Studies in the civil, social and ecclesiastical history of early Maryland; lectures delivered to the young men of the Agricultural College of Maryland

Front matter

■aq:

BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME FROM THE

SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND

Preface

In a very marked degree Maryland history has suffered at the hands of its friends. Desiring to be just, and often truly enthusiastic, they have viewed its course in the direct light of their own prejudices, and the consequence has been a perverted, incomplete, unphilosophical presentation. For Maryland history is many-sided, having, in its course, involved many questions of very diverse kinds, — ecclesiastical, civil, social, political, military. Starting in a small, unique colony, with peculiar institutions created by a charter, itself the outcome of political notions that were fast losing their hold on the popular mind, it had to fight its way, often in weakness, through those institutions up into larger and truer ideas of human liberty. Fight its way; for there was always a sufficient number of conservative men, who held by what was old, to make the efforts of the liberal majority difficult, and to necessitate years of effort before success could crown their endeavors.

And this contest went on in all the departments of life, political, civil, social and ecclesiastical; in the last as eminently as in any other; for ecclesiastical affairs belonged as much to the political life of a people then as civil or social affairs did, and probably excited always far more of prejudice and passion than either of them.

To form a just estimate of the history of a people a man must transplant himself into the days which he is describing. For nearly as much as the Maryland of

VI PREFACE.

1776 differed from the Maryland of 1634, does the Maryland of 1893 differ from the Maryland of 1700, the period of the greatest and most radical changes in government and policy; and to stand now and argue about questions of the policy of the colony then from the civil or social ideas of this present time, is folly. We must view things from the standpoint of those times, — put ourselves in their place; for what might be folly now was wisdom then, and certainly what is wisdom now it would have proven wicked and absurd to have attempted then. And yet this is the way some have attempted to write Maryland history.

Again, Maryland has been unfortunate in the bent of mind of her historians. Too many have approached the matter in a partisan spirit, as if they would fortify a position, defend a claim, out of her records. In ecclesiastical matters this has been most notable. She has had her Protestant historians and her Romanist historians. She has also had her infidel, or at any rate agnostic, historians, and great questions have been tossed about, pretensions derided, claims scorned, assumptions set up, assertions made, with reckless effrontery.

All that can be said is, that such is not the way to write history. It is to be written by first determining the facts, viewing them according to their setting in the midst of their own times, explaining them according to the exigencies that created them or the purposes for which they were called into being. We are not wiser than the people of those former days. We may be better grown than they; our state of society may be more mature. But according to their day and generation they knew^ as well what was good for them as we know now what is good for us. And the way to write history is to recognize this fact.

PREFACE. VU

It is in this spirit I have attempted to write these lectures. I do not call the book a history, for that is an ambitious word and very often misapplied. It will be found, I trust, a series of panoramic views, full and sufficiently clear in outline to give every one definite and accurate ideas of that earlier life of our State. I have endeavored to write without prejudice, and to follow out the principles of historical writing that I would suggest to others. The people of the province were a sturdy set and worthy of all respect. They were of heterogeneous elements, viewed in whatever way we will, but at the same time they had that power of cohesion and assimilation that gave a oneness to their colonial life. And as they passed on from year to year they gave to Maryland features that commanded the esteem of the country and of the world.

It is gratifying to know that Maryland made herself. Neither king nor proprietary was ever her friend, save as her prosperity promoted their own. She grew, and did so by the liberality of the principles on which her government was administered.

It is my earnest hope that this work may commend itself to the favorable judgment of all that shall read it, and especially to the judgment of the children of Maryland herself.

T. C. G.

Table Of Contents

FIRST LECTURE.

INTKODUCTOBY. — COLONIZATION IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTUEY.

Apathy of the English; cause, the Reformation. By what title colonies might be planted. Oommission of Henry VH. to the Cabots. Gift of Pope Nicolas to Portugal; of Alexander VI. to Spain. Settlements of the Atlantic coast when charter to Maryland given. Early English attempts. Gilbert, Raleigh, Gtates. A province under a charter private property and alienable. Territory discovered or conquered belonged to Crown. Provincials, though English subjects, subject to arbitrary will of the king. Prerogative the rule of the day. Afterwards parliamentary control. Charter of Maryland: description of. James I. as lawmaker p. 9