•^-''O^ ;. 
 
 ^-^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,0 
 
 
 ^^. 
 
 
 
 
 
 K^"^ V^ 
 
 .^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 > ^^^ 
 
 
 \^^^^" 
 
 
 
 
 ■'%'. 
 
 V^^ 
 
 ■^<'. A^ 
 
 
 ^°-*^ 
 
 
 V. * » « * .^^ 
 
 

 
 
 
 '^A..>X 
 
 o 
 
 
 ^;> 
 
 G" 
 
 '^0' 
 
 
 -^0 ° '^•v. 
 
 <^ 'o.k ,0 '-' '.•5 •(.>■ ^^ A ■'7> A 
 
 
THE 
 
 Archives of Maryland. 
 
3funD-"2PubUcaltoTi, QTlo. 23. 
 
 THE 
 
 Archives of Maryland 
 
 AS ILLUSTRATING 
 
 THE SPIRIT OF THE TIMES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 EARLY COLONISTS. 
 
 A Paper read before the Maryland Historical Society, 
 
 January 25, 1886, 
 
 HENEY STOCKBEIDGE. 
 
 gallimorr. 1886. 
 
PEABODY PUBLICATION FUND. 
 
 Committee on Publication. 
 
 1886. 
 
 JOHN W. M. LEE, 
 BRADLEY T. JOHNSON, 
 HENRY STOCKBRIDGE. 
 
 Printed by John Murpht t Co. 
 
 Printers to the Maryland Historical Society. 
 
 Baltimore, I 886. 
 
EXPLANATORY. 
 
 The following paper was pre])ai-ed at the request of the Mary- 
 land Historical Society, as a sort of codification of the three 
 volumes of Maryland Archives, published for the State by that 
 Society. It makes no claim to original, or extended research, but 
 is confined to the field to which it was limited by the vote of the 
 Society, and has no aim but to alleviate the labor of (or be an 
 index to) the investigation of that publication. The volumes, as 
 issued, are not numbered, and fm- convenience of reference are 
 cited as if numbered in the order of their publication. This 
 remark is rendered necessary by the fact that the volumes are not 
 in regular succession in point of time, the third volume being 
 synchronous with the other two, giving the Proceedings of the 
 Colonial Council for the same period for which the first and 
 second give the Proceedings of the General Assembly. The first 
 volume issued contained the "Proceedings of the Assembly" 
 from 1637 to 1664, and is referred to as " 1 Ar. " ; the second, 
 " Proceedings of Assembly " from 1666 to 1676, referred to as 
 " 2 Ar." ; and the third, " Proceedings of the Council " from 1636 
 to 1667, referred to as " 3 Ar." 
 
 H. S. 
 
THE 
 
 "ARCHIVES OF MARYLAND. 
 
 WHETHER the "Archives of Maryland" 
 are, or are not books of the sort to which 
 Lord Bacon referred when he wrote, "Some 
 books may be read by deputy, and extracts made 
 of them by others," I trust no apology will be 
 thought necessary for suggesting that they are the 
 sort of books that the average " consumer of mod- 
 ern literature" will be the rather apt to read "by 
 deputy " than in any other way. Possibly it was 
 that thought which induced the Historical Society 
 to request that one be deputized to visit the oases, 
 in what even they regarded as an arid region, and 
 to bring before them a report of the flora and 
 fauna, if any should be found. The Society's man- 
 date to undertake that task is this deputy's excuse 
 for the present paper. 
 
 An examination, however, of the three volumes 
 of "Archives of Maryland" now issued is not 
 devoid either of entertainment or profit. The 
 
 1 
 
grand old Hebrew prophet called upon his nation 
 for its instruction, " Look unto the rock whence 
 you are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye 
 are digged." In the same spirit it cannot be alto- 
 gether unwise for us to revert to the beginnings of 
 our civic life, and finding there the germs of many 
 of the customs, institutions, and names that linger 
 with us still — the protoplasm out of which much 
 of the beauty and fragrance of our present social 
 and political life has been evolved — learn their 
 reason and real meaning. 
 
 During the thirty years covered by the volume 
 of the Archives which is devoted to the " Proceed- 
 ings of the Council," and all but a few months of 
 the thirty-eight years covered by the two volumes 
 the "Proceedings of the Assembly," Caecilius 
 Calvert, the second Lord Baltimore, the grantee of 
 the Charter of Maryland, was living, and directing 
 the affairs of the province, as well as it was practi- 
 cable for him to do from a residence so remote as 
 his in England, with the slow modes of communi- 
 cation then enjoyed, and in a country passing 
 through vicissitudes like those of England at that 
 day. It is a key that unlocks the meaning of 
 many of the events transpiring in the colony, to 
 remember that the period covered by them em- 
 braces the last thirteen years of the reicn of 
 Charles I. (till 1649), the revolution, chaos, civil 
 war, and Oliver Cromwell's Protectorate of the 
 
Commonwealth for ten years (till 1660), and from 
 that date the restoration, and reign of Charles II. 
 
 Under the power granted him in his charter to 
 deputize one to act for him in his absence Lord 
 Baltimore conferred vice-proprietary authority 
 upon persons selected by him, and resident in the 
 province, to exercise there all the high powers with 
 which he was vested — subject at all times, how- 
 ever, to a right of revision and veto still reserved 
 to himself. 
 
 This authority was for the most part, conferred 
 upon members of his own family — his brothers 
 Leonard, and Philip, and his "sonne" Charles. 
 The exceptions were that on the death of Leonard 
 Calvert, in 1647, Thomas Greene acted, by death- 
 bed appointment of Leonard, for one year (3 Ar. 
 187), till William Stone was duly commissioned 
 (Id. 201), and he retained the position, with a brief 
 interruption by the Commissioners of the Council 
 of State for the Commonwealth of England, in 
 1652 (Id. 271), till supplanted by Commissioners 
 appointed " in the Name of his Highness the Lord 
 Protector of England, Scotland, Ireland and all 
 the dominions thereto belonging" in 1654 (3 Ar. 
 211). When Lord Baltimore was able to resume 
 his charter rights, in 1656, he was so unfortunate 
 as to select Josias Fendall as his lieutenant ; after 
 whose "Mutiny and Sedicon " he confined himself 
 to his own family — his brother Philip (1660) (3 
 Ar. 391) and son Charles (1661) (Id. 439). 
 
Lord Baltimore's Authority. 
 
 Lord Baltimore's Charter gave him little less 
 than the power of an absolute monarch. It con- 
 stituted him and his heirs " veros et absolutes 
 dominos et Proprietarios " (3 Ar. 4) of the realm 
 granted him, and thus vested him with all power, 
 civil, military, naval and ecclesiastical — head of 
 Church and State on sea and land. In his exercise 
 and delegation to his lieutenants of the power thus 
 granted he exercised, and delegated all. He never 
 forgets, nor do they, to describe him as "Absolute 
 Lord and Proprietary of the Provinces of Mar}^- 
 land and Avalon," and he is the entire govern- 
 ment, — the legislative, the judicial and the execu- 
 tive. Thus his commission to Leonard Calvert 
 "constitutes, ordaines and appoints him our Lieu- 
 tenant Generall, Admirall, Marshall, Chancellor, 
 Chiefe Justice, Chiefe Magistrate, Chiefe Capt & 
 Comder as well by sea as by land " (3 Ar. 152-3) ; 
 and wl^en Leonard Calvert was temporarily absent 
 he transferred to "my welbeloved cosin william 
 Brainthw^ Esq." the same offices (Id. 160). The 
 same are embraced in the commission to William 
 Stone (Id. 202-3) ; and he appointed Thomas 
 Greene, Esq. " to bee his said Lopps Lieveten*nt 
 Generall, Chancellor, Keep of the great Seale, Ad- 
 mirall, chiefe Justice, Magistrate & Comander as 
 well by Sea as by land of this his Lopps Province of 
 
Maryland and the Islands to the same belonging" 
 (Id. 231, 241). We find the same wide range of 
 authority and power conferred upon Thomas Hat- 
 ton (Id. 255), and upon Charles Calvert (Id. 542), 
 and the Governor and "Councell" contract " Peace 
 with the Cynicoes Indians " and " make a Warre 
 w''' the Susquahannoughs " (2 Ar. 378), exercising 
 the highest attribute of sovereignty. The same 
 power was conferred by the council on Robert 
 Evelin (Id. 102) ; on Cornwallis (Id. 133), and on 
 Fleet (Id. 150). And this was in full harmony 
 with the claim of Leonard Calvert years before 
 (1642). On that occasion the Assembly "express- 
 ing a great Opposition to the march against cer- 
 tain Indians the Lieu* General told the Burgesses 
 he did not intend to advise with them whether 
 there should be a march or not for that Judsrment 
 belonged solely to himself as appeared by the 
 Clause of the Patent touching the power of war 
 and peace, but to see what Assistance they would 
 Contribute to it in case he should think fit to go" 
 (1 Ar. 130). The exercise of such high power was 
 the complaint of the commissioners, Bennett and 
 Clayborne, who charged that these colonial officials 
 had pressed against the adherents of the Com- 
 monwealth charges of " Sedition & Rebellion 
 againat the Lord Baltemore, whereby not onely 
 the Lands, houses and plantations of many hun- 
 dreds of people, but also their Estates and lives 
 
6 
 
 were liable to be taken away at the pleasure of 
 the aforesaid Lord Baltemore and his officers " 
 (Id. 312). 
 
 It is true that the charter in giving "free full 
 and absolute Power to Ordain, Make and Enact 
 LAWS" provides that tliis be done "with the 
 Advice Assent & Approbation of the Freemen of 
 the Province" — but this no more constituted them 
 the legislating power than the requirement at the 
 present day, that certain appointments of the 
 executive shall be subject to confirmation by the 
 senate, constitutes the senate the appointing power. 
 On the contrary, we read of measures discussed 
 and adopted b}^ the assembly and the addition 
 "then the Lieu* General enacted it in his Lord- 
 ships name for a Law" (1 Ar. 136). Indeed the 
 common form of enactment was " Be it Enacted by 
 the Lord J'roprietary with the Assent of the Ypper 
 and Lower howse of the General Assembly" but 
 in the troubled and uncertain times of the English 
 revolution we find them entered " Acts made by 
 William Stone Governor" (1 Ar. 28o, 299). Acts 
 passed by the General Assembly and approved by 
 the Governor had force until laid before the Pro- 
 prietary when his "disassent" rendered them void 
 (1 Ar. 75). It was no uncommon thing for acts 
 passed by the General Assembly to fail of approval 
 by the Governor ; and in some instances acts that 
 had passed and met the approval of the Governor 
 
were rejected by the Lord Proprietary when exam- 
 ined by him in Enghind. And his dignity and 
 authority were protected by this rigorous enact- 
 ment. 
 
 " All mutinous or sedicious speeches, practices or attempts 
 (without force) tending to divert the obedience of the people 
 from the right Ho''^* Cecilius nowe Lord Baron of Balte- 
 more, and Lord and Proprietary of this Province or his heirs 
 Lords & Proprietaries of the Province or the Governor of or 
 vnder him or them for the time being (and proved by two 
 sworne witnessas shalbe lyable to bee punished with im- 
 prisonm' during pleasure, not exceeding one whole yeare, 
 fined, banishm' boaring of the Tongue, slitting the nose cut- 
 ting of one or both Eares, whipping, branding with a redd 
 hot Iron in the hand or forhead, any one or more of these as 
 the Provinciall Court shall thinke fitt." 
 
 If such offence was coupled with force, to this 
 assortment of penalties were added — 
 
 " losse of hand 
 or the paines of death, confiscacon of all lands, goods & chat- 
 tells within the Province banishm' ymprisonm' during life 
 any one or more of these as the Provinciall Court shall 
 adiudge " (1 Ar. 428). 
 
 Meanwhile it required great tact to keep in 
 harmony with the shifting powers of the home 
 government, and, taking one consideration with 
 another, their lot upon the j)olitical fence was not 
 a happy one. 
 
8 
 
 The determined eifort evidently was to be upon 
 the side of whatever party was dominant in Eng- 
 land. 
 
 In ]S"ovember, 1649, Greene acting as Governor 
 in the temporary absence of Governor Stone, pro- 
 claimed Charles, " the most renowned Prince of 
 Wales the vndoubted rightfull heir to all the 
 dominions of his ffather Charles of blessed memory 
 and Kinge of England Scotland ffrance and Ireland 
 defender of the ffaith &c " and followed this by " a 
 general pardon to all and every the Inhabitants of 
 this Province for all and every Offense and Offenses 
 by them or any of them committed" (3 Ar. 243). 
 In 1654 Governor Stone proclaimed the Common- 
 wealth the government of England and Oliver 
 Cromwell Protector, and granted " a Generall 
 pardon of all offenses Committed in this Province 
 Since the last Generall pardon" (Id. 304). And 
 a Paper in the Public Record Office declares " itt 
 is notoriously knowne that by his express direc- 
 tions his officers and the people there did adhere 
 to the Interests of this Commonwealth when all 
 the other English Plantations " did otherwise 
 (Id. 280). But the English Commonwealth ceased 
 to be and the Stuart dynasty re-ascended the throne, 
 and then, on the nineteenth of November, 1660, the 
 
 "Gou'"& Couuc-ill " " by the spcciall order and authority of 
 the Right Honno'*'* the Lord Proprietary of the Province, 
 Doe aocordin<^ to our duty and allegiance, heartily joyfully 
 
9 
 
 and vnaniraously acknowledge and proclaime, that imediately 
 upon the decease of our late Soueraigne Lord King Charles 
 the Jmperiall Crowne of the Realme of England and of all 
 the kindoms Dominions and Rights belonging to the same 
 Did by inherent birthright, and lawfidl and vndoubted Suc- 
 cession descend and come to his Most Excellent Ma'^ Charles 
 the Second as being lineally, iustly and lawfully next heirc 
 of the bloud Royall of this Realme " (3 Ar. 393). 
 
 And yet, five years before, the colonists, by direc- 
 tion of the Proprietary, were so loyal to the existing 
 government as to execute official bonds running to 
 "Oliver Lord Protector of England" (3 Ar. 318). 
 
 Land System. 
 
 The whole territory described by Lord Balti- 
 more's charter was granted to him absolutely, sub- 
 ject only to the payment to the king of England of 
 two Indian arrows a year, and he was enabled 
 thereby to hold out strong inducements to settlers 
 by proffers of land in large tracts to those who 
 would occupy and improve it. It was not easy 
 however to protect them in the titles granted by 
 him in the manner which was practiced in Eng- 
 land, and in 1639 an act was passed rendering 
 enrolment by the Secretary of the Province essen- 
 tial to the perfection of a title by grant from the 
 Lord Proprietary, and another requiring the "Reg- 
 ister of every Court to keep a book of Record, in 
 9 
 
10 
 
 which he shall enter all grants, Conveyances, Titles, 
 and successions to land at the request of any one 
 desiring the same to be entred " (1 Ar. 61, 63). 
 
 Voluntary enrolments were much neglected, and 
 the enrolments, made in the Secretary's office under 
 this provision, were "mostly hjst or embezzled in 
 the rebellion of 1644," and efforts were made to 
 replace them from the original grants as far as 
 possible (Id. 329; 3 Ar. 230). But the voluntary 
 recording of conveyances, no special sanction being 
 given to the record, proved ineffectual, and in 1671 
 an act was passed which has undergone very little 
 modification from that day to this, and is substan- 
 tially our conveyancing, and record system of 
 to-day (2 Ar. 305, 3S9). 
 
 In the " Conditions of Plantations" proclaimed 
 by Lord Baltimore in 1636 (3 Ar. 47), in those of 
 1642 (Id. 99), and in those of 1648 (Id. 223, 233), 
 liberal grants of land were made to all settlers who 
 chose to avail themselves of them — so much to 
 each man, so much additional for his wife, for each 
 minor child, and for each servant — to be held by 
 the grantee perpetually, yielding specified rents to 
 the Lord Proprietary, thus initiating the unfortu- 
 nate s^^stem of "ground-rents," of the pernicious 
 effects of which w^e have not yet seen the end. 
 
 Special grants of tracts to be " erected into a 
 Manner," " with such Royalties and Priviledges 
 as are most usuallv beloncrino- unto Manners in 
 
11 
 
 Engl'^" were promised and made: Manors of two 
 thousand acres to any person who in any one year 
 transported twenty settlers to tlie province (3 Ar. 
 223) ; manors of three thousand acres to any one 
 who transported thirty persons (Id. 233) ; while 
 Robert Brooke, for transporting himself, wife, 
 eight sons, two daughters, twenty-one men ser- 
 vants and eight maid servants, was granted one 
 whole county wherever he might see lit to locate, 
 and was made commander and the embodiment of 
 nearly all other offices in such county, as well as 
 a member of the colonial council (3 Ar. 237, 
 240, 256). 
 
 This county was located on the south side of the 
 Patuxent River and called Charles County (3 x\r. 
 260). But only four years passed before Lord 
 Baltimore lost his abundant love for, and confi- 
 dence in Robert Brooke, and proceeded to " make 
 Void and Villify " that order and to order that 
 Charles County be absorbed into and make a part 
 of Calvert County (3 Ar. 308). 
 
 Among the claims for land under the pledges of 
 Lord Baltimore we find the Jesuit, Thomas Copley, 
 who demanded twenty thousand acres of land for 
 transporting certain persons, twenty in number, 
 into the province, and in his list of persons so 
 transported we find the names, well known to us, of 
 the Jesuit fathers, Mr. Andrew White and Mr. Jo: 
 Altam (3 Ar. 25^). 
 
 L.ofC. 
 
12 
 
 But extensive as Avas his territory, and lavish as 
 he was in bestowing it upon his subjects, Lord 
 Baltimore apparently had a craving for all the 
 land that joined him, and the gathering of the 
 State's Archives has brought us from the Public 
 Record Otfice in London, a letter addressed to him 
 by the King as early as July, 1638, rebuking him 
 most sharply for his dealings with the "Planters 
 in the Island near Virginia which they have nomi- 
 nated Kentish Island," warning him to desist and 
 closing with the menacing suggestion, " herein we 
 expect your ready conformity, that we may have 
 no cause of any further mislike" (3 Ar. 78). 
 
 But the boundary between Virginia and ^lary- 
 land on the " Easterne Shore" continued to be a 
 fruitful source of misunderstanding. Oliver Crom- 
 well, in 1(353, interposed his authority, as " Cap- 
 tayne Generall of all the forces of the Common- 
 wealth," in most devout phrase, to obtain a "speedy 
 resolution of the question" (3 Ar. 296). Lord Bal- 
 timore sent over maps (Id. 319, 327) ; Commis- 
 sioners were appointed, and various expedients 
 resorted to, but the question was not resolved in 
 Cromwell's day, as he had hoped. 
 
 Upon their other side toward the " Swedish 
 nation inhabiting in Delaware Bay," a conciliatory 
 tone was adopted in order " to worke and prcure 
 an Intercourse of trade and Commerce" "which 
 probably may redound much to th(3 beuelitt and 
 
13 
 
 advantage of this Commonwealth" (Governor 
 Stone, March 1653, 3 Ar. 300). 
 
 But when the Dutch planted themselves on the 
 Delaware his Lordship gave "Instruction & Com- 
 mand to send to the Dutch to Command them to 
 be gon." This mission was entrusted to Coll : 
 Nathaniel Ytie of Baltimore County, and he was 
 ordered to 
 
 "make his repaire to the pretended Governor of 
 a People seated in Delaware Bay . . and to reqnire him to 
 depart the Province. . . That in case he find opportunity he 
 insinuate vnto tlie Peo})le there seated that in case they make 
 theyr application to his Lordships Govern' heere they shall 
 find good Condicdns to all Commers w*''' shall be made good to 
 them " &c. (3 Ar. 365). 
 
 In the negotiations which followed, though there 
 is much to interest and amuse, there is very little 
 of which Marylanders can be proud. The Dutch 
 state their case clearl}", logically, and firmly, 
 though mildly, and conclude " Soe wishing the 
 Lord God AUmighty will Conduct your honno'" 
 both to all prudent results that Wee may line 
 neighbourly together in this Wilderness to the 
 advancement of Gods Glory and Ivingdome of 
 Heaven amongst the Heathens and not to the 
 Destruction of each others Christian bloud whereby 
 to strenigthen the Barbarous Jndians nay rather 
 ioyne in loue and league together against them 
 Which God our Saviour will grant" (3 Ar. 374, 5). 
 
14 
 
 Lord Balliinore blusters, has no name for them 
 but "Ennemies Pyratts & Robbers," orders an 
 expedition against them, " to make Warre against 
 and to pursue said Ennemies Pyratts & Robbers 
 to vanquish & take them And to seize and keep 
 all or any houses and Goods" &c. (Id. 427). 
 But the council deeming discretion the better part 
 of valor, and, apprehending that they could get no 
 assistance from Xew England or Virginia for the 
 expedition, resolved that "All Attempts be for- 
 borne against the said towne of A'ew Amstell & 
 that they finde certainely whether the said towne 
 of Xew Amstell doe lye within the fortyth degree 
 of ^"ortherly Latidude or not " (Id. 428). 
 
 Lord Baltimore was evidently a master of such 
 emphatic epithets and fond of rigorous measures. 
 Captain William Clayborne had all his property of 
 every kind seized for his " sundry insolences Con- 
 tempts and Rebellions against our lawfull Govern- 
 ment and Propriety" (3 Ar. 7(3, 82, &c.), and 
 was held unpardonable (Id. 205, 221). Ingle is 
 a "rebel," a "pirate" (1 Ar. 238, 270, 301), and 
 a "K^otorious and ungrateful villain" (3 Ar. 214, 
 216), and is exempted from pardon: Gov. Fendall 
 is a " perfideous and perjured fellowe" "a false 
 and vngrateful fellowe" (1 Ar. 420j, and is 
 excluded from all pardon (3 Ar. o9G). William 
 ffuller is a " violent jncendiary and Seditious 
 
15 
 
 'pson " (3 Ar. 400). John Jenkins and others Ihe 
 same (Id. 445). 
 
 While thus jealous of trespasses upon his terri- 
 tory, however, the privileges of settlers which were 
 originally only accorded to English and Irish were 
 extended in 1648 to French, Dutch and Italians 
 (3 Ar. 222, 232), but he excluded from these 
 privileges all "corporations. Societies, Fraterni- 
 ties, Guilds, or Bodies Politick either Spiritual or 
 Temporal," and did not permit any grants that he 
 had made to be assigned to such (3 Ar. 227, 235), 
 " Because all Secrett trusts are usually intended to 
 decieve the Government and State where they are 
 made or some other persons " (Id. 237), and the 
 importation of convicted felons was specially pro- 
 hibited (2 Ar. 485). 
 
 Special encouragement was given to settlers on 
 the Eastern Shore of Virginia to immigrate into the 
 adjoining counties of Maryland (3 Ar. 469, 495), 
 and naturalization was granted to all applicants as 
 a matter of course, as readily as it now is (2 Ar. 
 144, 205, 271, 282, 330, 400, 403, 460, &c.), without 
 requiring of them that most absurd oath that is 
 now exacted. They merely "promised & engaged 
 to submitt to the Authority of the Bight Hon : ^^'^ 
 Caecilius Lord Baltemore" (3 Ar. 339, 398,429, 
 435, 465, 466, 470, 488, 514, 529, 533, 557, &c.). 
 
16 
 
 The Labor System. 
 
 Intimately connected of course with the tenure 
 of land was the system of labor, and this, accord- 
 ing to the practice in England in that day, was 
 largely servile labor. As already seen, induce- 
 ments were held out to colonists to transport to 
 the colony as many servants as possible by grants 
 of land proportioned to the number transported. 
 These servants were of two classes — slaves and 
 indentured apprentices, or persons under contract 
 to serve a certain length of time, to repay the cost 
 of their passage from England. In some instances 
 it appears that the length of the period of service 
 was limited by contract entered into before leaving 
 England, and in others was left uncertain, subject 
 to subsequent adjustment. This could not fail to 
 lead to disagreement, and call for legal interposi- 
 tion, and among the laws proposed to the General 
 Assembly of 1638-9, debated and approved, and 
 which failed to become a law, (with all the others 
 then considered) after engrossment, was one " That 
 all persons being Christians (Slaves excepted) of 
 the age of eighteen years or above and brought 
 into this province at the charge and adventure of 
 some other person shall serve such person at whoes 
 charge and adventure they were so transported for 
 the full terme of foure years" and "All persons 
 under the a2:e of ei2:hteen vccrcs shall serve until 
 
17 
 
 such person shall be of the f^ill age of four and 
 twenty Years " (1 Ar. 80). 
 
 Some, however, it is manifest did not submis- 
 sively render the service which they owed, and in 
 1641, running away was made felony punishable 
 with death (1 Ar. 107). In 1643 a letter was 
 addressed " to the Governor of the New JN'ether- 
 lands," complaining that " Some servants being 
 lately fledd out of this colony, into yours, we could 
 not but promise o'selves from you that iustice & 
 faire correspondence as to hope that you will 
 renriand to vs all such apprentice servants as are or 
 shall run out of this goverm* in to Yours," &c. (3 
 Ar. 134). For the purpose of recovering fugitive 
 servants who took refuge among the Indians, an 
 article was inserted in the treaty with the " Jndian 
 Nation of Sasquesahanogh," in July, 1652, which 
 provided that any servant escaping from the one 
 nation and takino" refu^-e with the other " shall 
 with all Convenient speede be retourned back and 
 brought home" (Id. 277). In the same year with 
 the letter to the Governor of the New Nether- 
 lands, Lord Baltimore as a matter of economy 
 directed 
 
 " That all my carpenters & other apprentice ser- 
 vants be sold forthwith for my best advantage, w'''' I vnder- 
 staud will yield at least 2000'"' tob apiece althoughe they have 
 but one yeare to serve, especially if they be carpenters, for I 
 vnderstand that 1500'"' of tob is an vsuall rate for the hire of 
 
 3 
 
18 
 
 one yeares labour of any ordinary servant. And I conceive 
 it better to hire at a certainty such servants from yeare to 
 yearc as my Commis" shall find necessary to looke to my 
 cattell, provide sufficient fodder for them, & to manage my 
 farme at west S' maries, . . then to have servants apprentices 
 there for that purpose, & to send supplies yearly out of Eng- 
 land to them " (3 Ar. 141). 
 
 In 1654, and again in 1661, acts were passed 
 prescribing the time which servants should serve 
 those who brought them into the province, grading 
 the time of service from four to seven years, 
 according to the age of the servants, or if they 
 were under twelve years when brought they were 
 not to be free till they reached the age of twenty- 
 one years. These acts required the " masters and 
 owners " of these servants to take them to the 
 Court on their arrival, that the Court might 
 " Judge of their age " and enter the same of record, 
 and to allow them " at the Expiration of their 
 Severall times of Service besides their old Cloathes 
 one Cloth suit one pair of Canvis Drawers, one 
 2:)air of Shoes & stockings one new Hatt or Capp, 
 one falling Axe one weeding Hoe, two Shirts and 
 three Barrells of Corne " (1 Ar. 352, 409). By the 
 act of 1666 the length of time of serving was 
 increased by one year upon most of the grades of 
 servants (2 Ar. 147). See also Id. 335, 523. 
 
 To guard against the loss of slaves by their 
 claiming freedom " according to the lawe of Eng- 
 
19 
 
 land " as the result of their becoming Christian- 
 ized and receiving baptism, a law was passed in 
 1664 that 
 
 " all Negroes and other slaues shall serue Durante 
 Vita, And all Children born of any Negro or other slaue be 
 Slaues as their ffathers were for the terme of their Hues And 
 forasmuch as divers free borne English women forgettfnll of 
 their free Condicon and to the disgrace of our Nation doe 
 intermarry with Negro Slaues . . . whatsoever free borne 
 woman shall intermarry with any slane shall Serue the master 
 of such slaue dureing the life of her husband And all the 
 issue of such freeborne woemen soe marryed shall be Slaues 
 as their Withers were " (1 Ar. 526, 533). 
 
 But even this act did not sufficiently inspire con- 
 fidence in the security of this species of property 
 so but what " Severall of the good people of this 
 Prouince were discouraged to import Negroes," 
 and others " to the Great displeasure of Almighty 
 God and the prejudice of the Soules of those poor 
 people Neglected to instruct them in the Christian 
 faith or to Endure or permitt them to Receive the 
 holy Sacrament of Baptisme for the Remission of 
 their Sinns " and it was accordingly enacted in 
 1671, that " becoming Christian, or receiving the 
 Holy Sacrament of Baptizme " 
 
 '' the same is not nor 
 shall or ought the same to be denyed adjudged Construed 
 or taken tobe or to amount vnto a manumicon or freeing 
 Inlarging or discharging any such Negroe or Negroes Slaue 
 
20 
 
 or Slaiies or any his or their Issue or Issues from his her their 
 or anv of their Servitude or Servitudes Bondage or bondages " 
 (2 Ar. 272). 
 
 In the revolutionary times of the Commonwealth 
 (1651), an example was set whicli has been fol- 
 lowed in later times, and the power was conferred 
 " to discharge and set free from their masters all 
 such persons soe serving as Soldiers " (3 Ar. 265), 
 as was also another Example by which " all such 
 persons as haue approved themselves faithfuU to 
 his LoP and don good service were preferred before 
 any others to such places & imployments of trust 
 & i)rotitt as they may be resj)ectively capeable 
 of" (Id. 326). 
 
 It was thought necessary in 1666 to enact a law 
 " prohibiting Negros, or any other Seruants to keepe 
 piggs hoggs or any other sort of Swyne, uppon 
 any pretence whatsoeur" (2 Ar. 75), and down to 
 the end of the period covered by these volumes, 
 there was felt to be a necessity for stringent, and 
 yet more stringent laws for preventing the escape 
 of the owned laborers, and securing the return of 
 " Runnawaies " (2 Ar. 146, 298, 523, &c.) 
 
 Currency. 
 
 The money question was a very serious one with 
 the colonists, and they were forced to devices which 
 would have added lustre to the financial fame of 
 
21 
 
 Lycurgiis if he could have hit upon such financial 
 expedients for Sparta. Besides the Indian cur- 
 rency of Peake and Roanoake, which was em- 
 ployed to some extent (3 Ar. 502, 530, 549, 555), 
 Tobacco was a legal tender from the first, though 
 not the exclusive one. In May, 1638, Capt. Henry 
 ffleete gave bond to the government in the penalty 
 of "one hundred pound weight of good beaver" 
 not to trade with any Indians or " transport any 
 truck throughe any part of this Province to trade 
 with any Indians on the South side of Patowmeck 
 River" (1 Ar. 74). In 1640 in collecting his rents 
 Lord Baltimore authorized them to be received in 
 the " Commodities of the Country " and " four 
 pound of tobacco or one peck of wheat " was the 
 equivalent of twelve pence, and two capons equal 
 to " sixteen pound of Tobacco or one Bushel of 
 wheat." Official fees and salaries were rated in 
 tobacco (1 Ar. 57) ; taxes for ordinar}' and extra- 
 ordinary expenses were levied in tobacco (3 Ar. 
 119, 124) ; and fines and penalties imposed in 
 tobacco. Governor Charles Calvert (3 Ar. 477), 
 the council (Id. 480), and the General Assembly 
 (2 Ar. 35, 6, 7, 8, 143, &c.), designate tobacco as 
 the " commodity," " the only comodity by which 
 this province doth at present Subsist." But as 
 the supply of this fiat money was practically 
 unlimited, and so became a nuisance, the legisla- 
 tive power required creditors to forbear all collect- 
 
22 
 
 ing of their debts, or accept " Tobacco att the rate 
 of Three halfe pence sterling by the pound of 
 tobacco" (2 Ar. 142, 220). Another measure of 
 relief adopted (1662), was "an acte for Encour- 
 agem^ of soweing English Grayne," which provided 
 " that wheate here groweing shall pass and be taken 
 at iiue shillings the Bushell : Barley and English 
 pease att three shillings the Bushell, Rye at foure 
 shillino-s the bushell and oates att two shillino-g six 
 pence the Bushell " and should be receivable for 
 all debts, public or private, and discount tobacco 
 debts at two pence per pound (1 Ar. 445), and 
 the Lord Proprietary published an ordinance for 
 receiving " dry hydes at two "^p' and raw hydes at 
 1-^ i 'p pound" (3 Ar. 458). 
 
 As in mining regions the search for precious 
 metals banishes all ordinary agricultural pursuits, 
 so here the production of tobacco — the substitute 
 for a circulating medium — threatened the colony 
 with starvation. In 1640 a penal act was passed 
 requiring every hand planting tobacco to plant 
 and tend " two acres of Corne," and at the same 
 time another " prohibiting the exportation of 
 Corne " ; and the inspection of tobacco, by one of 
 the three viewers who were appointed in every 
 hundred, Avas made compulsory (1 Ar. 97). These 
 acts or some of them were renewed in 1642 (1 Ar. 
 160), and repeatedly thereafter (Id. 217, 251, 309, 
 350, 360, 371; 2 Ar. 561; 3 Ar. 48). But the 
 
23 
 
 depreciation of this currency (tobacco), as the 
 result of over production, was so serious an evil, 
 that the colonists made effort after effort for relief, 
 by compelling- the suspension of its cultivation 
 (3 Ar. 340, 476, 504, 506, 547). And in 1666 an 
 elaborate non-production treaty was negotiated 
 with Virginia (3 Ar. 550, 558). Lord Baltimore, 
 however, sent from England his " 'Pticular & 
 expresse Disassent, Dissagreement & Disappro- 
 bacon " of the measure and it of course was a 
 nullity (Id. 561). Lord Baltimore tried to furnish 
 a better currency than tobacco by coining money 
 in England and sending it over to the colony 
 (3 Ar. 383, 385) ; but the Council of State in Octo- 
 ber, 1659, at the instance of Richard Pight, " Clerk 
 of the Irons in the Mint," " ordered That a War- 
 rant be issued forth for the apprehending of the 
 Lord Baltamore and such others as are suspected 
 be engaged with him in making and transporting 
 money" &c. (Id. 365). Change of administration 
 at home wrought change of condition here, and, in 
 1661, there was passed " an acte for the Setting vp 
 of a Mint within this Province of Maryland " 
 (1 Ar. 414), and steps were taken to provide bul- 
 lion for its working and to force its coinage into 
 circulation (Id. 429, 444). 
 
 Some idea of the purchasing power of tobacco 
 in exchange for necessaries and luxuries may be 
 formed from the bill presented to the General 
 
24 
 
 Assembly (April 21, 1666), by "John Lawson, 
 High Slieriffe of St. Maries," for executing a negro 
 and two Indians. The items are: 
 
 To 2 dayes imprisonm' the Negro w*** dyett 060 
 
 To a man to watcli him 2 dayes & 1 night 040 
 
 To the s*^ man for his dyett & paynes 070 
 
 To Graue making & other Expences 095 
 
 To the Exequuting the s^ 3 persons 800 
 
 1065 
 
 but this was deemed an overcharge and he was 
 voted a round thousand pounds in full settlement 
 (2 Ar. 94). 
 
 General Assembly. 
 
 The rio-ht of assent or dissent to the laws which 
 Lord Baltimore should propose was conferred upon 
 all the freemen of the province. They were called 
 to meet by proclamation of the Governor and all 
 had a right to participate, but it was promptly 
 provided that the freemen of any locality might 
 meet and " Elect and nominate such and so many 
 persons as they or the maior part of them so 
 assembled shall agree vpon to be the deputies or 
 burgesses for the said freemen in their name and 
 steed to advise and consult of such things as 
 shalbe brought into deliberation in the said assem- 
 bly " (1 Ar. 74, 154, 259). It was thus a " General 
 Assembly " in fact, — a name that we retain though 
 we have long ceased to know the thing itself. 
 
25 
 
 The Governor exercised the right of requiring 
 by special " Writt " the attendance of anyone not 
 sent as a deputy, and any refusal or neglect to 
 send deputies, or to attend if deputized, or sum- 
 moned, rendered the " Refusers or Neglecters 
 according to their demerits " liable to a tine, and 
 to be " Declared Enemies to the publick peace of 
 the Province and rebell to the lawful Government 
 thereof" (1 Ar. 328). It was allowable however 
 for any person to be present by proxy instead 
 of in person, and on some occasions the proxies 
 were as numerous as the persons in attendance 
 and some two or three held enough to be a 
 majority of the body. 
 
 The assembly when convened was expected to 
 attend to business. At its first meeting the rule 
 adopted was " The house shall sit every day holy 
 days excepted at eight of the Clock in the morning 
 & if any Gentleman or Burgess not appearing 
 upon call at such time as the President is set at or 
 after such hour shall be amerced 20"" of Tobacco to 
 be forthw'"" paid to the use of the house " (1 Ar. 
 53), and on the journal at repeated roll calls the 
 entry opposite to names is "Amerced for tar- 
 die" (Id. 36, 37, 39), and the amount of the fine 
 for tardiness was, some years later, increased to 
 one hundred pounds (Id. 131), and subsequently 
 reduced to fifty pounds of tobacco (Id. 274). There 
 was also some change in the hour of meeting, 
 
26 
 
 special adjournment being made at times to seven 
 o'clock in the morning (2 Ar. 74, 83, 86, 184), 
 never till later than nine. It seems probable, 
 however, that time pieces were not so numerous 
 or accurate as to prevent disputes on the ques- 
 tion of tardiness, for in 1642 they adopted this 
 rule, " the drum to beat as near as may be to sun 
 rising and half an hours distance between each 
 beating," and every man who would avoid the fine 
 must bo in his place " at the third beating of the 
 drum " — that is one hour after sun rise, and as this 
 was in the month of July, the meeting must have 
 been a little before six o'clock in the morning (1 
 Ar. 131). That may have been found slightly to 
 interfere with committee w'ork, for the distance 
 between drum beats was, at a subsequent session, 
 changed to one hour (Id. 171). 
 
 There was one person in the province who 
 inclined to a very broad interpretation of the 
 term " freemen " as fixing the qualification of per- 
 sons to sit in the General Assembly. This was 
 Mrs. Margaret Brent, kinswoman of the Calverts, 
 first of her sex here to demand equal rights for 
 women. To the session of 1647-8 she 
 
 "came and 
 requested to have vote in the howse for her selfe and voyce 
 allso for that at the last Court 3'^ Jan : it was ordered that 
 the said M" Brent was to be lookd uppon and received as his 
 Lp» Attorney. The Gou' denyed that the s"* Mrs Brent 
 
27 
 
 should have any note in the howse. And the s* Mrs Brent 
 protested agst all proceedings in this pnt Assembly nnlesse 
 shee may be pnt. and have vote as afores*" (1 Ar. 215). 
 
 Though the Governor was thus ungallaiit, and 
 the Lord Proprietary regarded her with anything 
 but favor, the General Assembly appreciated her 
 courage, tact, and ability, in a most perilous time 
 and wrote to his Lordship a year later: 
 
 "As for 
 Mrs. Brents undertaking & medling with your Lordships 
 Estate here we do verily Believe and in Conscience report 
 that it was better for the Collonys safety at that time in her 
 hands than in any mans else in the whole Province after your 
 Brothers death for the soldiers would never have treated any 
 other with that Civility and respect and though they were 
 even ready at several times to run into mutiny yet she still 
 pacified them till at the last things were brought to that strait 
 that she must be admitted and declared your Lordships attor- 
 ney by an order of Court or else all must go to ruin Again 
 and then the second mischief had been doubtless far greater 
 than the former so that ... we conceive from that time she 
 rather deserved favour from your Honour for her so much 
 Concurring to the publick safety then to be justly liable to 
 all those bitter invectives you have been pleased to express 
 against her" (1 Ar. 239). 
 
 In 1650 it was determined that the Assembly 
 
 " be held by way of vpper & Lower howse to sitt in two 
 distinct roomes apart for the more convenient dispatch of the 
 business to bee consulted of. And th* the Gou' and Secretary 
 
28 
 
 or any one or more of the Counsell for the vpper howse, And 
 any fine or more of the Burgesses assembled Shall haue the 
 full power of ct bee two howses of Assembly to all intents 
 and purposes. And all Bills passed by the s'' two howses 
 shall have the same eflPect in Law as if they were aduised and 
 assented unto by all the ifrecmen of the Province personally " 
 (1 Ar. 272). 
 
 That arrangement though then adopted for only 
 the current session still continues. The names by 
 which they appear in the archives are " Upper 
 howse " and "Lower Howse " though the latter in 
 1675 took to itself the alias name of " House of 
 Commons" (2 Ar. 440). His Lordship retained 
 the prerogative of convening the Assembly when 
 he pleased, and of summoning to sit in it such 
 number as he pleased; but in the time of the 
 Commonwealth, instructed perhaps by events that 
 had transpired in England, it was enacted that the 
 Assembly should be convened at least once in 
 three years (1 Ar. 341), and in 1676 the " Citti- 
 zens and deputies of the lower howse of Assem- 
 bly " complained so loudly to his Lordship because 
 " by his Lordships command fower deputies or 
 deleoates had been elected " in each countv and 
 then " but two were called by his Lord''' Writt To 
 Sitte in the Assembly" that his Lordship yielded 
 to the request, only exacting an oath of allegiance 
 to himself (2 Ar. 507). 
 
 The General Assembly thus constituted, both 
 before and after its division into two houses. 
 
29 
 
 shows a purpose to do things decently and in 
 order, and a determination to protect its own 
 prerogatives and dignit3^ At its first meeting 
 it adopted as a standing ride of order what it 
 often reiterated, till it obtains at the present 
 
 clay that " no One shall refute another with 
 
 any nipping or vncivill terms nor shall name 
 another but by some Circumloquation as the 
 Gentlemen or Burgess that spake last or that 
 argued for or against this bill" (1 Ar. 33, 131, 
 171, 215, 273; 2 Ar. 64, 441). But they appar- 
 ently found occasion to check something more 
 objectionable than " reuiling speeches," for they 
 adopted the rule that " noe one shall come into 
 eyther of the howses whillst they are sett, with 
 any gun or weapon uppon perill of such fine or 
 censure as the howses shall thinke fitt" (1 Ar. 
 216, 273 ; 2 Ar. 65, 441). 
 
 The daily sitting would seem to have been 
 terminated at first at the will of the Governor, 
 or Lieutenant General, as the closing entry of the 
 journal each day is "Governor (or Lieutenant 
 General) adjourned the house" (1 Ar. 173, 175, 
 &c.) And though in 1642 " it was declared by the 
 howse that the howse of Assembly may not be 
 adjourn'd or Prorogued but by and with the Con- 
 sent of the howse" (1 Ar. 117), and a little later 
 there was "the protest of some of the howse 
 a<^ainst his Lordships power of adjournment" 
 
30 
 
 (1 Ar. 180), his Lordship did not yield the right, 
 and it is only for a short time that we find such 
 entries as "the howse adjourned itself" or "the 
 howse was adjourned by the sj)eaker" (1 Ar. 
 276, &c.) 
 
 Between the two houses a jealousy was soon 
 developed which gave rise to some sharp verbal 
 contentions between them. The one insisted on 
 being regarded as the UPPER House; and the 
 other sturdily maintained an equality, if not supe- 
 riority. In 1660 it sent "to the Governor and 
 Councell " a message " that this Assembly of Bur- 
 gesses iudging themselves to be a lawfull Assem- 
 bly without dependence on any other power in the 
 Province now in being is the highest Court of 
 Judicature. And if any Obiection can be made to 
 the Contrary Wee desire to heare it" (1 Ar. 388). 
 To this communication the upper house gave a 
 somewhat menacing answer " vpon the delivery of 
 w''*' paper" says its journal "the Burgesses desired 
 a Conference with this Vpper howse by j\P Slye 
 and M'" Thomas Hinson which was Condisended 
 unto." At the conference that followed the Bur- 
 gesses " intimated that they could not allowe this 
 howse to be a vpper howse " but were willing 
 to " sitt with it as one body." The Governor 
 (Fendall) assented to the arrangement on certain 
 " tearmes " which were so distasteful to the Secre- 
 tary (Philip Calvert), that he "refused to enter 
 
31 
 
 into the lower liowse, it being a manifest breach of 
 his LoP* Right Royall Jurisdiction and Seigniory." 
 When they again sat in two houses each appears 
 to have stood stiffly upon its dignity with the 
 other. In 1666 the lower house resent " that their 
 proposals to the Upper Howse for the General 
 Good of this Province upon their Remand from 
 thence hither shall be thus scrible Scrawled & 
 obliterated" (2 Ar. 24), and demand satisfaction 
 for such an offense. A few days later the lower 
 house " desires the upper howse to signify their 
 Assent or Disassent immediately" to a measure it 
 had adopted " for that this howse are resolved to 
 have no further debate thereon " (Id. 37). This 
 was met by a response equally peremptory, and a 
 member was sent to " make known to the Speaker 
 that the Governour expects him with the whole 
 Lower howse in the room where the Upper Howse 
 sitts within half an hour at furthest." The lower 
 house replied that it did not intend by what it had 
 done " to disgust the Upper Howse," and was then 
 soundly lectured and bidden to " take this rule by 
 the Way Obstinate Fortitude is as pernicious to 
 the commonwealth as fearful Honesty" (Id. 42), 
 a proverb that would have done no discredit to 
 Sancho Panza himself. But the upper house could 
 go further than merely lecture the lower in case 
 of disagreement. On the twenty-third of April, 
 1669, it (consisting of seven members) ordered: 
 
32 
 
 " that the Chancellour & some of the Members of tliis house 
 go to the Lower House and require them to raze the mutinous 
 & seditious Votes contained in the paper Entituled The Pub- 
 lick Grievances delivered into this House by the Speaker the 
 20"' April last out of their Journall Before which is done this 
 House is Resolved to treat with them no further. It being 
 adjudged in this House that it is an Arraignment of the Lord 
 Proprietor the Governor & Council" (2 Ar. 177). 
 
 For the four succeeding days the two august 
 bodies maintained a most pugnacious attitude. 
 The upper house imperiously demanded an expur- 
 gation of the journal of the lower house ; and the 
 lower gave reason and rhetoric for its refusal. It 
 said : 
 
 " We are sorry exceeding Sorry that We are driven to 
 Say that your Answer & Objections to the paper Entituled 
 the Pnblick Grievances are not Satisfactory or that by the 
 refulgent Lustre of the Eradiations of Reason that shine & 
 dart from them the weak & dim Eye of our Understandings is 
 dazled & struck into Obscurity . . . We shall be willing to 
 have our Journal Contradicted, expunged, obliterated, burnt, 
 anything, and to have our Grievances appear in any form or 
 dress of words most pleasing to yourselves if We might be 
 assured that the Weight and pressure of them vnder which 
 the Country groans & cryes might be removed" (Id. 180). 
 
 The obnoxious entry was in the end corapromis- 
 ingly removed, though the "Grievances" were but 
 partially so. 
 
 The vigilance with which both houses guarded 
 their dignity and punished '* Contempt " and the 
 
33 
 
 latitude given to the definition of "Contempt" 
 spared neither bar-room nor pulpit. Upon the 
 journal of the upper house is entered, " then came 
 a Member from the Lower House to desire leave 
 to SjDeak with Col. Wm. Evans being a Member of 
 this House which was granted" (2 Ar. 14). 
 
 Mr. James Browne " being Elected as one of the 
 Deputies & Delegates of Baltimore County " did 
 not " attend his service of the Country in the 
 General Assembly," and it was " ordei^d there- 
 upon that the said James Browne be for his 
 Contempt af*^ fined forty pounds Sterling" (2 Ar. 
 243). 
 
 If the absence of the member was involuntary it 
 w^ould seem that the absentee was subjected to no 
 punishment except the loss of pay and perquisites ; 
 for at the end of the session of 1650, when the 
 committee brought in their "bill of charges" and 
 allowed each member fift}^ pounds of tobacco for 
 each day's attendance they report " As for that M"" 
 ffrancis Brooks was not able throu2,"h sickness to 
 attend the howse, and drawing of his wine the 
 Committee thinke fitt, not to j^rovide for him att 
 all " (1 Ar. 284). 
 
 But when the person supposed to be guilty of 
 contempt was within reach he did not escape with 
 a mere fine. James Lewis " had abused Mr. Van- 
 hacke one of the members of the Lower House " 
 and for this contempt the upper house " Ordered 
 5 
 
34 
 
 that the said James Lewis go into the Lower 
 House and upon his Knees ask the whole House 
 forgiveness and Mr. Vanhacke in particular and 
 pay for a fine 2000 lb tob'' " (Id. 254). 
 
 More grievous still was the contempt, and the 
 punishment of " Edward Erbury Merchant of the 
 Sare of Bristoll," against whom it was alleged 
 (May first, 1666) : 
 
 " there was an abuse Comitted last night 
 to the disturbance of the whole howse in their quiett & rest. 
 And the s'' Erbury did call the wliole howse Papists, Rogues, 
 Rogues" . . . "and there is not one in the Cuntry de- 
 serves to keepc me Company ; " . . . "and vpon a full debate 
 thereon had in this howse, They doe judge the same to be a 
 scandall to the Lord Prop'' to liis Lieutenn' Generall & to 
 both howses of Assembly & a greate RefleccOn upon the whole 
 Province in Generall And therefore vnanimously voted by 
 this howse that the s** Erbury be brought before this howse to 
 giue answere to the abovesaid Charge in relacon to those 
 Informacons now giuen in ag' him." 
 
 And he was accordingly brought before the 
 house and being 
 
 " taxed by the speaker of all those words 
 spoken .... he answered that he remembered none of those 
 words as is alledged Only heConfesseth that he was in drinke 
 and remembers not that ever he spoke such words. A^'hich 
 answere being taken into Consideracon the howse doe judge 
 the same altogether vnsattisfactory & th' noe 'pson of full age 
 shall take a<lvantage by drunkennes in such case." 
 
35 
 
 And the lower house upon this conviction referred 
 the case to the upper house to prescribe tit punish- 
 ment for the grave offense, and 
 
 "the vpper howse doe 
 order that the s*" Erbury be tyed to the Aple tree before the 
 howse of Assembly & be there publickly whipt vpon the bare 
 back with thirty-nine lashes ... & that the s*^ Erbury doe 
 pay the sheriff his fees. . . . And further ordered that the 
 s*^ Erbury be after he is whipt brought into both howses of 
 Assembly publickly to aske them forgiueness" (2 Ar. 55, 
 120). 
 
 On Wednesday, April fourteenth, 1669, Charles 
 Nicholett preached a sermon before the lower 
 house in which he exhorted them to " Beware of 
 that sin of permission," and " to goe on with Cour- 
 age " to discharge their duties " agreeable to their 
 own Conscience," and it being thereupon charged 
 in the upper house " that Charles Nicholett hath 
 spoken seditious Words against the Government 
 of the Province, It is ordered that a Messenger be 
 dispatched away to fetch the said Nicholett to 
 make his Appearance in this House to abide the 
 Censure of the House for the said Seditious 
 Speeches" (Id. 159). His explanation when he 
 appeared, though not the same as Erbury's was no 
 more satisfactory than his had been, and it was 
 thereupon : 
 
 "Ordered that the said Nicholett go to the 
 Lower House & there acknowledge his Error in his late Ser- 
 
36 
 
 mon preached to the LoAver House in that lie modled with 
 Businesses rehitiug merely to the Government & there to 
 crave the pardon of the Lord Proprietor the Lieutenant 
 General & the Assembly & that he bring the Certiticate under 
 the hand of the Clerk that he has done it in the face of the 
 whole House . , . and that he pay unto John Gittings Clerk 
 of the Assembly forty shillings or the value thereof in 
 Tobacco for Fees." 
 
 This order was " returned from the lower house 
 uiulerneatli which was written, Mr. Xicliolett 
 acknowledged in the Lower House as is above 
 written" (Id. 163). 
 
 They appear to have been as averse to dishon- 
 esty among themselves as to political preaching 
 by their ministers, for in the session of 1676 they 
 enacted a fine of four thousand pounds of tobacco 
 against Henry Ward of "Caecil County:" 
 
 "for that 
 being a member of the last Assembly he did Informe the 
 sjvid lower house that he had a very good hoi'se lost in the 
 Country service in the expedicon to the Whorekills And that 
 the Lower house giveing creditt to such Informacon did 
 thinke fitt to allow him out of the Publick Leavy Eighteene 
 hundred pounds of tobacco, And it is now made Evidently 
 appeare that the said Ward lost noe such horse in the Publick 
 service and that the said allegacon was most egregiously 
 false" (2 A r. 540). 
 
 His fine was thus a little more than twice the 
 amount of his dishonest 2:ain. 
 
37 
 
 Penal Law. 
 
 This idea of restitution to the injured pervades 
 many of the acts both of the General Assembly, and 
 of the Council. Thus a servant running away was 
 held to a double term of service (1 Ar. 348) ; 
 and one harboring the runaway was responsible 
 for all damages sustained by the escape (Id. 451). 
 Whosoever should " wrongfully kill or carry away 
 any marked swyne of another man's must pay 
 double the value of such swyne to the true owner 
 thereof, and 200^ of Tob. more to him that shall 
 inform thereof, and 300^ of Tob. more for a ffine 
 to the Lord Prop'" (1 Ar. 251; 2 Ar. 29). This 
 was afterwards increased to treble the value of the 
 hogs stolen (2 Ar. 278). Again it was enacted, 
 (1654) that " whosoever shall take and Carry away 
 any of the Goods or Chattels of any person con- 
 trary to the owners will shall restore four fould 
 if able and if not the person or persons so offend- 
 ins: as aforesaid shall make the said four fould 
 satisfaction by servitude" (I Ar. 344). 
 
 The same principle rules in several laws which 
 provide that a man who has incurred a debt 
 without the means to pay it should make resti- 
 tution by personal service— in other Avords, should 
 work it out (1 Ar. 70, 152, 188). And, as a 
 security for the creditor, no debtor might have 
 a pass, without which he could not leave the 
 county of his residence (Id. 160, 174, 194). 
 
38 
 
 The same principle was applied to " letigeous 
 persons " by providing that " all persons what- 
 soever that are Cast in any cause be they p." or 
 det**® shall be amerced (besides the damages and 
 Cost to the Recoverour) ffifty pounds of Tobacco " 
 (1 Ar. 486). 
 
 This was milder than the Council desired, for 
 its recommendation was " that the party cast in 
 appeale shall pay treble dammages for the pre- 
 vention of vexatious sutes " (3 Ar. 341). 
 
 Perhaps the most severe application of this 
 principle was in the provision that " if the Judge 
 thinke any verdict greivious to either party . . . 
 and the jury evidently partiall or willful! he may 
 charge another jury to enquire and try by the same 
 evidence, and if they find contrary to the former 
 jury all the former jury may be fined at the 
 discretion of the Judge" (1 Ar. 152). 
 
 It is probable that under this law the office of a 
 juror became as unpojiular as was the office of a 
 constable in New York under the administration 
 of Wouter Van Twiller. It must not be thought, 
 however, that the Government provided no punish- 
 ment for crime but restitution to the injured. On 
 the contrary it seems to have had quite a penchant 
 for imposing " Condigne punishm*" upon a wrong 
 doer "that Soe he may be a Tirrable Example To 
 others of Off^ending " (2 Ar. 491). In the session 
 of 1638-9 there was passed to the point of engross- 
 
39 
 
 ment " an act Determining Enormious Offenses " 
 (I Ar. 73), designed no doubt to give a catalogue 
 and definition of the acts which should be treated 
 as felony and render the offender infamous. By 
 repeated acts it was provided that the " Inhabi- 
 tants of this Province shall have all their rio-hts 
 and liberties according to the great charter of 
 England " (I Ar. 83), and nothing should " in any 
 sorte infringe or prejudice the Just and lawfull 
 Lybertyes or priviledges of the free borne subjects 
 of the King-dome of England" (1 Ar. 300, 398), 
 and that justice should have no delay was em- 
 bodied in the oath of the Lieutenant General, 
 Councillors and other officers (3 Ar. 210, 213), and 
 in matters where there had been no special enact- 
 ment for the Province, there " right & just shall 
 be determined according to equity & good con- 
 cience not neglecting (so far as the Judge or 
 Judges shall be informed thereof & shall find no 
 inconvenience in applycation to this Province) the 
 rules by which right & just useth and ought to be 
 determined in England in the same or like cases" 
 (1 Ar. 147, 183-4, 435, 448, 487, 504, &c.) 
 
 The large discretion given to the Judge in that 
 law was confided to the Judge, Governor or Lieu- 
 tenant General by repeated acts, and the punish- 
 ment of many offenses (counterfeiting for example) 
 was left entirely at the discretion of the Governor 
 (1 Ar. 247). Perhaps this was unavoidable in the 
 
40 
 
 paucity of prisons, or means of restraint ; but there 
 were some offenses which the General Assembly 
 determined so far as they were concerned should 
 not by any possibility, be committed twice by the 
 same person ; and others which they wished should 
 bear a sure punishment which all should under- 
 stand could not be tem]3ered by judicial leniency. 
 Treason to the king, the Lord Proprietary, or 
 the Lieutenant General, they made punishable by 
 drawing, hanging and quartering of a man ; by 
 drawing and burning of a woman, corruption of 
 blood and forfeiture of all property and franchises : 
 Petit treason was to be punished by drawing and 
 hanging of a man, by burning of a woman ; sor- 
 cery, blasphemy and idolatry by burning ; "Burg- 
 lar}'-, Robbery, Polygamic, Sacriledge, Sodomy and 
 Rape " by hanging. The exceptions to these modes 
 of punishment in this bill were two, to wit : " the 
 punishment of death shall be inflicted on a Lord of 
 a Mannour by beheading . . . and if the offender 
 can read Clerklike in the judgment of the Court 
 then the offender shall lose his hand or be burned 
 in the hand or forehead with a hot iron & forfeit 
 all his lands : againe offending he shall for such 
 second offense suffer pains of death & forfeit all 
 lands and goods and Chattells " (1 Ar. 71-2). 
 
 In 1641, and again in 1642, it was published 
 under the Greate Scale that " It shall be felony in 
 any apprentice servant to depart away from his or 
 
41 
 
 her master or dame with intent to convey him or 
 her selfe out of the Province," and in any other 
 person to '' Accompany such servant in such 
 unlavvfull departure. And the offenders therein 
 shall suffer paines of death " (1 Ar. 107, 124). 
 
 In 1650, " Everyone giving false witnes vppon 
 oath or perswading or hiring another to give such 
 false witnes vppon oath shalbe nayled to the Pil- 
 lory and loose both Eares or put to other corporall 
 shame or correccon as the Court shall Adiudge : " 
 For striking an officer, or witness, or any other 
 person in presence of the Court, the offender was to 
 lose his hand (1 Ar. 286, 350). 
 
 " If any Idle and Buss-headed person " forged 
 and divulged " false rumors news and reports, or 
 by Slandering tale bearing or back biting Scandal- 
 ized the Good Name of any person " he was doomed 
 to pay " from 1000 to 2000 pounds of tobacco and 
 be Censured by way of Satisfaction to the Party 
 Injured thereby" (1 Ar. 343 ; 2 Ar. 273). 
 
 In 1663 it was enacted " Th? a Pillory & Stocks 
 bee sett vpp att every Co""^ howse in Each respec- 
 tive County & a Ducking Stoole in the most con- 
 venient place of the County," and " th^ the Com"" of 
 each County Co'' provide an iron for the burning 
 of Malefactors w*'^ the Lre R. & anoth'' w'^^ the 
 Lre H." (1 Ar. 490, 491). But for St. Mary's as 
 the metropolitan County, an additional luxury was 
 provided at the same time in the enactment " tli' a 
 6 
 
42 
 
 Logg howse be built Twenty foot square at St. 
 Marv's vppon the Counteyes lands for a Prison" (1 
 Ar. 490), at an expense of two thousand pounds of 
 tobacco. Whether the officials were blind to their 
 duties and privileges does not clearly appear ; but 
 three years later a law was published under the 
 Great Seal of the Province for something more 
 pretentious — "that there be foure acres of land 
 ncerest about the Spring on the East side of St. 
 Maries feild be allotted to build a prison vpon and 
 that there be tenn thousand pounds of tob. raysed 
 out of the province to be laid out in building the 
 prison" (2 Ar. 139). This prison was intended 
 for the accommodation of debtors as well as crimi- 
 nals (Ibid, and Id. 542). 
 
 It was probably on account of the inconvenience 
 of having but one place of detention for the whole 
 province, and not local jealousy on the part of the 
 County, that led to the enactment three j^ears later 
 *' that there be a Logg house Prison Twenty ifoot 
 square Built at Augustine Harman's in Baltymore 
 County at an expense of tenn thousand pounds of 
 tobacco for p'venting servants & Criminall 'psons 
 from Running out of this Province" (2 Ar. 224). 
 
 In what part of the County Augustine Harman's 
 was does not appear, but the commissioners of the 
 County could not agree as to the location of the 
 Court House, and the upper house of the Assem- 
 bly, after waiting four years, decided for them, in 
 
43 
 
 February, 1675, that " the most Convenient Phice 
 for the same will be the head of Gunpowder River 
 on the North Side," and ordered it erected there 
 accordingly (2 iVr. 430). Probably the desire to 
 have a locality that was accessible to that part of 
 the County that was on the " Easterne side of the 
 bay" (3 Ar. 530), had its influence in determining 
 the selection. 
 
 The Indian Question. 
 
 It is due to the truth of history, though it may 
 not be flattering to pride of ancestry, to say that 
 these volumes show that the Indians were always 
 under suspicion, and had few rights which the 
 colonists considered themselves bound to respect ; 
 that in fact they sympathized deeply with the feel- 
 ing that is said to have induced another set of men 
 to resolve ; (1) " The earth hath the Lord given to 
 his saints, and (2) Resolved that we are his saints." 
 The colonists do not appear to have been ever 
 troubled with a doubt of the power and right of 
 King Charles to give all lands and waters abso- 
 lutel}^ to Lord Baltimore, or of Lord Baltimore to 
 grant it on such conditions as he pleased to them ; 
 and in this firm belief they regarded vessels which 
 came to their shores without his or their permis- 
 sion as pirates, and all persons presuming to place 
 foot thereon without recognizing their allegiance 
 to Lord Baltimore, whether Dutch, Swedes, or 
 Indians, as intruders, trespassers, public enemies. 
 
44 
 
 An illustration of this is furnished in the case of 
 "a Certaine Ship called the Maid of Gaunt in 
 1(354." This ship had traded in Virginia by war- 
 rant of the Governor of that province, and came 
 into St. George's River apparently on the same 
 peaceful errand. At all events she had shipped 
 part of a cargo belonging to Marylanders, but 
 upon the allegation that " the owner and Mer- 
 chants thereof were Inhabitants of the King of 
 Spain's Dominion " " Cap' Thomas AA'ebber master 
 of the Good Ship Called the Mayflower of Lon- 
 don " " with the assistance of said ship, men and 
 Ammunition " captured her, held her as })rize, and 
 was sustained therein by Governor Stone (3 Ar. 
 297,305). 
 
 As early as May, 1638, the council conceiving 
 that "in so remote an Hand as the He of Kent and 
 situate among divers Salvage nations, the incur- 
 sions as well of the Salvaoes as of other enemies 
 pyrates and robbers may probably be feared" 
 appointed John Boteler " Captaine of the military 
 band of that He of Kent in all martiall matters" 
 with " full power to leavie muster and traine all 
 sorts of men able to beare arms and in case of any 
 sodaine invasions of Salvages or Pyrates to make 
 warre and to vse all necessary meanes to the 
 resistance and vanquishing of the enemy " (3 
 Ar. 75). 
 
 Among the acts engrossed for a third reading in 
 March, 1639, but laid over with all the others was 
 
45 
 
 one that required every housekeeper to have at all 
 times in his or her house for every person " able 
 to beare amies one Serviceable fixed gunne of bas- 
 tard muskett boare one pair of bandaleers or shott 
 bagg one pound of good powder foure pound of 
 pistol or muskett shott and Sufficient quantity of 
 match for match locks and of flint for fire locks " 
 (1 Ar. 77). 
 
 In January, 1639, Governor Leonard Calvert, 
 because that " Certain Indians of the Nation called 
 the Maquantequats have Comitted Sundry Insol- 
 ences and rapines upon the English inhabiting 
 within this Province " and refused the satisfaction 
 that was demanded " and therefore Compelled us 
 to enforce them thereunto by the Justice of a warr " 
 commissioned Nicholas Harvey to go " with any 
 Company of English as Shall be willing to goe 
 along sufficiently provided of arms to invade the 
 said Mancantequuts and against them and their 
 Lands and goods to execute and Inflict what may 
 be inflicted by the Law of warr and the pillage and 
 booty therein gotten to part and divide among the 
 Company that Shall performe the Service " (3 Ar. 
 87). Similar declarations of war, or commissions 
 for military service, against the " Sesquihanowes," 
 or other aborigines were issued year after year, 
 and sometimes two and three times in a year, and 
 though the reason assigned at times is " Satisfac- 
 tion for Outrages " it is quite as often " punish- 
 
46 
 
 ing insolences," or preventing them, and the officer 
 is commissioned " to goe out upon said Ind : or 
 aid : confeder : as shalbe found in any suspicious 
 manner & them to expell or vanquish & jiutt to 
 death, & their amies or goods to piHage, & thereof 
 to dispose at yo"" discretion, & to destroy them or 
 any other misch : doe vnto them by hxw war " 
 (3 Ar. 132, 137, &c.) 
 
 The proceedings had not always the pretence 
 of following the laws of war. In 1641 Governor 
 Leonard Calvert proclaimed " I do hereby author- 
 ize and declare it lawfull to any Inhabitant what- 
 soever of the isle of Kent to Shoot wound or kill 
 any Indian whatsoever comeing upon the said 
 island" (3 Ar. 99). But the colonists of Kent 
 Island were not long to enjo}^ a monopoly of this 
 amusement. The next year his proclamation was, 
 " I doe hereby authorize all or any of the English 
 of this Colony to shoote or kell any Indian or 
 Indians in any part about patuxent river that 
 shalbe scene or mett either vpon the land or water 
 without the said bound after sixe dales after the 
 date hereof, except such as have or bear visibly a 
 white flag or fane" (3 Ar. 126, 147). With such 
 measures of defense and protection it is little 
 wonder that we find it proclaimed a few months 
 later " these are to publish & declare that the Ses- 
 quihanowes Wicomeses, and Nantacoque Indians 
 are enemies of this province, and as such are to 
 
47 
 
 be reputed & proceeded against by all persons " 
 (Id. 116, 118), or " noe man able to bear arms 
 shall go to church or Chappell or any considerable 
 distance from home without fixed gunn and 1 
 charge at least of powder and shott" (Id. 103, see 
 also 1 Ar. 254). 
 
 The cattle of the colonists, unrestrained, drew no 
 nice distinctions between the crops of their owners 
 and those of the Indians, and their hogs running 
 at large seem to have been a novel and attractive 
 species of game for the Indians, who could not 
 understand why they should not protect their own 
 crops, and hunt all animals running in the woods, 
 as for generations they had been accustomed to do. 
 For redress the person who had suffered " Spoil in 
 his Swine" was permitted to demand "satisfaction 
 of any town whose Indians have done him such 
 spoil ; " and, in case of refusal, or delay to comply 
 with the demand, had " free Liberty to right him- 
 self upon any the persons or Goods belonging to 
 that Town by all means that he may" (3 Ar. 96). 
 With this free license for reprisals it was by no 
 means desirable that the barbarians should have 
 civilized weapons, and so an act of the General 
 Assembly to prevent this was passed (1648) that 
 " noe Inhabitant of this Province shall deliver any 
 Gunn or Ammunition to any Pagan " (1 Ar. 233) ; 
 changed in form the next year to " Noe Inhabitant 
 of this Province shall deliver any Gunne or 
 
48 
 
 Gunncs or Amiinicon or other kind of Martiall 
 Arnies to any Indian borne of Indian parentage " 
 (Id. 2o0). 
 
 The Governor and Council earnestly sustained 
 this policy of disarmament (3 Ar. 144, 160, 260j ; 
 and yet it did not secure satisfactory exemption 
 from " Insolences." The Indians even had the 
 assurance in 1666 to appear before the General 
 Assembly and demand that one rule should be 
 applied to both peoples. They complained : 
 
 " Your 
 h')<rs & Catdc injure Us. You come too near us to live and 
 drive Us from place to place. We can tly no further let us 
 know where to live & how to be secured for the future from 
 the Hogs & Cattle. Emerson hath thrown down the fence 
 made by the Indians at Nanjimy about their corn by whicli 
 eight men have lost their whole Crop of Corn for which 
 they Complain & desire to be secured for the future. Let us 
 have no Quarrels for Killing Hogs no more than for the Cows 
 Eatins: the Indians Corn. If an Indian kill an Eng-lish let 
 him be delivered up M'* Langsworth's children were killed 
 and the jNIurthcrers were delivered they found a ]Man Indian 
 dead in the ])ath killed by the English for which thav have 
 no Satisfaction & desire it may be Considered " (2 Ar. 15). 
 
 The summary manner in which such '' nuir- 
 therers " were disposed of when so delivered up 
 is illustrated by an entry in the journal of the 
 Assembly two years later when the Lieutenant 
 General sent it the followini;' messa2:e : 
 
49 
 
 "You have here sent you the Indian tliat murdered Capt. 
 Odber it is that Rogue that caused our kite Troubles Ababcos 
 Indians have brought him M"' Henry Courssy knows the 
 Indian & does assure me that this is the Fellow that shott 
 the said Odber I do hereby order that this Murderer be 
 executed at St. Mary's toMorrow." 
 
 But the Greneral Assembly could not tolerate 
 such procrastination and indulgence but " Ordered 
 that the said Wianamon be shott to death here at 
 St. Mary's some time before three of the Clock 
 this Afternoon" (2 Ar. 195). 
 
 The methods adopted for protection did not 
 differ materially from those still in vogue where- 
 ever the two races come in contact: — expeditions 
 against them, — confining them to reservations, — 
 binding them by treaty. 
 
 The first regular expedition against them was 
 authorized in 1642 when it was enacted that " It 
 shalbe lawfull to the Lieutenant Generall to make 
 an expedition ags* the Sesquihanoughs or other 
 Indians as have committed the late outrages vpon 
 the English at such time & in such manner as he 
 shall think fitt " (1 Ar. 198, 8, &c.). In 1643 
 Capt. Tho Cornwaleys Esq having a " propensenes 
 to goe a march vpon the Sesquihanowes " was 
 authorised "for the vindication of the honour of 
 God, & the Xtian and the English name vpon 
 those barbarians & inhumane pagans " " to levie 
 volunteers & to doe all other things requisite for 
 7 
 
50 
 
 tliG training of the soulcliers punishing of inso- 
 lences vanquishing the enemies and disposing of 
 the spoiles" (3 Ar. 133). In 1644 Capt. Henry 
 ffleete was commissioned " to goe vp wth yo'^ com- 
 pany to pascatoway and there to consider whether 
 it wilbe more to the honor, safety, or advantage of 
 the English to have war or truce wth the Sesqui- 
 hanowes at this present," and if he " shall not 
 think best to treate or truce wth them you are to 
 vse all lawfuU & discreet meanes you can to pillage 
 or take them or if it shall seeme best to kill them ; 
 and to break off all league and treaty betw^eene 
 them and our confederates" (Id. 149, 150). 
 
 In 1647 because that "sundry the inhab** of this 
 province had sustayned diuers great losses in their 
 estates by the Indians of Nantacoke & Wicomick " 
 Captain John Price was commissioned " to take 30 
 or 40 such able men as he shall thinke titt and 
 make choyce of" and go to the Eastern Shore and 
 there to " imploy his uttmost endeauor skill & 
 force by what meanes hee may, in destroying the 
 s* Nations, as well by land as by water, eyther by 
 killing them, taking them prisoners burning their 
 howscs destroying their Corne, or by any other 
 meanes as he shall iudge convenient" (3 Ar. 191). 
 
 In 1652, in an expedition ordered against the 
 " Easterne shore Indians " at the instance of the 
 " inhabitants of the Isle of Kent " for the " Sup- 
 J)ressing of those heathens and avenging of Guilt- 
 
51 
 
 less Bloud and the preservation of our lives with 
 our wives and children " (Id. 279) it was " ordered 
 by the Council that for all Such Indian prisoners 
 as Shall happe to be taken and brought in when 
 this March is ended they shall be divided accord- 
 ing to their Valuation uj^on a Generall Division 
 throughout the Province amongst " those who had 
 defrayed the expenses of the expedition (Id. 283-4) ^ 
 but that it was not intended that this enslaving of 
 the Indians should extend beyond those wdiom they 
 were pleased to consider enemies is manifest from 
 an act of Assembly passed in 1654, enacting that 
 " whatsoever person or persons that shall steale 
 any friend Indian or Indians whatsoever or be 
 accessory in Stealing them and shall sell him or 
 them or transport them out of the County shall be 
 punished with death" (1 Ar. 346). 
 
 Twenty years later these "friend Indians " ren- 
 dered the colony such service that it was " Voted 
 by the house tli* Matchcoats Corne Powder and 
 Shott be purchased and forthwith delivered to the 
 friend Indians by w^ay of gratification for the Ser- 
 vices done by the Said Indians in the late Warre 
 ag' the Susquehannough Indians, viz to the Pas- 
 cutaway, Chapticoe, Nangemy, Mattawoman & 
 Pamunkie Indians" (2 Ar. 488). Yet such was 
 the distrust of everything bearing the name of 
 Indian, that this same vote, that gave this sub- 
 stantial recognition of favors received from them, 
 required them to deliver hostages to the English. 
 
52 
 
 Although the proposition that " the only good 
 Indian is a dead Indian " had not then been enun- 
 ciated, yet the germ of that sentiment was clearly 
 vital among them. Tho Matthews, with his brother 
 Ignatius, and Henry More, in 1664, went by invi- 
 tation to an entertainment given by the " Indeans 
 of Pascataway " who " had taken two prisoners of 
 the Johnadoes upon the Xorth side of patomake 
 river" and reported to Governor Charles Calvert 
 " After I came they presently began to torter the 
 man and gave mee this Relacon ... as for the 
 Relacon & maner of their tortering th™ I omitt till 
 I shall see yo" hono'^" (3 Ar. 501). 
 
 Though they may have been interested specta- 
 tors when one tribe of Indians tortured another I 
 find in the Archives no evidence that they them- 
 selves resorted to torture to obtain information — 
 at least they did not when they thought a different 
 course more certain of obtaining it (Id. 49S) ; still, 
 when they went to war, they meant war and not 
 peace, and on the same date as the last occurrence 
 the Council " Ordered th* Warr be pclaimed ag* the 
 Cinego Indians th* a Reward of a hundred Armes 
 lenght of RoanOakc be giuen to eury 'i^son whether 
 Indian or English th* shall bring in a Cinego 
 prison'' or both his Eares if he be slayne " (Id. 
 502), and at the same time it was declared "to be 
 lawfull for any 'pson Jnhabiting in this prouince 
 to kill slay or take prisoner any of the aforesaid 
 
53 
 
 Cinego or Johnado Indians that shall enter this 
 proiiince" (Id. 503). But the saddest illustration 
 of their manner of dealing with the Indians, in 
 what they called war, which is presented in these 
 volumes, is found in the pages that record the 
 events of the expedition under the command of 
 Thomas Truman against the Susquehanna Indians 
 in 1676. These Indians, though a very powerful 
 tribe, had shown themselves desirous of peace with 
 the colonists, and it is proof of their favorable 
 inclination that when a treaty was negotiated with 
 them, the reason assigned in the Council was, 
 because that " the Indians had a long time desired 
 and much pressed for the conclusion of a peace 
 with the Government and Inhabitants of this 
 Province which as is now conceived may tend very 
 much to the Safety & advantage of the Inhabitants 
 here if advisedly etfected " (3 Ar. 276) ; and, for 
 the same reason doubtless, a further alliance offen- 
 sive and defensive was made with them in 1661 
 (Id. 420), and yet a further one in 1666 (Id. 549), 
 and in this last year the general Assembly had 
 declared that the " honor of his Lordship and the 
 English Nacon will vndoubtedly suffer by breach 
 of faith even to a Heathen" (2 Ar. 131), but the 
 officers of this expedition forgot so just a sentiment. 
 The plain facts of this transaction seem to be 
 that, in 1675, the Susquehanna Indians, being- 
 harassed by the Senecas, as they had often been 
 
54 
 
 before, came to the English settlements, and asked 
 for permission to live among the " friend Indians " 
 near the settlements ; and this privilege being- 
 refused them they " did condescend to remove as 
 farr as the head of the Potovvmack " (2 Ar. 429- 
 '30). Later in the season there were depredations 
 committed upon the settlers in Baltimore and 
 Anne Armidel Counties, and also in Virginia, and 
 a joint expedition into the Indian countr}^ was 
 fitted out b}^ the two colonies under the command 
 of Thomas Truman. He, with his force, appeared 
 " At the forte of the Susquehannoughs ... on the 
 North side of Puscattuway Creek ... on the Sab- 
 both morning about the 25 or 26 day of September " 
 . . . and sent a messenger to the fort and desired 
 " some of their great men to come and Speake with 
 the s*^ Majo"" vpon which message of his there came 
 out 3 or 4 of them ; " afterwards thirty or forty. 
 They were told " of the great jnjuries that had 
 been done to the Country and th* he came to know 
 who they were th* had done them, And the great 
 men Replyed that it was the Senecaes." Further 
 parley ensued, the Indians believing that pursuit 
 of the marauders was useless, that the retiring 
 Senecas might be at this time " at the head of the 
 Patapscoe river," and could not be overtaken, yet 
 they consented " To assist as Pilates and to joyne 
 in the pursuite ag' the Senecaes," and the next 
 morning they were promptly at the place appointed 
 
55 
 
 for meeting for that purpose. They were then 
 ao'ain taxed as beino- themselves the authors of the 
 injuries compkiined of, " and they vtterly denyed 
 the Same and showed an old Paper and a Meddall 
 w^'' a black and Yellow Ribbond thereto and the 
 Said Indians did say that the Same was a pleadge 
 of peace given and left with them by the former 
 Governors as a Token of Amity and friendship as 
 long as the Sun and Moone should last." Major 
 Truman declared to them that he " did believe the 
 Senecaes had done the Mischeife and not they and 
 that he was w^ll Satisfied Therein ; " yet he placed 
 six Indians under guard and consulted with the 
 Virginia officers, as the affidavit expresses it 
 
 "Sitting 
 upon a Tree Some distance from the Indians and after Some 
 While they all Rose and came towards the Jndians and Caused 
 them to be Bound, and after Some time they talked againe 
 (the Virginians and particularly CoUon^^ Wasshington urging 
 the most sanguinary course) soe after further discourse the s* 
 Indians were carryed forth from the place where they were 
 bound & they knocked them on the head " (2 Ar. 476, 483). 
 
 So utterly inexcusable was the act that the Low^er 
 House of the General Assembly accused Major 
 Truman of murder; — the UiDper House investigated 
 it, examined witnesses, and the Major himself, who 
 made no denial of the allegations against him. 
 He was adjudged guilty and thereupon the Lower 
 House sent the Upper House a bill of attainder 
 
56 
 
 against him to wliicli the answer returned was, that 
 " His Lop and this House doe Conceave it not Safe 
 for them To Vote the killing of Susquehannoughs 
 Embassadors noe Murther for to them and all the 
 world it does and will Certainely appear the great- 
 est that ever hath been Committed" (2 Ar. 503). 
 And the Upper House informed the Lower " That 
 this house Cannot Consent to inflict a pecuniary 
 punishment upon a person who hath been accused 
 by the Lower House of Murder and by this House 
 found guiltie of the Same" (Id. 512). As the 
 result of this disagreement, as to the mode of pun- 
 ishment, between the two houses no punishment at 
 all was inflicted upon Major Truman. In fact 
 it may be doubted whether there was any very 
 earnest desire for his punishment. It was only 
 Indians that he had killed, and though the manner 
 in which it was done was not to be commended, 
 the thing done was not to be too severely con- 
 demned. The destruction of wolves was encour- 
 aged by the payment of a bounty from the colonial 
 treasury (1 Ar. 346, 362, 372, 428, 446 ; 2 Ar. 325, 
 348, &c.), that of the Indians, as we have seen in 
 repeated instances, by granting to any who would 
 take it, the " pillage," the " spoile " of them, and 
 the prisoners themselves for servants. This record 
 of their treatment of the aborigines is probably the 
 darkest chapter in the history of the colonists. 
 
 In the journal of 1666 "articles of j^eace and 
 amity" between the Lord Proprietary and the 
 
57 
 
 " Indians of Pascataway Anacostanck Doags " and 
 eight other tribes are recorded, and in these the 
 device of Indian reservations first appears. This 
 treaty is one of the most liberal towards the 
 Indians of any that were negotiated, for it 
 expressly provides that " the privilidge of hunt- 
 ing Crabbing fishing & fowleing shall be preserved 
 to the Indians inviolably;" but the sort of equality 
 recognized appears from a comparison of the 
 fourth article, which reads " If an Indian kill an 
 Englishman he shall dye for itt," with the eighth 
 article which reads " John Roberts & Thomas 
 Morris shall pay the Indians of Chingwawateick 
 one hundred and twenty amies length of Roane- 
 oake for the Indian that was slayne by them at the 
 head of Portoback Creeke in August last." This 
 unusual severity for the killing of that Indian was 
 probably owing to the fact that at this time the 
 " Queene of Portoback " was under the special 
 protection of the Lord Proprietary. Three years 
 before she had made a piteous complaint of the 
 trespasses and injuries done her by the colonists, 
 and the Lieutenant General had issued a procla- 
 mation forbidding the colonists to seat any land 
 within three miles of her " habitacons or planta- 
 cons" (3 Ar. 489). 
 
 The treaty with the several tribes above named 
 " declares the sole pwer of Constituting and ap- 
 poynting the Emperor of Pascatoway to be & 
 8 
 
58 
 
 remayne in the R* Hono^^® Caecilius Lord and 
 Prop'' of this Province & his heirs ; " (this right 
 had been asserted several years joreviously) (3 Ar. 
 454, 482). It appoints a king for the "Indians of 
 Hangemaick " and it provides " that the severall 
 nacons afores*^ shall continue vpon the places where 
 they now live," the bounds of these places to be 
 fixed by the Governor "as to him in justice shall 
 seeme most for the publick good " " within which 
 bounds it shall not be lawfuU for the s*^ nacons to 
 entertayne any forreign Indians whatsoever to Hue 
 with them" (2 Ar. 25, 26). 
 
 Similar steps were taken for the "proteccon" of 
 the Indians of the Easterne Shoare near Chop- 
 tank " in 1669 (Id. 197, 200), and for the " Matta- 
 pany & Patuxon Indians in 1674 " (Id. 354, 360, 
 369,373). 
 
 A treaty of inviolable peace and perpetual 
 amity and friendship had been " established and 
 confirmed with several of the tribes of the " East- 
 erne Shoare" in July, 1659 (3 Ar. 363). 
 
 In February, 1675, " some of the greate men of 
 the Sussquehannoughs " appeared in the General 
 Assembly and " desired to Know what part of the 
 Province should for the future be allotted to them 
 to Occupy." The Governor was left " to appointe 
 a place ; " the Assembly " seeing nothing for it to 
 doe but to provide armes Ammunition and Pro- 
 vision, and imediately to beginne the warre " (2 
 
59 
 
 Ar. 451), and they passed "an act for the Raysing 
 a present Supply (50,000 pounds of tobacco) for 
 his Excellency the Cap' . Generall to defray the 
 Charges of making Peace with the Oynegoe Indians 
 and making warr with the Susquehannes Indians " 
 (Id. 462). How Major Truman conducted that 
 Avar we have already seen. 
 
 Other treaties (so-called) bound the Indians 
 more rigidly to their good behavior. That with 
 the Passayoncke Indians in 1661 provided "that 
 in case any Englishman for the future shall hap- 
 pen to finde any Passayoncke Indian Killing either 
 Cattle or Hoggs that then it shall be lawfull for the 
 English to kill the said Indian" (3 Ar. 433), and 
 that with the " Delaware Bay Jndians," in 1663, 
 contained precisely the same provision (Id. 486). 
 
 Religion. 
 
 Probably nothing in the early history of Mary- 
 land possesses more interest, and certainly nothing 
 requires more care and delicacy in the handling 
 than the question of the religion of the colonists. 
 Hallam, speaking of this era in England, says 
 "relio-ion was the fashion of the age," and it is 
 evident that when the colonists crossed the ocean 
 they did not leave this fashion behind them. No 
 characteristic is more prominent in all their lan- 
 o-uao-e than relioious phrase which abounds in acts 
 
60 
 
 of Assembly, proclamations, commissions, and so 
 forth to a degree that seems to us to savor of 
 irreverence, if not of blasphemy. Proclamations 
 issued even upon unimportant subjects commenced 
 " To all persons to whom these presents shall come 
 Greeting in the name of our Lord God everlast- 
 ing," and oaths, used on any and all occasions, 
 commonly concluding " So help you God and by 
 the contents of this booke " (3 Ar. 193, 197, 214, 
 218, &c.), were so multiplied, that the General 
 Assembly at length interposed its humble request 
 to the Proprietary " that such things as your Lord- 
 ship may hereafter desire of us may be done with 
 as little Swearing as Conveniently may be Expe- 
 rience teaching us that a great Occasion is given to 
 much perjury when swearing becometh common" 
 (1 Ar. 242). Lord Baltimore, if requiring less 
 religion of his subordinates than the Puritans of 
 New England, yet required at least high moral if 
 not religious character of them. In his full letter 
 of instructions to Governor Stone in 1651, he 
 ordered that no person should be " of our Council 
 of State Commander of a County or Justice of the 
 Peace " who lived " scandalously or Viciously with 
 any Lewd Woman or professed himself of no 
 reliiJiion or was an usual Drunkard Swearer or 
 Curser " (1 Ar. 333) ; and the same principle that 
 has remained undisturbed to the present time was 
 adopted in 1654, under the commissioners of the 
 
61 
 
 Commonwealth, when it was enacted that " T^oe 
 work shall be clone on the Sabboth day but that 
 which is of Necessity and Charity to be done no 
 Inordinate Recreations as fowling fishing hunting 
 or other, no shouting of gunns to be used on that 
 day except in Case of Necessity" (1 Ar. 343). 
 This was a change from four years earlier when 
 the journal of a sitting of the Assembly is dated 
 "April 6^^ 1650 Sabbath " (1 Ar. 261). When this 
 Sabbath law was passed it was apparently sup- 
 posed that the business of ordinary keepers fell 
 within the category of necessity or charity, but it 
 was subsequently determined that it was a " Pro- 
 phanacon of the Sabbath or Lords Day " to sell 
 strong liquors or permit " tippling or gaming att 
 Cards dice, ninepinn playing or other such unlaw- 
 fuU exercises," and the same was expressly pro- 
 hibited, under the penalty of two thousand pounds 
 of tobacco, and other disabilities (2 Ar. 414). 
 
 It cannot be expected that the Archives will 
 end the controversy so long and earnestly con- 
 tested as to who is entitled to the credit of the 
 much-vaunted religious liberty of the colony. But 
 there are a few facts which clearly appear : first, 
 that the sovereign who granted the charter was not 
 a Roman Catholic, nor was that the religion of the 
 State at the time : Second, that Lord Baltimore, to 
 whom the charter was granted, was a Roman Cath- 
 olic : and Third, that the colonists were mingled, 
 
62 
 
 Roman Catholic and Protestant; all deeply imbued 
 with the religious sentiment of the age, zealous for 
 their own creed, and desirous, by appeals to preju- 
 dice as well as to reason, of giving their own as 
 far as practicable an advantage over the opposite, 
 which they knew was heresy, yet prepared under 
 the circumstances surrounding them to give for the 
 time being, a qualified toleration to such heresy, 
 though neither of the parties was free from the 
 bigotry of the age, or had any clear perception of 
 equal religious libert}^ and right, or of a religion 
 neither dominating the civil government nor domi- 
 nated by the civil government. 
 
 It is also clear that the controlling influence, at 
 first, was one that had great regard for the recog- 
 nized Christian Saints. A large portion of the 
 places to which the settlers gave names bear the 
 names of some of the saints of the calendar, and 
 later the names are strongly suggestive of Puritan 
 origin. Thus we find the Council assembled in 
 June, 1662, at a place named "The Resurrection," 
 and ordering that " a pryson bee built there " (3 
 Ar. 460) ; and when the Protestants made a home 
 upon the Severn they named it " Providence " (1 
 Ar. 260), and though an act of Assembly erected 
 it into a County by the name of "Annarundell 
 County" (Id. 292), another act, four years later 
 (1654), " Declared that the County now Called 
 'Annarundell County' shall be Called and Recorded 
 
63 
 
 by the name of the County of Providence " (Id. 
 345). The same spirit that insisted upon that 
 name was willing to dismiss the " St." from names 
 already given, and we find " St. Maries County " is 
 changed in use (1654) into " maryes County " or 
 " County of Maryes " (Id. 340, 354). We find also 
 the early dates fixed by Saints' days. The General 
 Assembly is to convene on the " morrow after the 
 feast of St. Simon and St. Jude " (1 Ar. 113), on 
 " Monday after St. James' Day " (Id. 127), " at the 
 two most usual feasts of the year viz* the Annun- 
 ciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary and Saint 
 Michael the Arch Angell " (3 Ar. 234), "at the 
 ffeast of our Lords nativity " (Id. 267), &c. 
 
 As religion was the great matter of contest in 
 England, so it entered in no slight degree into the 
 affairs of the colony from the first. When Lord 
 Baltimore (George Calvert), in 1629, driven by 
 snow and ice from the inhospitable shores of 
 Avalon, went prospecting to Virginia, Governor 
 Potts and the Virginia Council remonstrated with 
 the home government against granting him any 
 special privileges, because he and his followers 
 made "profession of the Romishe Religion" and 
 they say that: 
 
 "amonge the many blessings and favores 
 for which wee are bound to bless God and which this Colony 
 hath receaved from his most gracious Majesty, there is none 
 whereby it hath beeue made more happy then in the freedom 
 
64 
 
 of our Religion which we have enjoyed and that noe papists 
 have been suffered to settle their abodes amongst us " (3 Ar. 17). 
 
 But the remonstrance was ineffectual. The 
 Lord at home was more influential than the 
 colonists across the sea ; and when, about three 
 years later (1632), the charter was granted to Lord 
 Baltimore (Caecilius), the reason assigned was 
 because he was " moved by a certain laudable and 
 pious zeal for extending the Christian religion and 
 extending our empire in parts of America hitherto 
 uncultivated and inhibited by Savages and know- 
 ing nothing of the Divine Being" (3 Ar. 3). 
 Strangely enough for the times there was granted 
 to him, though of a different creed from the sover- 
 eign and the State, "the patronages and advowsons 
 of all Churches which (with the increasing wor- 
 ship and religion of Christ) shall be built, together 
 with license and faculty of erecting and founding 
 Churches, Chapels and places of Worship and of 
 causins: the same to be dedicated and consecrated 
 according to the Ecclesiastical Laws of our King- 
 dom of England" (Id. 4). 
 
 As soon as legislation began religion began 
 to be nursed. In the session of 1638-9, when 
 everything important was considered and noth- 
 ing enacted, among the bills that reached the 
 point of engrossment, was one that " Holy Church 
 within this Province shall have all her rights 
 liberties and immunities safe whole and inviolable 
 
65 
 
 in all things" (1 Ar. 35, 40, 83). The next year 
 it fared better, and was enacted that " Holy 
 Church within this Province shall have and enjoy 
 all her Rights liberties and Franchises wholy and 
 without Blemish" (Id. 96). Another bill in that 
 session of 1638-9 made " eating flesh in time of 
 Lent or on other days when it is prohibited by the 
 Law of England " a crime punishable by a fine of 
 five pounds of tobacco (Id. 53), but " idolatry which 
 is the worshipping a false God or to commit blas- 
 phemy which is accursing or wicked speaking of 
 God was a felony to be punished by hanging" 
 (Id. 71). The use of proper language was further 
 sought to be secured by enactments that " every 
 one convicted of pro])hane cursing and Swearing 
 shall forfeit five I Tob." (Id. 159, 193). 
 
 In March, 1641, there " was presented by David 
 Wickliff'e in the name of the Protestant Catholics 
 of Maryland " a petition, and complaint of the 
 obstruction of Protestant w^orship, and Thomas 
 Gerard, against whom this " petition of the Protes- 
 tants " was directed, on hearing by the Assembly, 
 was found " guilty of a misdemeanor " and fined 
 " 500 I tobacco towds the maintenance of the first 
 minister as should arrive" (1 Ar. 119). 
 
 The journal of the English House of Lords 
 
 shows that on the 28th of November, 1645, there 
 
 was presented to " the Com*^^ of Lords & Comons 
 
 for ffbrraio:ne Plantacons The Peticon of diuerse 
 
 9 
 
66 
 
 the Inhabitants of Maryland setting forth the 
 tyranicall Gouernement of that Province, euer 
 since its first settling, by Recusants ; whoe haiie 
 seduced and forced many of his Ma*^ Subiects, 
 from their Religion," and humbly praying the 
 assistance and protection of the Parliament. 
 " Diuers marchants of the Citty of London trad- 
 ing to the English plantations," also petitioned to 
 the same etfect, because, they said, " the said Lord 
 Baltimore and his agents have not only acted 
 horridd things in that province as Papists and 
 Enemyes, but alsoe tearmes the Hono^' Parlya- 
 ment Rebells " (Id. ]81). Undoubtedly the hand 
 of Ingle was in these petitions, yet on considera- 
 tion of them it was (December 25th, 1645) "Ordered 
 by the Lords in Parlyament assembled. That the 
 Comittee for foraigne Plantations, doe drawe vp 
 an Ordinance and present it to this House for the 
 settling of the Plantation of Maryland vnder the 
 Comand of Protestants " (3 Ar. 164-5). The com- 
 mittee presented an ordinance accordingly, ordain- 
 ing and declaring "that the said Cecil Caluert 
 Lord of Baltimore hath wickedly broken the trust 
 reposed in him by the said Lres Patents, and that 
 it is convenient and necessary that the said Lres 
 Patents bee repealed and made voyde," and that 
 there be appointed " an able Governor and fitt 
 Officers of the Protestant Religion and well affected 
 to the Parlyament" (3 Ar. 173). All that followed 
 
67 
 
 under this ordinance these Archives do not disclose. 
 They do show, however, that the Governorship of 
 the colony passed, for the time being, out of the 
 Calvert family, and that William Stone, a Protes- 
 tant, became Governor. In his ofacial oath he 
 swore, among other things, " I will not by myself 
 nor any Person directly or indirectly trouble 
 molest or discountenance any Person whatsoever 
 in the said Province professing to believe in Jesus 
 Christ and in particular no Roman Catholick for 
 or in respect of his or her Religion nor in his or 
 her free exercise thereof" (3 Ar. 210). Precisely 
 the same provision was inserted in the oath of the 
 councillors, a majority of whom were Protestants 
 
 (Id. 214). 
 
 From other sources we know that the three fol- 
 lowing were very busy years in England, and the 
 climax was reached on the thirtieth of January, 
 1649, when the king lost his life upon the scaifold, 
 and Oliver Cromwell became protector of the 
 Commonwealth. 
 
 Three months after the king's death on the 
 twenty-first of April, 1649, the General Assembly 
 at St. Maries passed "AN ACT CONCERNING 
 RELIGION," which sixteen months later (August 
 26th, 1650), was "confirmed by the Lord Proprie- 
 tary under his hand and seale " (I Ar. 244). 
 
 It becomes us, as loyal Marylanders, not to 
 smile when we hear this famous statute called " an 
 
68 
 
 act of toleration," and to forget, if we can, that the 
 great bulk of it is composed of penalties — fines, 
 whippings, severe whippings, banishment, confisca- 
 tion and death, against all sorts and forms of 
 errors and heresies save those held by the persons 
 enacting it, and to remember only that it contains 
 the famous and familiar toleration clause ; that if 
 we except the enormous exception which it con- 
 tains, it embodies a declaration of religious liberty 
 as broad and full as can be found in any nation or 
 language — a veritable jewel in a toad's head. But 
 putting the worst construction upon this as a penal 
 act, it certainly gave a larger freedom (or at least 
 a diff'erent freedom), than was agreeable to the 
 authorities in England. Among the instructions 
 to the Commissioners for "reducing the colonies to 
 their due obedience to the Commonwealth of Eng- 
 land " was one to see that the act of Parliament 
 " for abollishing the booke of common praj^er 
 was received and enforced" (3 Ar. 265). And 
 Cromwell, in his tender care for their religious wel- 
 fare, wrote them a letter from Whitehall, in Janu- 
 ary, 1653, in which he advised " That Love be 
 cherished and the great Interest of Religion be 
 owned and countenanced whereby you will ingage 
 God's care over you, who alone can make your 
 affairs prosperous," &c. (3 Ar. 297). And the next 
 year it was " Enacted and declared in the Name of 
 his Highness the Lord Protector and bv the 
 
69 
 
 Authority of the Generall Assembly That none 
 who profess and exercise the Popish Religion 
 Commonly known by the Name of the Roman 
 Catholick Religion can be protected in this Pro- 
 vince by the Lawes of England . . but such as 
 profess faith in God by Jesus Christ (though dif- 
 ferins: in Judc^ment from the Doctrine and Disci- 
 pline Publickly held forth shall not be restrained 
 from, but shall be protected in the Profession of 
 the faith) & Exercise of their Religion . . pro- 
 vided that this liberty be not extended to Popery 
 or Prelacy," &c. (1 Ar. 341). The commissioners 
 for settling the aifairs of the Province had pre- 
 viously declared that all such as "doe profess the 
 Roman Catholick Religion " should be disabled to 
 sit in the General Assembly (3 Ar. 313) . 
 
 In 1656 Lord Baltimore by proclamation (3 Ar. 
 325), declares the "act whereby all persons who 
 profess to believe in Jesus Christ have liberty of 
 conscience and free Exercise of theyr religion " is 
 to be duly observed ; and in 1657 he " doth Faith- 
 fully promise vpon his Honor to obserue and j)er- 
 forme as much as in him lyes " the said act (Id. 
 334), and re-guarantees the same in 1659 (Id. 384). 
 
 Religious solicitude for the young appeared in 
 1671, when there was proposed "an act for the 
 founding and Erecting of a School or College 
 within this Province for the Education of youth in 
 learning and Virtue," one of the provisions of 
 
70 
 
 which was "That the Tutors or School Masters of 
 the said School or College may be qualified accord- 
 ing to the reformed Church of England or that there 
 may be two School Masters, the One for the Catho- 
 lick and the Other for the Protestants Children and 
 that the Protestants may have liberty to Choose 
 their School Master" (2 x\r. 262-4). And in the 
 same spirit the Upper house, at the same session, 
 desired to have incorporated in the " act for the 
 Preservation of Orphan's Estates," a provision 
 that " First Care must be taken to have the 
 Children Educated in the Religion of their dec*^ 
 Parents" (2 Ar. 317). But disagreement as to 
 the details of the project for a school or college 
 caused it to fail entirely ; both parties appar- 
 ently preferring that the youth should grow 
 up without either " learning or Virtue," than 
 that they should have learning and virtue of a 
 different brand from their own. 
 
 Quakers. 
 
 Of course there might be errors and heresies so 
 sreat as to f>;ive serious cause of alarm and call for 
 the most rigorous action. Such an one was dis- 
 covered by the colonial Council in 1658 in " the 
 increase of Quakers whos denyall of subscribing 
 the engagement," in addition to the threatening 
 attitude of the Indians, gave such " cause of jeal- 
 
71 
 
 ousies" that Captain John Odber was commis- 
 sioned to put the militia at once on a war footing ; 
 and it being discovered that Thomas Thurston and 
 Josias Cole had remained in the Province above a 
 month without taking the oath of fidelity, it was 
 "Ordered That a Warrant should jssue for the 
 apprehension of said Thurston and Cole to answer 
 theyr misdemeanors" (3 Ar. 348). The warrant 
 was issued " to the sheriffe of Annarundell to take 
 the body of Josias Cole and him in safe custody 
 keepe vt in order without Baile or Mainprise" 
 (Id. 350). And an order went "to the Sheriffe 
 of Caluert County to bring the body of Thomas 
 Thurston to Mr. Henry Coursey's by the twenty- 
 fifth of July." These orders were executed and 
 then the council discovered the magnitude of their 
 undertaking, for not only had they Thurston and 
 Cole on their hands, but they were compelled to 
 take 
 
 "into consideracon the insolent behaviour of som 
 people called Quakers who at the Court in contempt of an 
 order then made & proclaimed would presumptiously stand 
 covered and not only so, but also refuse to subscribe the 
 engagement in that case provided alleadging they were to be 
 governed by Gods lawe and the light within them and not 
 by mans lawe and vpon full debate . . . ordered that all 
 persons should take & subscribe the said engagement by the 
 20* of August next or else depart the Province by the 25* 
 of March followeing vpon paine due to Rebbells & Traitors " 
 (3 Ar. 352), 
 
72 
 
 and the Governor issued his proclamation accord- 
 ingly. Even this did not rescue the province from 
 the great danger of Quakers, and the next July the 
 Council 
 
 " Ordered as foUoweth : viz 
 Whereas it is to well knowne in this Province that there haue 
 of late bin seuerall vagabonds & Jdle persons knowne by the 
 name of Quakers that haue presumed to com into this Prov- 
 ince as well diswading the People from Complying with the 
 Military discipline in this time of Danger as also from giving 
 testimony or being Jurors in causes depending betweene party 
 & party or bearing any office in the Province to the no small 
 disturbance of the Lawes & Civill Govern' thereof: And that 
 the keeping & detayning them as Prisoners hath brougiit so 
 great a charge vpon this Province the Governor & Councell 
 taking it into theyr Consideracon haue thought fitt to Appoint 
 & doe hereby for the prevention of the like inconveniences for 
 the time to com Require & command all & euery the Justices 
 of the Peace of this Province that so soone as they shall haue 
 notice that any of the foresaid Vagabonds or Jdle persons 
 shall againe presume to com into this Province they forth- 
 with cause them to be apprehended & whipped from Con- 
 stable to Constable vntill they be sent out of the Province " 
 (3 Ar. 362). 
 
 Thurston, who still remained, was arrested under 
 this order, but succeeded wdth much adroitness in 
 showing that it did not apply to his case, where- 
 upon, determined that if the general order did not 
 cover his case, a special order should be made that 
 would, the Council ordered as follows : 
 
73 
 
 "The board doth Judge That the said Thurston be for 
 euer bannished this Province & that if he be found within 
 this Province at any time 7 days after the date heereof or 
 shall att any time after returne agaiue into this Province that 
 he be by the next Justice of the Peace caused to be whipt 
 with 30 lashes & so sent from Constable to Constable till he 
 be Conveyed out of the Province. And that if he shall then 
 at any time againe presume to returne into this Province that 
 he be whipt with 30 lashes at euery Constables & be againe 
 sent out of the Province as aforesaid. And it is further 
 ordered that no person whatsoeuer presume to receaue har- 
 bour or conceale the said Thomas Thurston after the tenth 
 day of this Present month vpon Paine of fine hundred pounds 
 of Tob for euery time that they shall so Keceaue harbour or 
 Conceale him the said Thomas Thurston " (3 Ar. 364). 
 
 Those, who, for conscience sake, refused to bear 
 arms, were proceeded against by court martial, 
 though these Archives do not show precisely what 
 penalty was inflicted upon them (3 Ar. 435, 441, 
 456). Their meetings to confer over their perse- 
 cutions were thought to be full of danger to the 
 colony (Id. 494-5), so that in 1666 the Council 
 "Ordered that the Secretary doe forthwith issue 
 out warr*' to each respective sheriffe for the taking 
 the names of such persons within their Balywick 
 who goes und"" the Notion of Quakers and to make 
 return in a list of theire names and surnames at 
 the next Prouin=^" Court" (Id. 547). 
 
 But they were not all driven away from the 
 Province, or into concealment. In 1674 Wenlock 
 10 
 
74 
 
 Chriterson, well known in history for his courage 
 and steadfastness in maintaining the principles 
 and practices of his sect in Boston, having found a 
 fresh field in Talbot County, with others "of us 
 who are in Scorne called Quakers," sent a petition 
 to the General Assembly to be allowed to dis- 
 charge certain duties, especially those of witnesses 
 and administrators without taking an oath (2 Ar. 
 355). This difficult question gave the Assembly 
 much and painful deliberation, but after two years 
 the Lower House announced its conclusion, that, 
 " this house doe Conceave it utterly unsafe for the 
 L^ Proprief" to make any Law in this Province to 
 exempt the people called Quakers from testifying 
 vpon Oath and therefore thinke it Unfitt for this 
 house to advise his Lords^ to Condesend to any 
 votes of either house of assembly tending that 
 way" (2 Ar. 492). 
 
 Temperance. 
 
 Among the perplexing questions with which the 
 colonists were called to deal, was one which has 
 not yet entirely lost its interest, nor as to the best 
 manner of dealing with which is there yet entire 
 unanimity. Legislation on the subject was largely 
 experimental then, it is hardly other than that 
 now. Among the very first bills brought before 
 the General Assembly of the Province was one 
 
75 
 
 " For restraint of Liquors " (1 Ar. 34) ; and in the 
 " act for the authority of Justices of the Peace," 
 at the same session, it was provided that for 
 " Drunkenness which is Drinking with excess to 
 the notable perturbation of any organ of sence or 
 motion the offender shall forfeit to the Lord Pro- 
 prietary thirty pound of tobacco or five Shillings 
 Sterling, or otherwise shall be whipped or by some 
 other Corporall Shame or punishment Corrected 
 for every such excess at the discretion of the 
 judge" (1 Ar. 53). 
 
 Pursuing the same policy, that is, treating drink- 
 ing itself as the crime, the General Assembly, in 
 1642, enacted that " every one convicted of being 
 drunk shall forfeit 100 1: tobacco toward the build- 
 ing of a prison . . or if the off^ender be a Servant 
 and have not wherewith to Satisfie the fine he shall 
 be imprisoned or sett in the Stocks or bilbos fast- 
 ing for twenty-four hours " (1 Ar. 159, 193). Sub- 
 stantially the same was the act of 1650 (Id. 286). 
 The act of 1654 went further and made it the duty 
 of "every officer and Magistrate in the Province 
 from the highest to the Lowest to use all Lawfull 
 meanes to convict such as to their knowledge shall 
 be Drunke ; " and it imposed an equal fine upon 
 " every person in this Province that shall see any- 
 one Drunk and shall not within three days make 
 it known to the next Magistrate" (Id. 342). The 
 " act concerning Drunkness " of 1658 provided a 
 
76 
 
 severer penalty, and enacted " that hee that shalbe 
 lawfully convicted of drunkeness shall for the first 
 oifense be sett in the Stocks Six hoiires, or pay one 
 hundred pounds of tobacco, ifor the second oifense 
 to be publickly whipt or pay three hundred pounds 
 of Tobacco. Being the third tyme convicted as 
 aforesaid, the Offender shalbe adiudged a Person 
 infamous, and thereby made vncapable of giving 
 vote, or bearing Office within this Province during 
 the space of three years next after such Convic- 
 tion " (Id. 375). 
 
 The " Vpper howse " of the General Assembly 
 itself imposed this penalty upon Thomas Hills, 
 and for " sweareing " when in his cups, com- 
 pelled him to " goe to the lower howse and there 
 accknowledge his faults with expressing his hearty 
 sorrow for the same" (Id. 404). But if the cul- 
 prit was an official he did not escape so easily. 
 Thomas Gerard was a member of the Council, and 
 against him his " Lordships attorney generall " 
 filed an information in 1658, charging that he, 
 "to the Create offense of Almighty God dishonor 
 of his Lordship & whole Councell hath diverse 
 times misbehaued himselfe & offended in Drunk- 
 ennes & other Lewd behaviour Committed on 
 board of Covills ship Rideing in St. Georges River," 
 &c. With the information were filed certain affi- 
 davits evidently designed to screen him as far as 
 the facts would permit. Mr. Henry Coursey swore 
 
77 
 
 " that he was on board of Covills ship with Mr. 
 Gerrard that the said Gerrard had drunke some- 
 thing extraordinary but was not so much in drinke 
 but he could gett out of a Carts way " (3 Ar. 354). 
 Upon this information, for his "crimes and mis- 
 demeanors," he was banished from the Province 
 with " forfeiture and Conficacon of all his estate 
 both reall and personall ; " and though the Gov- 
 ernor afterwards remitted that sentence, so far as 
 banishment was concerned, yet it was permitted to 
 stand as a forfeiture of all franchises and he was 
 required to " give Recognizance for his Good 
 behaviour" (Id. 409). 
 
 Besides treating drunkenness as a crime in the 
 drinker, some effort was made to discourage too 
 loose a traffic in spirits. The act of 1638-9 pro- 
 vided that where the goods of or in the hands 
 of any person are not sufficient to pay all his debts 
 . . debts for wine and hot waters shall not be Satis- 
 fied till all other debts be paid " (1 Ar. 84). 
 
 A strong effort was made in 1674 to impose a 
 heavy duty upon liquors imported, and both houses 
 voted a prohibition of their importation from New 
 England, New Yorke, and Virginia, yet the vote does 
 not seem, to have been matured into law (2 Ar. 361, 
 375 to 380) . They recognized the necessity of tav- 
 erns in a country like theirs, but they recognized 
 also the importance of having good citizens only for 
 inn-keepers, and sent a message to his Excellency 
 
78 
 
 to request that he would issue "a license to keep 
 Ordinary to noe person but th* he shall give Bond 
 to his Excellenc}'- with good Sureties that they shall 
 Suifer noe drinking or gameing upon the Sabboth 
 day," &c. (2 Ar. 346) ; and by another act liquor 
 selling on the Sabbath was strictly prohibited (Id. 
 414). But to them an ordinary without liquors 
 was the play of Hamlet with Hamlet's part left 
 out. A license for an ordinary was a license " to 
 keep an Inn or Ordinary And to make Sale of 
 Beer wine Strong Waters or any other fitting and 
 'wholesome Drink Vittualls or provisions " (3 Ar. 
 304). But the Inn-keepers must have been very 
 rapacious, for act after act was passed, fixing the 
 prices which they might charge for each liquor 
 which they furnished in a list long enough to 
 shame the wine card of fashionable hotels of the 
 present day. These lists include French Brandy, 
 French wine, Canary, Malligoe, Madeira, Fayal, 
 "Portoport and other Portugall wine," strong Cider, 
 "Clarrett," "Strong Beere or Ale," " Rumm," 
 English Spirits, " dutch dramms," " Annisseed 
 Rosa Solis," Perry, Quince, Lime Juice, Rhenish 
 Avines, Sherry, Mumm and various others (2 Ar. 
 148, 214, 296). But they voted that "no ordi- 
 nary keeper within this Province shall at any 
 time charge anything to Account for Bowles 
 of punch or any quantity of mixed Drink 
 but shall only sell the several Ingredients to 
 
79 
 
 the said mixture " at the rates they had pre- 
 scribed (Id. 268). The Inn-keepers of course 
 found it no difficult task to fix their liquors to 
 suit the prices fixed on them by the Assembly, 
 which soon led the Assembly to " Conceave th* the 
 underrating of the s*^ Liquors hath been the Occa- 
 sion of the Soj^histicacon of Liquors " and there- 
 fore " Voted by this house th* noe rates or prices 
 of anie Accomodacons be set or Ascertained but of 
 such only as are of absolute necessity for Sustain- 
 ing & Refreshing of Travellers (th* is to say) Horse 
 meate mans meate Small Beare & Lodging " (2 Ar. 
 351, 407, 560). But they were at their wit's end in 
 their effort to find the proper limit to ordinaries, 
 that is, to fix the point which would supply the 
 necessities of trav^ellers, and would not promote 
 dissipation in the youth or in the homes of the 
 colonists. It was plain to see that there must be 
 an ordinary where the General Assembly met, and 
 where the Courts were held; and there many 
 wished the licenses to stop. But after much 
 deliberation it was agreed to request the Governor 
 " by proclamation to suppress all other Ordinaries 
 in this Province but that where the Provinciall 
 Court & County Courts are kept and Besides in 
 Ann Arundell County at Richard Hills, in Patux- 
 ent at Richard Keenes & George Beckwiths, in 
 Dorchester County at Peter Underwoods and one 
 at the Wading Place between Kent and Talbot 
 
80 
 
 Counties and no more in the whole Province " (2 
 Ar. 432, 4). This was in 1675, and a complete 
 reversal of the policy which they pursued in 1662, 
 when " for the better Encouragement of all honest 
 and well minded people whoe now doe or which 
 shall hereafter Keepe Victualling howses " they 
 conferred upon them special authority and power 
 substantially equivalent to that enjoyed by a land- 
 lord in the matter of distraining for rent (1 Ar. 
 447). 
 
 To them a State House without an ordinary as 
 an attachment w^as an absurdity, if not an impossi- 
 bility. When they framed " an act for the pur- 
 chasing a State howse " at St. Maries for 12,000 
 pounds of tobacco, they stipulated that the vendor, 
 Mrs. Hannah Lee, should " dwell and keep ordi- 
 nary in the same for the tearme of three yeers " 
 (1 Ar. 447, 455) ; and when later they engaged 
 William Smith "to repaire the Cuntry's howse at 
 St. Mary's, he was bound to keep ordinary therein 
 for seauen years" (1 Ar. 538; 2 Ar. 50, 51), but 
 they did not mean that he should impose upon the 
 colony any exorbitant charge for the entertainment 
 of its officials, and as they scrutinized his bill in 
 1666 they decided 
 
 "vppon debate This Howse is willing 
 to allow Will'" Smyth his ace' w""" hee hath charged the bur- 
 gesses this Assembly for Liquors : As wine, rumme, Brandy 
 Punch & Liminade made with Wine. But th' w*^*" hee calls 
 
81 
 
 Liminade w^'out strong drinke they will allow only 25 1 pr 
 gallon, And as to their dyett & Lodging they will allow 
 what they iustly may be charged withall & noe more " (2 Ar. 
 127). 
 
 The same frugal mind in the matter of spirits 
 was in the Council when they laid in their supplies 
 for the military expedition against the Eastern 
 Shore Indians in May, 1639, for they at that time 
 provided for the soldiers of the expedition a whole 
 barrel of oatmeal, but only " 4 cases of hot waters " 
 (3 Ar. 85, see also Id. 345). 
 
 Attoeneys. 
 
 Besides the Indians and Quakers there was 
 another class of men which fell under the sus- 
 picion of at least a portion of the colonists and 
 which, incredible as it seems to us they felt that 
 they needed some protection against. This appears 
 first from the report of a joint committee of the 
 General Assembly in 1669, in which the " real 
 grievances of the Province " are set forth. The 
 fourth specification of these grievances says: 
 " That the Privileged Attorneys are one of the 
 Grand Grievances of the Country." At the same 
 time Robert Morris went before the lower house 
 of Assembly, and there did " in the name of the 
 Commons of this Province impeach M'' John 
 Morecroft Gen' being one of the Attorneys of the 
 11 
 
82 
 
 Provincial Court for exacting fees above and 
 beyond the Laws & Customs of this Province & 
 that he is retayned as attorney for some with 
 unreasonable fees, for a whole year's space so that 
 by that means it Causes several Suits to the Utter 
 Ruin of people" (2 Ar. 167). 
 
 Five years later there was passed "An Act to 
 reforme the attorneys counsellors & Solicit'^ at law 
 of this Province to avoyde unnecessary Suites and 
 Charges att Law " (Id. 409). From the character 
 and reputation which that class of people have 
 borne from that time to the present, we are forced 
 to conclude, either that the grievance complained 
 of was rather fancied than real, or else that the 
 reform which was enacted w^as completely success- 
 ful, and has been permanent. 
 
 Witchcraft. 
 
 There was another class of people quite as objec- 
 tionable to the colonists as Quakers and Attorneys, 
 and, if possible, more difficult to deal with. This 
 was the witches, against whom the capital statute 
 of James was invoked, and at least in the case of 
 Mary Lee, on her way to the colony, execution was 
 had by the same law (Lynch law) by which one 
 Cooper was recently executed in Baltimore Count}'. 
 The particulars of this execution are given in two 
 affidavits made before and filed with the Council in 
 
83 
 
 June, 1654. The story as told by one of the 
 deponents, Henry Corbyn, of London, merchant, 
 
 " Saith That at Sea upon his this Deponents Voyage hither in 
 the Ship called the Charity of London ra'^ John Bos worth 
 being Master and about a fortnight or three weeks before the 
 said Ships arrivall in this Province of Maryland, or before a 
 Rumour amongst the Seamen was very frequent, that one 
 Mary Lee then aboard the said Ship was a witch, the Said 
 Seamen Confidently affirming the Same upon her own deport- 
 ment and discourse, and then more Earnestly then before 
 Importuned the Said Master that a try all might be had of 
 her which he the Said Master m'^ Bosworth refused, but 
 resolved (as he expressed to put her ashore upon the Barmu- 
 does) but Cross wids p^'ented and the Ship grew daily more 
 Leaky almost to desperation and the Chiefe Seamen often 
 declared their Resolution of Leaving her if an opportunity 
 oiferred it Self which aforesaid Reasons put the Master upon 
 a Consultation with m'' Chipsham and this deponent, and it was 
 thought fitt, Considering our Said Condition to Satisfie the Sea- 
 men, in a way of trying her according to the Usuall Custome 
 in that kind whether she were a witch or Not and Endeav- 
 oured by way of delay to have the Commanders of other 
 Ships aboard but Stormy weather prevented, In the Interime 
 two of the Seamen apprehended her without order and 
 Searched her and found Some Signall or Marke of a witch 
 upon her, and then calling the Master m' Chipsham and this 
 Deponent with others to See it afterwards made her fast to 
 the Capstan betwixt decks. And in the morning the Signall 
 was Shrunk into her body for the Most part, And an Exami- 
 nation was thereupon importuned by the Seamen which this 
 deponent was desired to take whereupon She Confessed as 
 
84 
 
 by her Confession appeareth, and upon that the Seamen 
 Importuned the Said Master to put her to Death (which as it 
 Seemed he was unwilling to doe, and went into his Cabbinn, 
 but being more Vehemently pressed to it he tould them they 
 mitrht do what they would and went into his Cabbinn, and 
 Sometime before they were about that Action he desired this 
 depon* to acquaint them that they Should doe no more then 
 what they Should Justifie which they Said they would doe 
 by laying all their hands in generall to the Execution of her." 
 (3 Ar. 306). 
 
 The " deposition of ifrancis Darby " fully cor- 
 roborates Mr. Corbyn in all material points, but 
 especially in showing the effort of the master of 
 the ship to escape all responsibility for the execu- 
 tion. 
 
 The colonists were evidently in sympathy with 
 the sentiment expressed by Wesley, three-quarters 
 of a century later, that " giving up witchcraft was, 
 in fact, giving up the Bible ; " and, as we have seen 
 in considering the criminal law^, they placed it, 
 under the name of sorcery, by the side of blas- 
 phemy and idolatry, as a capital oifence, repeat- 
 edly in their statutes. 
 
 The charge to Justices and other officers, often 
 repeated in these Archives, was " to enquire of 
 all manner of Fellonyes witchcrafts inchantments 
 Sorceries Magick Arts trespasses forestallings 
 ingrossings and Extorcons whatsoeuer " (3 Ar. 
 422, 535, 554, &c.) 
 
85 
 
 That this diligent quest was not always fruitless 
 is shown by a " Petition of the Deputies and Dele- 
 sates of the Lower House of Assembly," presented 
 to the Governor in February, 1675. This peti- 
 tion humbly showed to his Excellency: 
 
 " That whereas 
 lohn Cowman being Arraigned Convicted and Condemned 
 upon the statute of the first King lames of England &c for 
 Witchcraft Conjuration Sorcery or Enchantment used upon 
 the Body of Elizabeth Goodale and now Lying under that 
 Condemnation, and hath humbly Implored and Beseeched 
 Us your Lordships Petitioners to Mediate and Interceede in 
 his behalf with your Excellency for a Reprieve and Stay of 
 Execution — 
 
 Your Excellencies Petitioners do therefore accordingly in all 
 Humble manner beseech your Excellency that the Rigour 
 and Severalty of the Law to which the said Condemned 
 Malefactor hath Miserably Exposed himself may be remitted 
 and Relaxed by the Exercise of your Excellencys Mercy & 
 Clemencie upon so wretched and Miserable an Object " (2 Ar. 
 425). 
 
 This petition met a gracious reception for it was 
 answered that : 
 
 " The Lieutenant General hath Considered 
 of the Petition here above and is willing upon the request of 
 the Lower house that the Condemned Malefactor be reprieved 
 and Execution Stayed, Provided that the Sheriff of St. Maries 
 County carry him to the Gallows, and that the rope being 
 about his neck it be there made known to him how much he 
 
86 
 
 is Beholding to the Lower liouse of Assemblie for Mediating 
 and Interceeding in his Behalf with the Lieu* General and 
 that he remain at the City of St. Maries to be employed in 
 such service as the Governor and Council shall thinke fitt 
 during the Pleasure of the Governor " (Ibid.) 
 
 In what the Governor could safely employ one 
 having the elusive power of a witch we can only 
 conjecture. It may be that he desired to use him 
 as an instrument for the punishment of other 
 criminals, as he had precedent for doing in the 
 action of Leonard Calvert, who, when Governor, 
 " exchanged the sentence of death of John dandy 
 into service for 7 yeares to his Lop & to remaine 
 exequutioner of all corporall corrections according 
 to the writts lawfully directed to him " (3 Ar. 146). 
 
 May we not hope that the succeeding volumes of 
 the Archives will show that this vigilance, or this 
 executive clemency, in dealing with witches, induced 
 all of that class of malefactors to leave the Province, 
 and migrate, on their broomsticks, to Salem, Massa- 
 chusetts, where they had an epidemic of them some 
 fifteen or twenty years later ! 
 
 But for the contemporaneous records, presented 
 to us in these volumes of "Archives," it would 
 seem hardly credible that the state of things which 
 they demonstrate, could have existed where we 
 now live. The rude life, the stern struggle with 
 nature and man, the liberality hampered by 
 bigotry, the abject submission cou^^led with bold 
 
87 
 
 assertion of right, the burning religious zeal joined 
 with forgetfulness of the charity that true religion 
 requires, form a picture of the Spirit of the Times 
 in which light and shadow are strangely mingled. 
 If we find details which feed our pride, we find 
 others that lead us back to humility ; and while we 
 regret the " good old times " we can but heartily 
 congratulate ourselves that they have passed away. 
 Looking back across the gulf of two hundred and 
 fifty years, our greatest occasion of rejoicing is at 
 the progress made — at the abundant proof fur- 
 nished that " the world does move." 
 

 
 v'^'' c " " 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Wh^^; 
 
 
 • ^ .r 
 
 ,<^'^ "^^. 
 
 
 
 V^^jf/a^ "^^ > ^^ 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 .^" . t ' . , ^r. ' ' .«> , o - = . <P. 
 
 
 
 ■^ 
 
 
 •^^ 
 
 « s , .dJ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^, 
 
 " • ' ^ • . V ^^ " = " " 
 
 
 •j^s-' - ■^■- --••'''; v^^' :^:^;ii;!^: ^<i' 
 
 ^--^ ^mfl.-: A-:^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 v.>- 
 
 .0 
 
 p 
 
 <^„ 
 
 -^^0^ 
 
 c^ 
 
 ^^.■. 
 
 
 .^^'-^ ^'^S ^^ '^ °^;^^^ ^ ^ -Si 
 
 A^ C N C , ^J" 
 
 
 
 
 •^ /\ ^m-' .Z^-^^. 'Wj r 
 
 '4^ • "' &•■'%> 
 
 
 JAN ' 
 
 n •> .0