HISTORY OF MARYLAND.

CHAPTER I.

Cecilius, lord Baltimore, prepares for sending out a colony-The Vir ginians petition against his charter-Their petition ineffectual, and the planters reconciled-Lord Baltimore appoints his brother to conduct the colony-Their arrival in the Chesapeake-They explore the Patowmack-The governour fixes upon St. Mary's for their first settlement-Circumstances favourable to them-Proceedings of the colonists after landing-Great harmony between the natives and colonists-Interrupted by Clayborne and his party-Clayborne resorts to open military force-The lord proprietor's in structions relative to grants of lands-Grants of small lots in the town of St. Mary's-The nature of the first form of government of the colony-An ordinance for that purpose-Proclamation in England against emigration-Traffic with the Indians regulated in the province-The isle of Kent reduced to lord Baltimore's government-The county of St. Mary's organized-An assembly of the province called-The first assembly of the province meet-The assembly take into consideration the laws sent in by the proprie. tor-The laws sent rejected-How far the laws of England were deemed to be in force-The laws sent in by the proprietor again proposed and rejected-Courts of justice meet-Proceedings therein against Clayborne's party-The inhabitants of the isle of Kent refuse to submit-Governour Calvert proceeds with a military force against them-Secretary Lewger authorised to hold the assembly-Act of attainder against William Clayborne-Trial of Thomas Smith, one of Clayborne's men-Inquiry by the assembly into the conduct of captain Cornwallis-Resolution of the assembly relative to servants-The assembly dissolved-The lord proprietor refuses his assent to the laws enacted by the assemblyWilliam Clayborne's petition to the king in council, and order thereupon.

CHAP.

1.

1632.

Cecilius,

pares for

out a co

CECILIUS CALVERT, baron of Balti

more, having, on the twentieth of June, 1632, obtained his charter for the province of Maryland, as lord Balti-before-mentioned, had now to make preparations for more, pre- carrying into effect his father's intended plan of cosending lonisation. The procuring a sufficient number of lony. colonists, and the furnishing them with all conveniences and necessaries essential to a residence in a remote country, which was as yet a wilderness, unavoidably protracted the time of their departure from England to some considerable length.

The Vir

ginians petition

charter.

In the mean-time, however, much discontent was industriously excited among the planters in Virginia, by inducing them to suppose, that the very soil upon which they trod, and which they had earned by their fatigues and dangers, was about to be taken from under their feet, and by this charter 1633. transferred to others. A petition therefore was framed in the name of the planters, and in May, 1633, gainst his presented to his majesty, in which they remonstrate, "That some grants have been lately obtained, of a great proportion of lands and territories within the limits of the colony there, being the places of their traffic, and so near their habitations as will give a general disheartening to the planters, if they be di̟vided into several governments, and a bar to that trade which they have long since exercised towards their supportation and relief, under the confidence of his majesty's royal and gracious intentions towards them." The king referred the consideration of this petition to the consideration of his privy-council,

I.

and agreeably to this reference the council, on the CHAP. fourth of June, in the same year, made an order, in which they appointed the twenty-eighth of that 1633. month, when the business should be heard, and that all parties interested should then attend. This was done accordingly, and their lordships having heard the cause, ordered that the lord Baltimore and the planters of Virginia should meet together* between that time and the third of July, 1633, and endeavour to accommodate their controversy in a friendly manner. Also, that the propositions made by either party should be set down in writing, with their several answers and reasons, to be presented to the board on that day. This was likewise accordingly done, and on the third of July, same year, it was finally ordered, "that the lord Baltimore should be left to his patent, and the other parties to the course of law, according to their desire; but for preventing of farther questions and differences, their lordships did also think fit and order, that things stand as they "do; the planters on either side shall have free traf. fic and commerce each with the other, and that neither part shall receive any fugitive person belonging to the other, nor do any act which may draw a war from the natives upon either of them; and lastly, that they shall sincerely entertain all good correspondence, and assist each other upon all occasions, in such manner as becometh fellow-subjects and members of the same state."+

* This must have meant, that the planters, by their agents or attorneys in England, should meet the lord Baltimore. † See this order in council at large, in note (S) at the end of this volume.

CHAP.

I.

1633.

As we are at liberty at this day to judge of this transaction calmly and dispassionately, it is impossible not to perceive, that the planters in Virginia (by whom it may be supposed to be meant in the above order the actual settlers and colonists resident in Virginia, and not any of the numerous members of the old Virginia Company) were instigated to this opposition to lord Baltimore's charter by a few influential persons among them, (particularly Wikliam Clayborne) who sought to obtain a property in different portions of the territories of Virginia, without putting themselves to the trouble or expense of obtaining a legal conveyance or charter for the same. Unquestionably by the laws of England, under which they professed to live, the right of granting a property in the soil of the country, was originally, after its discovery by Cabot, vested in the king, and subsequently in the treasurer and Company of Virginia, under the second and third charters from the king. But as the right of making grants of the same, heretofore appertaining to the Company, was taken away by the judgment in the court of king's bench, under the quo warranto, which judgment was certainly binding, until legally reversed, such right, by the laws of the kingdom, reverted back again to the king, according to the feudal principles of the monarchy. The planters in Virginia, then, had really no interest in the question. None of their individual rights or particular plantations, on which they lived, were at all invaded. We may, indeed, adopt the observations of a late historian of Virginia upon this subject;-" This grant to lord Baltimore did not interfere with the rights of former set