USA > Maryland > Maryland toleration; or, Sketches of the early history of Maryland, to the year 1650 > Part 1
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org.
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6
Gc 975.2 A &5m 1746104
M. L.
REYNOLDS HISTORICAL GENEALOGY COLLECTION
L
ALLEN COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY 3 1833 02251 7772
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016
https://archive.org/details/marylandtolerati00alle 0
-
563
MARYLAND TOLERATION ;
OR,
SKETCHES OF THE EARLY HISTORY OF MARYLAND,
TO THE YEAR 1650.
BY THE REV. ETHAN ALLEN, PRESBYTER OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH, BALTIMORE CO., MD.
BALTIMORE : JAMES S. WATERS. - MDCCCLV. 563
-
MARYLAND TOLERATION:
1746104
SKETCHES OF THE EARLY HISTORY OF MARYLAND,
TO THE YEAR 1650.
BY THE REV. ETHAN ALLEN, PRE-BITER OF ICE PR. TEFIANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH, BALTIMORE .O. MD.
BALTIMORE: JAMERS WATER -.
------
1
MARYLAND TOLERATION;
OR,
SKETCHES OF THE EARLY HISTORY OF MARYLAND.
MORE than two years ago, the present writer drew up the following sketches, at the request of some of his younger brethren in the Ministry, who wished to have the facts of our early history before them. And at the request of brethren whom he does not feel at liberty to refuse, he now sends them forth in this form. In putting forth these sketches of the early history of Maryland, it is right he should state, that he has nothing to present, but what is already known to those who are familiar with its beginning and its subsequent progress. And his purpose now simply is, to set forth chronologically, such facts within his reach, as have come down to us. and exhibit and illustrate directly or indirectly its religious character and condition. He has endeavored to avoid putting down mere probabilities, aiming to let the facts, as much as possible, speak for themselves.
A. D. 1608.
THE FIRST EXPLORATION OF CHESAPEAKE BAY AND RELIGIOUS SERVICES ..
The first permanent Colony which settled in Virginia, as is well known, was a Church of England Colony ; and settled there in 1607. In June and July of the following year, the celebrated Capt. Smith, Governor of Virginia, undertook to explore the Chesapeake Bay. In his history of the Virginia Colony,* we learn, that he left Jamestown, the second day of June, in an open barge of near three tons burthen, having in his company, a physician, six gentlemen and seven soldiers. He returned in nine days. This voyage does not seem to have been satis-
* 1 Vol. p. 182.
1
-
factory to him, for on the 24th of July, he set out again, in order to complete the discoveries which he had before commenced. He took now with him a physician, five gentlemen and six soldiers. He appears at this time, (1608.) to have examined the Bay and its shores to the Sus- quehannah pretty thoroughly ; excepting that part of the Eastern shore, from Swann's point in Kent County, to the lower part of what is now Dorchester County. This be passel without, examination.
But he records-and it forms a beautiful introduction to our religious history-that during the voyage of exploration, " our order was daily to have Prayer with a Psalm." Thus early, as we are here shown, two hun- dred and forty-six years ago, when the shores of the Chesapeake were occupied by the wild Indians-and they pagans-and its waters for the first time wafted on their surface the bark of the white man-did prayers and hymns of praise ascend in the name of JESUS to the living GOD. It was then, for the first time, that the shores and waters of our noble Bay re- sounded with the teachings of God's Holy Word, the Bible, and with the Services of His Worship. These men, the then Governor of Virginia, and those with him, were not unmindful in the wilderness and on the deep, of the GOD Who bas ail things in His hands. They were Christ- ians, Church of England Christians, who had the book of Common Prayer. They were men who prayed to GoD daily, and daily offered to Him praise. Thus, with the very first sail of our Anglo-Saxon race, that ever caught the breeze upon the waters of the Chesapeake-came the Bible and the book of Common Prayer-and men of stout Christian hearts to use them. "Our order was daily to have Prayer and a Psalm- at which SOLEMNITY the poor savages much wondered." It was indeed, under the circumstances, a solemnity. It was no light thing, nor was it done in a corner. The Indian himself saw-and seeing it he wondered.
1612. . THE EXTENT OF THE TERRITORY OF VIRGINIA.
In 1612, March the 12th, there was granted to the London or South Virginia Company, the Charter known as the third and last Virginia Charter. It is mentioned here, because it shows us the extent of terri- tory given at that time to that Company." It states that it extended " from the point of land called Cape or Point Comfort, all along the sea coast northward two hundred miles ; and from the said Point or Cape Comfort, all the sea coast southward two hundred miles. And all that
* 1 Hazzard, 73.
1
-
5
space and circuit of land, lying from the sea coast of the precinct afore- said, up into the land throughout, from sea to sea West and North-West," etc. North thus of Point Comfort, the Virginia territory included all that is now Maryland and Delaware, and one-third at least of New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Maryland, therefore, that now is, was then a part of Vir. ginia ; it was all in Virginia territory and known as Virginia.
THE VIRGINIANS A CHURCH OF ENGLAND COLONY.
Now with respect to Religion in the " articles, orders and instructions," etc., set down for Virginia Nov. 20, 1606, seven months after the first Virginia Charter was issued, is found the following : " We do specially ordain, charge and require the presidents and Councils [of the two Vir- ginia Colonies] respectively, within their several limits and precincts, that they with all care, diligence and respect, do provide that the true Word and Service of God and Christian Faith, be preached, and planted, and used," etc., " according to the doctrine, rites and religion, now professed and established within our realm of England."* In the second Charter, that of May 23, 1609,t it is said, " we should be loath, that any person should be permitted to pass, that we suspected to affect the superstitions of the Church of Rome. We do hereby declare, that it is our will and pleasure, that no one be permitted to pass in any voyage, from time to time into the said country, but such as shall have first taken the Oath of Supremacy," &c. And the third Charter empowers certain officers there specified, to administer the oath of Supremacy, which was also the oath of allegiance,¿ to "all and every person, which shall at any time or times hereafter, go or pass to the said Colony of Virginia." This oath thus prevented any one from becoming a resident in Virginia, who could not, or would not acknowledge the King, as the temporal head of the Church ; and required the officers specified, to see it administered. The Colony was thus consequently made a Church of England Colony.
And while upon this point, it may be well to add, that in 1619, the Church of England was established in the Colony. And up to this time, there had been neither papists nor puritans in it. "There is reason however to believe," says Dr. Hawks,§ "that about this time, a small number of puritans sought refuge in the Colony, but it was too in- considerable to introduce any change in the religious opinions of the people, and public worship continued to be conducted as it always had been, in conformity with the Ritual of the Church in England.| In
* 1 Henning, 60. + 1 Hazzard, 72.
§ Hawks' Contributions Va., p. 35.
# 1 Hazzard, 78.
Į See Henning.
6
1631-2 was enacted the following, -" It is ordered that there be a uni- - formity throughout this Colony, both in substance and circumstance to the Canons and Constitution of the Church of England as near as may be ; and that every person yield ready obedience to them, upon penalty of pains and forfeiture in that case appointed." So late as 1639, twenty years after the establishment of the Church in the Colony, several laws were then made against the puritans ; and so rigorous were these laws, that " none but conformists in the strict and most absolute sense were permitted to reside in the Colony."* These however were made by way of anticipation, for, says Burk,f " as yet there were none amongst them. They were made to prevent the infection from reaching the country."
1624.
In this year, by the judgment of the Court of the King's bench, upon a quo warranto, the Charter of Virginia was annulled, and on the 20th of August, the Kingt " appointed and authorized for ordering, mana- ging and governing the affairs of the Colony, persons residing in the parts of Virginia." Of the twelve thus appointed, three were subsequent- ly Governors of the Colony, and among the others was William Clai- borne.§ lle came out first in 1621, 'To survey the planters' lands and make a map of the country.' We mention his name. here, because it plays so conspicuous a part in after years. In this commission, the King says, " We did resolve, by altering the Charters of said Company, as to the point of government, wherein the same might be found defective, to settle such a course, as might best secure the safety of the people there,
and yet with the preservation of the interests of every planter or adventurer, so far forth, as their present interests shall not prejudice the public plantations."
1625.
This year, on the 27th of March, King James died, and was succeeded by Charles Ist. On the fourth of that month, previous to James' death, a Commission was issued appointing Sir George Yeardly, one of the before named Council, Governor, leaving out two others, but continuing William Claiborne, and adds, " Forasmuch as the affairs of state in said Colony and plantation, may necessarily require some person of quality and trust to be employed as Secretary, for the writing and answering such let- ters, as shall be from time to time directed to, or sent from the said Gov-
* 2 Bozman, 198. + 2 Burk, 67.
§ 1 Henning, 116.
$1 Hazzard, 191, 192.
-
7
ernor and Council of the Colony aforesaid, our will and pleasure is, and we do by these presents nominate and assign you, the said William Clai- borne, to be our Secretary of State, of and for the Colony and plantation of Virginia."* In using the word quality in this Commission, we are shown something of the position in society of Claiborne, for it was " a word in use, in those times, signifying men of the first rank in society under the degree of nobility, and synonymous to gentry."t
In the proclamation of Charles Ist, for the settling the plantation of Virginia, dated May 13, 1625, it is said, that the repeal of the Chartert " was not intended to take away or impeach the particular interest of any private planter,-the government of the Colony of Virginia, shall imme- diately depend upon ourself-[before, it had depended on the London or South Virginia Company]-and not be committed to any company, or corporation to whom it may be proper, to trust matters of trade and com- merce, but cannot be fit or safe to communicate the ordering of affairs of state," etc. The officers in the Colony therefore now appointed, were to be responsible to the King-and not to the Company, as before. These commissions have been referred to here for future use in this sketch.
1627.
Gov. Yeardley was now dead; and on the 20th of March, 1627, John Harvey was appointed Governor.§ The same commission appointing him, continued Claiborne one of the Council, and also in his office of Secretary of State. Thus under three successive Governors, he was a member of the Council, and under two, Secretary of State. These commissions, says McMahon, || "abundantly evidence the high estimation ' in which he was then held."
" During the years 1626, 7, 8, ff the Governors gave authority to Will- iam Claiborne, 'the Secretary of State of this Kingdom,' as that most ancient dominion was then called, to discover the source of the Chesa- peake Bay, or any part of that Government, from the thirty-fourth to the forty-first degree of North latitude. This was, as a learned Annalist (Chalmers) alleges, "in pursuance of particular instructions from Charles Ist to the Governors of Virginia, to procure exact information of the riv- ers and the country." McMahon says, ** that he received these licenses from the English government-licenses to trade under which he was authorized to discover, &c.
* 1 Hazzard, 233, 4. § 1 Hazzard, 234, 5.
** ** p. 7
+ 2 Bozman, 100, note.
Ip. 7, note.
# 1 Hazzard, 204, 5.
T 1 Bozman, 265.
-
-
,
1
8
1629.
While acting under these licenses, as Claiborne himself states in a peti- tion to the King, in 1638,* "he discovered, and did then plant upon an Island in the great Bay of Chesapeake, in Virginia, by them named the Isle of Kent, which they bought of the kings of the country, and built houses, transported cattle, and settled people thereon, to their very great costs and charges." He does not indeed state the year in which this was done. But in a " Breviat of the proceedings of the Lord Baltimore,"t it is stated that the Island called Kent was seated and peopled under the Virginian government, three or four years before the King's grant to him," that is, Lord Baltimore. As that grant was made in 1632, three or four years previous, would be 1628 or 9. In a pamphlet of 1655, called Virginia and Maryland,{ it is stated, that " the Isle of Kent was planted almost three years, before the name of Maryland was ever heard of." This too would fix that event to 1629. For the name Maryland was given to the territory which still bears the name, in 1632. Such were the statements of men high in office, to those high in office in England, who all well knew the fact.
Claiborne thus discovered the Island ; purchased it of the Indians, and then took up the lands on it according to the custom of the Colony at that time.§ The settlement was at that time recognized as one of the settlements of the Virginia Colony, and sent burgesses, who sat in the Assembly of Virginia.
Kent Island is on the Eastern side of the Chesapeake Bay, at the mouth of Chester River, opposite the city of Annapolis ; precisely in that part of the Bay, which we have seen was not examined by Capt. Smith in 1608 ; and was, as Claiborne says, discovered by himself. It is stated in Scott's Geography of Maryland, to be fourteen miles long, by six and one-half miles broad, and contains thirty-nine thousand acres.
Thus so early as 1629, Kent Island, then in Virginia, was occupied, settled and cultivated by Virginians, under the government of Virginia. And the preceding documents show not only that it was in Virginia, and a part of Virginia, but also that its settlers, of whom there were more than one hundred, were of the Church of England, just as was its pro- prietor himself. Nor was its proprietor inattentive to its religious inter- ests ; for among the occupants there, was the Rev. Richard James, a
* 2 Bozman, 582. + 1 Hazzard, 628. # p. 9, see also 1 Hazzard, 621. § Streeter's " Maryland two hundred years ago," p. 12
1
9
Clergyman of the Church of England," if not from the beginning of the settlement, yet within a very short time afterwards. It was the prior settlement to that of St. Mary's, by five years ; and was the nucleus, from which subsequent settlements spread over to the main land, in the Coun ties now known as Kent, Queen Anne, and Talbot. And so true have been those counties to their early Church, that to this day, only three Romanist Chapels are found in their borders, and but one resident priest. And so did the Church of that Island spread, that in 1692, when the Church of England was established in the Colony, six parishes were erected within its limits, one of which is known to have had four Church edifices-St. Paul's, Queen Anne County.
In October, 1029,t Sir George Calvert, the first Lord Baltimore, a Romanist nobleman, visited Jamestown in the Virginia Colony. Imme- diately on his arrival, the Virginia Assembly, then in session, as required by the instructions before mentioned.# caused the oath of allegiance and supremacy to be tendered to him.§ The oath of supremacy, obliged him who took it, to acknowledge the King as the temporal head of the Church of England ; and the oath of allegiance, required submission and obedi- ence to the King, as an independent sovereign. These oaths, Lord Balti- more must have taken before in England; but now he declined them, and the Assembly contented itself by referring the matter to the King and council.| Leaving Jamestown therefore, he sailed up the Bay to examine it-but he could not have been long so engaged, for in the fol- lowing January he was at home in England.
1631.
It has been already seen, that in the years 1626, 7, 8, William Clai- borne was licensed, or commissioned according to instructions from the King, by the Governor of Virginia, to trade and make discoveries in the Chesapeake Bay, and that while so doing, he discovered and purchased of the Indians Kent Island, and made a settlement there. This, as he states in his letter to the King in 1638, Lord Baltimore took notice of. And whether in the year 1630, he had heard of Lord Baltimore's appli- cation for a grant, which would include Kent Island, and desired to make his own title to it still more secure or not, he now himself made applica- tion to the King, and obtained from himn a license, which he seems to have supposed, would secure to him his Island beyond question. This license
* Virginia Records, Mr. Streeter. § 1 Bozman, 255.
+ Mr. Streeter's Address, p. 2. ; p. 3. Hawks' Church of Va , p 47, 24 Berk, 25. T Streeter, p. 11.
/
-
10
bears date May 16, 1631, and reads thus: "These are to license and authorize you, the said William Claiborne, one of the Council and the - Secretary of State, for our colony of Virginia, his associates and company freely and without interruption, from time to time, to trade for corn, furs, &c., with their ship, boats, men and merchandise, in all seas, coasts, harbors, lands, or territories in, or near, those parts of America, for which there is not already a patent granted to others, for sole trade * giving, and by these presents granting unto the said William Claiborne, full power to direct and govern, correct and punish such of our subjects, as shall be under his command in his voyages and discoveries, etc."* Now, when had patents for sole trade been granted? In the year 1629,t a commission had indeed been granted to Captain Bass, by the Governor of Virginia, to trade between the forty-first and thirty-fourth degrees of north latitude-or to sail to New England, or the West Indies,-but there was not one word in it, about sole trade. From the mere wording of the King's license to Claiborne, it may not appear at first sight, to have had any reference to Kent Island. But in his petition to the King, and the Councils' decision thereon, in 1639, we are shown that it was so understood. And it was supposed by Claiborne, and the King also, to give him, that is Claiborne, the authority to govern the discoveries he might make. The title to territory according to usage was to be derived from the Colonial authorities, but here was given him the power to exer- cise Government.
In this year, 1631, was a second settlement made within the territory, subsequently embraced in Lord Baltimore's charter-that of the Swedes : near what is now Wilmington, Delaware. In 1627,t a number of Swedes and Finns came over to America, and purchased of some Indians, the land from Cape Ilenlopen, on both sides of the Delaware Bay; and erected a fort on the West side of the Bay, near the Cape, not far from what is now Lewistown, Delaware. This was for the purpose of defense against the Indians in carrying on trade. But in 1031, the Swedes erected a fort further up the Bay, on the same side, on Christiana Creek, near what is now Wilmington ; and there, they laid out a town, and made a settlement. That settlement was soon cut off by the Indians, but the Swedes nevertheless continued to hold possession there. The settlers of course were members of the Swedish Church. The beginning of which Church there, was thus made.
1632. We come now, to the time when Lord Baltimore obtained his Charter,
* 1 Bozmau, 266, note. . + 2 Bark, 32.
$ 1 Bozman, 200.
11
or grant of Maryland. On the 25th of April of this year, Sir George Calvert, the first Lord Baltimore, died; and was succeeded by his eldest son, Cecil Calvert, as heir to his title and his estates. On the 16th of the June following, a Charter was granted to this second Lord Baltimore from Charles Ist, giving him that part of the territory of Virginia, extend- ing from Watkins Point on the eastern shore of the Chesapeake, north- · ward to the fortieth degree of North latitude; and from the ocean to the Potomac west, containing more than eight millions of acres. This grant, Lord Baltimore considered, as including the whole peninsula, between the Delaware and Chesapeake, up to the fortieth degree of lati- tude, which crosses the Delaware, a little above the city of Philadelphia ; embracing thus, all of Delaware and Pennsylvania, up to that point. And this is doubtless a true and fair construction of the boundaries given him.
This territory, the King named Maryland, the land of Maria, that being the name of his Queen, and was given, as "a country hitherto uncultivated, in the parts of America, and partly occupied by savages"- in partibus America hactenus inculta et barbaris. This, however, was not true. The Swedes, as we have seen, had planted a Colony on the western shore of the Delaware, near half a degree, or thirty miles south of the fortieth degree of latitude. But it may be admitted that Lord Baltimore either did not know of this recent settlement, or that his north- ern boundary would include it. But not so of Kent Island That had been settled three years previous, by Church of England Virginians ; and Lord George Calvert, who it is claimed drew up the Charter and was there more than two years before this, knew it. Claiborne says, in his petition to the King, 1638,* that Lord Baltimore took notice of it when there. A pamphlet of 1655 says,t "that Lord Baltimore pretended, though not truly, that the country was unplanted, and that his sugges- tions to the king, that those parts were uncultivated and unplanted unless by a barbarous people, not having the knowledge of God, was a misin- formation." It certainly was not the fact.
Now, bearing in mind, that this Charter was given by a Protestant King, of a thoroughly Protestant Kingdom, to a Romanist nobleman of that kingdom, let us inquire what it says connected with, and bearing upon religious matters.
In the first place, then, it says, Section 2d, of Lord Baltimore, that " being animated with a laudable and pious zeal for extending the Christian religion," &c. It may indeed have been the animating zeal of
* 2 Bozman, 582.
+ Maryland and Virginia, pp. 5, 9, 13.
-
-
12
-
the first Lord Baltimore, to extend the Christian religion as he received it, that is Romanism; but we have very little proof that it was of the second Lord Baltimore to whom the Charter was actually given. Besides, it was a customary fermula in Charters before granted, whether given to Church of England men, puritans, or Romans. Bozman says, * " this cant pervades all the charters of North America, both French and English." And we are not surprisedi that he should call it cant, when he advocatest " a total prohibition, enacted by law, against missionaries being permitted to go among the Indians," and calls "planting Christianity among a [this] people that knew not God, nor had heard of Christ, a false and unfounded sentiment !"
The words, Protestant, or Roman Catholic, or their synonyms, are not found in the Charter. All that is granted in it, therefore, is independent of any such expressed distinction.
In the 4th Section, however, " the patronages and advowsons of all Churches, which, with the increasing worship and religion of Christ, within the said region * aforesaid, hereafter shall happen to be built, together with the license and faculty erecting and founding Church- es, Chapels, and places of worship, in convenient and suitable places within the premises, and of causing the same to be dedicated or conse- erated according to the Ecclesiastical laws of our Kingdom of England," along with other rights and privileges, were granted to Lord Baltimore.
This, it will be perceived, confined the erecting and founding of Churches and Chapels, and all places of worship, to his license and fac- ulty. None consequently could be built but such as he should permit and authorize. It placed thus the erecting of Protestant Churches, and Roman Catholic ones also, at his will and pleasure ; so that if he saw fit he could forbid and prevent any of either name from being built.
Again, it gave him alone, the right and power of presenting such Ministers to the Churches built, as he should choose ; thus keeping it out of the hands of the Bishops. or others, in the Roman Church on the one hand, and of Protestant patrons, or the people on the other. This was not indeed worse in the Charter than in some cases in England. For the right of advowson, or the presenting of Protestant ministers in England, was a privilege enjoyed by some Roman Catholic nobleman there, as late as in the reign of William and Mary. The conferring these powers thus, placed the Church, whether Romanist or Protestant, in his hands ; it could not move a step, in the matters mentioned, only
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.