The history of Maryland : from its first settlement, in 1633, to the restoration, in 1660 ; with a copious introduction, and notes and illustrations, Part 90

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 90

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).

503

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

"and dissolution of that parliament, the sayd Mr. Bennett and CHAPT. captain Clayborne did again, in July, 1654, come into Maryland, VI. and with the assistance of some of the people above mentioned," 1654. (the Puritans of Providence,) "by force of arms turned out cap- tain Stone and the lord Baltimore's other officers, and put others in their roomes; by what authority no man knows; for, although they had had, as they pretended, an authority, (which in truth they had not,) from the parliament which was dissolved in April 1653, to do what they did in Maryland in 1652, accord- ing to Mr. Strong's relation, yet, after the dissolution of that par- liament, the authority from it ceased, so as all proceedings in prosecution thereof afterwards was unwarrantable, unless that authority, which they pretended, had been given them by an act or ordinance of parliament for a certain time not expired, or con- firmed by the succeeding supream authority heer," (in England,) "which it was not."

The commissioners having now come up from Virginia to Maryland, whether lawfully authorised or not by the present go- vernment of England, proceeded in their holy work of rooting out the "Popish councillors" of Maryland. It may be best here to follow their own statement of their proceedings on this occa- sion .* About the fifteenth of July, "they applied themselves to captain William Stone the governor, and council of Maryland;" (for what purpose they do not expressly state, but it is to be in- ferred, for the purpose of inducing the governor and council to submit to their directions ;}) "who, returning only opprobrious and uncivil language, presently mustered his whole power of men and soldiers in arms, intending to surprise the said commission- ers, and (as could be imagined) to destroy all those that had refused the said unlawful oath, and only kept themselves in their due obedience to the commonwealth of England, under which they were reduced and settled by the parliament's authority and commission. Then the said commissioners, in quiet and peaceable manner, with some of the people of Patuxent and Severn, went over the river of Patuxent,; and there at length

* This statement appears by way of preamble to their order, declaration, or "commission for the administration of justice," &c., dated July 22d, and enroll- ed August 8th, 1654 ; which the reader will find at large, as hereafter more par- ticularly referred to in note (LXXXIV.) at the end of this volume.

t Mr. Strong says, they "applied themselves in a peaceable and loving way to persuade them into their due and promised obedience to the commonwealth of England."

# From this it would appear, that the scene of these first negotiations was on the Calvert side of the Patuxent ; from whence the commissioners supported by

504

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

CHAPT. received a message from the said captain Stone, that the next VI. day he would meet and treat in the woods; and thereupon be- 1654. ing in some fear of a party to come from Virginia he condescend- ed to lay down his power lately assumed from the lord Balti- more, and to submit (as he had once before done) to such go- vernment as the commissioners should appoint under his high- ness the lord protector."

It will be recollected, that Mr. Bennett, one of these commis- sioners, now regulating the affairs of Maryland, and now advan- cing in hostile array against the legitimate governor thereof, was, at this very time also, governor of Virginia .* It is to be pre- sumed, therefore, that this "party to come from Virginia" had been preconcerted and directed by governor Bennett's orders, so as to afford timely support and aid to the Puritans from the Sev- ern and the Patuxent, then under his own special command, for the more certain and effectual reducement of the colonists of St. Mary's.t With the Puritans from the Severn in his front

the Puritans from the Severn and such of their partizans on the Patuxent, as de- clared for them, advanced across that river into St. Mary's, as a body of armed militia would, "in a quiet and peaceable manner," where they met with no op- position.

* This is confirmed by an extract from the records of Virginia, inserted by Burk, in his Hist. of Virg. vol. ii. p. 100, note ; wherein the appointmentof Mr. Digges, as one of the council of Virginia, by Richard Bennett, governor, is stated, as of the 22d of November, 1654.

+ It is not improbable, that this expected "party from Virginia" was to have been composed of a levy of men from the counties of Northumberland and West. moreland, situated just across the Patowmack, nearly opposite to St. Mary's county ; which party would have then taken the inhabitants of St. Mary's in the rear, when they were marching to oppose the Puritans of Severu on the Patux- ent. It is worthy of remark, that these counties of Virginia, opposite to the then settled parts of Maryland, appear to have made greater and earlier progress in population than any of the other counties of Virginia, except those situated on the James river. From an extract from the records of Virginia, (stated by Burk, in his Hist. of Virg. vol. ii. p. 101,) bearing date November 20, 1654, wherein the number of burgesses for each respective county, (in Virginia,) is re- gulated, it appears, that there was not at that time a single county in all that in- termediate space of country between the York and Rappahanock rivers, except Gloucester county ; which was to send two burgesses to the assembly ; while, in the northern neck, as it is called, there were the counties of Northumberland, Westmoreland, and Lancaster, of which the two last mentioned were to send two burgesses each, and the first one only. The population of Westmoreland, at this time, is to be more particularly ascertained by a statement in the same ex- tract, that Westmoreland then contained " 170 tithables." According to Beverly, (Hist. of Virg. p. 218,) who wrote in the beginning of the eighteenth century, "all white men, above the age of sixteen years, were called tithable." Negroes also were counted as tithable persons; but of them, we may suppose, that in 1654 there were very few in these northern counties. This would give to those

505

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

and the Virginians from the northern neck in his rear, governor CHAPT. Stone could with prudence do nothing else than submit, as just VI.

stated, and thereupon the commissioners issued their order or

1654.

declaration, bearing date, "at Patuxent river in the province of vernment The go- Maryland, the 22d day of July, 1654," comprising therein a vested in captain commission "for the conservation of the peace and public admi- Fuller and nistration of justice within the province of Maryland to captain a council. William Fuller, Mr. Richard Preston, Mr. William Durand, Mr. Edward Lloyd, captain John Smith, Mr. Leonard Strong, Mr. John Lawson, Mr. John Hatch, Mr. Richard Wells, and Mr. Richard Ewen,* or any four of them, whereof captain William Fuller, Mr. Richard Preston, or Mr. William Durand to be al- ways one, to be commissioners for the well ordering, directing, and governing the affairs of Maryland under his highness the lord protector of England, Scotland, Ireland, and the dominions thereof, and in his name only and no other." The commission further authorised them to appoint and hold courts of justice, and to proceed therein as near as might be to the laws of 'Eng- land, and "also that they summon an assembly, to begin on the 20th day of October, (then) next, for which assembly all such should be disabled to give any vote, or to be elected members thereof, as have borne arms in war against the parliament, or do profess the Roman Catholic religion." By the same commission Mr. William Durand was appointed secretary of the province, and captain John Smith, sheriff, of St. Mary's county ; as we may suppose, though not so expressed. Annexed to the fore-

three counties, in the ratio of their burgesses, an effective militia of white men, above sixteen years of age, to the number of four hundred and twenty-five. If governor Stone, therefore, was under " fear of a party to come from Virginia," amounting to even three hundred militia, which was considerably more than all his own little army could have amounted to, it certainly was most prudent in him " to submit as he had once before done."

* It is probable, that all these gentlemen were Puritans, and most of them leading men of that party of them, who had settled at Ann Arundel. Captain Fuller was probably a military man, and might have been in the service of the Puritan army in England. We have seen him before, (p. 458,) appointed as the commander of some militia, who had been ordered to march against the Indians of the eastern shore, and we shall soon see him again as commander in chief of the Puritans in the decisive battle on the Severn between our contending provin- cial parties. Mr. Durand was the first elder elected by the Puritans on the Sev- ern, when they first settled at Ann Arundel; and Mr. Edward Lloyd had been the first commander of Ann Arundel county, appointed by governor Stone after the organization of the county. Mr. Leonard Strong was subsequently the agent of the Maryland Puritans in England, were he wrote his before mentioned pam- phlet, entitled, " Babylon's Fall in Maryland," &c.

VOL. II .- 64

506

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

CHAPT. VI. going commission, there appears on the present records a written order, signed by Bennett and Clayborne, and addressed to Mr. 1654. Thomas Hatton, the secretary of the province, appointed by lord Baltimore, as before stated, requiring him to deliver the records of the province and all the papers concerning the same unto Mr. William Durand .*

Thus we see, as is usual on all such revolutions, the victorious party carefully appropriating to themselves all the offices and emoluments, of which their opponents were possessed. This, from its general usage, might have been expected. But the il- liberality, and indeed ingratitude, of these Puritans, on the pre- sent occasion, in respect to the disfranchisement of the Roman Catholics, as above stated, deserves the severest reprehension, and can admit of no palliation. When, through the imprudent liberality of lord Baltimore, in originally granting indulgence to every sect to settle within his province, and afterwards more particularly, through the special permission of his government at St. Mary's, in allowing these Puritans to form their settlements on the Severn in Maryland, after they had been driven out of Virginia, an asylum had been thus generously granted to them ; that they should rise up against their benefactors, seize the reins of the government into their own hands, and then proscribe and interdict these very benefactors from all their political rights, and, as subsequently appears, cruelly sequester their property from them as delinquents, was such a shameful sacrifice of all moral feelings at the shrine of religious zeal, as cannot but cover their descend- ants in the province at this day with confusion and regret. Some apology, perhaps, may be made for them, by observing, that the instrument of government, by which Cromwell had been then lately installed "lord protector of England," &c., (on the 16th of December, 1653, as before stated,) contained (in the 14th, 15th, and 16th sections thereof,) similar disabilities imposed upon all those, "who had aided, advised, assisted, or abetted in any war against the parliament, since the first day of Janua- ry, 1641; or who had advised, assisted, or abetted the rebel- lion of Ireland, as also on all such who do or shall profess the Roman Catholic religion." All such persons were thereby declared to be "disabled and uncapable for ever to be elected, or give any vote in the election of any member to serve in parlia- ment." It was therein further declared,-"that all votes and

* See note (LXXXIV.) at the end of this volume.

507

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

elections given or made contrary, or not according, to these quali- CHAPT. fications, shall be null and void : and if any person, who is here- VI. by made uncapable, shall give his vote for election of members 1654. to serve in parliament, such person shall lose and forfeit one full year's value of his real estate and one full third part of his personal estate ; one moiety thereof to the lord protector, and the other moiety to him or them who shall sue for the same."* Agreeably to this important clause of the constitution an order was given, at the time of issuing the writs of election,-"That no person, who had ever been against the parliament during the time of the civil war, or the sons of any such persons, should be capable of be- ing chosen to sit in that parliament ;"-nor were any such persons made choice of .; This severe proscription or disfranchisement of a very large portion of the people of Great Britain, and much more so of Ireland, seemed at this day to have been naturally congenial with the acknowledged arbitrary government of Crom- well. But, why should the petty Puritans of Maryland have followed the example? Gratitude ought to have whispered to them, that the readers of their history two hundred years after- wards would frown with indignation upon their conduct.

Captain Fuller and his fellow commissioners, it seems, faith- An assem- fully complied with their orders in summoning an assembly to which meet on the 20th of October, as directed. On the meeting of meet. the assembly on that day, at Patuxent, where it was held,¿ they appear to have sat together as forming only one house, and not as before, divided into two houses-upper and lower. Captain Fuller is enumerated, on the record of the "assembly proceed- ings," at the head of a list of the members then "present." Mr. Richard Preston, (who was next to captain Fuller in the preceding commission for the government,) is designated on the list as speaker of the assembly. The names of all the other com- missioners for the government, appointed with captain Fuller, in the preceding commission, appear also in the list of members

bly called,

* Copies of this important political instrument or form of government seem to be scarce. It is inserted in none of the Histories of England, in use at the present day, except by Tindal, in his Appendix to Rapin's Hist. of England.

+ Clarendon's Hist. (folio edit. ) p. 647 .- Rapin's Hist. (Tindal's edit.) vol. 11, p. 84.

# As it appears from subsequent documents, that the records of the province, delivered up by Mr. Hatton to Mr. Durand, were by the latter deposited and kept at the house of Mr. Preston "at Patuxent," we may infer, that the Puritans had now fixed upon that place as the seat of government, and that this assembly was held at the house of Mr. Preston. But, where Mr. Preston's house was si- tuated, or on which side of the Patuxent it was, we are not enabled to determine,

508

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

CHAPT. "present;"' together with the names of seven others not in the VI. preceding commission ; making in all sixteen members, inclu- 1654. ding captain Fuller and Mr. Preston the speaker. It appears from one of the acts of this session, that Mr. Thomas Hatton, the former secretary, and Mr. Job Chandler a former councillor, had been chosen burgesses to this assembly "for the county of St. Mary's and Patowmack river," and had been so returned by the sheriff. They appeared in the house accordingly, but "de- clared before the assembly, that they refused to sit and act as burgesses, in respect that they, the said Thomas Hatton and Job Chandler, had taken an oath to the lord Baltimore, and for other reasons expressed in a writing by them subscribed and left with the secretary." The assembly, on this declaration, made an or- der, "that a new writ for a second choice of burgesses for the limit aforesaid should be issued to give power to the sheriff for a new election of burgesses to supply the default and delinquency of the said Thomas Hatton and Job Chandler ; and accordingly the sheriff returned Mr. Arthur Turner and Mr. John Wade chosen burgesses by the unanimous consent of the freemen inha- biting the said county of Saint Mary's and Patowmack ; and the said Mr. Arthur Turner and Mr. John Wade appeared and freely offered themselves to the service of the commonwealth in this province, and were approved members qualified for that end.

It will be recollected, that the commission to captain Fuller and others, for the government of the province, just stated, di- rected, that "all such should be disabled to give any vote or to be elected members thereof," that is, of the assembly to be held on the 20th of October, "as had borne arms in war against the parliament, or professed the "Roman Catholic religion." As the majority of the inhabitants of St. Mary's county were at this time undoubtedly of the Roman Catholic religion, they were by this clause disfranchised of their political rights, either of voting or being voted for. We have before stated our supposition, that the Protestants, to whom lord Baltimore had entrusted the ad- ministration of his government of the province, to wit, governor Stone, Mr. Secretary Hatton, and the several councillors, whom he had appointed, were not Puritans, but most probably, (as may indeed be strongly inferred from this violent opposition of the Puritans on the Severn against their administration, ) Protestants of the old church of England. It is probable also, that the few Protestants of St. Mary's, besides those to whom the govern-

509

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

ment had been thus entrusted, were, for the most part, of the CHAPT. same old church also. It would then have been natural, that such VI. men as Mr. Hatton and Mr. Chandler, formerly the principal of- 1654. ficers of the proprietary government, should have been the ob- jects of their choice. Under all these circumstances it becomes difficult to reconcile with the truth of facts the foregoing expres- sion in the record just quoted ; to wit, that "Mr. Arthur Turner and Mr. John Wade were chosen burgesses by the unanimous consent of the freemen inhabiting the said county."* We fear, that such a choice of burgesses savoured too strongly of our elections in modern times ; in which the choice being made and dictated by a few leaders in caucus assembled, the many, who were entitled to vote, had really and truly nothing to say upon the subject, except to do as they were bid.

Mr. Hatton and Mr. Chandler, however, were not to be let off on this occasion by the assembly so lightly as they might have expected. A new election had been attended with some expense chargeable to the county. If these two gentlemen had informed their electors, previous to their election, that they could not serve in the assembly, if elected, such expense would then have become justly chargeable on the county ; but, if they had neglected so to do, it was considered as their default, and, in the opinion of the assembly, they were liable to the charges and expenses of such new election. This is to be inferred from the following order of the assembly passed towards the latter end of the ses- sion :-

"It is ordered by the assembly, that, whereas some charge hath been brought to this house by the sheriff, occasioned by the default of the burgesses of the county of St. Mary's and Patow- mack, viz. Mr. Thomas Hatton and Mr. Job Chandler, so that there was a necessity of proceeding to a new election, that this charge cannot be levied on the whole,} but there where the de- fault was made, that is, on the county of St. Mary's and Patow- mack, and if the fault appears not to be in the electors, but in the said Hatton and Chandler, then the said county hath liberty granted to recover the charge on the delinquents."

The first proceeding of this assembly, after being thus organ- ized, was, as generally occurs on all revolutions, the ratification ceedings.

* Upon the same grounds we may ascertain, how much credit is due to Mr. Strong's assertion, before quoted, from his pamphlet entitled " Babylon's Fall," &c .- wherein he says, that "at this assembly there was a full and lawful repre- sentative of the whole province."

; That is, "on the whole" province.

Their pro-

510

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

CHAPT. of their own assumed powers. For this purpose they passed VI. and enacted, what was entitled "the act of recognition." For 1654. the title of this act, that of the assembly of 1650, for the "re- cognition" of lord Baltimore's authority within the province, herein before stated, seems to have afforded a precedent; but, these acts do not appear to have been founded upon analogous causes, inasmuch as lord Baltimore's authority over the province does not appear to have been ever superceded by any other os- tensible government, although a rebellion against his government had certainly existed. This present "act of recognition" seems to have been founded merely on revolutionary principles.

"It is enacted and declared in the name of his highness the lord protector of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the do- minions thereunto belonging, and by the authority of this present general assembly, that the reducing of this province of Mary- land by power of the supream authority of the commonwealth of England, committed to Richard Bennett, esq., and colonel William Clayborne, and the government as it is now settled by commission granted to captain William Fuller, Mr. Richard Preston, Mr. Wm. Durand, Mr. Edward Lloyd, Mr. Leonard Stronge, Mr. John Hatch, Mr. John Lawson, Mr. Richard Wells, Mr. William Parker, Mr. Richard Ewen, is acknowledg- ed by this assembly, and freely and fully submitted unto, and that no power, either from the lord Baltimore or any other, ought or shall make any alteration in the government aforesaid as it is now settled, unless it be from the supream authority of the com- monwealth of England exercised by his highness the lord pro- tector immediately and directly granted for that purpose; that, after publication of this act, all the inhabitants of this province are required to declare in particular and express terms, under their hands, their owning and accepting of the present govern- ment and subjection thereunto ; that all such person or persons as deny the present government, or do, either in word or deed, vilify or scandalise the same, or, by actions secret or open, dis- quiet, oppose, [or] disturb the same government, shall be ac- counted offenders against the lord protector of the common- wealth of England, the peace and welfare of this province, and dealt with according to their offence.

" That no commission or power shall be owned or received in this province other than that which is already settled therein, but that which is the supream authority of the commonwealth of

de au de d

C S f

từ

e fo

511

HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

England shall immediately and directly grant and confirm; and CHAPT. whosoever shall publish any commission, proclamation, order or VI. declaration, writ or summons, which is not from the supream 1654. authority, so granted as aforesaid, shall be accounted an offen- der against the public peace and welfare of this province, and dealt with accordingly."* 1

Having thus provided for the security of the government, as established by them, they then proceed to a declaration (in the form of another act,) of some of the rights of their subjects, the inhabitants of the province; shortly expressing themselves thus :

"It is the mind of this assembly, that any free subject of the commonwealth shall have free liberty, not only by petition to seek redress of grievances, but also to propound things necessary for the public good, provided that it be orderly done."

The latter part of this declaration most probably had a refer- ence to the old former disputes, which had taken place between the lord proprietary and the provincial assemblies, in respect to the right, claimed by him, of initiating or propounding laws to be enacted by those assemblies. This right seems, however, to have been here strangely reversed. Of the right of the lord proprietary to propound laws to the assembly, he being a branch or constituent part of the government, some question might arise; but, that every subject or inhabitant of the province should have this right, could be reconciled only by the paucity of those inhabitants. The policy of the measure might be tested by suggesting the adoption of it by congress or any of the state le- gislatures. What an inundation of business they would soon have on their hands!

Next to their civil and political rights, those of religion seem to have attracted the attention of this assembly. The follow-

* Chalmers, (in his Annals, p. 223,) has stated, in reference to this act, that "the assembly naturally passed, in the first place, an act of recognition of Crom- well's just title and authority ; because from him it had devised its present power." But, it is evident, from a perusal of the foregoing act, that it was not intended merely as a recognition of Cromwell's title or authority, but principally of their own. Neither does it appear from this act, that the commissioners-Bennett and Clayborne had their "present power" from Cromwell for their proceedings in this their second "reducement" of Maryland, but acted only under their for- mer commission of 1651, in which Curtis was included. Mr. Chalmers was most probably misled by inspecting only the title of the act, as it is in Bacon's Collection of the Laws of Maryland. Not having the whole of the act before him, he supposed, from the title, that it was a "recognition" of Cromwell's au- thority ; which, indeed, stood in no need of any colonial bolstering.

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 90

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