perjon is conscientiously scrupulous of taking an oath. And again, by the act of 1822 (chap 204, conf 1823, ch 116, sec 2) all the parts of the Constitution and form of Government relating: to oaths to be ta- ken by officers of government, w^ere re- pealed and by the first j^ectiun it was prescribed that every member of the Senate and of the House of Delegates, before he acted as such, should take the following oath: — **1, A B, do swear or affirm, (us the case may be) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland and that 1 will support the constitution and laws there* of; that I wil! not, directly or indirect- ly, receive the profits or any part of the profits of any o'her office, during the time of my acting as Senator, (or mem- ber of the House of Delegates,) and ttiat I will faithfully discharge my duty 185 iis Senator (or member of the House of Delegates) without prejudice or par- tiality, to the best of my skill and judg- ment." ( 182-2, ch 204, conf 1823, c!i 116,) and Electors of the Senate and ail Executive and Judicial officers, be- fore they act a3 such, and all Jurors, elected or appointed to any office ot profit or trust, civil or military, before entering upon the duties thereof, shali respectively take and subscribe tiie fol- lowing oath or affirmation, to wit — **], A B, do swear or affirm (as the case may be,) that 1 will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland, and that I will support the Constitution and laws thereof, and that 1 will, to the best of my skill and jtido;ment, diligently and faithfully, wilhout partiality or prejudice, execute the office of , according to the Constitution or laws o( this State.'' Thus will it be seen that the old re- strictions of the Constitution have been jrradually relaxing, and the qualifica- tions for office and the declarations of religious belief have become much more enlarged than they formerlv were. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS. Having occupied as mucb space in the foregoing detail as our limits would allow, w€ propose here to mereij glance at th€ following topics, as being; «f more particular interest: — 1. The Revolution of 1€36. 2. The Reform Bill of 1636-7. «3. Th« First Election under it; and Ihe arrangement of the Executive and Senatorial Districts. 4. Tiie cost of the Md. Judiciary 5. The History of the Internal im- provement System of Md, 6. Education. 7. The Census. MHS^Iill-ILi^HllS/lJS'^ . CHAPTER I. THE REVOLUTION OF 1836-^ THE EIGHT MILLION BILL &c. The year 1836 was eventful in Mary- land. The Session of the General Assembly which commeneed on ti'.e 28th December, 1835, reojained active- ly engaged in legislative duties, until the 4th of Aprilj and then adjourned for some weeks, principally for tlie purpose of ascertaining the disposition of their constituents in regard to the propriety of passing or rejecting a bill in relation to Internal Improvements- and ways and means for executing them, which had been framed after much deliberation and excited the deepest in- terest in its progress, and was discussed with much animation, a majority of the members being reluctant t© assume for the State so vast a responsibility as it proposed, without more than comoiCiQ precaution. 189 On the 2-2d May the body re-assem- bled, and during a session of a fortnight, finally matured and passed the bill alluded to. It proposed that three Commissioners to be appointed by the Executive, should proceed lo borrow, either in Europe or this country, upon the best terms they could obtain, ou the faith of the State, bonds or certifi- cates of Slock, bearini; an interest of six per cent, not redeemable in less than forty years, tue ^Uiu of ei^hi millions of dollars. The comrnissionets v. fre hrnited however not to neootiate, unless a premium could be obtained on said loaii, which should net at least 20 per cent i.o the treasury. This premiuna was panij appropriated to the pavuient of ibe m- terest which should accrue on the ioao for the first three years^aud xh*^ residue together with the bonus receivable up- on sundry new bank charters, and tL& total receipts from the various works of Internal Invprovement effected by this bill, were appropriated as a Sink- ing Fund adequate to the discharge oi the principal debr, beioretne expiratiori of the period tor which it was to be oc- laiued. iVMu i^avini'; the fctaie tiereafitr 190 in possession of a large and lucrative stock. The deep anxiety of the friends of Internal Improvements for the accom- plishment of tho vast undertakings which were to bring the emporium of Maryland into a fair competition witi ihe cities of the Union, for trade am commerce, and especially for the fate oftho3estu|>endous undertakings which had already made considerable progress at the expense of the State and its Citizens, but were as yet unproductive because so far from being completed, was no\v apparently in a fair way to be gratified, and the certainty of the com- pletion of those works hailed as the commencement of a new era ot pros- perity; when the whole scheme Tias unexpectedly arrested by a |:olii\csl incident which diverted for a time th • attention of every member of communit} from all thoughts of improvement to the more immediate necessity of preserving the very existence of tht; Government Itself. The Administration of President Jackson, being about to close, the State of Maryland, as well as the rest of the Union, was much divided as to the 191 choice of a successor. The triends of the existing Administration SHj^ported the election of Martin Van Buren —the opposition advocated General William H. Harrison — each party was sanguine of success in Maryland, and upon the vole of Maryland, many supposed the election to depend, or at least, that an election by the primary electors might be won or lost. To the excitement incident to the election of a President of the Union, was added on this occasion the deep interest which the people of Maryland always take in the election of a new State Senate, which, continuma: as it did for five years, gave a decided in- clination in the State Government, in favor of the party which succeeded in that election. During the electioneering, the Ad- ministration party in this State, availed themselves with great effect, of the objections which a large body of the people iti many of the counties, and more or less in all of them, felt to the State embarking in such extensive pro- jects, and becoming so deeply involved, as had been adventured by the Whig Legislature of the preceeding sessions. 192 For, although the opposite partj had in full proportion participated in the nriea- sure, yet according to the well known practice of parlies, the majority are always made accountable for ail faults. The disaffection on the subject alluded to, went to such extent, that in St. Mary's and Charles counties, the elec- tion of Electors of State Senate was contested hardly at all upon the ground of politics, but between a Whig ticket ot friends to Interiial Improvenient,and a ticket combining those of both parties opposed to the Internal Improvement bill — and that subject^was the theme in the canvass. Besides the Internal Improvement bill, the same party availed themselves of the unpopularity of the bill which had also passed the previous legislature by the joint efforts of both political parties, for indemnifying the sufferers by the mob which occurred in the city of Baltimore in August 1835, to which object the avails of the Auction Duties were applied until the amount should be discharged. This bill gare great offence in some sections of the State, and operated powerfully as i»n etection- eenng theme amongst certain classes in 193 BaUiniore city and county. The party which had associated in other directions, particularly in Freder- ick, Wdsiiii gton, Hariord and Cecil counties, in iuvor of a Reform in the Constitution oi the Stale, formed originally of members of both political parties, had now become of such con-* siderable force as to b:) very much of an object ior party politicians to avail themselves ofm some way. It became obvious that, for the sake of success, they v\ ould be as likc)y to take sides and identify themselves with a party, as that a party tinding itsclt alone unequal to its rival, would alHmpt a union with such powerful allies for (l.e sai^e of in- suring success. Some leaders of the Administration party were now ex- tremely anxious uj lorm li)is association in those counties in wliich Kefoim was most popular — in other sections the topic was kept out of view as much as possible. These several considerations had great influence in the election of Klec- tors of the State Senate,and contributed to reduce the large majority which the Whigs had at the previous election, to a mere majojitj. Twenty-one Whigs 194 and nineteen Adaiinistration men, were elected. On tlicdav appointed for the meeting; of the Coilej^e of Electors at Annapolis, tlie whole of the Whig members attend- ed and (pialirted — but as the Constitu- tion required thjJt not less '.haii twenty- f.!ur members should constili.te a quorum for the election of a Senate, the min- ority, in>tead of attending; the College, met at l\ q City Hotel in secret con- clave with s:)me proinmeot men ot the Administration party, and came to a determination not to attend, unless the twenty-onti Electors won'd consent that they, the nineteen, should he allowed to name a majority of the Senate about to be elected. '11)0 qualified Klecf^rs declined to receive any communicat on touching their duty, or the mar-in-^r of its per- forniance from a body ^o imkjiown to the Constitution — and remained igno- rant of tlie exact tenor of the proposi- tion itself, until it appeai'ed in the form of a manifesto i?* the Baltimore papers. After renv'ininu; tliree days at Anna* polls, the nineteen E'ectors separated, announcin<>: in their manifesto, that they thereby resigned into the hands of 105 the/ people, the authority with which they had clothed them— and that a» they considered that this course would terminate tlie exislence of the Senate, and conse(}iienfly, of tiie Constitution and thean.h>rity (if a!! t!'.e ofncers {»f annnal appDiatnient, \hi-y stijrgest that a Convention, to consist of six persons from each county and citv, should riieet at the City of "Ajsnapolls o:» the 3d Monday of Novembi-r. ^> conlinue nil such appoinlmcnls unlH anew Consilium Hon should be formed bij a Convention to be called for thai pinpase., W 'I'he I Fridican-.entin uhidi the people of the State so u:iexpeftedly found their governin*2st,idl the diingcr of impend- ing anarry a!id civil strife to which an aCtenipt tappoint'd faction, and endless tnrn^oii \vj at tlie elecnnn wliicb took place in October for Delegates to the Geneial Assembly. Of tlte clo;hty Kienibers of u hicb that house was < om- posed, only twenty attached to tlie Van Buren party w: ich had cuuntetiaiiced the measure, succeeded to seats, most of lliciu by very small majoritie*-, and sume of then) only by publicly disavow- ing the conduct ol the recusants. 'jMie Leiiis'ature th^retore consisted of a Whia yenale, (unanimcu?,) and of R House of DelciiaUs consisting of si.xty Wiii;2;sand twenty Van Buienists. The eiiiii OS-ins topic ot the session was the foiiumplatt'd Rtifoii'vi in the State Consiitution. 200 ' The Van Buren members were much diviJen any so important and difficuk a subject in the deliberate asseiiblies of ihisor any othe;' Republic. The bills passed the Senate without one disseiUing voice. In the House of Delefjates t'»e votes were fifty-nine for, and fouhtf-en against the bills, — Of tiie latter njm()*T seven were Whigs, viz: I from St. Marv's 2 from Charles, 3 fro.ii Calvert, and I froni Vorcester — the ren'.aininpr seven were Van Bureii men, viz: 1 from Charley, I from CaN vert, 3 from Cecil and 2 from Allegany the men.be's of wh.ieh party divided 13 for, a!ul 7 againstJtlie bill. The Whig members stood 5*2 for, and 7 egainst the bill. rkform proposed. The bilhthjs pi'^S'd proposed entirely to rem:)did the Executive and Legisla- tive departnirrjts. EXKC'JTlVfc; DF.PARTMENT. The Governjf, ioittead of being elec- 202 led annually by joint "ballot of both houses of tlie General Assembly, by this act was to be elected lor threa years by a general vote of the people, and is ineligible for tbe next teiin. The State was divided into three Gubernatoiial distri(t>, of which the Eastfrn Shore counties constifule one; St. Marys, Charles, Calvert, Prince George's, Montgomery and Anne Arun- del cour.tiesand the cilies ol Baltimore and Annapolis, constilnte another; and the remaining counties of the State the oihcr (iislrict; iind iiom these dif^trictSt Rlternatclv.lhe Governor was to be chos" en, addinj; to the qualifications hereto- fjro rec^uired, that he sliall have resided at least three years in the dis- trict, fiom which lie may be elected. The Executive Council was abolish- ed, and all the f xccutive powers in futute weie to be exercised Ly the Governor, and in cases o' icnportaiU p.ppointnents by and with the advice and consent ol the Senate — to whom however hs was forbidden to re-nom- inate the same | eison when once re-* jetted by them, except at their request. The oifice ol CleriC to the Council ^\'as abolibhcd, and a Sccrttarv of State 2tl3 rabstitufed, io be ajiiiually appointed by tlieGdveinor.siibjtcl to ihe approval olthe Senate. In case of a vacancy in tl.e cffice of Ouveinor, llie^Gtnetai Afi^etnbly were byj(.inl ballot lo ptcceed to fill the s^ame f ( r (he rt^sidiie of the trim Item the samepbeinatorial distiict. Meantime, MntW it is so filled, the Secretary of State shall act as Governor, or iirc?s» of vacancy in that eflue, the Presidt^nt of the Senate, and should (lia* he also vacant, the Speaker of the House of Delegates officiates ss Governor. The first ejection rf Governor imtter this act was held on the 1st Wc(ines° day in October 1638: lots v/ere drawu todeteimine I'loin which gobcrnatorial district lire first and {he second choice was to be made. The tern) of his cffice « omnjenccd t)n the 1st Monday in January 1839, and contiiiutd f . r three yeaisand until .a successor was cliosen and (jualilied. LEGISLATIVE-DEPAKTMl KT. ^ Senate. — The leitns of the old Senate expired so soon as a ntvv Senate \vas elected and (lualificd ui der this Reform act, according to the Conslilu- Hon and Laws of the Slate* 204 tt was to be compose;! of twenty-one members — one to bi' elected by ballot ofthe vottrs in the city of Daiiimore, and one in like manner in each county of the State. [ Theteim of one-third of those first elected, expired in two year?; one other t inl in f.mr years, and tlu* rcnaining third in six year»; ihey were to be clas5i« fiexl ti) t'^it effct i:nvned!ately on first a=;st'.T»'jUn J", and in such mariner as the Sen'^tors should prescribe. Thus, one third of the bo;ly nre to !jc elec'ed every two yeari*; and after the first terms expire, are to serve f r six years, and are inelio^ible to re election. Vacancies aro t;) be filled by a new election in the count/ or city, for the residue of the teru'i. Hou^E OF Dklegatis — Until ihQ new census of IS40 v.a> olficialiy pto. tnuiu:fd, tlie House of Delegates con- sisted of a specifi^.Ml lunnher. After the official pro;nul;;ation of the census of IS4{), and after every secoiid census thereafter, the ratio of lepresen- tatives in the Hous.i of Drlcoratcs, wa^ fixed accordin;; to the follovviuLi b.jsis. Every county hav'Ug less iImii I5,00(> souls, federal uuiiibets, 3 delegules'. 205 ■ Over 15,000. and less than 25,000, 4 delegates Over 25.000. and Ic^s than 35,000, 5 delegates; Over 35,000, 6 de'ep;atPS. Z The city of Ballimore to have as many deltgntes as the county having the hirgcst dele». ation. The city of Annapolis shall cease to send a distinct delegation, and be here- after incorporated as a part of Anne Arundel county. Electigns, — The. first elpction ot Governor, Senatois and Delej^ates, under this act, took place on ihe llr^t Wednes- day in Octoher, 1838; and all the elec- tions thereader ueieto be held on the first JVcdiiisday, instead cf the first Monday in October. Master akd Slave — The relation of master and slave in this state, shall not be abolished, usiless a bill to abol- ish the same, shall be passed by a unan- imous vote of the members of each branch of the General Assembly, bs published at least thiee months before the next election of delegates to the General Assembly, and be confirmed by a like unanimous vote at the next regular session — nor then williout A?^ 206 eompensalion to the master. Seat OF G)vernmk\t^ &c. — Anua* pol:s is secured a< the Seat of Govern- ment, an'l tho place fw holding the sessions «if the Court oi Appeals of the WesiCM Shore, anil- of t!ie Court of Chanci.'ry, C'erks of the County Courts^ and Reorders of fVUls, and Reo;isler in Ckiincenj. — I5y a bill, distinct iVom the foregoing, the Constitution was altered as lo t!:e mode o\ elioosinfr nnd as to the term of office of those officers. They were to be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, for the term of seven y^ars Pe^-sons holding these offices at the time of this act were hov\ever,exccpted from its operation till ]S45. CHAPTER HI, ■ FIRST ELECTIOX OF GOVERN- OR AND ARUANGEMENT OF DISTHICTS. The first election, under the Reform Bill, when the Governor was elected by the ptM^ple, took place on the 1st Wedneid;u' ii Ociober 1838. VVilliain Grayson, Esq., of the Eastern Shore, was elected and qualified on the 1st Monday i.j January 1839 to serve for three years. His salary by the bill was iixed at$4,'20{) per annum, and he was required to reside at tlie seat of government, where a furnished dwelling is provided by the State. The fir«t ^election in the Wcsfern District, by the people, rcsuUed in the choice of Francis Thomas, E^Jj.; and the first election in the thitd district iu the choice of Thomas G. Prat^ Esq. GUBERNATORIAL DISTRICTS. According to the provisions of the amendment of 1830, continued 1837, to the Constitution of Maryland, the State hasbeeu divided into three Gubernator* 208 tfl/ Districts, from each of which the Governor is lo be chosen alternalelj. The Ivst or ''Ecsion District," is composed of Cecil, Ktnt, Quetn Ar.ne's, Talbot, Caroline, Dorchesier, Somerset and Worcester counties, — or \vh?it is 'denominated the Eastern Shote of Marvhmd. From this distiiti the Governor was elected, on the first "Wednesday in October. 1838, and is in future to be elected every nint years thercaftei*. 7'he Second cr *'tVestein Disfrici,^' is composed ot Baltimore, Haiford, Carroll, Frederick, Washington and Allegany counties. A Governor was to be elected Irom this district, <;n the 1st Wednesday in October, 1841, and on the same day every ninth year there- after. The Third or '^Sculkern Bislrict,^' is composed of, St. Mary's, Charles, Calvert, Prince George's, AnneAruui del and J\Iontf:?mery counties and the cities of Baltimore and Annapolis. A Governor was to be elected from this district, on the 1st Wednesday in October, 1844, and every mnlh year thereafter. 'Ihe Governor is elected t each case to serve for three jears, 209 fer;d is not eligible for re-election. In ease of vacancy occuring in the office, the successor serves onlj for the residue of the term. SEXATORrAL ARRANGCluENT^ The first Senate of Maryland, under the amended Constitution, qualified on the firht Mondaj in December, 1838. According to the amendments as carried out by the Senate, January 1839, immediately after their tormation, the Senators of the Slate were classified so as th&t the term of one-third of the member* sliall expire every second year. The jir5^ Senatorial election, under ^his arrangement, took place on the first Wednesday in October 1840, and h to take place on the same day of every sixth year thereafter, at which time a Senator is to be elected for eoch, the City of Baltimore, Baltimore Countj, Allegany County, Washingfon County, Cecil County, Queen Anne's Couaty, Worcester County. The second Senatorial election takes place on the first Wednesday in Oc- tober, 1842, and in the same countses every six h year thereafter, at v,'h.:zh 210 time a Senator is to be elected for eacl of the following counties: Charles County, Calvert County- Caroline County, Anne Arundel Coun tj, Prince George's County, Mont- gomery County, Somerset County. The third Senatorial election takes place on the first Wednesday in Oc- tober, 1844, and in the same countief on every sixth year thereafter, at which time a Senator is :o be elected, for each of the following counties: St. Mary's County, Kent County Talbot County, Dorchester County i Frederick County, Harford County Carroll County. CHAPTER III. THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM. The peculiarly favorable position of Maryland, as a central state of the Union, and as presenting the most favorable route for rapid and easy communication with the valley of the West was not unobserved by her citi- zens, or allowed to remain long un- improved by them. They marked the superiority of her water courses as a thor- oughfare for trade, and the fact that the waters of the west and those of the Atlantic approach nearer to each other by the Potomac valley than by any other route, which will always render that the most eligible direction for trade. The precise data which amply sus- tain the superiority of this route wer* collected and published before the peo« pie of Maryland undertook to mak- that connection by the artificial high ways which she is now constructiog,-. 212 These data have never yet been con- troverted — and they cannot be. it was to Gneral George Washing- ton hiniself, as the pioneering engineer of such a project, that the state of Maryland is indebted for the sugges- tion. He was one of the first of sur- veyors, as well as of warriors and of statesiren. Gen. George Washington presided in the first internal improve- ment convention that ever assembled in the United States. This convention met at the city of Annapolis, perhaps in the year 1785, at any rate immediately after the revolution, tor the purpose of promoting the project of improving these peculiar advantages of position.—- Many of the most eminent men of that day were in that convention. Inspire 1 hy the views there presented, the state of Maryland was induced to embark in the undertaking,and at that early pe- riod, exhausted as the country then was bv the recent struggle for independence Maryland led the way towards "internal improvements," fully persuaded of tlie capacities that nature had stamped upon her position for becoming the lavorite depot of the vast^trade which would cne day find its way across the Ali^-. its gany ridge and connect the iniliioiis of people that would inhabit each side of the mountains. Large expenditures were authorised by the legislature to improve those facilities. The old Maryland canal was pro- bably the first canal constructed in this country, l^ut it was with a vii^w to tlie improvement of the navigation of the Potomac river that the principal ex~ p.enditure was- then authoiijed by the state. So little, however, did the peojjle of this country then know of the science of internal improvements, that it is nwt 'o be wondered at that the details of those new enterprizes shouM be ill-directed and unfortunate. The £.ttempt to make the bed of the Potomac river navigable, drained (he treasury of the slate of Maryland of the then very formidable sum of $140,000, w-thout realising any benefit whatever. Nor was t!.e next project in which pome of her citizens were induced to en^bark, with olheis of t'le adjoining state of Delaware, a whit more fortu-: Rate. Tile inhnbitants ot that part ot the two states which lies between Elk River, leading into the head of the Chesapeake, and the DeKware Lay^ ^14 caught at the idea of connecting t)ie two bays by a canal. How little was tnen known in this country on the sub- ject of canalling, was sufficiently illus* trated by the fac*: that after holding a few public meetings upon the subject, it was finally resolved to commence the work upon their own hook, under the firm persuasion that it was little more oi a task than to dig a common mill race — and to work they went ac- cordingly with all due enthusiasm. They soon got tired ol digging how^ ever — and came to the conclusion that it would be better to form an associa- tion and employ workmen. Very con- siderable funds w-ere raised, dnd an engineer appointed, who happened to know, that before a canal could be effective^ a feeder must be found to supply water upon its summit level, and to work he went with a formidable force to conduct a neighboring stream of water to the point of elevation. To excavate this sub-canal, exhausted the whole of the funds of the company, ane works of improvement should be completed. Predicating upon this conclusion, the several internal improvement com- panies forthwith went to work and in* ciirred heavy outlays in pu>.hing on their enterprizes. All of them, with the exception of that of the Eastern Shore rail road, which was abandoned, tkre at this d:»y either in operation, or 222 hr progressing towards completion. The course of several of them how- eTer have been strewed with diffiruK ties. It had been the unfortunate fate of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal company,for instance, to have its talent- ed projector apd presiding officer, Charles Fenton Mercer, displaced, and the office bestowed a person having no attachment to the enterprise, upon a partizan of his own, from a remote section of the union, altonether un- acquainted with the duties required of such an officer, and indifferent, it is feared, to any thing but the perquisites of the office. Again and ajijain it was the fortune of the same company to have their credit impaired by imputa- tions upon the proceedings of those en- trusted with the management of the company, and by long and labored in- vestigations into their prrceedings.— And finally, it was their hard destiny to have politics mixed up more or less with their administration, and obstruct- ing their onward direction. The principal embarrassments which occurred however were common to the whole of their projects, and originated in tlie difficulties which were uneX'« 228 rectedly found in obtaining funds upon the credit of the state on the terms which the law prescribed. At the naoment the law passed, or at any time before, there would have been no difficulty in obtaining funds at those rate?, but the untoward circumstances to which the monetary concerns of both Europe and America were sudden- ly reduced in that year, — the failure of the banks to continue specie payments; the depreciation of American securities and of the value of all stockb-^the gen- ral impairing of credit, all operated to increase the difficulty of obtaining funds. It was at length found indis- pensable to resort to direct taxation in order to insure the fajth of the state and to sustain its credit. When the legislature of Maryland first harmonized her conflicting parties local and political, in behalf of inter- nal improvements, which happened in the session of 1821-2, — and before any works were commenced, they very pru- dently determined to prepare fo^: the enterprise by levying taxes to sustain the treasury during the progress of their undertaking. The product of thQse taxes amounted to about $1003- 224 WIO per annum. This precaution however was aban- doned two or three years afterwards, ynder the pursuasion that it would be practicable to effect the improvements without the necessity of resorting to a tax upon the people Had the state confined its operations to a single en- terprise^and completed one before en- tering up n another project, there is no doubt that ail the projects couU have been accomplished one after anolher,and fctfar^less expense than they will even- tually cost. But such were the inveter- ate difficulties, which surrounded the projects, that though all admitted that this would he the course of prudence, it was utterly in vain to attempt to con- trol the case. The old local interests remained inflexible. Potomac should not have her canal, unless Baltimore had her rail road, and Susquehanna her tide water canal and rail road also — and soon. All must go on at once, or none should go. And onward they all went, still full of hope and buoyant with expectations. But the trying time was to come. In almost every such undertaking there is much aidor in the commencement, 225 which becomes exhausted whilst en* couutering those difficulties that are in- seperable from great works. Mistakes, mismanagrement, disappointment as to locality, thousands of objections start up, and even the patient and pprsever- ing friends of the enterprize are worn out ^^ith embarrassments which sur- round their progress. And the crisis at last arrives when it is discovered that the mginal estimates of cost will be considerably exceeded — their funds already exhausted — their credit at a large discount, and the public impa- tient at the delays which they have been unable to avoid. The interest, in the meantime, upon the amount al- ready expended, accumulates heavily, and has to be provided for, as well as the means wherewith to progress in the remaining work. Delay is render- ed exceedingly expensive — and to get on becomes every hour more and more difficult. One more manly effiDrt would proba- bly complete the enterprize. That ef- fort required that the legislature shouhl sustain the credit of the state for the occasion by an efficient direct tax* The people of Maryland hardly hesitated. S£6 A large majority in «:af'h branch o! the legislature acqtiusceii srj the necessity; a new assc^sra-Mit (»l it.e whole of the property within tne stue was ilirtcted to be made, and a fix, considered ad- equate to the exigency has been lev- ied upon the pe p'c. In th.e 3'ear 1841 the Tax Bill vvt,s pas cd, thouoh it was severaJ ycirs hefore it was got into ef» ficient operatjoii. The lollovvirig statement will give a general idea 0,000. The Tide Water Cawo/ is 45 miles lon^, an900 000. The Port Ihpostt Canal is 10 mile? long, and co-t $-200,000. The BaVimore and Ohio Rail Rail Road is 168 miles long and cost some or $7,000,000. Its income in 1844 was $658,620 and its nett profit $346^^ts more than is paid, in the Empire iState of New York. It appears by the same document, that the cost of the Judiciary system of Virginia.exclusiveof iMao:istrates courts is $74,350, in addition to \^hich, the Judges o! the Courts of Appeals, and of the General Court, (of whom there are 27,) receive a mileage allowance of 20 cents a mile, for every mile they travel, in goin^ to and returning from court. In Pennsylvania the Judiciary De- partment costs $99,744.50; and in Ohio independently of the sums paid to the Associate or Probate Judges, (the am- ount of which is not given,) the sala- ries paid to the Judges of the courts of 282 Common Pleas, and the Judges of the Supreme and Superiour courts, arc stated at $25,251 25. The same wiiter in commenting fur« ther on the cost of the Judiciary in Maryland, says: Our object however in adverting to this subject, is to show, that the greater portion of the amount which is paid from the treasury to the Maryland J«» diciary is in fact placed in the treasury by revenue derived fromjthe courts. — The amount which is paid out of the treasury to the Judges is $36,548 67, We find by an examination of the last report of the treasury that there was received during the last year — For taxes in Chancery 674 32 For taxes on plaintiffs 5,772 25 For fines, forfeitures and a- mercements 4,414 9ji The treasurer has received or should have received for the current year for the tax on the commissions of Judges, Clerk and Regis- ters 1,650 00 The income tax on Clerks and Registers, at 2^ per cent 00 the amount returned ^ 233 by them to the last Legis- lature as their incomes will be 1.114 22 For the tax imposed by laws] of last session on Clerks and Registers 10,000,00 Making a revenue directly derived from the judicial action of our courts of $23,826 71 Without adding other sources of rer- enue which might be fairly credited as derived from the judiciary, we find the amount received from the treasury by the judges over the asiount placed in the treasury by their action !s$12,722,&6 • CHAPTER V. ^ ' EDUCATION. ■ When it is considered that the Ed« ucationofthe people is tlie only safe basis upon which any republican gov- ernment can rest m security, it will at once occur to every mind, that it is not only expedient, but also essentially ne- cessary that the cultivation of the mind of the youth who are to become the fu- ture citizens of a country should be one of the principal objects of attention to every wise government. It may then be well enquired, what has|Maryland done and what is she now doing towards the education of her citizens? According to the census of 1840 the number of persons in Maryland, who could nor read nor write was 11,817. In 1825, a law was passed for the Introduction of Primary Schools under systematic rules and regulations into the State. This hw has been adopted in many of the counlies of the 8tate« 23S ^nd acted upon with success. Soon after its passage the law went* into operation in Anne Arundle county In 1838 it was first put into opera- tion in Frederick County. The means Jippropriated by the State of Maryland lor Education con- sists as follows: — 1st. The "Academy Fund" — This is an appropriation of some $800 or ihereabout, which has been granted by the state for the benefit of an Acade- my in each County of the State, and which is a charge upon the Treasury at large, havinjj: been granted first to one county and then to another, as the oc- <-asion might call for it, untill finally each county seems to have a prescrip- tive right to this amount, for i*s high school. The amount thus paid annu< ally by the State is now about $19, 600,00 as per the Treasurer's Report of 1844 5. This fund is appropriated as follows^ To St. John's College $3,000,00. ^'Each county $800 16,000,00. ^'Brookvijle Academy 200,00« ^'Bev. John McElroy, Fred. 400,00. $19,600,00« 236 ' Andtlie Institution to which the fund« Snay be given is bound to educate one poor scholar for each hundred dollars given to it. We may also here remark that, in addition to the funds thus bestowed by the State, the Legislature had frequently made grants of Lotteries, and other pecuniary advantages, such as freedom from Taxation &p., for the benefit of Literary Institutions. It granted atone time a Lottery of 20,000 to St. John's College, and also a Lottery of $50,000 to the Frederiek Female Academy. St. John's College. We may also remark under this head that immedi- ately on the close of (he Revolutionary war, an endowment of St. Jol n*s Col- lege was made by a large appropria- tion annually thereto. During high party times this donation was wiih« drawn and the college illegally depriv- ed of it. But subsequently, on a calm representation of the facts, an appropri- ation of $3,000 annually was made ta the College, provided she would relin- quish all claims upon the State for the original grant and have the same record- ed in the court ot Appeals. Thi* 2B7, was accordingly done. 2. The "Free School FrND."T!ri« 18 a distinct Fund trom the above, and was coinraenced somewhere about the year 1815, when the State, upon char- tering the banks, required of them to pay a bonus for their charters which was to be appropriated for the purpo- ses of education. At the same time that the banks paid this sum, the) were also further re- quired, as a part of their bonus to make a Turnpike Road from the Cont^co- cheague to Cumberland. As this Turnpike enured principal ly to the benefit of the western coun- ties of the State, it was agreed that the part paid by the banks to the school fund, should be annually and equally divided between the seveial countiei o( the state and the city of Baltimore. This fund has been managed by the State and invested by it in bank stock, as a ''Capital"for the benefit of the several counties. And from this Cap- ital, amounting in 1844 ♦o the sura of $159,108 48, the proceeds are paid over annually as required to the sev- eral counties for the benefit of their Free Schools. 238 Further; — when the State received from the General Government its share of the Surplus Fund it was arpropria- ted (1839 ch. 33.) to the benefit ol the Free Schools of the state. The State afterwards having occasion to borrow this money, the same amount was re- turned from the proceeds of the Bait, and Washington Rail Road on which it is now a charge. One Thousand Dollars of the interest of this surplus fund was appropriated for the education of the Indigent Blind of the State; and the remainder is distribu- ted,one half equally between the several counties and the City of Baltimore^ and the other halt between the same according to their respective popula« tion. From the interest of this fund there was paid in the year 1844 the sum of $34,069,36 to the benefit of the Free Schools of the State. i* Altogether in 1844 the Treasurer of the State received for the Free Scboolt Fund $63,808 65; and disbursed to the counties the sum ot $67,333 96.— (Treas, Report pp. l3.) This School Fund is paid over by the Treasurer to the School commisRODerij 23& of those counties where (here are such officers, and in other counties to the commissioners of the Tax or Levy Court, and it is by them distributed as they judge best, either equally among the Schools, or unequally according to the population. The State also appropriates for the Education of its Deaf and Dumb the the sum ot $3000. The County Tax. — In addition to the amount received frrtm the State both "for its "Academies" and for its "Free Schools" many of the counties have the power to lay a furthet Tax, through their Levy Courts, so as to ep able them to carry out the system of Primary Education. In Frederick County the sum of $8000 is usually levied on the county at large for the benefit of the schools. And also, in this county, at the discretion of the Trustees, the sum of 25 cents per month is levied on each pupil, who is able to pay. The funds thus derived from the State, the County, and the moderate tax on the pupil, constitute the means of support ol the Primary School Sys* tetti of Maryland, 24Q From this detail it will be »ee» that a liberal and beneficent pohcj is pursued by Maryland, hanapered as she is with debt, for the foster- ing of Education. For besides the aid that she has extended towards the Uni- Tersity of Maryland, at Baltimore, she has liberally endowed St. John's Col- lege at Annapolis, an Academy in each County of the State, and has also freely lent her hand of assistance towards the aid of the Free Schools of each county, thus providing for the education of all classes and grades of her citizens. CHAPTER VI, CENSUS OF MARYLAND FOR 1840, As published by the Marshal. Wh tes Free blacks Slaves, Total popula- tion Al'y. 14,777 216 Wash. 27,733 1,556 Fred. 27,575 2,987 Carroll 15,223 895 Bait. 24,184 3,4781 Harf'd. 12,065 2,449 Mont.* 8,280 1,240 P.G. 7,832 1.080 St. M. 6.051 1.413 Cal. 3.664 1,292 Char. 5,988 817 A. A, 14,597 5,120 Cecil, 13.351 2,552 Kent^ 5,618 2,486 Car. 5,373 1,727 Talbot 6,054 2,336 Q.A. 6,1C8 2,540 Som, 11.563 2.645 Dor, 10,647 3,965 Wor. 11.643 3,063 BCity 81,317 17,980 Sill 2,505' 4,420, l,120; 4,400 l,5S7i 5,127, 10,640' 5,757 1 4.401 9,280 9.816' l>34Si 2,7411 776' 3,698' 9 979; 5,3951 4,232| 3.543 3,212, 15,704 28,792 34,982 17,238 32,062 17,051 14,647 19,552 13,22? 9.355 16,093 29,531 17,249 10,845 7,876 12.088 12,628 19,603 18,844 18,249 102.509 316,544 I 61,837 89.736 | 46S.127 *iJy an aci oi CoHgresa,llie census oi lliia county «»« ordered to be loiaki n, OD account of not being coiu pl«te. 242 ThP as^grpgate Increase of ttie pnpufaUon oi the state within the last fitty ypitrs has beei) 148,399 or an average of very nearly 3.000 per year. The cify of Baltimore alone, has increased in population within the la^t fifty years from 13,503 to 102.509, say 89,006, leaving- 59,393 increase tor the residue of the state. The population of the Eastern and Western Shores from 1790 to 1840, inclusive, are as foilow?: Kastern Snore 1790, 107,638; 1800, 112,536 — 1810, 117 121— 1820, 115,639—1830,119,582-. 1S40, 117.382. Westprn Shore — 1790, 2rl2. 089; 1800. 237,- 1.56; 1810,^63,435— 1820, 291,711— 1830, 327.- 464: 1840, 350,745. It wiil t)e perct'iveil that 'he population of the Eastern Shore within the last filty years has only increased 9,744, or n ne ppr cent. — and that within tl.e last ten years the popula- tion of t!'at shore has diminished 2,200, or abotit two pel cent. The population of the Western Shore, has in the last fifty years, increased 148,654 — and in the ia?t ten years 23,281. Jlsgregatea of ivhites, free colored, and ilavei under each census from 1790 to 1840. In 1790, whites, 208,649. free colored, 8,043 sUves, 103.036— total 219,728. In 1800, whites, 216,356, free colored, 19,- 587, slaves, 105,635— total 341,578. Increase j[i ten years, 21,850. In 1810, whit'^p, 235,117, fee colored, 83,927, slaves. 111.532— total 380,648 In^ crease in ten yeais, 38,968. In 1820, whites, 255,622— free colored 4^.730, slaves, 106.998- total 407,3f0. iDcrea^p 243 m fen years, 26,804. In 'l830, whites, 291,108— free colorpd 52.938, slaves, 102,994 Total 447,040. In- crease in ten years 39,690. in 1840, whites, 316,544— free colored, 64,837, slaves, 89.736— total 468,117. Increase an ten years, 21,077. The proportion of whites to the colored population in the year 1755, was 23 whites, tp one colored, in 1790 it was 1,88, in 1800. 1.75 to one; in 1810, I 62, in 1820, 1.77— in 1830, 1.88— in 1840, it was 2.088-100 whites to one colored per.<=on. The condition of the colored popular lioo, has however, during this period undergone a very material change. Sixty years asjo, nearly all the descent (fants of Africa within the state were slaves. In 1790, not quite one out of every fourteen were dee. In thirty years from that period, (1820.) the number of free had increased to 44,730, and bore the proportion of considerably more than one-fourth of the total numbf?r of their race in the state. During the SitKie period, the entire increase of the slaves, was but 3;968, being le«s than four per cent. In 18*30. more than ooe-third of the colored people of the state were free, and in 1840, the pro* portion ol free colored to the slaves was as 61 to 89 — approximating one- CHAPTER VII. COLORED POPULATION— CoLo- NrZATION. The original project of the founders of the Maryland Colonization Society was, by a gradual yet certain procegs, to reliere the state entirely of its whole colored population, both free and slave, with their own consent. And this was to be effected, first by removing the free blacks, offering them a free passage at the expense of the Society, and then by gradually promoting the liberation of the slaves, and removing ihem. Up to the time of a change ^vhich was recently made in the laws of Mary- land, in no State of the Union had e- mancipation so rapidly progressed, and in fut, in no state ot the Union, at present, is there su large a number of tree colored people as in Maryland. But since the year 1831, the legal policy of the State has been to check emancipation as much as possible by 245 prohibiting the freeing of slaves, unies4 on the f'ondition of their leaving the State, and also to lessen the free color- ed population by prohibiting immigra- tion 'nto the State. According to the last census, in (1840,) the number of whites in our state were 316,544; free colored 64^837 slaves 89.736,- Total 468 117. " The proportion of free colored popu- lation in our s(aht and three q'jarter per cent. It will be thus observed that w*bi!e the white population iscon>iderably in- treasing, and tlie free colored popula- tion also incieasing at the average rate of about 900 per year, that the slave population is greatly drained oft" by the higher price that they command in the SDutkern markets, and by their reiKOY- 21f fei from tlie State without tl e privilege of a return. The tendency ih en of affairs in Mary- laud has beeu lowards au increase of the free colored population and a de- crease of the slave population, and a de- crease diUo of the entire colored popu- lation. A very important question here arises as to what is the true policy of Marv^ land ? Is it to check this tendency to a con- version of the entire colortd population of the slate into a free population; or is it to promote the increase oi tiie fret population at the expense of ihe slave population ? Is it desirable thai thire should be a mixed population of free and slave in the state? or ralher, to have it all frte f or to have all slaves, as tiie operation of the law, (except so far as it is coun- teracted by the natural increase of the free colored populaiion) now tends to make it? If it be not desirable to ha\e a population mixed of free and slave, (and all seem to complain of its cor- rupting influence) then, which would te the most beneficial to Maryland, to have an entire free colcrtd populetion, Us or Jin entire slave colored population? We say that this is an important question to be decided, for this reason, because, if Colonization is the policy of the state, of course the I la-clcs must be freed or else be bought out before it, (the colonization scheme,) can entirely relieve the state «>f its colored popula- tion. And the policy of the hw there- fore, should be, to encourage freedom rather than slavery. Indeed the sacrifices always made by Maryland for the promotion of Coloni- zation ,«^ the steadfastness with which through a series of years, she has adher- ed to that policy, shows how dear is to her the great object wliich she expects to eventually accomplish by it, and th« certain though gradual change which she contemplates being able to eflfect in the character of her population in finally rendering it of an entirely homogene- ous character. The fact that Colonizution is looked Upon in Maryland as the great antidf^te Jo the mad schemes of the abolitionists is what endears it still more to the peo - pie of our State. Yet notwithstanding the tax annually paid by ihe plople to carry out the Col - 249 ^uization scheme, ema»cipatiop> is not now the policy;— the law of 1831, (which is much dis^egMded) prohibiting the liberation of slaves within the bor- ders of the State, except upon certain extraordinary conditions It was about the year 1831 that the State adopted the policy of prohibiting manumission, except in extraordinary cases, or 6a condition of the perbon^ who should be so manumitted, leaving the stale; and al- so of prohibiting entirely the introduc- tion of colored persons, free or slaves, into the state. Tlie whole increase of the free color- ed population therefore, arises, from ibis natural inci ease alone and not by immi» gration; and the drain /rom the state, of the slave population, is fiister, by sale and other causes, as a slave population, than it would be, by colonization, it tve&. The State seems therefore to have a- dopted the policy of encouraging the existence of a sufficient number of the free colored population to colonize from; at the same tinie that, keeping steadily in view the ultimate object of at la^t entirely disburdening the State of this kind ol population, it allows the more 25G rPipid process of extirjction to g;o off; by the quiet removal of the slaves iiom the State bj the fetrong and ovej r'ulmg motives of self iiUferest. The steady, settled, definite object then of those patriotic sons of Ma^-yiand 10 whom we owe the "beneficenl scbecic of Maryland Colonization, has bee; , to enroll Maryland, if gradually, yet i-i-iVd\ii]y, with those States North of Mason's and Dixon's line. And, the fact if Maryland's being a border Slate,. \\here the black hue first faintly min- gles with and fades into the white, and the further (act of the sieady legisla^ tion of Maryland tending towards this end, and that tlie scheme of Coloniza. tiom also furthers and promotes this ob- iect, gives encoutagement to the hope Vhat wiiat has been consideied one (.-f the greatest obstacles to the advanct- mem of our State in prosperity will at length be removed, aiid that she wili then take side, in increase of popula- tion and of wealth, with the most fi.- 1 ored of her sister confederates. If then the existence of a riiixed po] - Lijaiion of free ai;d slave must, frou) the policy of Maryland, siili be tolerated, uetvrilhsuudstjg the corruplir.g iv.^u- 251 «nce that^thtiy exercise upon each othef, it might well become a question worthT «f the consideration of fetatesmen and piiilanthropists, whether something more could not now be done to im- prove and ameliorate the condition of the free blacks of the State, by prepar- ing them for the contemplated changej by substituting, even in this countrjj habits of industry tor those of idieuess, of regularity for disorder, of neatness and exertion for fifth and indolence, of steady labor and sobriety for loafering and drunkenness, and by encourging a cultivation of the moral faculties and the formation ot a character to be depended upoji and trusted to, in place of the petty, pilfering, triding, indolent and lazy habits which so ex- tensively prevail among them to the destruction of their comfort, ^. their jQealth, their lives, and to the loss of much 'vealth and labor to the public. COLONIZATION. In 1831 (ch 281) the Legislature of Maryland appropriated the sum oi $10,000 per year for the promotion of colonization, and appointed a Board tof Managers to carry out their bcBefi- ceat views. lo addition to thisj privai^ 252 collections have also been taken up and have generally varied from 2 to $10,000 per year This Board, in 183^, first sent 150 emigrants from the Eastern Shore, to the Colony of Monrovia, in Africa. — In 1834 it was determined to form the new settlement of Maryland in Liberia, at Cape Palmas. In 1837 this Colony consisted of more than 300 persons, and was in a flourishing condition. — Up to the year 1841, the sura expend- ed by the Society in founding the Col- onv, had been about 127 thousand dol- lars, of which sum 76 thousand had been paid by the State Colonization fund, and 32 thousand by private indi- viduals. From 1831 to 1839 the So- ciety had sent out 14 expeditions con- taining 634 emigrants, being about two thirds of the annual increase of one year. The effort of the Society has b^en to establish a regular Packet and to induce the colored people oi the State by a sense of their own interest, and a de- monstration of the advantai^e of a change, to make the emigration by which they would be so much benefitted The question then as to whether, hr 258 tliis slow process/this whole'popuiation can be removed is an interesting one which is now being resolved, but which we have not time now to consider, or comment upon,as this article has already spread out to a much greater length, uader oar hands, than was inteD