The history of Maryland : from its first settlement, in 1633, to the restoration, in 1660 ; with a copious introduction, and notes and illustrations, Part 27

Author: Bozman, John Leeds, 1757-1823
Publication date: 1837
Publisher: Baltimore : J. Lucas & E.K. Deaver
Number of Pages: 1062

USA > Maryland > The history of Maryland : from its first settlement, in 1633, to the restoration, in 1660 ; with a copious introduction, and notes and illustrations > Part 27

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 (link on the Part 1 page).

"Mr. Secretary [Calvert]: - Doubted the sub-committee had not heard the other part ;- doubted whether the fishermen were not the hinderers of the plantation. That they burn great store of

* It may be noticed here, that it could not be known in England, at the time of this charter, that the colony of puritans from Leyden, before mentioned, who had left Southampton in England, about two months prior to this, (viz: on the 6th of September, 1620,) would have settled within the limits of this grant, having taken with them authority under the South Virginia company, within whose limits it was intended they should settle.

t See this patent at large in Hazard's Collections, vol. 1, p. 103.

237

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

woods, and choke the havens. He never would strain the SEC. IX. king's prerogative against the good of the commonwealth. It was not fit to make any laws here for those countries, which were not as yet annexed to the crown .*

" Mr. Neale :- Three hundred ships at least gone to New- foundland out of these parts," (meaning, according to Mr. Chal- mers, the west of England.) "That this complained of hereto- fore to the lords of the council. London engrosseth all trades and places. That the patentees for this northern plantation, intended for the public good, intend their private; which hurteth the commonwealth. Second Edward VI. free liberty for all the subjects to go to the Newfoundland for fish:{ Now make men compound for places: Take away their salt. They cannot carry even proportion; but must either leave or lack. That the fishing there little above seven weeks. No leisure to attend an admiral court. Pretence to reform abuses ; but was to set fines. Taxed a hogshead of train-oil on every master of a ship that appeared not at his court .¿ That the lords of the council gave an order against this, which those planters have disobeyed. Enacted great sums, and shot off ordnance against the king's subjects. That London merchants, by restraining trade, undo all trade. That many things may be added to this bill : casting out ballast, &c.

* Mr. Chalmers, in his Annals, (ch. iv. p. 84,) has thus paraphrased this speech of Sir George Calvert .- " That those foreign countries are not yet annex- ed to the crown of England, but are the king's, as gotten by conquest; and, there- fore, in such new plantations the king may govern as his majesty shall think fit; that the fishermen, for whose advantage this bill only provideth, are the true cause of the disorder in those parts, by destroying the woods, and casting ballast into the havens. And he recommended to the consideration of the house, whether we shall here make laws for the government of those parts."

t This alludes to the statute of 2 & 3 Edw. VI. ch. 6, before stated in the In- troduction, p. 39.

¿ This grievance arising from an admiralty-court must have been under a court of that nature erected by the council of Plymouth, under their charter of November 3d, 1620, and held by some judge acting under their appointment and authority in Newfoundland. A clause in that charter " granted power and authority to the council to nominate and constitute all such officers and minis- ters as should be by them thought fit and needful ; and also to make, ordain, and establish all manner of orders, laws, directions, instructions, forms, and ceremo- nies of government and magistracy, fit and necessary for and concerning the government of the said colony and plantation, not only within the precincts of the said colony, but also upon the seas in going and coming to and from the said colony." Under a similar clause in the charter of Maryland a court of admiralty was subsequently erected in that province, as will appear in a subsequent part of this History.

238

INTRODUCTION TO A

SEC. IX. "Mr. Guy :- If this house hath jurisdiction to meddle with this bill, would consent to the proceeding thereof. That there are divers patents. He engaged for the plantation of Newfound- land .* The Londoners in this to be commended, however their greediness in other things justly found fault with. That the king hath already done as much by his great seal as can be done here by this act. That the French planted there about thirty years sithence.t That provision made, the fishermen might have timber there. That the plantation ever furthered our English merchants. Moveth that the pirates may be repulsed, if any come thither ; ¿ and this to be provided for by the bill.

" Mr. Brooke :- That we may make laws here for Virginia ; for, if the king give consent to this bill passed here and by the lords, this will control the patent. The case divers for Gas- coyne, &c., which principality of themselves. To commit it.

" Sir Edwin Sands :- That Virginia holden of the manor of East-Greenwich."§

This debate is not stated here with any thought of its having a forcible bearing on the great subsequent question of dispute between the colonies and Great Britain, but with a view to illus- trate the tenor of Sir George Calvert's political principles, as well as his ideas of colonization ; which principles and ideas we may suppose him to have retained, when he afterwards under-

* This appears to be the same Mr. John Guy, a merchant, and afterwards mayor of Bristol, before mentioned, (see the Introduction, p. 163,) who is said to have revived the spirit of colonization about the year 1610, by several sensible treatises, which he wrote upon that subject. He had the chief agency in pro- curing the patent to Henry Howard, earl of Southampton, and others, including himself, as before mentioned ; and also visited Newfoundland with a view of settling a colony there, but without success.

+ It is said by Oldmixon, (Brit. Emp. in Amer. vol. 1, p. 6,) that the French did not settle themselves in Newfoundland, until the reign of Charles the second. But as the French are said, by Hakluit, (according to Holmes's Annals, anno 1591,) to have sent a fleet of ships from St. Malves, in France, for Canada, in that year, and that they were, at that time, accustomed to fish at the islands about the bay of St. Lawrence for morses or sea-cows, it is possible they might have then commenced some settlements in those islands, to which Mr. Guy may here allude.

# In the year 1611, one Peter Easton, a noted pirate, visited Newfoundland, for planting, as we may suppose, and not for fishing. He prevailed on captain Whitburne to apply for a pardon for him, as he wished to return home to Eng- land; but not succeeding, he entered into the service of the duke of Savoy, since entitled king of Sardinia. Oldmixon's Brit. Emp. in Amer. vol. 1, p. 4. Smith's Virg. vol. 2, p. 281.

§ See this debate stated as above by Chalmers, (in his Annals, ch. iv. note 14,) who cites the journal of the house of commons, of the 25th of April, 1621.

239

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

took the settlements of his colonies of Avalon and Maryland. SEC. IX. Although the writer, from whom this debate is taken, seems to have considered Sir George, on this occasion, as a strenuous advocate for "the royal prerogative;" yet, if we give credit to Sir George's own assertion, "he was not for straining that pre- rogative, against the good of the commonwealth." He seemed also to deny the right of parliament to legislate for the colonies ; but for a reason, it is true, very different from those, on which the colonies afterwards went, in our day, in resistance to that power. It is certain, that king James had taken up an idea, that all colonies, planted by him in America, were under his own special superintendence. Like Gascony formerly, and other countries gained by conquest, they were not to be considered as a part of the realm of England, and therefore not subject to the legislation of an English parliament, any more than Scotland or Ireland. It is easy, however, to see the mischief of this prin- ciple; for, if the colonies were not under the protecting hand of parliament, they were left to the lawless mercy of such a prero- gative as king James pleased ; which had become, as Sir Ed- ward Coke then termed it,-" an . overgrown monster."* But Sir George Calvert, as might be expected, fell into the king's views of this subject; and the reader will perceive, when he comes to peruse the charter of Maryland, which is supposed to have been the production of Sir George's own pen, a mixture therein of the people's right to legislate for themselves, with a reservation of the proprietary or royal prerogative, of governing solely by his own ordinances. Although the bill to remedy the grievances here complained of, relative to the right of fishery, regularly passed the house of commons, yet, as the learned annalist, from whom we have taken the preceding extract,f states,-"owing to the reasons suggested by the secretary of state, (Calvert) it did not become the law of the realm ;" either not being passed by the house of lords or rejected by the king. As this right to a free fishery in America, through the influence of this debate, and a subsequent one on the same subject, here- after to be noticed, occasioned a clause of reservation of the right to the subjects of England and Ireland to be inserted in

* Sir Edward got himself imprisoned by this very expression. His papers were seized, and the door of his chambers in the temple sealed up, in a few days after the dissolution of this parliament, in January, 1621, O. S.

. . t Chalmers's Annals, ch. iv. p. 84.

240

INTRODUCTION TO Á

SEC. IX. the charter of Maryland, in 1632, as well as in some other char- ters, further remarks on it will be postponed to a future occasion.

As most of the historians relative to America, who have men- tioned Sir George Calvert's province of Avalon in Newfound- land, vary in the date which they affix to his patent or grant thereof, and consequently in the time or year of his settling a colony therein, we are at liberty to select that which seems to have the surest foundation. Some have set down the date of his grant to have been in the year 1620, and the settlement in 1621. Others expressly state the settlement to have been in 1622, leaving an inference, that the grant was in the preceding year. But, as the original charter or grant, or an authentic copy there- of, is still extant in the British Museum, and, as stated in a pub- lication of apparent authenticity, bears date the-"21 A. R."- meaning, without doubt,-"the twenty-first year of the king,"- its date must be referred to the year of our Lord 1623 .* This

* Oldmixon, in his Brit. Emp. in Amer. vol. 1, pp. 4, 5, thus speaks of this grant,-" This gentleman," (Sir George Calvert,) " being of the Romish reli- gion, was uneasy at home, and had the same reason to leave the kingdom, as those gentlemen had, who went to New England, to enjoy the liberty of his con- science. He therefore resolved to retire to America, and finding the Newfound- land company made no use of their grant, he thought of this place for his retreat; to which end he procured a patent for that part of the island, that lies between the bay of Bulls in the east, and cape St. Mary's in the south, which was erect- ed into a province, and called Avalon. Sir George sent over persons to plant and prepare things for his reception ; and in 1621, capt. Edward Wynn went thither with a small colony at Sir George's charge, who seated himself at Ferryland." --- With this historian, the authors of the Mod. Univ. Hist. (vol. 39, p. 249,) seem to agree, as they generally do on other occasions, as far as his account of the co- lonies extends. Chalmers, (in his Annals, ch. ix.) states, that " in the year 1622, Sir George Calvert established a small but flourishing settlement at Ferry- land, (in Newfoundland,) which he governed by his deputy, and which he vi- sited in person in the beginning of the reign of Charles I .; " for which he cites Purchas's Pilgrims, 42, and the letters 'of Sir George Calvert in the Strafford papers. This seems in some measure to coincide with the preceding account by Oldmixon ; and it is further stated in the Mod. Univ. Hist. ibid, that " in 1622, capt. Wynn was reinforced with an additional number of colonists ;" when the settlement might be considered as "established," as Chalmers states .- Notwith- standing these authorities, however, in an " Extract from the catalogue of MSS, relative to America, preserved in the British Museum," which extract is insert- ed in the Bibliotheca Americana, (a work published in London, in the year 1789, ) one of these MSS, is stated as follows :- " Charta Avalonia, or Charter of Ava- lon, granted by king James, 21 A. R."-Whether this be the original charter, or a manuscript copy of it, is not stated in the catalogue. But, if the figures and letters,-" 21 A. R."-are accurately printed, they must mean, the twenty-first year of the king : which would make the date of the charter to have been in the year of our Lord 1623. In corroboration of this state of the Charter of Avalon, may be cited the Geographical Grammar of Patrick Gordon, published in 1719, a

241

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

grant was, apparently, in direct repugnance not only to that pre- SEC. IX. viously made by the king in 1610, to the earl of Northampton and others, as before mentioned,* but also to the grant then re- cently made to the duke of Lenox and others, in 1620, under the denomination of New England; which latter grant extend- ing as high up as the forty-eighth degree of north latitude, must have comprehended the whole of Sir George Calvert's Province of Avalon. As the settlement attempted by Mr. Guy, under the first mentioned patent of 1610, totally failed, and the paten- tees had to all appearance entirely relinquished their intention of making any further use of their patent, Sir George might, perhaps, see no impropriety in accepting a re-grant of the same territory. Whether the collision between his grant and that of New Eng- land in 1620, produced any dispute, we are not informed. The surrender of the New England patent, in the year 1635, must have relieved him from such interference. Notwithstanding these prior grants, Sir George prepared to execute the purposes and intention of his patent. Previous, however, to his own embark- ation for the country granted to him, he thought it most proper for him to send a small colony thither, under the command of a captain Edward Wynne, as governor, who seated himself and colonists at a place called Ferryland, a harbour on the east coast of Newfoundland, between Cape Race and the Bay of Bulls. Here he commenced a settlement, erected granaries and store- houses, and built the largest dwelling house that had ever been seen on the island. In the following year, (which, supposing the date of the patent to have been in 1623, must have been in 1624,) Governor Wynne had the encouragement, through the interest and means of the proprietor, of receiving a reinforce- ment to his colony, by the arrival of an additional number of colo- nists and fresh supplies of stores and provisions. Exaggerated ac-

work which has been always deservedly held in high estimation by literary men. He therein, under the head of Newfoundland, thus speaks of its government .- " In the year 1623, Sir George Calvert, principal secretary of state, having ob- tained a patent for a part of Newfoundland, erected the same into a province, (called Avalon,) and therein settled a plantation ; which after him was enjoyed by his son Cecilius Lord Baltimore."-It ought not, perhaps, to be omitted, that immediately preceding the foregoing statement of the charter of Avalon, in the Bibliotheca Americana, mention is also made of another MS. therein, entitled,- " Account of the Settlement of Newfoundland, by Sir George Calvert ;"-but the catalogue does not state any date, either of the time when that " Account" was written, or when the settlement, of which it treats, took place.

* See the Introduction, p. 189.

VOL. I .- 31

242

INTRODUCTION TO A

SEC. IX. counts of the fertility of soil and pleasantness of the country having been transmitted to Sir George, he was induced soon after to visit his colony in person .*

It cannot with evident certainty be stated, that Sir George Calvert, in the settlement of either of his provinces, Avalon or Maryland, had in view the formation of an asylum for English Catholics ; although it is so stated by several historians, as be- fore mentioned ; such intention of his being no where clearly expressed by himself, unless it be in the before mentioned MS. account of Avalon, by Sir George himself, still remaining in the British Museum; of the contents of which, we have no op- portunity of examining. With regard to Maryland, the fact, ascertained in history, as well as in the records of the province, that most of the first colonists of that province were Roman Ca- tholics, leaves a strong inference, that it was the original con- templation of Sir George thereby to erect for such Catholics a place of refuge. In respect to Avalon, however, we have not this fact, as a ground for such inference. But, as one of the earliest historians of Newfoundland attributes Sir George Cal- vert's design, in planting his colony of Avalon, to the desire of making "a place of retreat" for English Catholics, in which he is followed by other subsequent historians, t such motive being founded on strong probability, may be safely admitted. Other causes of influence on the conduct of Sir George on this occasion, might also have had some operation. Colonization, in the reign of king James, might be called the fashion of the day. It took its style and shape from the monarch himself. He had high ideas of his talents for legislation and government, and appeared to amuse himself in the gratification of this passion, by plant- ing colonies in the thinly populated parts both of Scotland and Ireland. It was natural, therefore, for Sir George Calvert, as well as most others of the great men of the kingdom, as they actual- ly did, engage with zeal in these speculative schemes : although, as we are told, speculative reasoners, even during that age, foretold, that they were then laying the foundation of an independent

* See Oldmixon and the Mod. Univ. Hist. as before cited. The dates above mentioned correspond also with what is stated by Chalmers, as before cited,- that Sir George visited his colony in person, in the beginning of the reign of Charles the first, which commenced in 1625.

t See Oldmixon's Brit. Emp. in Amer. vol. 1, p. 5, and the Mod. Univ. Hist. vol. 39, p. 249.

243

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

government in America .* Sir George Calvert, however, had SEC. IX. certainly no such design in view.

For further illustration of Sir George's political principles and character, as well as his ideas of colonization, but more particu- larly because the right of free fishery became a question of im- portance in the civil policy of Maryland, as before suggested, it will be proper to renew our attention to the debate on that sub- ject, which took place at the next session of parliament, of which Sir George still continued a member.t -- On the total disruption of the proceedings of the Spanish match, and the return of Prince Charles and Buckingham from Madrid, that minister, with the aid of the prince prevailed on the king to call a parlia- ment, which assembled on the 19th of February, 1623-4, old style. The patent before mentioned, granted to the duke of Lenox and others, having been referred to the committee of grievances,¿ Sir Edward Coke, from that committee, made a re- port theron to the house, which brought on the following debate:

"17th March, 1623-4 .- Sir Edward Coke reporteth from the committee of grievances. Have condemned one, viz. Sir Fer- dinand Gorges his patent for a plantation in New England. Their counsel heard; the exceptions being first delivered them .. Resolved by consent ; that, notwithstanding the clause in the patent, dated 3d Nov. 18th Jac. that no subject of England shall visit the coast, upon pain of forfeiture of ship and goods, the patentees have yielded, that the English fishermen shall visit, and that they will not interrupt any fishermen to fish there : For, he no new discoverer; fishermen of this and other nations having fished there before his patent. Drying of nets, salting their fish, &c. incident to their fishing: Whereunto he also agreed. After he was gone after the debate, overruled the fish- ermen might take timber for repair of their ships: 1st, Quia in- cident ; 2d, taken so before his patent; 3d, fishermen never take

* See Hume's Hist. of Eng. Appendix to the reign of James the first.

t It would seem, that at this session of parliament, he represented the Univer- sity of Oxford, his Alma Matar .- Allen's Amer. Biog. Dict. art. Calvert.

# A proclamation, that had been issued by the king, November 6th, 1622, ap- parently to protect the above mentioned grant to the duke of Lenox and others, prohibiting sundry abuses therein mentioned, to wit, taking the timber of the planters, barking trees, and ruining harbours by casting out ballast, must have been also taken into consideration by the committee, with the above mentioned patent .- See the proclamation in Hazard's Collections, vol. 1, p. 151 ; and re .. marks thereon by Chalmers, in his Annals, ch. iv.

244

INTRODUCTION TO A

SEC. IX. any timber with them; 4th, bring in great store of money for fish.

"Resolved :- English fishermen shall have fishing with all incidents of drying fish, nets, timber, &c. 2dly, That the clause of forfeiture, being only by patent, and not by act of parliament, void.

" Resolved upon question :- That the house thinketh fit, the fishermen of England shall have fishing there, with all the inci- dents necessary, of drying nets, and salting, and packing.

" Upon the second question ; in the opinion of this house, una voce, the clause of confiscation void and against law.

"Upon the third question ;- in the opinion of this house, the fishermen of England may take necessary wood and timber for their ships and boats use in fishing there."

" 3d May, 1624 .- The debate concerning the fishing in New England renewed.

" Sir Wm. Earle :- For the planters; who more beneficial to the commonwealth than the fishers .*

" A proviso, in parliament, tendered to this bill, which read.

" A second proviso tendered by Mr. Guy, which read.

" Sir Ed. Cooke :- Sir F. Gorges's his patent condemned for the clause that none shall visit with fishing upon the sea-coast. This to make a monopoly upon the sea, which wont to be free. A monopoly attempted of the wind and the sun, by the sole packing and drying of fish.t

"Mr. Secretary :- That free fishery, prayed by this bill over- throweth all plantations in those countries. That liberty by this

* Sir William Earle certainly differed in opinion here very widely from that great political economist, Sir Josiah Child; who strenuously maintained, (as be- fore suggested, ) that it was better for Great Britain, that Newfoundland should not be planted with any colonies, as they would be prejudicial to the fishery. Events seem every day developing themselves to demonstrate the truth of another position of Sir Josiah Child; to wit, that New England itself, as a colony, was, even in the year 1689, when he wrote, of greater injury than benefit to the mother country.

t Sir Edward Coke's animosity to monopolies, (though very proper, ) was, with . out doubt, whetted by his late imprisonment immediately after the last session, as well as by his previous removal from his chief justiceship in 1616. He had not always been of the same opinion on this subject, as appears from his argu- ment in the remarkable case of monopolies in 44 Eliz. when he was attorney ge- neral, reported by himself in 11 Co. 84, b. The true ground of controversy on the present occasion was,-whether the right to the soil and freehold by grant was to controul and take place of, the previous right to a free fishery establish- ed by long usage prior to such grant. The national interest, so dependant on the right of fishery, finally prevailed.

245

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

bill to cut down wood, within one quarter of a mile of a dwelling SEC. IX. house; which exceeding prejudicial to the planters. So for Newfoundland.

[Mr. Chalmers, from whose annals this debate is taken, here inserts the following "remark .- Sir George Calvert then pos- sessed the territory of Avalon in that island, where he had planted a colony."]

" Mr. Glanvyle :- The first stage worth ten of the rest. The provision for timber in Newfoundland omitted; because, that an island having no rivers : But New England hath divers into it.

"Both the provisos upon question rejected. The bill upon question passed."

Although this bill passed the house of commons, as the for- mer, at the last session, had done, yet, (as the annalist from whom the extract is made,* observes,) "the influence of prerogative still existing, it met with its former fate, and became not a law."

The parliament were also much engaged, during this session, in other business, still less agreeable to Sir George, and in which, probably, he took no part. Both houses of parliament still la- bouring under uneasiness and jealousies relative to the Spanish match, and the great encouragement of papists at court, pre- sented a petition to the king, in which, among other things rela- tive to popery, they requested,-"that all papists should be re- moved from London and the court." As this would necessarily imply also a removal of all papists from offices and places of trust, in and about the king and court, the remark of Rapin on this petition may be here quoted .- "Had the king consented to this request, the face of the court would have been entirely changed. The duke of Buckingham's mother, who, by her son's means, disposed of all offices, must have been removed. His dutchess would also have been of the number; as well as one of the secretaries of state."t "Soon after the petition the parliament caused also a list of fifty-seven popish lords and knights, who were in public offices, to be presented to the king. The only two principal secretaries of state, at this time, were Sir George Calvert and Sir Edward Conway.# The latter is expressly stat-

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.

The history of Maryland : from its first settlement, in 1633, to the restoration, in 1660 ; with a copious introduction, and notes and illustrations, Part 27

Author: Bozman, John Leeds, 1757-1823 Publication date: 1837 Publisher: Baltimore : J. Lucas & E.K. Deaver Number of Pages: 1062

Author: Bozman, John Leeds, 1757-1823
Publication date: 1837
Publisher: Baltimore : J. Lucas & E.K. Deaver
Number of Pages: 1062