Page images



defiance this obnoxious act, and more effectually, though more peacefully, prevented its execution.

9. The British merchants sent no more prohibited goods to Maryland; and the ministry, alarmed at the opposition, promised the repeal of the duty on all articles except tea.

While Maryland stood firm, the other colonies began to give way. New York deserted the association; Pbiladelphia followed. Several merchants of Baltimore requested the associators to consider the matter. Delegates from all the counties met at Annapolis, but so far from yielding their consent, they denounced both the proposition and its authors. At last, Boston gave up the system. Maryland never abandoned its pledge.



Public Officers--Tithes--Expiration of the Law— ProclamationParty Spirit--Dulany and Carroll.

1. The public officers did not receive regular salaries, but were paid by fees given for each service performed. The profits of some officers became enormous, and the people became restless under these exactions.

Questions.—9. What did the ministry promise? What is said of Maryland ? Did Boston yield ? Did Maryland? 1. What is said of the pay of public officers ?

2. There was also another burden. The clergy of the Church of England, which had been established by law, were supported by tithes, or taxes. The rate was, at first, forty pounds of tobacco a head, afterwards, thirty pounds. As the population increased, the income of the parishes became


3. In the spirit of opposition to unjust burdens, these too did not escape. The legislature endeavored to diminish the amount of the fees, and obtain other reforms. The House of Delegates, having ordered the arrest of a clerk for taking illegal fees, was prorogued by the governor.

4. The law that gave the clergy thirty pounds of tobacco a head, instead of forty, having expired, they claimed that the old law was in force, and the governor issued a proclamation fixing the old rates of fees.

5. The intolerant spirit which had cheerfully sustained the tax for the support of the clergy, as a weapon of offence against non-conformists, was now passing away. The clergy moreover being appointed by the governor, the sympathies, therefore, as well as the interests of that body, were likely to be with the governor and his party, who were the representatives of arbitrary power.

Questions.—2. What other burden ? 3. What did the legislature endeavor to do? 4. What law expired? What did the clergy claim ?

What proclamation ? 6. What is said in this section ?



6. The people, therefore, were generally opposed to the clergy, and as they never would submit to the exercise of arbitrary power, the proclamation at once roused up all the fire of “The Sons of Liberty."

7. Parties were immediately formed. The governor, officials, and their adherents, formed one party; the body of the people, headed by the lawyers, the other.

Great excitement prevailed ; public opinion was appealed to in every mode.

8. Prominent among the disputants were the leaders of the two parties. That of the party of privilege, was Daniel Dulany, at that time the most eminent lawyer in the province, who also had done the people good service in the days of the stamp act, but who now formed an exception to his class, which was all with the people. He held the most lucrative office, and resisted every attempt to infringe upon the profits of place. The leader of the popular party was a young man, spirited, wealthy, and highly educated, one of the brightest in the galaxy of bright names that have shed lustre upon the history of Maryland - Charles Carroll of Carrollton.

Questions.-6. What was the effect of the proclamation? 7. What parties were formed ? 8. Who were the leaders ?



tion--Return to Maryland - First entrance into Public Life—First Citizen-Dulany-Triumph of Carroll.

[ocr errors]

1. This eminent man, and intrepid champion of liber. ty, was descended from a family which had settled in the province before the revolution of 1689. He was born at Annapolis in 1737, and at eight years of age was sent to France

to be educated. CHARLES CARROLL, of Carrollton. 2. At the age of twenty he commenced the study of law in London. He returned to Maryland in 1764, just in time to enter into the strife which his countrymen were waging against tyranny. As he was a Roman Catholic, he was , numbered among the disfranchised. But this personal injustice, while it excluded him from the councils, did not prevent hiin from sympathising in the wrongs of his people.

Questions.-1. Birth and education? 2. Why disfranchised?



3. His first entrance into the conflict was his opposition to the stamp act, and the taxation of commerce. But now he had to deal with a powerful and skilful adversary. Mr. Dulany was his equal in education, his superior in age, experience and reputation; in fine, with all the odds in his favor.

4. Trusting, however, in the justice of his cause and the integrity of his purpose, Carroll did not hesitate to enter into the contest.

The dispute was carried on under the names of “ First Citizen" and "Antilore," Carroll adopting the first


5. The way by which he came to adopt this singular title was as follows: Dulany had written a dialogue, as if held by two citizens, and, instead of giving them names, he called them “ First Citizen” and “ Second Citizen.” He so managed this supposed discussion that the “First Citizen,” who was meant to represent the party opposed to the proclamation, was defeated in the argument. Carroll assumed the name of the “First Citizen," and carried on the dialogue with more justice to the side represented by that character.

6. Dulany found a foeman worthy of his steel, and the man of straw which he had made proved a

Questions.-3. What was his first entrance into the conflict ? Who was his opponent? 4. What name did he adopt? 6. How came he to adopt it? 6. Who was his opponent?

« PreviousContinue »