IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) 1.0 I.I 1.25 2.5 1.4 ||||22 IIM 1= 1.6 V] <^ /a o e-l /a % > V M CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reprcduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methods normale de filmage sont indiquds ci-dessous. D D D D D D n y D D D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int6rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ 11 se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires; □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur D D D D D Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcoior^es, tachet^es ou piqu^es Pages detached/ Pages ddtach^es Showthrough/ Transparence I I Quality of print varies/ Quality in6gale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmdes d nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. □ This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X / 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X ■lils du difier jne lage The copy filmed here has been reproduced tlianks to the generosity of: Douglas Library Queen's University The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — »> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'examplaire filmd fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de: Douglas Library Queen's University Les images suivantes ort dt6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de I'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commenqant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole ~-^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de rdduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. rata »elure, 3 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 c c 11 s I c c r o ai ti ]v: di ti re MARYLAND'S ATTITUDE IN THE STRUGGLE FOR CANADA. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. The French and Indian War in America began in 1754 and continued until 1760, when Canada fell into the hands of the English. The French were successful for the first four years of the war, and the frontiers of Virginia, Mary- land and Pennsylvania were at the mercy of the enemy during that time. The length of the struggle surprises one ; certainly the English were stronger than the French in numbers and resources, and might have repelled the aggres- sions of the French in America by one or two decisive blows. It is true that England did not lend a helping hand in this colonitil war until 1755, and at first sent out several inefficient commanders, but the chief cause of ill-fortune was the fjiilure of the colonies to cooperate with one another and with Great Britain. While the colonies were organizing or trying to organize, the French were advancing under good leadership and encircling their op])onents. To a ISIarylander studying this period the following ques- tion suggests itself: How did my State behave ? Certainly Maryland's welfare, indeed her very existence, was at stake ; did she do her duty? These questions will be discussed in the following paper. Maryland 'and Pennsylvania were the only colonies that remained under the Proprietary form of government down to 10 MarylamVs Attitiuh in flic Strac/rjle for Canada. [316 the Revolution. Maryland's charter was a very liberal one ; it er House, represented the Lord I'roprietor, and its members were summoned by special writs. They were tlie advisers ot the executive, and at the same time formed one branch of the legislature. Fre((uent wrangling resulted l)et\veen these two brandies of the legis- lature, the one being the protector of the liberties of the people; the other, the conservative defenders of their lord's prerogatives. The popular branch continually gained ground at tile ex})ense of the prerogatives of the Lord l-*ro])rietary,' anil l)y IGoO the Lower House had secured Hrm control of legislation in .Maryland. This is evidenced by an act passed in that year, wherelty it was enacted that "no Subsidies, aydc, Customes, taxes, or impositions shall hereafter bee hiyd assessed, leavyed or imj)oscd upon the freemen of this Prov- ince or on theire Merchandize; Goods or Chatties without the Consent and Approbation of the freemen of this Province their Deputies or the Major parte of them, first had and declared in a General Assembly of this Province."' lu 1689 the r^ord Proprietor lost his political rights in the province and ^faryland became and remained a Crown colony till 1715. During this time Proprietary government lost much of its prestige, and the revenues which Lord Balti- more was still allowed to enjoy were attacked by the Assembly. Those of a public nature it desired to transfer to the Crown, to be used for the support of the province. The volume of legislation increases largely at this time, and we notice that laws were only made by the Assembly for short periods; old laws were continually repealed and reenacted ; in this way the Assembly managed to keep a secure hold upon the government of the province. Besides they enacted against the Catholics severe laws, which gave offense to a large 'An act of 1638 declared that a General Assembly of " Freemen of the Province " should have " like power priveledges authority and Jurisdic- tion . . . as the house of Commons within the Realm of England " . . . Assembly Proceedings, 1G38-16C4, p. 75. •Assembly Proceedings, 1G50, p. 303. 14 Maryland's Attitude w the Struf/r/Ic for Canada. [320 dement of tlie population. It is true this was tlie looked for result of Protestant ascendency and narrow-minded lejiis- lation; but it was oi)posod to the spirit of the Proi>vi('tary government, and rebuked the liberal policy of the liords Pro])rictors. By the time the Proprietary government was restored, in 1715, ]\[ar3']and had almost learned to do without it ; neither did its restoration give rise to any marked joy or loyalty on the part of the jieople, nor did it regain its former political status. From nov,- until the French and Indian War we note the increasing dissensions between the Assembly and the Proprietary ; many of the privileges of the latter were gradu- ally and imperceptibly slipping away. In 1739, during Governor Ogle's administration, an attack was begun upon the revenues of the Proi)rietary, and was only concluded by the overthrow of the Proprietary government itself This leads us to an explanation of the causes that underlay the conduct of ]\Iaryland during that war. The Lower House had become the mainspring of the provincial government ; it assumed the protection of the liberties of its constituents, endeavored to make laws for the people and not for the I'ro- prietor, and not (mly defended their rights and privileges from any encroachment by the Pro])rietary, but in turn encroached upon the prerogatives of that government. The Assembly now saw and decided to take advantage of a favor- able o|)i)ortunity to wrest from Proprietary rule in Maryland the last vestiges of its power. I- CHAPTER 11. FRENCH AND INDIAN WAR. Tliat the events which follow may be cleavly mulevstood, it will be advisable, first, to ,!;ive a brief sketch of the early period of tlie French and Indian War, pohiting out the part played by ^Maryland. The French and Indian War was a strugut into effect, however ; union could not be forced upon the colonies in accord witii the dictates of Parliament, — it had to come from within. During this period of their history the lack of unity among the colonies in facing a danger which menaced them all alike was very marked ; but in one thing there seemed to be considerable unity, and that was the almost universal resistance whidi the colonial Assemblies oiiered to their gov- ernors when attem])ting to carry out their instructions. AVe see this even among the Xew England colonies, but especially south of New York, so that Gov. Sharj>e, in the autumn of 175-i, said that by this time lie had learned " not to entertain very sanguine hopes of the resoluticms of American Assem- blies." ' Tiieir professions of regard for his ^Majesty's inter- ests were loyal enough, and supj)ly bills were freely pre- sented ; but the fact is, all the Assemblies looked upon this as a good opportunity to establish the liberties of the com- monwealths on a iirmer basis, and hence, when voting suj)- plies, they attached to their bills objectionable clauses, soughc to wrest important concessions from their rulers, and gain ■m ' Sharpe Correspondence, I., 108. « October 20, 1754. 3 December 3, 1754. •* Sharpe Correspondence, I., 109. V / t ■ •■' '* : 22 MaryUind's Attitude in tlic Strw/fjk for Canada. [328 for themselves complete self-government. Of course, these objectionable bills the governors were obliged to veto in the interest of their |)ro])riotors, or the English government itself; and Sharpe complained that they "endeavored to cast an odium on their respective governors by laying them under the necessity of rejecting such bills as were presented them." However, when the alarm in the Ohio Valley became more general and the war assumed groiiter ])ioportions. New Eng- land came forward and contributed her share ; New York lent liberal aid ; New Jersey seemed to partake of the infec- tion that i)ossessed Pennsvlvaniaand refused to doanvthintr: "they seem to have had nothing else in view at their meet- ings," says Sharpe, " but to show the greatest disregard of and contempt for the old gentleman's recommendations " ' (referring to Gov. Belcher). Virginia had contributed j£10,000 and soon afterward £20,000 more, and Maryland had contributed £6000 besides the £500 given to the Six Nations. Maryland had constantly before her the example of her sister Proprietary colony, Pennsylvania;' Sharpe was con- tinually expressing fears that the obstinacy of the L'ennsyl- vania Assembly would have an influence upon that of Mary- land, and subsequent events prove that the latter was inclined to be subservient to the policy maintained by the former. The terror of the inhabitants on the western frontier was very great ; the Indians made many incursions upon Maryland and Virginia soil, killing a number of families and destroying their property. This occasioned great alarm and many of the people in the western part of the province abandoned their homes; such was the state of affairs until the arrival of Braddock raised their hopes. Fort Cumberland was the only protec- tion which the western inhabitants had, and this was inade- quate ; snudl forces only could be raised for the defense of ' Sharpe Correspondence, I., 110, ' Pennsylvania's influence on Maryland, see below, ch. III., sec. 5. i 111; ' I 1 jl .' 329] Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. 23 the frontier. On A}>ril 14, 1755, General JJraddock met the colonial governors ' at Alexandria, and a plan of oj)erations was agreed u])(>n, Eraddock hoping to enlist the active sym- pathies of the colonies. In this, however, he was to be disappointed. The Assembly of Maryland was again called to vote a su])ply, but Sharpe was able to do nothing with them. The deaths of twenty-six of the •' distant inhabi- tants," as a resnlt of the encroachments and devastations of the French and their savage allies, )iad no effect upon the Assembly, for they " set notiiing in competition with the points for which they were contending," and, says Gov. Sharpe, "the lives and safeties of the people must submit to their caprice and liumour." He was obliged to prorogue the Assendjlv until the followinii' vear, for thev refused to do anything, exce})t upon their own conditions. JJraddock was much incensed at the cold reception which he received from the provincial Assemblies, and was highly displeased that no common fund was provided for his disposal in }>rose- cuting the war. He communicated with the governors, Sharjie among the number, stating his expectations and the quota which each should furnish. Sharpe again ju'ojjosed a poll tax, and urged, besides, that the power to levy the tax be taken from the Legislature and put in the hands of the several Governors and Councils, in order to "prevent useless disputes and controversies."- Sharpe, in his anxiety to obey instructions, called a meeting of his Assembly for June 23, 1755, but with no sanguine feelings; he looked forward to a series of disputes, and thought that rather than aitl Eraddock they would indulge in fault-hnding because his troops had carried oft" servants, carriages and horses belonging to the inhabitants over whose lands they had marched. The Assembly olfered £5000, but the measures proposed for raising the loan were such as the Governor could not sanction. Sharpe was much disconcerted and distressed to see ' Governors of Va., Md., Penn., N. Y., and Mass. - Sharpe Correspondence, 1., 203. II I 'il' ! 24 Maryland's Attitmh in the Struggle for Canada. [330 the condition of the peopk' on the western frontier withont being able to help them. He was led to say, " the Assembly will never recde from the ]ioints that his Lordship's instruc- tions ()l)lige niC to insifct on tho' half the province should be depopulated." ' He even thought, should Braddock have " taken the French Forts on the Ohio," he could not h( Id them, for the colonies would not support a garrison or supply it there " without compulsion." The Braddock exped' ion against Fort Duquesne, as is well known, ended in complete failure :' suffice it to say that the failure, which was due to the lack of effective co(ij)eration on the part of the colonies coupled with Braddock's own lack of good judgment, gave the French an alarming advantage, for it was followed by the disgraceful retreat to Philadel- phia of Col. Dunbar," who commanded the forces after the death of Braddock, and the abandonment of the field; this left the frontier without defense, except such as a hundred or two half-starved provincial troops could give. All the bar- riers were thrown down, and Sharpe thought that 2000 regu- lar troops with as many Indians could have marched to the Chesapeake almost without hindrance ; for such was the opinion he had of the 18,000 Maryland militia and the Vir- ginia troops. If the French had taken full advantage of their victory they might have made the invasion of Maryland an entering wedge and thus have cut the colonies in two, as the British afterwards attempted to do during the Revolution. However, this was not done, for etlbrts were now being made to oppose the French in the north ; and the latter, seeing that the real struggle would be in Canada and on the lakes, withdrew a large portion of their forces from the Ohio. But much injury was committed and some blood shed on the defenseless frontier ; the western inhabitants were terrified and fled to the more populous sections of the province. 'Sharpe Cor. I., 239. ' Orme's account of Bradilock's defeat, July 0, 1755 ; Sharpe Cor. I., 258. ^'Dinwiddie Papers, II., 139. 331] 3Iarylnn II, 30 MarylamVa Atlilwh in the Stnu/(/kfor Canada. [336 Thoufjjh a duty on exported tobacco was levied in Maryland as early as 1638, it was the act of 1(571 that occasioned so much dispute subsequently. It was entitled an "Act for the Rayseing and Providcing u Support for his Lordship . . . dureinp; his natureall life . . . and towards the defrayinij; the Public Charj^es of Governmeut."' By this act the sum of two shillinjijs sterling was imposed as a duty upon every hogs- head of tobacco which should be shipped ** in any Ship or vessell'* out of the province, but it was specially provided that one-half of the revenue thereby raised should be used for the constant maintenance of a ma^a/ine with arms and ammunition for the defense of the province and other public charges. A concluding clause directed that this act should continue during the natural life of Cecilius, then Lord Baltimore, and " for one Cropp more next after his decease and noe longer." It was also agreed that the Proprietor should receive his rents and fines for the alienation of lands in good tobacco, when tendered, at the rate of two pence per pound. However, by subsequent acts, the act of 1671 was continued during the lives of his successors, Charles Calvert and Benedict Leonard Calvert. When the government was seized by the Crown in 1691, the tobacco tax of two shillings was collected and lodged in the public treasury, and when the first royal governor, Copley, entered upon his office (1692), the Assembly settled upon him one shilling, or one-half the duty which had been appro])riated by former acts for the support and defense of the ])rovince. Lord Baltimore had always claimed the other half, as of the nature of a private contract between himself and his tenants, in consideration for the loss he sustained by receiving his quit-rents in tobacco at the rate of two pence per pound. Receiving no benefit therefrom, his agent, Henry Darnall, petitioned the Assembly for the privilege of collecting this and other of his lordship's revenues. The Assembly replied evasively, but the King approved his claim and he continued to enjoy the twelve 'Assembly Proceedings, Vol. II. (1666-1676), pp. 284-286. 1 || 337] Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. 31 pence tariff. On Sept. 19, 1715, it was raised to f'i 4 ••4 r 4 ' li f' : 38 Maryland' 8 Attitude in the Striu/glefor Canada. [344 into a contest with its Proprietary for supremacy, and now that an opportunity oifered, with the Proprietary government at its weakest stage, they meant to settle it in their own favor. Thus matters stood; and the government was practically at a staiidstill when the people of Maryland received the news of Washington's surrender at Fort Necessity. The Assembly at this critical moment at once surprised and exasperated Didwiddic and the ministry; Sliarpe it irritated, but did not surprise, for he knew his nxen. Upon the defeat of AVash- ington, Sharpe called a special session for the consideration of a supply. He addressed the Assembly in these words : " In This Emergency the Hopes and Expectations of our Neigh- bors whom in Duty, Honour and Interest we are Engaged to Support and Defend are fixed upon us for assistance; and What must the World think of our Conduct or W^hi't Calami- ties may We not expect, if from an unseasonable parsimony We boldly look on while they arc Cut to Pieces. The Boundless Ambition of the Common Enemy and Cruel Rage of their Savage allies now upon our J^orders flushed with victory indesi)ensably require a Vigorous and immediate Exertion of all Powers to check their Progress.'" A fund for defense was recommended, and the Assembly responded promptly to the earnest appeals of their Governor, by acting upon his suggestion without delay. A vote of ^6000 current money was passed in aid of Virginia, and assented to by Governor Sharpe. Dinwiddle writes his congrntulations to Sharpe, saying : " \\'ashington's defeat has caused more than a victory, it has roused the spirits of our neighboring colonies." ' But notice that the ways and means ' provided for raising this fund include ordinary licenses and a tax of one pound sterling on every imported convict.^ At the time this supply was passed Sharpe had instructions not to assent to any bill ' Assembly Proceedings, 1754, July 17. "Sharpe Correspondence, I., p. 70. ^ Assembly Proceedings, 1754, July 25 ; Bacon's Laws, 1754, ch. 9. * See below, p. 40. 345] Maryland's Attitade in the Struggle for Canada. 39 uled an a bill appropriating the ordinary licenses. But necessity and the knowledge that a supply could not be secured any other way induced the Governor and his Council to yield to the Lower House. Sharpe begged the indulgence of his lordship and pleaded urgency as his excuse. Baltimore, on the contrary, far from being gratified at the behavior of his province, was displeased at the public appropriation of the license fees ; and although he had nothing to lose, for he had never received this revenue as long as he had been Lord Baltimore, never- theless Frederick did not become reconciled to the lots of this prospective I'evenue until September 9, 1755. The Assembly had gained its ])oint and now became more deter- mined than ever. In the meantime, Sharpe was making the best use of his resources. He raised a company of one hun- dred men and sent them to Wills Creek to engage with other colonial troops in the erection of Fort Cumberland. This fort was erected to serve as an outpost for the frontier de- fense and as a base of supplies for expeditions against Fort Duquesne. Sharpe, contemplating an attack upon the French stronghold, sought again the assistance of his Assembly, and in December, 1754, the Lower House passed a supply of £7000 to be provided by an emission of " notes of credit." But the provisions for sinking the same contained the old clauses concerning ordinary licenses and imported convicts, which Sharpe, in obedience to his instructions, was bound to reject. Again, in February, 1755, the Lower House voted a supply " for his Majesty's service," this time .£10,000, with the foreknowledge, no doubt, that the bill would not become a law. It contained the same provisions that were before objected to by the Proprietary and was rejected. But the Lower House responded by resolving that " they would not grant a Shilling by any other means "; consequently Sharpe's project could not be carried out. These controversies between the representatives of the people and the agents of the Pro- prietor caused the defeat of effective legislation. Many of the Councillors and the Governor were wavering in their 11 «•" 40 MaryhmVs Attitude in the Sti'ur/ Bacon's Laws of Maryland, 1733, ch. VI. 351] Maryland^ H Attilwh in the Stnujghfor Canada, 45 cy a Irted liods irst, :irae and )ther (ills )ugh there was no obligation to that effect. However, the final redemption of the residue of the bills in cireuiation was fixed for September 19, 1764, the cx))iration of the thirty-one years, the statutory limit. This clause is an important one, as we shall see, for it was the cause of much contention bc^tween the two houses of Assembly in 1755. At first, on account of the lack of confidence felt by the people in the fund ]irovided for its redemption, paper money rapidly depreciated until £230 currency was only worth „£100 sterling. But as soon as the people became convinced of the " goodness of the fund," and when, in 1748, one-third was actually redeemed, the bills rose in value, and by 1753 £150 currency passed for X100>8terling.^ It seems that in 1748, the first period provided for redem])tion, all outstanding paper bills were not presented for reissue. Only £85,984 148. were brought in, an amount lacking £4015 6s. of the original issue. " Some of the Politicians," says Sharpe, " who out of their singular regard for the Pocketts of their Constituents and perhaps their own Interest "'*' discovered that fact and proj)osed to make use of it to embarrass the government. A large majority of the House of Delegates were persuaded that the £4000 in question were destroyed by fire or other accidents, and that a new issue to the same amount would not affect the value of the currency, for it would not increase the sum provided for by the Paper Currency Act. While the exigencies of the time might have justified a reasoning after this fashion, yet it was treading dangerous ground to legislate upon a sup- positi(m. There was little evidence that this amount of paper had been destroyed ; on the contrary, there was reason to believe that a great deal of it was still in circulation, for small quantities were held by people living at considerable distances from the seat of government, who did not think it worth their while to make a special trip to the Loan Office ' Sharpe Correspondence, I., 138, etc. * Sharpe Correspondence, I., 162. 46 Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. [352 to have a small amount exchant^ed.' When the bill for £7000 was passed by the Lower House it was provided that c£4015 6s. of it should be a new issue of the j)aper money office.'^ This was rejected by the Council for the reasons mentioned, and because it was thought dangerous to establish a precedent that might have led to other measures having for their effect the debasement of the currency. Maryland did not stand alone in this controversy, for New York and New Jersey had also refused to vote su]>plies except they be allowed a new emission of paper currency, and royal instruc- tions prevented their governors from consenting to this. Pennsylvania likewise was very anxious to " strike more paper." In i>Iaryknd the paper money controversy created a serious obstruction and blocked tighter than ever the wheels of administration. ■'!-.., f :' 4. — Refusal of the Proprietary to share the Burdens of TAxvnor. Since the voting and expenditure of the supply of £6000, three fruitless sessions of the Assembly had been wasted in unsuccessful efforts to i)ut the province in a state of defense. Their work "'as dissipated in disputes over ordinary licenses, imported convicts and the paper currency. Sharpe's urgent appeals were in vain, and the Lower House remained firm in the conviction of the justice of its course. Neither side was willing to make any concessions to the other, and no agree- ment was reached between the aduiinistration and the dele- gates. All the while reports were sent from Fort Cumberland i;o the Governor concerning the frequent depredations and murders which were committed by the Indians among the "back inhabitants,"'^ as the people in the western part of the province were called. These distressing facts were laid ' A rise in the value of the currency at this time would tend to give further credence to this view. ''The remainder was provided for by special taxes. 'Sharpe Correspondence, I., 365. '.;' 353] Maryland's Attitude in the Sinujglefor Canada. 47 before the Assembly by the Governor, and the Lower House recommended a company of ran(2;crs to picket the frontier and £1500 for their support; but the bill failed, presumably because it contained a clause placing an additional tax of five shillings on imported convicts. As there was no news from Braddock and further delay was dangerous, Sharpe secured a small company of volunteers and hastened to Fort Cumberland. While on his way thither a report of Brad- dock's defeat reached him,' occasioning great surprise and producing the wildest commotion among the settlers. A private subscri{)tion had been raised by the members of the Council and other gentlemen of the province ; this was all Sharpe could count upon, and out of it he garrisoned several forts or places of refuge for the people of Frederick County, and supported at Fort Cumberland Dagworthy's company, the only body of ^laryland troops that had accompanied the Braddock expedition. Every effort was made by Sharpe to quiet the panic-stricken inhabitants and strengthen the fron- tier defense. To say that he was partially successful is a tribute to his executive ability, for Sharpe was left to cope with the situation almost alone. As it was, a large number of the western inhabitants left their homes and fled to Balti- more and other places. Fort Cumberland was merely the pretense of a fortification and was too I'ar west to be of service in protecting the province. If the French on the Ohio had not changed their tactics at this juncture the consequences might have been serious. The Indians made several though unsuccessful attempts to capture Fort Cum- berland. In the meantime Lord Baltimore became aroused for the safety of his western lands and bowed to the resolu- tions of the Assembly ; he yielded his claims^ to the ordi- nary licenses and hawkers' and pedlcrs' licenses as well, as soon as the news of Braddock's defeat reached him,* and issued instructions to his Lieutenant-Governor to pass any ':■': ) 'July 15, 1755. See also above, p. 24. '£640 per annum. Sharpe Cor., I., 368. 'Sept. 9, 1755. '■I ti ': ' • 48 MarylancVs Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. [354 act of the Assembly for a money loan which appropriated these licenses for the " common cause." The Lord Proprie- tary flattered himself that his concessions would settle all misunderstanding between the administration and the legis- lature; but he was mistaken. It was easily seen that this concerfblon had been forced from his Lordship reluctantly. Far from being a great favor, it was an acknowledgment of the po„er and authority of the Lower House of the Provin- cial Assembly. By patience and determination the House of Delegates had won its issue with the Proprietary, though five or six almost fruitless sestions had been spent in the effort. The Pro])rie- tor had lost through undue interference with the right, which the province had now acquired, to levy its own taxes and control public revenues. The long disputes over imported convicts, paper money, and especially ordinary licenses had aroused discontent with the Proprietary administration, in- difference for the English government that supported its policy, and led the representatives of the people to prejudice their own safety to maintain their liberty. '"• After this broadside had taken effect the Lower House aimed another. The vantage-ground they had gained em- boldened theni to attack the personal or private rights of the Lord Proprietary. This leads us to the fourth cause of Maryland's inactivity in the French and Indian War : that is, the refusal of the Pro})rietary to share the burdens of the war and waive the right to h.ave his estates exempted from taxation. During the autumn of 1755 nothing was done to check the depredations and outrages of the Indians on the frontier, for the Assembly was not called together again tintil February, 1756. Gov. Shirley, of Massachusetts, had succeeded to the chief command of the American forces after the death of Braddock. A council of war was held in New York in December, 1755, where the plans for 1766 were decided.^ i'l-: 'Sharpe Cor., I., 815-320. 355] Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. 49 in- kthe for lary, the h of k in While the scene of action was transferred to the Canada bor- der, it was left to the tact of Governor Sharpe, who was ap- pointed commander for the Southern colonies, to organize an expedition against Fort Diiquesne. There existed the old desire to recover this American fort and overawe their Indian enemies, at whose hands they suftered more than from the French, for the Indians had improved the opportunity for plunder offered by French successes. To cope with such a state of things the activity and cooperation of the colonies were imperative. In Maryland, as in Pennsylvania, the force of public opinion was also brought to bear upon the provincial government to induce speedy action. With the hope that the pressure of circumstances might have the de- sired effect on the Assembly, Sharpe called it together again, February 23, 175G. The Assembly appeared willing to grant supplies, provided it could have its own way in direct- ing the measures for raising them. After a delay of nearly two months, a supply of £40,000 was voted by the Lower House. To raise this large grant taxes were placed upon a variety of commodities, imports and exports ; even bachelors and billiard tables were not omitted ; while taxes imposed by previous acts, notably that of 1754, were continued by this act of 1756.^ With unswerving constancy the Lower House included all the objectionable features of former sup- ply bills and a few more besides, such as the duty on im- ported convicts, ordinary licenses, new emissions of paper money and a land tax. The last was distinctly a new feature, for it was the first tax on land ever imposed and collected in Maryland; but the great demand for revenue necessitated recourse to such a tax. The bill met with a stormy recep- tion. " Too much dictation by the Lower House," objected the Council. It is true the delegates had prescribed rather minutely the ])urposcs for which each portion of the money should be appropriated, and left but little to the discretion of the Governor except to see that they were properly carried '^\i ■rii?i ' Bacon's Laws of Marylaud, 1756, ch. V. 50 Maryland's Attitude in the Strtiggle for Canada. [356 out. The Lower House had acquired powers over money bills equal to those of the House of Commons, and this was a practical assertion of them. The duty on convicts, the emission of paj)er money and the land tax got their share of opprobrium. These were " some " of the reasons for the rejection of the bill by the Upper House. But the delegates were firm in resisting nearly every attem})ted compromise of their schemes and plans, and often allowed the debate to fall away into parliamentary quibbling, in which the real points at issue were lost sight of. A second and a third time the same bill for a supply of £40,000, with a few slight modi- fications, was passed by the Lower House and as often re- jected by the Upper. The delegates assumed too great a power over the settling of the land tax, it was objected ; after what manner we shall see. One of the most important measures introduced into this bill was the provision that a small tax, one shilling per hun- dred acres, should be imposed on all freehold estates, and the Proprietary lands as well.' The Lord Proprietary was lord and owner of the soil, and in virtue of these rights his lands were beyond the control of the Assembly. Lord Baltimore held a large quantity of vacant land in the western part of the province. Frederick, who was only anxious to swell his ' The hinds of the Lord Proprietary were of three classes, manor, reserved, and vacant lands. The manor lands were largo tracts, held by the Lord Proprietor, that had been properly surveyed and a descrip- tion of v?hose bounds and general features had been entered upon the public records. They were leased in parcels to tenants. The reserved lands were tracts of territory which were ordered to be held in reserve for the Proprietor, on account of their fertility, mineral wealth, contiguity to his manors or towns. These reserved lands had not been surveyed nor laid out, nor designated by any particular name, as the manors were ; but like the manor lands they were rented in portioiis by his Lordship's agents, who were forbidden to sell or grant them to any one. All other lands owned ity the Pr()[)rietor, notably those in the western part of the province and on the frontier, and which were open at the Land Office to purchase by any one at the " common rates," were called vacant lands. These afforded no immediate revenue. Sharpe Cor., L, 426. Ill' 357] Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. 51 Bre; ip's her the to ids. income, urged Sharpe repeatedly to advance the price of his western lands and the rents of his manors ; but the insecurity of the western border diminished the number of applications for this land, and in consequence it was difficult to raise the price of that for which there was little sale. The Proprietary gave no assistance to his province in these trying times, and in this instance one can hardly help excusing the Assembly for regarding Frederick as an obstacle that had to be con- quered. In the tax upon land his manor and reserved lands were included, and in this way Baltimore was made to contribute a small portion at least towards the defense of his own province. Had Frederick come promptly forward to the relief of the people with a modest contribution he might have created a loyal feeling among them and have saved himself many vexatious encroachments upon his rights. The first attempt to tax the Proprietary in Pennsylvania was responded to by the Penns with a contribution of £5000. Furthermore, the safety of the province settled, the value of his western land would be restored; as Sharpe tried to con- vince him, the annual loss to his Lordship was at this time much greater than the tax proposed upon his estates. There- fore it could only be short-sighted policy to hamper the Governor with instructions that led Sharpe to entertain " no sanguine ho])es of the bill." His Lordship was afraid of adding another precedent to those which had already marked the downfall of his feudal prerogatives. Sharpe again expressed his former conviction that it must be left to Parliament to step in and " save the Assembly the trouble of providing for its own safety." However, the more Baltimore resisted, the weaker his position grew : a conference of the two branches resulted in a satisfactory agreement upon the bill. In the meantime a change of sentiment had taken place among the councillors of the administration ; it was con- sidered futile to op])ose the Lower House further at this time and thereby jeopard the safety of the province ; consequently, Sharpe, aided by the persuasion of the Proprietary Council, 62 Mai'yland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. [358 came to the conclusion that it was Ijest to assent to the bill if passed again, even though it contained the olijcctionable tax upon Lord Baltimore's land. His excuses were "the preservation of his province," the loss in Proprietary revenue, and the parsimony of Frederick himself. In regard to the latter, Sharpe said : " If an Act of Generosity in his Ldp had afforded me the least Room I would not have desi)aired of making them [i. e. the Assembly] ashamed of their Behaviour and of rendering them odious to their own Con- stituents." In the conference between the two branches of the legislature many trifling objections were adjusted. The duty on imported convicts was excepted, an additional land tax was i)rovided for to supply any deficiency that might occur in the sinking fund, and above all it was mutually agreed that Lord Baltimore's manors and rent-paying reserved lands should bear a tax equal to that imposed upon lands patented or granted by the Lords Proprietary to the inhab- itants of the province, while his other lands should be ex- empted. The bill for a supply of £40,000 was passed May 14, 1756, after thirteen weeks of delay and dispute. Sharpe took the situation philosophically, though he expressed his disapproval of the Assembly's conduct. Conscious that " the Lower House would not let the Lives of a few inhabitants come in Competition with their Schemes and Views," anxious alike for the safety of the ])rovince and the increase of his lord's revenues, Sharpe took the advice of the Proprietary Council and assented to the land tax. He had acted con- trary to Baltimore's wishes. It was not without " some Apprehentions," said he, "that this Step . . . would be censured as a cul|)able Concession and subversive of His Ldp's Rights and prerogatives "; but the security of the province wcs his first duty, and Sharpe yielded. Frederick's indecision had decided Shari)e in the course he took, and upon it he felt willing to stake his reputation with the Lord Proprietary.' Although Sharpe was advised to i!: 'Sharpe Cor, I., 399. 359] Ilary land's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. 53 follow ill the path of Governor Morris of Pennsylvania, in " guarding against any Invasion of Proprietary rights and prerogatives," he received no definite and peremptory instruc- tions upon the issues between J>ord Baltimore and the people. Governor Sharpe had solicited instructions to remove the " uncertainty," and stood ready to execute them though he should be called by the people "an Odious Instrument" for so doing. Lord Baltimore's revenue the past year had fiiUen £1600 below what it had been the year previous, and this was attributed to the abandonment of the western lands and their depreciation in value ; while, on the contrary, the Pro- prietary land tax, for the five years to which it was limited, only amounted to £400. " Was His Ldp's Case my own," writes the Governor at the time, " I am sure I would never have hesitated a moment to contribute my Share with the people to defend the province and annoy the Enemy." ^ It is clear that a liberal stroke on the part of Lord Baltimore, a modest but sympathetic contribution, would likely have saved him considerable embarrassment. By the act of 1756 the Assembly scored another point against Proprietary rule. 5. — Pennsylvania's Influence upon Maryland. Let us turn for a moment to Pennsylvania to see the influ- ence exerted by her upon Maryland. The conduct of both provinces with regard to the land tax was very similar, for each had the same interests at stake and the same kind of a government. Sharpe watched the course of Pennsylvania's Assembly closely and reported every favorable move to his own legislative body, hoping in the event of his neighbors passing an " acceptable bill " that Maryland's Assembly would be influenced to become " Imitators of the Quakers' conduct." General Braddock's defeat was as much of a surprise to the Pcnnsylvanians as it was to Marylandcrs. They, too, had practically left the British to fight their own battles, but II 'SharpeCor.,I.,427. ■JT- 64 3Iaryland'a Attitude in the Stnigr/Iefor Canada. [360 I ■: the Assembly was now sufficiently aroused to pass a vote of £50,000. To raise this sum the General Assembly ])roposed a tax of " twelve pence per pound and twenty shillinj:;s per Head, Yearly for two Years, on all the Estates real and per- sonal, and Taxables " within the province. All the lands of the Proprietaries as well as those of the people were included. This proposition was made July 30, 1755, and it fell with the effect of a bombshell upon the Proprie- tors. It locked to them like an effort to destroy their author- ity. The measure aimed in particular at the vacant lands held by the Proprietary, and with some reason, too. Gov- ernor Morris, in obedience to his instructions, opposed the proposition with all his skill in argument. The position of the people was based upon equity and common benefit. It is but fair, said the Assembly, since we are called upon to defend the Proprietary estates on the frontier, that our Pro- prietors should bear their share of the burdens. The oppo- sition of the administration to this measure was based on prerogative, precedent and law. Says Governor Morris : i. "All Governors, from the nature of their office, are ex- empt from the ])ayment of taxes." 2, " This exeuiptiou is supported by a positive law of the proviuce; for a law of the province, investing the assessors with power to assess and lay taxes in the several counties, contains an express proviso that the Proprietary estates should not be taxed." 3. " It is contrary to the constant practice and usage of this and all other Proprietary Governments to lay any tax upon the lands or estates of the Proprietaries exercising the government by themselves or their lieutenants." * The Assembly asserted a right to tax the Proprietors as landlords and not as gov- ernors, and requested Gov. jSlorris not to " make himself the hateful Instrument of reducing a free people to the abject state of Vassalage." ' " What Laws of Imposition," said he, "... have I attempted to force down your Throats ? " 'Pennsylvania Colonial Records, VI., 535, 526. '^ Pennsylvania Colonial Records, VI., 584. gov- Ifthe |l)ject he, 361] Maryland'' A Altitude in the Stnu/r/kfor Canada. 55 The Assembly responds : "A I^aw to Tax the people of Penn- sylvania To defend the Proprietary Estate, and to exempt the Proprietary Estate from bearing any ])art of the Tax, is, may it please the Governor, a Ijaw abhorrent to comnu)n Justice, common lleason and common Sense." While the Administration had law and precedent on its side, the prop- osition of the Assembly seems to have been fair and just- Thus did the burgesses express their feelings toward Pro- prietary rule, for they were determined to endanger the safety of the colony, if necessary, to attain their ends. Gov- ernor ^lorris came forward with a compromise and proposed to grant bounty lands to those who would volunteer for the expedition against the French. Lands west of the Alle- ghanies were to be given, without purchase money and free from the payment of quit-rents for fifteen years, and then not to exceed the common quit-rent ^ of the province. But this did not satisfy the Assembly, and judging from the tone of their messages, they deemed it almost an impertinence in the Governor to have suggested an alternative to their measure. Consequently the bill for £50,000 fell through. Shortly after, another bill, appropriating £60,000 for the same pur- pose and with substantially the same provisions, was pro- posed.- Governor Morris could not give his assent to this bill. lie was firm with the Assembly and faithful to his suj)ei'iors ; but he was honest enough to confess that the Proprietors' real reason for not yielding to the tax upon their lands was " to ])reserve the rights of their Station ; if they gave up these they would soon be stript of everything they had a right to enjoy, both power and property."^ Tiie Governor then expressed a desire that the Penns be taxed by Parliament, if they were to be taxed at all, " for if the power is ever given into the hands of the people here," he wrote, " they will use it without mercy." ' '4s. 2d. sterling. "Nov. 6,1755. 3 Pa. Col. Records, VI., 544. ♦Pa. Col. Records, VI., 738-9. J ■' m ■1 66 Maryland's Attitude in the Strur/fjle/or Canada, [362 i '•» ! I: But the ])erscvcrancc of the Assembly bore good fruit. In the meanwhile the Proprietors had been informed of the de- feat of Braddock, the insecurity of the province and the doings of the Assembly. Governor Morris's conduct was commended and the Proprietors, in order to settle the dis- pute, offered a contribution of ,£5000 with a proviso that their estates should be exempted from taxation. While this was proifered as a free gift and not as a commutation for their share of the Assembly's appro])riation, Morris was instructed that if the burgesses provided simply the difference, £55,000, he should not insist upon the balance.' This is significant ; the Assembly interpreted it as a concession on the part of the Proprietaries, and this it certainly was. The gift was accepted and the bill for £60,000 passed November 26, 1755, but the Assembly provided only for the striking of £55,000 in bills of credit, the remainder being supplied by the gift of £5000 which was accepted in lieu of a tax upon the Proprietary estates." Although the administration thought it had staved off the idea of taxing the lands of the Proprie- tary, the people had won a real victory. In the interim the people of Maryland were watching Pennsylvania closely, and so was Sharpe ; he was awaiting the turn of the tide. If their Assembly passed a suitable bill he intended calling together his own ; on the other hand, unfavorable action by his neighbor would make it useless, so the Governor of Maryland thought ; for h was confident that if Pennsyl- vania set an ill example Maryland would be sure to follow it.^ But the passage of £60,000 in the autumn of 1755 gave him fresh hope. Consequently, he called his Assembly together early in 1756 and expected a ready response. In this he was partially disappointed, as we know, for the Mary- • Pa. Col. Records, VI., 731. *The bill was not satisfactory, but passed the Council because of the restlessness of the people for some definite action. Pa. Col. Records, VI., 734; also VI., 737-738. 'Sharpe Cor., I., 269. i " 36.3] Mari/land's Attitude in the Stnu/r/k for Canada. 57 land Assembly adopted Peinisylvaiiia's tactics. The land- tax was again the bugbear, and the Governor and his council were forced to reject the first ]>ropo8al to grant £40,000. At this period Maryland and Pennsylvania had the same controversies, but the tax proposed in Maryland was quite different from the so-called " pound-tax " ' of Penn- sylvania. For instance, the latter included all the Projjrie- taries' ])crsonal and real estate in the province, whicli was taxed and assessed according to its value, i. <\ at the rate of 12d. per £, by such assessors as the people should elect. Maryland, on the contrary, proposed a specific tax of Is. per hundred acres, which embraced the Proprietary manor and reserved lands,'^ but excluded the vacant lands. The Lower House even receded from this, as we have seen, and agreed to tax only those ])arts of his lordship's reserved lands which were actually leased out and paid a rent ; the remainder being classed with the vacant lands. Thus ^lary- land's proposition was different from that of Pennsylvania and far more reasonable. Nevertheless it was treated with more indifference by Lord Baltimore than was shown by the Penns." This may partly account for the easy victory which the Assembly gained over the administration in March, 1756, for a solution of the difficulty was forced upon Governor Sharpe by Frederick's in Jecision. In truth, Maryland scored a victory before her neighbor, and her example reacted by way of encouragement upon Pennsylvania. In the meantime William Denny had succeeded Morris as Governor of Penn- sylvania.' The Assembly tried its persuasive powers upon him with a bill to grant £100,000 for the King's service, including in its provisions a tax upon the estates of the Pro- prietaries. This bill was rejected ; but Governor Denny ' i. e. 12 pence per £, and 20 shillings per head. * See above, p. 50, note. ' For as soon as the Penns received Gov. Morris's letter of July 30, 1755, they ordered a contribution of £5000. Pa. Col. Records, "VI., 730. ^August, 1756. il' m l\ .ri I " I i^^'j!' 58 MarylaiuVn Attitude in the Struf/gle foi' Canada. [364 was more plastic in the hands of the Assembly than INforris and in due time they were able to win him to their own schemes. Benjamin Franklin was at this time a leader in the Assem- bly. So powerful was his influence and so ellectually did he champion the views of the Assembly that he was even accused by the administration of trying to take the govern- ment out of the hands of the Proprietaries. It was now determined to send a re])rescntative to England to present their grievances, and Franklin was selected '~ as the fittest advocate to exonerate the Assembly before Parliament and expose the " Iniquity of the Proprietary Instructions." He arrived in London July 27, 1757, and wisely resolved to see the Proprietaries first. Before them he laid the complaints of the Penusylvanians,the most important of which, we remem- ber, was the question concerning the taxing of the Proprie- tors' estates. Franklin was referred to their solicitor, Ferdinand John Paris, "a proud, angry man," as Pennsyl- vania's represciitallve termed him. Franklin refused to deal with any one but the Penns themselves. His petition was referred to the Attorney-General for the latter's opinion. What the Attorney's opinion was, if he gave any, Franklin never learned, but about a year later the Proprietaries " sent a long message to the Assembly," says Franklin, "drawn up and signed by Paris, reciting my paper, . . . giving a flimsy justification of their conduct, adding that they should be willing to accommodate matters if the Assembly would send out some person of candour to treat with them for that pur- pose, intimating thereby that I was not such." •' In the meantime Governor Denny had yielded to the pres- sure upon him ; he had been persuaded by the Assembly to pass an act,* wherein the estates of the Proprietaries were ' Pa. Col. Records, VI., 739. « Feb., 1757. ' Franklin's Works, I., p. 298 (J. Bigelow edition). ♦ For £100,000, passed in April, 1759. The estates of the Proprietors were assessed and taxed by assessors of the people's choosing. By this 365] MarylamVH Attitude, in the Stnu/r/lc for Caniuhi. 69 taxed ill common with those of the i)eople. This was the grand rallying point of ail their disputes, and now that the Assembly had carried the provincial administration with them, instead of responding to the message of the Proprie- taries, they sent over the act itself for confirmation. The Proprietaries determined to prevent it from receiving the royal assent and employed able counsel to argue their case. Franklin now appeared b(!fore the iioard of Trade' to defend the Pennsylvania Assembly, but they reported unfavorably upon the act. However, the act was afterwards reviewed before the King in Council, and through the aid of Lord Mansfield the report of the Lords of Trade was reversed.* Indeed, the Assembly had anticipated the order of Council by the levy of one year's tax under the act in question. Pennsylvania's victory over her Proprietaries was decisive. Act the Proprietaries were subjected to the same taxes as were laid upon other lands by the several Acts that were passed after 1754. The Act was to continue for twelve years, and it was estimated that within that time tlie Lords Proprietary would be made to pay about £72,000. ' May, 1760. - Franklin's Works, I., p. 300 (Bigelow's ed.). Bancroft's United States, II., 529-530. ;or8 this I CONCLUSION. DAWN OP INDEPENDENCE. I i '1 ':■ .t t'l'.. I, From Governor Sharpe's correspondence we learn the real motives of the Assembly's actions. His letters to his own brothers, in particular, contain calm and disinterested surveys of Maryland politics at that time. It is clear that Maryland failed in the duty she owed her sister provinces and the mother-country, and were there no circumstances to explain this fact her behavior would be inexcusable. Indifference and " unseasonable parsimony " are the first causes that occur to us. It was with the greatest difficulty, we remember, that the province was brought to a sense of her danger when the French were occupying the Ohio Valley, and not until Washington's surrender were they induced to vote a supply. They "looked on the incursions of their ambitious and insulting enemies,'" says Sharpe, " with the greatest indifference." The Assembly was excessively frugal and they objected to being burdened with taxes. Only small sums were voted, and when to save aj)pearances apparently liberal bills passed the Lower Hous.e they were clogged with provisions that prevented them from becoming laws. This is also seen in the unwillingness of Maryland to tak«> any aggressive steps or to carry war ou*^side of her own territory. All that was done was confined to the defense of the frontier and the fortification of the province against invasion. The Assembly would pass no effective militia law nor provide equipment for the provincial troops, and it not only refused to allow its troops to go beyond its own borders except in the pay of Great Britain, but also neglected to support the garri- sons within the province. When in 1758 the French with- :.:), ., Sharpe Cor., I., 109. !d 1- 1- 367] MarylamVs Attitude in the Struggle Jor Canada. 61 drew from the Ohio Valley and the Southern colonies were out of dangtr, Sharpe wrote to Baltimore : " As the Inhabi- tants of the Province . . . are not ambitious of acquiring a Keputation for Zeal and exemplary Loyalty, they seem to be very indifferent about the Event of the Campaign." ' We may even go a step further and say that the Assembly or many of the leading men acted disloyally, for the Governor, in his efforts to raise money from the people by private sub- scriptions, was opposed bj the Burgesses, who endeavored to persuade the people that if money were raised by such methods they must expect to do without Assemblies and abide by ordinances rather than " Laws made . . . with their own consent." " With the empty sounds of Liberty and Priveledge," says Sharpe, "... these Tribunes impose on the weak minds of the people . . . while . . . they effect- ually contribute to their Destruction." The refusal of the Assembly to support Dagworthy and his company at Fort Cumberland and the reduction of the already small provin- cial force to 300 in 1757 seem inexcusable. One member of the Assembly, it is said, went among the soldiers and told them that since no money had been raised to ])ay them they were not obliged to continue in the service, and that if they did the Assembly would never agree to pay them. More- over, their treatment of royal requisitions and their conduct toward the Roman Catholics showed clearly their temper towards all dictation. The system known as "Crown Requi- sitions " was imposed by the English government upon the colonies at an early date. It was the first scheme introduced by the Crown to raise money in the provinces for the con- duct of border warfare. A royal requisition to each Gov- ernor prescribed the quota of men and supplies expected. The system was obnoxious to the colonies, and esi)ecially to Maryland, for the charter of the latter contained ami)le pro- visions against royal interference with the autonomy of the province. Requisitions were sent to Maryland as early as 'Sharpe Cor., II., 397. Ml ' i, !^ "' 62 Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. [368 1694, but, despite their imperative character, they were com- monly received with indifference and met a dogged resistance. Maryland held that "no taxes or imposition of any kind could be laid without the assent of the General Assembly," and the Assembly endeavored to prevent any infraction of this char- tered privilege.^ Even during the suspension of Proprietary government (1689-1715) the Royal government only obtained its levies with the consent of the Assembly. Maryland pur- sued the same policy during the French and Indian War, as we have seen. The plan for a general union of his Majesty's northern colonies for defense and the "common fund'' had both failed. Braddock's requisitions were treated with contempt, and he not only received but little assistance from Maryland and Pennsylvania, but was hampered by them besides. Maryland failed to support properly the small com- pany furnished for his expedition,^ and repeated mutterings of discontent were heard from the people and in the Assem- bly against Braddock's troops for their unscrupulous conduct in ajipropriating at will large numbers of servants, carriages and horses. Some of the governors applied to England for an act of Parliament to com])el the colonies to contribute their quotas, and Calvert, Baltimore's secretary, wrote Sharpe the warning: "it wo'' be Best the Americans did not Subject themselves to Tax from hence "^ — a threat rash and unheeded, as subsequent history proves. Governor Sharpe again brought forward his pet idea of a general poll-tax enforced by Par- liament, for he was convinced that nothing but a compulsory act by Parliament could "eifoctually preserve the Colonies from ruin." ' While the disputes with the Proprietaiy explain largely the apathy in Mai*yland toward the mother- country, it does not account for it fully. Tiie province was ' As early as 1C98 Maryliiml maintained tliat no law of England should be binding npon them without their consent. 'Sharpe advanced £100 from his own pocket for the purpose. Sharpe Cor., I., 245. ''Sharpe Cor., I., 135. * Sharpe Cor., II., 85-86. 369] Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. 63 Luld k,rpe always jealous of her rights, and the charter was the standard by which she measured her independence of England. Mary- land enjoyed most of tlie privileges of a sovereign state and acted accordingly. It is evident from the legislation of the House of Commons that Parliament was much incensed at the behavior of Maryland. In 1756 (February 3) a grant of £95,000 was made to the " Plantations in North America ; " but in the distribution, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and tlie two Carolinas were excluded the benefit. Calvert gave the reason to Sharpe in these words : " The Construc- tion had and held of them Province is, they have fail'd of that just regard and not complying to his Majesty's Secy of State, therefore the Legislature here think them at present not of notice to His Majesty." ^ Furthermore, Lord I.'OU- don, when he became commander-in-chief of the American forces (1756-1758), wa.~ not able to command the respect and obedience of Mainland's Assembly. They did not listen to his retpiisitions and scorned all dictation. Contrary to his orders, they resolved to withdraw the garrison from Fort Cumberland, on the frontier of the province, and reduce their force to 300 men; at the same time they refused to allow any Maryland troops to leave the province under his command except they be in his pay. By such legislation the frontier was left ill-])rotected, and the province would have been in great danger had the French at Fort Duquesne manifested any activity. ^yith the accession of the Pitt ministry in England in 1758, and the appointment of Amherst to the command of the British forces in America, the tide turned. General Forbes was placed in charge of an expedition against Fort Ducjuesne, with instructions to secure the active cooper- ation of the Southern colonics. But the attitude of the Assembly reflects great discredit upon the })rovince. They had refused to maintain the garrison at Fort Cumberland, and the troops, having been without pay for eight months, 1 W L I ill ' Quoted as it stands ia the Records. Sharpe Cor., I., 370. I tl 64 Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. [370 or not having "fingered any money," as Sharpe put it, were on the point of disbanding. In order to keep this force together until the close of the campaign General Forbes was obliged to take the 300 men stationed at Fort Cumberland and Fort Frederick into his own pay and advance £1500 for their support upon the credit of the province. In this way they were kept from starving and remained a part of Forbes's army until Fort Duquesne was reclaimed.' After much persuasion the Assembly promised to reim- burse Forbes for his advances, but this resolution does not seem to have been fulfilled. Upon the occupation of Fort Duquesne warfare in the south was practically over, and General Amherst, with his aides. Generals Johnson and Wolfe, conducted the war to a successful close in the north ; Canada was captured by the British, but without any assist- ance from Maryland. The entreaties of Pitt and Amherst were of no avail, and Sharpe had to resign himself to the consciousness that the Assembly must be left to its own course. The treatment of Roman Catholics is an unsavory sub- ject in Maryland history. During the French and Indian War the persecution of this portion of the population con- tinued. Every possible pretext for bringing in bills to re- strict their liberties and " prevent the growth of Popeiy " seems to have been seized upon. Fortunately, however, many of these bills never got beyond the journals of the Lower House. If pqrchance a person of this faith had secured an appointment to a responsible position a protest would be made "against favors shown to Catholics." Charges were made that they were in collusion with the French, but most of those charges, happily, proved to be malicious lies concocted for the purpose of creating a pre- judice against the Roman Catholics. So strong was the sen- timent against them that members of the Assembly failed of >Nov. 25, 1768. lie 1)6 le- h- )f 371] MarylancVs Attitude in the Strurjgh for Canada. 65 reelection on acf^ount of their opposition to bills affecting the Catholics. In response to the petitions of the Lower House Sharpe pronounced their behavior " unexceptionable " and said it would be hard to take any measures that might be called persecution.^ In 1756, when the vote of £40,000 was passed, a double tax was placed upon the lands of all Roman Catholics ; to this there was little objection on the part of the administra- tion, for the reason that Catholics were excused from attend- ing "Musters as Militia." ~ Their petitions to Sharpe to veto the bill and their threats to appeal to the King in Council had no effect. Governor Sharpe, though he con- fessed that he did not think it so great an injustice, would have prevented the double taxation if he had been able. In the same year in which the double taxation was imposed it was even proposed in the Assembly to disarm all Roman Catholics in the province, and the opposition to this obnox- ious measure only prevailed by a slender majorit}' of one.^ Sharpe's conduct is to be highly commended, for though a Protestant he never allowed himself to be carried away by the intolerant spirit that prevailed. The Governor defended himself against all charges of favoritism in a frank and com- mendable manner, conscientiously opposed all attempts of the Assembly to persecute the Catholics, and refused to sanction any acts affecting them which were unreasonably severe. Yet, withal, we find no disloyalty among the Cath- olics. Rather is their treatment a reflection of the character of tlie Assembly itself and an indication of the general apathy that prevailed in the province in regard to the issue of the struggle for Canada. Instead of spending all its energy to restore the security and di Mty of Maryland, the Assembly wasted much of its valuable time in false charges 'Sharpe Cor., I., 408. Shiirpe, though a Protestant himself, said that they were really better than the Protestants. •'Sharpe Cor., I., 419-20. »The vote stood 19 to 18. Assem. Proc, Sept., 1750. H . 66 Maryland's Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. [372 and in the passing of laws against the " Papists," attempting to make them, as it were, a subterfuge to shield its own in- activity. We are not surprised, therefore, that Sharpe, as did others, harped incessantly upon the idea of an act of Parliament to compel the colonies, in particular Maryland and Peinisylvania, to help themselves. General Forbes's admonition, " Great Britain will not be blind to their Be- haviour . . . on this occasion," was verified in 1765. When, in 1766, Maryland was called to at count by the House of Commons, the task of defending her conduct fell upon Franklin, who explained it away as best he could.' Opposition to Proprietary rule existed from the very begin- ning of the province. The people at the start took the law- making power out of the hands of the Proprietor, to whom it was given by the charter ; the wisdom of the first Proprietor made him yield to a compromise that was unavoidable. This attitude of the Assembly developed by 1739 "a Political Faction," which opposed the Administration in everything. The Assembly of that year may be truly called an Assembly of grievances. From henceforward, "no Supplies without redress of grievances " became the rallying principle, and the French and Indian War gave them a glorious opportunity to enforce this principle and extend their encroachmouts upon his lordshij)'s prerogatives. The Assembly, however, carried their disputes to an extreme not warranted by the griev- ance^! themselves, as we have seen in the quarrels over the port duty and the tobacco tax. ^lany of the burgesses seem to have lost their heads and to have exhausted their powers of logic in their attempts to right fancied wrongs. Again, in the paper money controversy they took a weak stand, and if the Assemblv had been given a free rein it would have greatly depreciated the currency of the province. Subservi- ' Franklin took the view that Maryland's backwardness was the fault of her government and not of her people. Franklin's Works, III., pp. 4'J5-6 (Bigelow'sed.). 373] Maryland's Attltudcin the Strur/gle for Canada. 67 lult lip. ence to the example set by Pennsylvania, permitting the people of the frontier to suffer from constant depredations, allowing the troops to starve without more effective measures of assistance, were evidences of an attitude on the part of the Assembly far from commendable, and Maryland was justly called to account for ])crverting such an opportunity to the attainment of selfish and ambitious ends. Something can be said, however, in favor of the indepen- dent attitude of Maryland's Assembly. Frederick Calvert's imbecile conduct proved him a man unfit to rule a great province. The Assembly had acquired large privileges which by the charter belonged originally to the Proprietor. Pos- sibly these were gained more by force than by right, but it meant to retain them forever. Out of feudal elements had developed a government by the people too dear to English ideas of independence to be relinquished. Consequently when Frederick begun to interfere with these acquired rights of the province he was unconscious, or if conscious, indifferent to the mistake he was making. He objected to the appropriation of ordinary licenses for the expenses of the war, although his predecessor Charles had readily assented to such appropriations for public purposes on less imperative occasions. He instructed his Lieutenant-Gov- ernor to object to the duty on convicts for fear of a censure from the Crown, although previous to this the right to pro- hibit their importation altogether had been recognized and assented to. The attempt to interfere with the Assembly's taxing powers, which was dictated by a selfish regard for his own interests, made Lord Baltimore very un])opular. Furthermore, his unwillingness to give the grievances of his people a fair hearing, his efforts to smother petitions to the Crown, aggravated the feelings of the jirovincials and made them all the more determined to resist Proprietary rule. His liberality was again put to the test in 1756 when the Assembly proposed to tax his estates ; the result we have already seen. Maryland was less radical than Pennsyl- 1 I i ' 1 •it ■■' i i V ; 1 ' 1 : ! , 1 68 Maryland's Aitilude in the Str^M/r/le for Canada. [374 vania, and had Frederick even manifested the liberality of the Penns he might have saved his estates. He was a heavy loser by the war, as Sharpe constantly pointed out to him, and economy as well as justice seemed to dictate a generous policy. But here the Proprietary was at fault again, and the Assembly persisted in its schemes. The design of the Assembly was to limit the authority of the Proprietary in the province and transfer it to the repre- sentatives of the people. And Governor Sharpe says of the legislation of the Lower Plouse that it "manifestly tended to deprive the Government of all Power and to throw it entirely into the hands of the People as it is in Pensilvania." * This spirit of aggression was not new ; it had only been intensified by the indifferent conduct of their Proprietor. \\ hy did Frederick not visit his province nor concern himself about its difficulties, nor inquire as to whether or not the province was able or ought to bear alone the burden of protecting his property ? It was because he cared so little for it. Is it any wonder, therefore, that " the Lower House," as Sharpe says, " seemed to be determined to grant no Supplies unless they could at the same time cany certain points which tended to subvert in a great measure the Constitution."' No doubt Governor Sharj)e's pet term for the Lower House — "a Levelling House of Burgesses" — is an apt one, for they were scheming to belittle and perhaps overthrow their Proprietary government. Frederick's policy was calculated to help rather than hinder this design; it created discord which might have been avoided, and invited the interference of the P]nglish Crown in the affairs of the province. It seems to have been the intention of some of the leading men of the Assembly to play the colony into the hands of the Crown. The object ibr doing such a thing may be surmised ; under Royal government the Assembly anticipated a monopoly of the provincial administration. The events of the next few years show their mistake. 'Sharpe Cor., II., 177. 'Sharpe Cor., I., 391. }\n\^ »2 fteir ice "g of be ted of 375] Maryland's Attitude in the Strug(]le for Canada. G9 Of the indications that point to such a design several are important. Doubtless the remembrance of the Royal govern- ment in 1715 was still fresh in mind, and the Assembly thought the Crown a safe retreat from the rule of the Pro- prietary. We have already seen what an etibrt the Lower House made in 1739 to petition the king to redress their grievances. Again, in 1756, the Assembly attempted to have their grievances brought before the King in Council, and desired an agent in London to represent them. Lord Bal- timore did his utmost to repress anything of this sort, for fear that it " would plunge him into a Sea of Trouble." ' This opposition increased their hostility towards Proprietary gov- ernment. It was Sharpe's belief that it was the object of the leading men of the Assembly " to throw things into confusion " and thus exem])t themselves and their constituents from all taxes. Beyond a doubt there was a strong desire on the part of many to bring about some interference on the part of the Crown which would be disagreeable to the Proprie- tary. Many supply bills were framed by the I^ower House "to save a])pearanees " and throw the odium of rejecting them upon the administration, thereby making it appear, to use the Governor's words, "that it is entirely owing to the Government of Maryland and Pennsylvania being in the hands of Proprietors that money for His Majesty's Service is not so readily granted in these Provinces as in other Col- onies."^ Notwithstanding Sharpe's prediction of the ap- proaching fulfillment of the proverb " which tells us that after a Storm coraeth a Calm," the Lord Proprietary was dubious of the attitude of the Assembly toward him. This is clearly evinced by the base scheme which Calvert now proi)osed to Sharpe. It was a design for bribing the Assembly, his plan being to repress a " Turbulent and Malevolent Spirit in the Lower 'Sharpe Cor., I., 401. = Sharpe Cor., II., 179. ill 'I I 70 MarylamVs Atiitiidc in the Slnu/r/kfor Canada. [376 House of the Assembly." After advising Sharpe to be careful of his a]>pointments to the Council, the " chief strenjfth and support of his Lordship's rights," he explains that nineteen out of twenty of the Representatives of the people consult their own interests; "therefore by throwing out a Sop in a proper manner to these noisy animals it will render them not only silent, but tame enough to bear strok- ing and tractable enough to ibllow any directions that may be thought iit to be given to them." Calvert's scheme was not to bribe the leaders but to buy off their followers. It is briefly as follows : Of the fifty- eight members of the House he would find '* baits " for thirty. These '* baits " were to be offices in the gift of the Administration, as the fourteen sheriffs' places, and others. At the beginning of each Assembly, which continued for three years, a majority of the members of the House were to be quietly promised an office on the expiration of their terras, ])rovided they were favorably disposed toward the Proprietary and voted as the Administration dictated. By such a plan the Proprietary government hoped to silence " the pretended patriotic Spirit and clamour of the Lower House, and secure the harmonious working of the various branches of the Provincial Government like unto the wheels of a clock." Numerous details are prescribed in Calvert's letter^ for the perfecting of his scheme. The essence of it only is sufficient for our purpose, that is, to reflect the char- acter of the Proprietary at this time. Governor Sharpe's reply to this proposition illustrates well the integrity and firmness of a man who has been much misrepresented. While admitting it to be good policy to reward those who manifested a good disposition toward the government, he prov s the utter impracticability of the scheme proposed. "Scarcely a member in the House," says the Governor, 'A secret letter from Calvert to Sharpe. (from the Calvert Papers). Sharpe Cor., II., 375-380 ULl-U. I 377] MarylantVii Attitude in the Struggle for Canada. 71 rnor, 5-380 " would thank me for bestowing such OfBces on themselves or their Friends even without its being made a Condition that they sho.'.ld . . . give only one Vote contrary to their In- clinations." The attempt to execute such a design would have rendered the Proprietary government more odious to the people than ever, and the enemies of the govern- ment would have prevented it by legislation, though it is exceedingly doubtful if any of the members could have been ensnared into sacrificing their popularity and re]>u- tations for any such consideration. Never, jirobably, in the history of the province was a more foolish suggestion made to its Governor. Sharpe makes this very plain to Frederick's secretary, and takes the opportunity of observ- ing again that too much dictation on the part of the Pro- prietary and his friends in the matter of appointments had already greatly handicapped his administration.^ The moral rebuke which Sharpe administers to Calvert is well worth quoting : " The only way . . . for His Ldp to obtain a solid and lasting Influence ... is to appear steady and resolute, to reward as far ... as it is in his Power those who behave themselves well, but never bribe any of those who endeavour to carry their Points by Violence to desist or forbear ; Let His Ldp and those in Authority under him pursue such Measures as they will always be able to justify and in the End I will engage that a vast Majority of the Upper Class of People will become Friends to His Ldp and well wishers to his Govern't."* These indications point to the fact that the province was seeking, or meditating at any rate, relief from Proprietary rule. Had not the cessation of hostilities soon restored the equilibrium of the government, it is difficult to surmise what might have happened. If we look away to Pennsylvania at this time we find a very similar state of affairs. In responding to appeals for •Sharpe Cor., II., 426-431. "Sharpe Cor., II. ,430. 72 Marylan(Vs Altitude in the Strugfjie for Canada. [378 supplies the Assembly continued to tax the estates of the Proprietaries. This called forth renewed op])osition from the hitter, and the ])eoplc became so highly incensed that steps were taken to do away with the Proprietary , '>vernment. It was determined to jietition the Crown to ])urchase the province from the Proprietors and make it a Crown colony. Franklin was a_t]:;ain api)ointed the provincial ajjjent to convey the ])etition and urge the measure before the Ministry in London. With that object in view he sailed for P^ngland, November, 1764. The rupture with Great Britain, however, culminating the next year in the Stamp Act, soon subordi- nated all other questions, and Franklin exercised an "nfluence little anticipated, becoming not merely the agent of .is own province, Pennsylvania, but really the representative and defender of all the colonies. Though jNIaryland did not go so far as Pennsylvania, Md indeed had little occasion to, yet the applause given tc ^ acts of her sister province indicates that very little interl ence would have been sufficient to drive her to a similar step. Down to this time there had been no desire on the i)art of the colonies for union or independence of England, and there was no concerted action before 17Co for such ])urpose. The colonies were at variance in their governme- and the long distances between centers of population had prevented much intercommunication. All unity of action was merely sympa- thetic cooperation for defense. Indeed, the colonies had no grievances against the English Crown except the Navigation Acts. Maryland, in fact, did not come into contact with the Crown, for the latter had n ) taxing power over the province. The provincials were so pleased with the overlordship of the Crown that they made the mistake of supposing that Mary- land would be better off as a Koyal colony than as a Pro- prietary colony. The Assembly's reception of the report of Maryland's two commissioners to the Albany Convention was significant: " We do not conceive those Gentlemen were ich no the liice. the ^iry- 'ro- It of tion 379] MarylamVs Attitude in the Strw/r/lc for Chnada. 73 intended or impowered to agree upon any Plan of a proposed Union of the several Colonies ... of which one General Government may be formed in America". . . . After the close of the French and Indian War Great Britain's oppression changed entirely the phase of colonial affairs. The Stamp Act was the first direct menace of the liberties of the colonies. Aside from mere economical con- siderations, Great Britain doubtless had strong motives for the passage of such an act, — a desire to revenge the tardiness of the colonies in the late war and to remind them of her supremac over them ; but it was soon seen that the minis- ters whi lad favored such measures had made a mistake and an undue assertion of authority. Union was now felt to be a neces'-ity for the preservation of their liberties. All other disr ;;es and grievances were laid aside for the time; the p** ncials united for resistance, and Franklin was put on t defensive in London. The French and Indian War had been a general preparation, and the provinces, despite the backwardness of many of them, had at least learned the lesson that coiiperation was necessary in all international struggles, and the only effective method of opposing dangers which threatened all al'ie. Maryland b learned the lesson too, and manifested her willingness to unite with her sister colonies at this momen- tous period. The province had developed a spirit of aggres- sion and resistance to Proprietary rule. We have seen how jealously the Assembly guarded the revenues of the province, and how they opposed all attempts of the Proprietary to infringe their taxing powers when once acquired. Similar attempts by Parliament to interfere with the " franchises " and " liberties " of the colonies finally led to their inde- pendence. ilL rere