date. Some of the publications consequent upon that election, having ascribed to him an improper interference with the measures adopted by the people of his county to celebrate their victory, he at length published a vindication of his conduct, in which he entered into an elaborate defence of the proclamation. It displays abilities of a high order, but abounds, as was usual with the political essays of that period, with harsh reflections upon the conduct and motives of the principal leaders of the opposition. He had thus thrown down the gauntlet: and the defiance was not long unanswered. Thomas Johnson, William Paca, and Samuel Chase, all lawyers of eminence, distinguished members of the lower house, and leaders of the opposition, now entered the lists as his antagonists. The promises of Mr. Chase's early efforts against the stamp act, had been fully redeemed. Still the fearless champion of popular rights, his mind swayed, and his energy inspired confidence, wherever he moved. In his co-adjutors, on this occasion, he had men worthy to be called his peers. The reputation of Thomas Johnson, does not rest alone upon the memorials of our colonial history. It has a prouder record, in the history of his State, in the councils of the American nation. Distinguished as the first governor of Maryland, after her elevation to the rank of an independent State, and as one of her ablest representatives in the continental Congress, his efforts in this mere provincial controversy are adverted to, not as the evidences of his character, but as the earnest of those virtues afterwards so conspicuous, in the discharge of his arduous and dangerous duties, during the darkest hours of the revolution. At this early period, he held a professional rank, and enjoyed a degree of public respect in his own colony, sufficient for enviable distinction. Mr. Paca had been, for several years, the representative of Annapolis, and was now, at the early age of thirty-three, the compeer of such men as Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Chase. Engaged in the study of the law, at Annapolis, at the same period, and concurring in their general views of public rights and policy, the foundation was there laid, of an intimacy and a personal attachment between Mr. Chase and Mr. Paca, which endured throughout life. The latter, more bland and conciliating in his demeanor, but as firm in his purposes, was found side by side with the

former, in the transactions of this period, as the friend of private life, and the fellow-laborer in public duties. Thus bound together by the firmest bonds of life, how beautifully was it ordained that their names should pass down to after ages, associated in the same close connexion on the Declaration of American Independence! With such men as antagonists, and such a cause to sustain, there was fearful odds, even against one so gifted as Mr. Hammond: and the controversy, therefore, terminated with his first essay, and their reply. (16) Presenting some new views of the measure in question, which was principally sustained by Mr. Hammond under the ordinance power of the charter, their publications display an ability which entitles them to rank with those of Dulany and Carroll: and all of them deserve to be rescued from the oblivion to which they are passing, with the subject from which they sprang.

the lower house

sition to the pro

clamation.

The course of the colony, in relation to this protracted controversy, was such as we would naturally expect from Proceedings of a people on the eve of a revolution, in which they in 1771, in oppo- were to manifest the fullest acquaintance with the principles of political liberty, and the most unyield. ing adherence to them under every circumstance of privation and danger. The first Assembly held after the issuing of the proclamation, was convened in October, 1771. During a session of more than two months, every effort was then made by the lower house to procure the withdrawal of the proclamation. The journals of that session abound with interesting discussions of the subjects. in controversy; and its proceedings display a high degree of ability. Prominent in these discussions were Messrs. Chase, Paca and Johnson, Charles Graham of Calvert, John Hall of Annapolis, and Edward Tilghman of Queen Ann's, all of whom were the opponents of the proclamation. Defenders it had none: for although there were one or two dissentients on the propositions relative to its advisers, those denouncing the measure itself, as illegal and oppressive, were unanimously adopted. By the resolves of that session, the right of taxation was asserted to be the exclusive right of the Assembly; and the

(16) Mr. Hammond's vindication will be found in Green's Gazette of 29th July, 1773: and the joint reply of Messrs. Johnson, Paca, and Chase, in Gazette of 9th September, 1773.

exercise of it by any other power pronounced unconstitutional and oppressive: the proclamation, and the regulation of fees in the land office, were declared to be arbitrary and illegal; and their advisers stigmatized as enemies to the peace, welfare and happiness of the province, and to its laws and constitution. (17) In the address of the lower house to the governor, which followed up these resolves, the arguments against the legality and propriety of these measures were closed by an appeal, remarkable for its just conceptions of their character. "Permit us (says this address,) to entreat your excellency to review this unconstitutional assumption of power, and consider its pernicious consequences. Applications to the public offices, are not of choice but necessity. Redress cannot otherwise be had for the smallest or most atrocious injuries; and as surely as that necessity does exist, and a binding force in the proclamation or regulation of fees in the land office be admitted, so certainly must the fees thereby established be paid to obtain redress. In the sentiments of a much approved and admired writer, suppose the fees imposed by this proclamation could be paid by the good people of this province with the utmost ease, and that they were the most exactly proportioned to the value of the officers' services; yet, even in such a supposed case, this proclamation ought to be regarded with abhorrence. For who are a free people? Not those over whom government is reasonably and equitably exercised; but those who live under a government so constitutionally checked and controlled, that proper provision is made against its being otherwise exercised. This act of power is founded on the destruction of constitutional security. If the proclamation may rightfully regulate the fees, it has a right to fix any other quantum. If it has a right to regulate, it has a right to regulate to a million; for where does its right stop? At any given point? To attempt to limit the right, after granting it to exist at all, is contrary to justice. If it has a right to tax us, then, whether our money shall continue in our own pockets, depends no longer on us, but on the prerogative." (18)

(17) Journals of 18th October, 1771.

(18) Journals of 22d November, 1771. This address was presented to the house by Thomas Johnson, then a delegate from Anne Arundel; and there were but three dissentients from its adoption.

in 1773.

These remonstrances were unavailing. The governor adhered to his original views, sustaining them by the emphatic declaraNew election tion, that instead of recalling his proclamation, were it necessary to enforce it, he would renew it in stronger terms. Compromise was now hopeless; and the refractory Assembly was prorogued. It was not again convened before its dissolution in April, 1773; when a new election was ordered for the ensuing month. The discussion between Mr. Dulany and Mr. Carroll was then going on; and the proclamation became again the engrossing topic of public controversy. Parties were rallied; and the elections, which were conducted entirely with reference to this measure, were attended with great excitement, and again resulted in the complete triumph of the opposition. (19)

(19) The extreme and general excitement produced by this controversy, is manifest from the triumphs which followed the victory of the people. Subjoined is an account of the Celebration at Annapolis, (extracted from Green's Gazette,) which corresponds, in the manner of celebration, with the rejoicings throughout the province :

"We are requested to insert the following account of the election :

"Last Friday was held the election for the city, when Messrs. William Paca and Matthias Hammond, were chosen by a very large majority of the freemen, indeed, without any opposition; much was expected, as Mr. Anthony Stewart had long declared himself a candidate for the city, even before a vacancy by the resignation of Mr. Hall, whose friends in the county insisted upon his taking a poll there. Mr. Stewart's private character justly recommended him to the esteem of his fellow citizens, but as he was originally proposed to turn out Mr. Hall or Mr. Paca, who stood high in the esteem of the people, and as a strong suspicion was entertained of his political principles and court connexions, Mr. Hammond was put up in opposition to him, and on the morning of the election so great was the majority of votes for Mr. Hammond, that Mr. Stewart thought it prudent to decline. "The polls being closed, and Messrs. Paca and Hammond declared duly elected, it was proposed and universally approved of, to go in solemn procession to the gallows, and to bury under it the much detested proclamation. "A description of the funeral obsequies may not be disagreeable to the public:

"First were carried two flags with the following labels: on one, Liberty; on the other, No Proclamation. Between the flags walked the two Representatives; a clerk and sexton preceded the coffin, on the left the grave digger, carrying a spade on his shoulder-the Proclamation was cut out of Antilon's first paper, and deposited in the coffin, near which moved slowly

Origin of the

tion.

Cotemporaneous with the proclamation controversy, was another, conducted with equal spirit and ability, and contributing largely to the excitements of this period. In Vestry Act ques- intrinsic interest, the Vestry Act question was scarcely inferior to the former; but it did not involve the same high constitutional doctrines; nor did its discussions lead to the same investigation of the principles of government, and of the proper securities of political rights. Yet although a mere technical question, it was so mingled with the political contests of this period, that we shall be pardoned for adverting to its general nature and objects. It has been seen, that the church of England became the established church of the colony in 1692; and that provision was then made for the established clergy, by the imposition of a poll tax of 40 lbs. of tobacco on the taxables of each parish. This tax was assessed with the public dues, and sent out to the sheriff for collection, for the use of the minister. By succeeding acts, it was continued down to the act of 1702, upon which the church establishment principally rested at this period. Under the inspection law of 1763, which regulated clergy dues as well as officers' fees, this tax was reduced, during its continuance, to 30 lbs. of tobacco per poll; and that law being suffered to expire, in consequence of the disagreement between the two houses already alluded to, the more onerous tax of the act of 1702 was therefore revived.

Taxes are not generally acceptable, in any form or for any purpose, to those who pay them; but they are particularly odious,

on, two drummers with muffled drums, and two fifes, playing the dead march; after them were drawn six pieces of small cannon, followed by a great concourse of citizens and gentlemen from the country, who attended this funeral. In this order they proceeded to the gallows, to which the coffin was for a time suspended, then cut down and buried under a discharge of minute guns. On the coffin was the following inscription :

"The Proclamation, the Child of Folly and Oppression, born the 26th November, 1770, departed this Life 14th of May, 1773, and Buried on the same day by the Freemen of Annapolis."

"It is wished that all similar attempts against the rights of a free people may meet with equal abhorrence; and that the court party, convinced by experience of the impotency of their interest, may never hereafter disturb the peace of the city, by their vain and feeble exertions to bear down the free and independent citizens."