Virginia, was the diminution of territory occasioned by grants of great tracts of country lying within the limits of the colony. The most remarkable of these was the grant of Maryland to Lord Baltimore.
Maryland.
In June 1632, Charles I. granted to that nobleman for ever, "that region bounded by a line drawn from Watkin's Point on Chesapeak bay, to the ocean on the east; thence, to that part of the estuary of Delaware on the north, which lieth under the 40th degree, where New England is terminated; thence, in a right line, by the degree aforesaid, to the meridian of the fountain of the Potowmac; thence, following its course, by the farther bank to its confluence." The territory described in this grant was denominated Maryland, and was separated entirely from Virginia. The proprietor was empowered, with the assent of the freemen, or their delegates, whom he was required to assemble for that purpose, to make all laws for the government of the new colony, not inconsistent with the laws of England. Privileges, in other respects analogous to those given to the other colonies, were comprised in this charter; and it is remarkable that it contains no clause obliging the proprietary to submit the laws which might be enacted to the King, for his approbation or dissent; nor any reservation of the right of the crown to interfere in the government of the province.[44]
This is the first example of the dismemberment of a colony, and the creation of another within its original limits, by the mere act of the crown.
The first migration into the new colony consisted of about two hundred gentlemen with their adherents, chiefly Roman Catholics, who sailed from England under Calvert, the brother of the proprietor, in November, 1633and, early in the following year, landed in Maryland, near the mouth of the Potowmac. Their first effort was to conciliate the good will of the natives, whose town they purchased, and called St. Mary's. This measure was as wise as it was just. By obtaining the peaceable possession of land already prepared for cultivation, the Marylanders were enabled to raise their food immediately; and this circumstance, together with their neighbourhood to Virginia, where the necessaries of life were then raised in abundance, secured them from famine and its concomitant diseases;—afflictions which had swept away such numbers of the first settlers of North America.
The inhabitants of Virginia presented a petition against the grant to Lord Baltimore, which was heard before the privy council in July, 1633. The decision was in favour of the continuance of the patent; leaving to the petitioners their remedy at law. To prevent farther differences, free commerce was permitted between the colonies; and they were enjoined to receive no fugitives from each other; to do no act which might bring on a war with the natives; and on all occasions to assist each other as became fellow subjects of the same state.
1635
Assembly of all the freemen.
In February 1635, the first assembly of Maryland was convened. It appears to have been composed of the whole body of the freemen. Their acts were, most probably, not approved by the proprietor, who transmitted, in turn, for their consideration, a code of laws prepared by himself. 1638This code was laid before the assembly who rejected it without hesitation, and prepared a body of regulations adapted to their situation. William Clayborne.Among these was an act of attainder against William Clayborne, who was charged with felony and sedition, with having exercised the powers of government within the province without authority, and with having excited the Indians to make war on the colony.[45]
As early as the year 1631, Charles had granted a license to William Clayborne, one of the council and secretary of state of Virginia, "to traffic in those parts of America for which there is already no patent granted for sole trade." To enforce this license, Harvey, then governor of Virginia, had granted his commission also, containing the same powers. Under this license and commission, Clayborne made a small settlement in the isle of Kent, near Annapolis, which he continued to claim; and refused to submit to the jurisdiction of Maryland. Not content with infusing his own turbulent spirit into the inhabitants of Kent island, he scattered jealousies among the natives, and persuaded them that "the new comers" were Spaniards, and enemies of the Virginians. Having been indicted, and found guilty of murder, piracy, and sedition, he fled from justice; whereupon his estate was seized and confiscated. Clayborne loudly denounced these proceedings as oppressive, and complained of them to his sovereign. At the same time, he prayed for a confirmation of his former license to trade, and for a grant of other lands adjoining the isle of Kent, with power to govern them. The lords commissioners of the colonies, to whom this subject was referred, determined that the lands in question belonged to Lord Baltimore; and that no plantation, or trade with the Indians, within the limits of his patent, ought to be allowed, without his permission. The other complaints made by Clayborne were not deemed proper for the interference of government.
1639
Hitherto, the legislature had been composed of the whole body of the freemen. But the increase of population, and the extension of settlements, having rendered the exercise of the sovereign power by the people themselves intolerably burdensome, an act was passed, in 1639, "for establishing the House of Assembly." This act declared that those elected should be called burgesses, and should supply the place of the freemen who chose them, as do the representatives in the Parliament of England. These burgesses, with others called by special writ, together with the governor and secretary, were to constitute the General Assembly; but the two branches of the legislature were to sit in the same chamber. In 1650, this last regulation was changed; and an act was passed declaring that those called by special writ should form the upper house, while those chosen by the hundreds should compose the lower house; and that bills assented to by both branches of the legislature and by the governor, should be deemed the laws of the province.
Perfect harmony prevailed between the proprietor and the people; and Maryland, attentive to its own affairs, remained in a state of increasing prosperity until the civil war broke out in England. This government, like that of Virginia, was attached to the royal cause; 1641but Clayborne, who took part with the Parliament, found means to intrigue among the people, and to raise an insurrection in the province. Calvert, the governor, was obliged to fly to Virginia for protection; and the insurgents seized the reins of government. After the suppression of this revolt, and the restoration of tranquillity, an act of general pardon and oblivion was passed, from the benefits of which only a few leading individuals were excepted; but this, like most other insurrections, produced additional burdens on the people which did not so soon pass away. A duty, for seven years, of ten shillings on every hundred weight of tobacco exported in Dutch bottoms, was granted to the proprietor; the one-half of which was appropriated to satisfy claims produced by the recovery and defence of the province.[46]
1651
This state of repose was disturbed by the superintending care of Parliament. In September 1651, commissioners were appointed "for reducing and governing the colonies within the bay of Chesapeak." Among them was Clayborne, the evil genius of Maryland. As the proprietor had acknowledged and submitted to the authority of Parliament, he was permitted to govern the colony in the name of "the keepers of the liberties of England;" but could not long retain the possession of actual authority. The distractions of England, having found their way into Maryland, divided the colonists; and the commissioners supported with their countenance, the faction opposed to the established government. The contentions generated by this state of things, at length broke out in a civil war, which terminated in the defeat of the governor and the Roman Catholics. A new assembly was convened, which, being entirely under the influence of the victorious party, passed an act declaring that none who professed the popish religion could be protected in the province by the laws; that such as profess faith in God by Jesus Christ, although dissenting from the doctrine and discipline publicly held forth, should not be restrained from the exercise of their religion, provided such liberty was not extended to popery, or prelacy, or to such as, under the profession of Christ, practise licentiousness. Other laws in the same spirit were enacted; and a persecution was commenced against the Quakers, as well as against those guilty of popery, and prelacy.
A scene of revolutionary turbulence ensued, in the course of which a resolution was passed declaring