Papenfuse Layout.4

From Colony to State IN THE EMPIRE 1752 to 1769.2 Like most of the British empire in North [ 123 ] America, Maryland was left largely to its own devices until From Surveying to The first fifty years of the eighteenth century were a time of the 1750s. To be sure, there was a constant struggle for power Cartography institutional development and internal growth for the colo- within the colony. Both Lords Baltimore took an active inter- nies. As Edmund Burke was to point out in 1775 as he looked est in the affairs of their province and were forever at odds back on what seemed better times, it was a period of “wise with factions in the General Assembly. This very conflict and salutary neglect” during which the colonies were allowed strengthened the colonial assembly’s capacity for self-reli- to go much their own way.1 In Maryland the Calverts worked ance. It made it easier for Maryland to join the movement for diligently to maintain political and economic control. After independence in the 1770s, although the Proprietary, or Benedict Leonard Calvert, Cecil’s grandson, renounced his “Court,” Party cultivated its interest with such care and acu- Roman Catholicism and succeeded to the title as fourth Lord men that the decision for independence was far more painful Baltimore in 1715, the king restored his right to direct the in Maryland than in most of the other twelve colonies.3 government of the province, which had been taken from his Cartographic knowledge of Maryland did not advance father by force in 1689. Benedict Calvert enjoyed his new much beyond Herrman’s map, except for Walter Hoxton’s power for only eight weeks. He died on 16 April 1715, and the chart of 1735 (fig.n39), until the 1750s. As part of an overall title passed to his sixteen-year-old son, Charles. It was Charles’s policy of imperial reorganization and administration, the task, once he gained his majority, to replenish the depleted English Board of Trade, which was entrusted with monitor- family treasury from taxes that were his right under the Mary- ing the affairs of the empire, continued information-gather- land charter. In this regard he and his son Frederick, who ing activities and gradually built a formidable archive of succeeded to the title in 1751, proved capable of choosing maps and data on each of the North American colonies.4 men who served them well as colonial administrators. One of the best was Horatio Sharpe, who governed Maryland from figure 41 Detail from Henry Popple, A Map of the British Empire in America, 1733, Sheet 6, Pea- body Library Collection of the Johns Hopkins Universi- ty, MSA SC 1213-1-299. [ 125 ] From Surveying to Cartography HENRY POPPLE Popple’s map was widely disseminated. Not only was it LEWIS EVANS AND JOHN MITCHELL figure 42 copied by other cartographers but it also appeared in the Detail from Lewis Evans, In 1733 a former clerk of the Board of Trade, Henry Popple, home of at least one prominent Marylander. Figure 41 is a By the 1750s and the final phases of the Great War for Em- A General Map of the Middle published a charming atlas of the British empire in America, plate from the set owned by Charles Carroll of Annapolis pire with France, the British authorities had begun to take a British Colonies in America, parts of which he had completed as early as 1727. It included (1702–1782) and by his son Charles Carroll of Carrollton renewed interest in closer regulation of the colonies. From 1755, Huntingfield Collec- a plate showing Maryland (fig.n41). Popple advertised that he (1737–1832), the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of their perspective, the war with France was being fought for tion, MSA SC 1399-1-606. had the support of his former employers in the undertaking, Independence and a major force in Maryland’s transition the security of the thirteen colonies and therefore the colo- but his claim was disavowed in 1755 by the British govern- from colony to state.5 nies should bear a major part of the cost. Opinion on both ment because the French had used his map to advance their sides of the Atlantic was divided on the issue of paying for claims to territory in the New World. imperial defense. The controversy unleashed a torrent of figure 43a (top) figure 43b (bottom) Upper portion of Joshua Fry Lower portion of Joshua Fry and Peter Jefferson, A Map and Peter Jefferson, A Map of the most Inhabited part of of the most Inhabited part of Virginia containing the whole Virginia containing the whole Province of Maryland . , Province of Maryland . , 1751 [1775], Huntingfield Col- 1751 [1775], Huntingfield Col- lection, MSA SC 1399-1-61a. lection, MSA SC 1399-1-61b. figure 43c Detail from the lower portion of Joshua Fry and Peter Jefferson, A Map of the most Inhabited part of Virginia containing the whole Province of Maryland . , 1751 [1775], Huntingfield Collection, MSA SC 1399-1-61b. publications about the colonies and on the whys and where- Map, which came Time enough to my Knowledge to be mentioned pects of life in the South, especially the planting of the vile fores of colonial administration. In 1755 the general state of here, tho’ not to be rectified; and that is, the Breadth of the Penin- weed, tobacco, which he felt was as bad as spirituous liquors cartographic knowledge of Maryland was summarized in two sula from Fenwick’s Island to the South side of Little Choptank, and the importation of convict labor as corrupting influ- maps, one by Lewis Evans (fig.n42), A General Map of the which I make 65 Miles, whereas Mr. Parsons, one of the Survey- ences. “It is reckoned,” he wrote, that “there may be 300 to Middle British Colonies in America, and the considerably less ors, who ran the line across, informs me that it should have been 400 felons or miscreants imported yearly to Maryland from detailed Map of the British and French Dominions in North 70.7 England; this importation of vile levies is sufficient to corrupt America . , by John Mitchell. The Mitchell map was drawn any plantation settlement or improvement.”9 Nor did he from maps in the archives of the Board of Trade and is most JOSHUA FRY AND PETER JEFFERSON think highly of one of Maryland’s better-regarded governors, significant for the role it played in the Peace Treaty of 1783– Sir Francis Nicholson (governor from 1694 to 1699), who 84, which ended the War of the American Revolution. It was For at least forty years after the publication of Joshua Fry and moved the capital to Annapolis from St. Mary’s City.10 Nichol- on the basis of Mitchell’s map that the boundaries of the new Peter Jefferson’s Map of the most Inhabited part of Virginia con- son is best remembered for his influence on the master plan United States were set.6 taining the whole Province of Maryland . (figs.n43a and 43b) for the development of Annapolis. His two circles and main in 1753, there would be no new mapping of Maryland. Dur- streets laid out in the direction of the points of the compass [ 127 ] The Evans map is more complete for Maryland and is de- ing the American Revolution, our French allies simply pub- have lent considerable charm to the city and snarled traffic From Surveying to rived from much the same sources as Mitchell’s. Evans was a lished a French edition of Fry and Jefferson (1777, fig.n56). ever since. Douglass characterized Nicholson as “a knight er- Cartography surveyor in Pennsylvania. On one occasion he offered his ser- Not until Dennis Griffith published his map in 1795 (fig.n66) rant governor; by his cursing, swearing, and hypocritical devices to Lord Baltimore in the dispute with the Penns over would be there anything better than Fry and Jefferson in its votional exercises, he was at times made use of by the court the northern boundary of Maryland, asserting that he could general outline or in many of its details. The emphasis of the in dirty affairs; particularly when any new encroachments help substantiate the Calvert claim to the three lower coun- Fry and Jefferson map is on Virginia, and, as Edward Bennett upon the privileges of a people were designed with harsh us- ties of Pennsylvania, known collectively as Delaware. His of- Mathews, the noted nineteenth-century historian of Mary- age.”11 Nicholson had been governor of Massachusetts before fer was firmly rejected by Lord Baltimore in 1753 as “hardly land cartography, points out, “there is little indicated besides coming to Maryland and had not been popular there. worth notice,” and he published his map with the boundaries names and a few roads on the Maryland portion.” It even On the whole, however, Douglass restricted his critical of Maryland substantially as they are today. In the printed picks up erroneous information from earlier maps—placing commentary to a relatively few matters, and on balance pro- Analysis that accompanied his map Evans admitted that he Baltimore on the Bush River, for example. Despite its sparse- vided a good survey of Maryland at midcentury. He included had not drawn Maryland well: ness and some inaccuracies, however, the Fry-Jefferson map valuable insights into the use of slaves in the production of was to exert “a great influence on the cartographic represen- tobacco, Maryland’s most valuable crop and major source of The greatest Part of virginia is composed with the Assistance of tation of Maryland .

Load more