CH, Tx.] MARYLAND . -69 CHAPTER IX . MARYLAND . § 103 . The province of Maryland was included originally in the patent of the Southern or Virginia company ; and upon the disso lution of that company it reverted to the crown . King Charles the First , on the 20th June , 1632 , granted it by patent to Cecilius Calvert Lord Baltimore , the son of George Calvert Lord Balti more , to whom the patent was intended to have been made, but he died before it was executed . By the charter the king erected it into a province , and gave it the name of Maryland , in honor of his queen , Henrietta Maria , the daughter of Henry the Fourth of France , to be held of the crown of England , he yearly , forever, rendering two Indian arrows. The territory was bounded by a right line drawn from Watkin ' s Point, on Chesapeake Bay, to the ocean on the east, thence to that part of the estuary of Dela ware on the north which lieth under the 40th degree , where New England is terminated ; thence in a right line, by the degree aforesaid , to the meridian of the fountain of Potomac ; thence fol by lowing its course the farther bank to its confluence with the ; Chesapeake and thence to Watkin ' s Point . 2 § 104 . The territory thus severed from Virginia was made im , mediately subject to the crown and was granted in full and abso , lute propriety to Lord Baltimore and his heirs saving the alle , , giance and sovereign dominion to the crown with all the rights , , regalities and prerogatives which the Bishop of Durham enjoyed , , in that palatinate to be held of the crown as of Windsor Castle , , in the county of Berks in free and common socage and not in , by capite or knight ' s service . The charter further provided that , by the proprietary should have authority and with the consent of , , the freemen or their delegates assembled for the purpose to make , all laws for the province " so that such laws be consonant to , , ; ; 11 Holmes ' s Ann . 213 1 Chalm . Annals 201 202 Bacon ' s Laws of Maryland , ; ( 1765 ) 2 Doug . Summ . 353 & c . , , , ; ; 2 1 Haz . Coll . 327 to 337 1 Chalm . Annals 202 Charters of N . A . Provinces 4to , London 1766 . 70 HISTORY OF THE COLONIES. [ BOOK I. reason , and not repugnant or contrary , but as far as conveniently might be , agreeable to the laws , statutes , customs , and rights of this our realm of England .” ] The proprietary was also vested with full executive power ; and the establishment of courts of jus tice was provided for. The proprietary was also authorized to levy subsidies , with the assent of the people in assembly . The inhabi tants and their children were to enjoy all the rights , immunities , and privileges of subjects born in England . The right of the , advowsons of the churches according to the establishment of Eng , , land and the right to create manors and courts baron to confer , , titles of dignity to erect ports and other regalities were expressly given to the proprietary . An exemption of the colonists from all , , by talliages on their goods and estates to be imposed the crown ; was expressly covenanted for in perpetuity an exemption which had been conferred on other colonies for years only . License was ; granted to all subjects to transport themselves to the province , and its products were to be imported into England and Ireland by under such taxes only as were paid other subjects . And the , usual powers in other charters to repel invasions to suppress , , rebellions & c . were also conferred on the proprietary . $ 105 . Such is the substance of the patent . And Chalmers has , with some pride asserted that “ Maryland has always enjoyed the unrivalled honor of being the first colony which was erected into by a province of the English Empire and governed regularly laws enacted in a provincial legislature . ” 3 It is also observable that there is no clause in the patent which required any transmission , of the province laws to the king or providing for his approbation or assent . Under this charter Maryland continued to be gov , , erned with some short intervals of interruption down to the , by period of the American Revolution the successors of the origi nal proprietary . $ 106 . The first emigration made under the auspices of Lord , , Baltimore was in November 1632 and consisted of about two hun , dred gentlemen of considerable fortune and rank and their adher , ents being chiefly Roman Catholics . “ He laid the foundation of , , this province ” says Chalmers 5 “ upon the broad basis of security to , property and of freedom of religion granting in absolute fee fifty , ; , ; , p i i . 3 ? 7 & c . 1 . ch Haz Coll Chalm Annals 202 Marsh Colon . 2 . 69 . , , , 8 Id . ? i ' s Chalmers Annals 203 204 205 . 200 , 4 Id . 6 Id . 203 207 208 . CH. Ix.] MARYLAND . acres of land to every emigrant ; establishing Christianity agree ably to the old common law , of which it is a part , without allow ing pre-eminence to any particular sect. The wisdom of his choice soon converted a dreary wilderness into a prosperous colony .” It is certainly very honorable to the liberality and public spirit of the proprietary , that he should have introduced into his fundamental policy the doctrine of general toleration and equality among Chris tian sects (for he does not appear to have gone further ) ; and have thus given the earliest example of a legislator inviting his subjects to the free indulgence of religious opinion . This was anterior to the settlement of Rhode Island ; and therefore merits the enviable rank of being the first recognition among the colo nists of the glorious and indefeasible rights of conscience . Rhode Island seems, without any apparent consciousness of co -operation , to have gone further , and to have protected an universal freedom of religious opinion in Jew and Gentile , in Christian and Pagan , without any distinction to be found in its legislation . , by $ 107 . The first legislative assembly of Maryland held the , ; freemen at large was in 1634 - 1635 but little of their proceed ings is known . No acts appear to have been adopted until 1638 , , - 1639 3 when provision was made in consequence of an increase , , of the colonists for a representative assembly called the House , ; by by of Assembly chosen the freemen and the laws passed the , , by assembly and approved the proprietary or his lieutenant were to be of full force . The assembly was afterwards divided into an , , upper and lower house . At the same session an act which may , , be considered as in some sort a Magna Charta was passed de , , claring among other things that “ Holy Church within this prov ; ince shall have all her rights and prerogatives ” “ that the inhab itants shall have all their rights and liberties according to the ; , great charter of England ” and that the goods of debtors if not , , sufficient to pay their debts shall be sold and distributed pro rata , saving debts to the proprietary . 4 In 1649 an act was passed pun , , , , , , 1 ] Chalmers ' s Annals 213 218 219 363 . Walsh ' s Appeal 429 Note B . , ; by 3 [ That is to say none were agreed upon the assembly and the proprietary but by , acts appear to have been passed by the assembly which were rejected the proprietary by . and others were proposed the proprietary which the assembly refused to adopt See , , , , History of Bozman Maryland 295 300 - 318 . This author conjectures though the , records are silent on the subject that the difficulty between the proprietary and the assembly right to was that each claimed the originate the laws . ] , , , ; ; 4 Bacon ' s Laws of Maryland ch . 2 of 1638 1650 ch . 1 1 Marsh . Colon . & c . ch . , , , , ; p 2 . 73 1 Chalm . Ann . 213 219 220 225 . 72 HISTORY OF THE COLONIES. [ BOOK I. ishing blasphemy, or denying the Holy Trinity , with death and confiscation of goods and lands ; ? and, strangely enough after , , such a provision , in the same act after a preamble reciting that the confining of conscience in matters of religion hath frequently , fallen out to be of dangerous consequence it is enacted that no , person “ professing to believe in Jesus Christ ” shall be molested , , for or in respect to his religion or the free exercise thereof nor any way compelled to the belief or exercise of any other religion . 2 It seems not to have been even imagined that a belief in the di , vine mission of Jesus Christ could in the eyes of any sect of , Christians be quite consistent with the denial of the Trinity . This act was confirmed among the perpetual laws in 1676 . , , $ 108 . The legislation of Maryland does not indeed appear , to have afforded an uniform protection in respect to religion such as the original policy of the founder would seem to indicate . , Under the protectorate of Cromwell Roman Catholics were ex ; , pressly denied any protection in the province and all others , by “ who profess faith in God Jesus Christ though differing in , , judgment from the doctrine worship or discipline publicly held , forth ” were not to be restrained from the exercise of their relig ion . 3 In 1696 the Church of England was established in the ; , province and in 1702 the liturgy and rites and ceremonies of the Church of England were required to be pursued in all the , , , churches with such toleration for dissenters however as was pro vided for in the act of 1 William and Mary . And the introduc , , tion of the test and abjuration acts in 1716 excluded all Roman Catholics from office . 5 $ 109 . It appears to have been a policy adopted at no great distance of time after the settlement of the colony to provide for the public registration of conveyances of real estates .