[
259]
for the claims of
Baltimore,
Maryland would equally
enjoy the benefits of republican liberty.
Great as was the temptation to assert independence, it would not have prevailed, could the peace of the province have been maintained.
But who, it might well be asked, was the sovereign of
Maryland?
Her ‘beauty and extraordinary goodness’ had been to her a fatal dowry; and
Maryland was claimed by four separate aspirants.
Virginia1 was ever ready to revive its rights to jurisdiction beyond the
Potomac, and
Clayborne had already excited attention by his persevering opposition;
2 Charles II., incensed against Lord Baltimore for his adhesion to the rebels and his toleration of schismatics, had issued a commission to
Sir William Davenant;
3 Stone was the active deputy of Lord Baltimore; and parliament had already appointed its commissioners.
In the ordinance
4 for the reduction of the rebellious
colonies,
Maryland had not been included; if Charles II.
had been inconsiderately proclaimed by a temporary officer, the offence had been expiated;
5 and, as assurances had been given of the fidelity of
Stone to the commonwealth, no measures against his authority were designed.
6 Yet the commissioners were in-
structed to reduce “all the plantations within the
Bay of the
Chesapeake;
7” and it must be allowed, that
Clayborne might find in the ambiguous phrase, intend-
ed perhaps, to include only the settlements of
Virginia, a sufficient warrant to stretch his authority to
Maryland.
The commissioners accordingly entered the province; and, after much altercation with
Stone, depriving
