to the duties of his office earned for him the esteem and confidence of the king. But in 1624, he resigned, either because his oath of office was incompatible with his religious belief as a Roman Catholic, or lest it might become his duty as Secretary, to execute the penal laws against the members of that church.

3. As was mentioned in the previous chapter, the spirit of intolerance pervaded England, in fact, the whole world. Although Sir George felt assured of the protection of the king, he, determined to seek another land, and to found a new state, where, what hitherto was unknown, conscience should be free, and every man might worship God according to his heart, in peace and perfect security.

4. At first, he fixed his eyes on Newfoundland, in the settlement of which he had before been interested. But finding the climate and soil unsuitable, he determined to seek a more genial country in the south. Accordingly, in 1628, he sailed to Virginia, with the intention of settling within the limits of that colony, or, more probably, to explore the uninhabited country on its border, in order to secure a grant of it from the king.

5. Being unwilling to subscribe to the oath of allegiance that was tendered him by the colony,

Questions.-3. What did he determine to do? 4. Where did he first think of settling? Why did he abandon that intention? When did he set sail and for what place? What was his design? 5. Why did he leave Virginia ?

LORD BALTIMORE.

19

he left their borders and explored the Chesapeake above the settlements.

6. He was pleased with the beautiful and wellwooded country, which surrounded the noble inlets and indentations of the great bay, and determined there to found his colony. He felt satisfied that he had selected a territory possessing all the elements of future prosperity, fertile in soil, traversed by majestic rivers, and enjoying a climate unsurpassed elsewhere upon the continent.

7. Lord Baltimore returned to England, it is supposed, in 1629. In 1632, without any difficulty, he procured from his Majesty, Charles I, son of his former patron, the promise of a grant. The patent was prepared by Lord Baltimore himself, but before it was executed, he died, on April 15th 1632.

8. His eldest son, Cecil, having inherited his father's title and estate, received from the king the Charter promised to the father. The date of the Charter is the 20th of June, in the eighth year of the reign of Charles I, or 1632. The country granted by this charter was named Maryland, in honor of Queen Henrietta Maria, instead of Crescentia, which was to have been the original name

Questions.-6. Where did he determine to found his colony? 7. When did he return to England? When, and from whom did he obtain his charter? Who prepared it? When did he die! 8. Who received the charter? What was its date? What was the country called?

9. The Virginia colony opposed the scheme of Lord Baltimore, claiming that the grant transferred to others, territory belonging to it. William Claiborne had, under virtue of powers granted him by the Virginia colony, established a trading post on Kent Island, a part of the Maryland grant.

10. But as the charters of Virginia had been dissolved, the king and his ministers considered that the right was vested in the crown, of re-granting such parts of the territory of Virginia formerly included within the lines of these charters, as had not before been given to particular individuals. As will be seen, this was a source of future trouble in the colony of Maryland.

Questions.-9. Who opposed the scheme of Baltimore? Why? 10. How did the king and his ministers regard this claim?

THE CHARTER.

CHAPTER III.

21

THE CHARTER--Powers granted by the Charter-Land and Churches--"Hitherto uncultivated" lands--Application of the term--Claiborne-Swedes and DutchBoundary lines by the Charter.

1. By this charter, Cecil, now Lord Baltimore, and his heirs, were created absolute Proprietaries of Maryland. The Proprietary had full, free and absolute power to enact laws, with the advice, assent, and approbation of the freemen of the Province. But another clause of the charter seems to grant this power to the

Proprietary without the necessity of calling the Assembly, "provided these ordinances be consonant to reason, and be not repugnant nor contrary, but (so far as may be conveniently done) agreeable to the laws, statutes or rights of the kingdom of England," and further these ordinances must not

Questions.-1. What were the powers of the proprietary? What is said of another clause in the charter?

interfere with the persons or property of any one. This afterwards led to some disagreement between the Proprietary and the Assembly.

2. The Proprietary had full power to grant to his colonists such tracts of land as they might purchase. He was also granted the "license and faculty of erecting and founding churches, chapels and places of worship in convenient and suitable places, and of causing the same to be dedicated according to the laws of our kingdom of England."

3. In the second section of the charter,-in that part which is technically called the recital-it is said that Calvert "being animated with a laudable and pious zeal for extending the Christian religion, and the territories of our empire, besought leave to transport a numerous colony of the English nation to a certain region afterwards to be described, in a country hitherto uncultivated and partly occupied by savages."

4. The opponents to this charter claimed that these words hitherto uncultivated rendered the grant void, because, within the limits marked out by the charter, there were already settlements, namely, one on Kent Island, established by William Claiborne, and one by the Swedes and Dutch.

5. Whether there is any validity in these objections or not, there is some doubt whether these

Questions.-2. What is said of granting lands? Of building churches? 3. What is said in the second section of the charter? 4. What did the opponents to the charter claim? 5. What is said of this objection?