DEATH OF FREDERICK, LORD BALTIMORE.

137

"Frederick, Lord Baltimore, on his marriage with Lady Diana Egerton, the 9th of March, 1753, made his marriage settlement subjected expressly to the trust for Lady Baltimore's jointure, and finding he had no way of barring the entail, made an application to the British Parliament for that purpose, but failed; and Lady Diana shortly after died from a hurt she received by a fall out of a phaton, when out with his Lordship an airing; after her decease, his Lordship being bent upon cutting off the entail, on the 2d of January, 1761, executed deeds of conveyance for that purpose; however, this not appearing to satisfy either the minds of his lawyers or himself, in 1767, his Lordship suffered a common recovery in the provincial court of this province. If the last could effect there was an end to his conveyance of 1761, but being conscious that neither the one or the other had any effect against the devise of his father, Charles, Lord Baltimore, who, by his last will and testament proved in the prerogative court of Canterbury, the 12th of March, 1772, first devises his province or territory of Maryland, in America, to Robert Eden, Hugh Hammersley, Esqrs., Robert Morris, Barrister, of Lincoln's Inn, and Peter Provost, Esq., his executors, to raise the sum of £20,000, and then he goes on to say, 'and I do hereby give and devise, and limit my said province of Maryland, and all other premises thereunto belonging, last mentioned, unto the use of a certain youth called or known by the name of Henry Harford, the son of Hester Wheland, of the kingdom of Ireland, born in Bond street, and now of the age of nine years or more, and to the heirs male of his body lawfully to be begotten; and, in default of such issue, to the heirs male lawfully begotten on the body of a certain female called Frances Mary Harford, daughter of the said Hester Wheland, and born in Bond street aforesaid, and now of the age of eight years or more, and to the heirs of the said Frances Mary Harford; and if there should be failure of the issue of the said Frances Mary Harford, then to the use of the Honorable Mrs. Eden, my youngest sister, and to her and her heirs, and assigns for ever. And as touching the said principal sum of twenty thousand pounds, which I have directed to be raised out of my said province, and other the premises, and to be received by my executors, I do hereby give and bequeath the sum of ten thousand pounds, part thereof to my elder sister Louisa Browning, and to her husband, and the sum of ten thousand pounds, other part thereof to my younger sister the Honorable Caroline Eden, and her husband, to be paid to them respectively within six months after my decease, with interest of five per cent. till paid.""

These bequests were made on condition that the persons above named would give their acquiescence to the will.

ing liberties with great caution, and leaving everyone to provide for himself by his own industry, and not out of a common stock. It is to be observed that none of the governors (except the Lord Proprietary's sons or brothers), ever obtained any grant of land from the proprietary. It was also his Lordship's desire that his agents should purchase the natives' interest in any lands, rather than take from them by force what they considered their right, and it appears the same conduct was strictly adhered to by their Lordships as they became proprietors in succession; a case of this nature occurred a very few years prior to the Revolution, and which was related to me by Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, Esq., whose ancestors having obtained from Charles, Lord Baltimore (father of the honorable Mrs. Browning), a grant of 10,000 acres of land in Frederick county, with liberty to select the best land they could find; they first fixed on a spot beyond Frederick town, but

Mr. Browning continues:

finding the land better on this side of Frederick, changed to the spot which the present Mr. Carroll now possesses, on Monocacy river (Doughoregan manor), who went there and entered into a treaty with the Indians, and purchased their pretended right for £200, and for which he paid them in different merchandise, such as suited them. The grant of this land first appears to have been made on the 10th of April, 1723, to the Carroll family, some of whom dying, there were different assignments from time to time, up to 1734; but I understand the land was not taken up till just before the Revolution, by the present Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, Esq., for his father; and the only money that appears to have been given for this land was a rent of £20 per annum, which the present Mr. Carroll got rid of by the Act for the abolition of quit-rents, 1780."-Charles Browning's Chief Explanation, etc., p. 88: Baltimore, 1821.

"As soon as John Browning was apprised of the decease of Frederick, Lord Baltimore, and the contents of his will, he gave instructions to his solicitor, William Middleton, Esq., of Fanier's Building, Inner Temple, London, to draw a case and lay it before some of the most eminent men of that day at the Chancery bar, who gave it as their decided opinion, that the Honorable Mrs. Browning became legally entitled, on the death of Frederick, Lord Baltimore, without issue, to the province, with all its rights, tities, interest, and emoluments, and recommended the filing of a bill in chancery. A suit was accordingly instituted against the executors of Frederick, Lord Baltimore, who being aware of what was about to take place, had, in the interim, sent over to Maryland, to the then governor, Robert Eden, Esq. (who was also one of the executors), an attested copy of Frederick, Lord Baltimore's will, with instructions for him to get the same entered in the Register of Wills' Office, and to have Henry Harford, Esq., acknowledged as proprietary of the province of Maryland, by the Assembly, to have all grants made under his name and seal, as well as appointments to office, &c., &c. You will observe, Mr. Eden was at this time acting in a double capacity, he was Governor under the proprietary, to whom he was also trustee, whilst under age, and for which he was to receive £100 per annum; Frederick, Lord Baltimore, had also left the Honorable Mrs. Eden a legacy of £10,000, with the reversion in fee of the province, provided, that Henry and Frances Mary Harford died without issue; now the bequest of £10,000 to the Honorable Mrs. Eden, whose husband was Governor and executor, with the reversion in fee of the province to herself, was a much greater legacy in proportion than the sum of £10,000 was to the Honorable Mrs. Browning, to relinquish her rights, as her father, Charles, Lord Baltimore, had left ber the reversion in fee on the death of her brother Frederick, of the province, paying her sister, the Honorable Mrs. Caroline Eden, £20,000, (except Robert Eden, Esq.) Frederick, Lord Baltimore's executors, appear to have been curious people. Mr. Hammersley I did not know, but understood from my father he was a man that had but little business, and that not very respectable, and was a shrewd, keen fellow, possessing a good deal of low cunning; he was quite prime minister in the whole business, which he never failed to make use of when the occasion required it, and finding things were not likely to turn out so favorable as they wished, he desired Governor Eden to get the acknowledgement of Henry Harford confirmed as absolute lord and proprietary of the province, by the Assembly of Maryland as soon as possible, and to induce him to consider it would be as much for his interest as that of either Henry Harford, or his sister, proposed that two new counties should be laid out in the province, one to be called Harford, the other Caroline, Mrs. Eden's christian name, so that there was no sort of trick or manœuvre that could be practised that was not resorted to by Frederick, Lord Baltimore, and his agents, to deprive his sister and her son of their inheritance, and you will observe that all this was effected, Mr. Harford's name was made use of for only one year, and had not the then province been much agitated, by a difference that existed between America and England, concerning the latter wishing to impose taxes on the former inimical to the interest of the country, I have not the least doubt but upon reading Frederick, Lord Baltimore's will, they would not have been in a hurry to have acknowledged Henry Harford as proprietary of the province of Maryland, whose title must have appeared very doubtful, and such a one as they must have been convinced would undergo an investigation in a court of equity. During this time proceedings were going on in the court of chancery of England against the executors, and which was in part argued before the Lord Chancellor, but between that time and the time appointed by his Lordship for a second hearing, news had arrived in England that the United States of America had declared themselves independent of Great Britain, which the Lord Chancellor stated to the council on the day appointed for the further hearing of the cause, and objected to hear it, alleging it was only a waste of time, as let it belong to which it would, he had no power to give the rightful owner possession."

LORD BALTIMORE'S ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN.

139

Upon the death of Frederick Lord Baltimore, his illegitimate son, Henry Harford, instead of repairing to Maryland to take possession of the province under Frederick's will, confident "in the powers and success of his native country, remained in England, attending on the Court of Chancery, and waiting the adjudication of suits which were to determine the right to the Province of Maryland and its dependencies, between the memorialist (Henry Harford) and the heirs at law of the late Lord Baltimore, and which adjudication could have no effect, unless America should be conquered by the British Government."

The first assembly held under the proprietaryship of Henry Harford, began on the 15th of June, 1773, and on the 2d of July following, the Lower House adopted the following resolutions:

'Resolved, unanimously, That the representatives of the freemen of this province, have the sole right, with the assent of the other part of the legislature, to impose and establish taxes or fees, and that the imposing, establishing, or collecting any taxes or fees on or from the inhabitants of this province, under color or pretence of any proclamation issued by, or in the name of the Lord Proprietary, or other authority, is arbitrary, unconstitutional, and oppressive.

Resolved, unanimously, That in all cases where no fees are established by law for services done by officers, the power of ascertaining the quantum of the reward for such services, is constitutionally in a jury upon the action of the party.

“Resolved, unanimously, That the proclamation issued in the name of his Excellency Robert Eden, the Governor, with the advice of his Lordship's council of State, on the 26th day of November, 1770, was illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and oppressive.

Resolved, unanimously, That the paper writing under the great seal of this province, issued in the name of the late Lord Proprietary, on the 24th day of November, 1770, for the ascertaining the fees and perquisites to be received by the registers of the land office, was illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and oppressive.

‘Resolved, unanimously, That the advisers of the said proclamation were enemies to the peace, welfare, and happiness of this province, and the laws and conditions thereof."

1 Answer of the Senate of Maryland to a message of the House of Delegates, 19th December, 1785. Frederick, Lord Baltimore in his will bequeathed £1,500 each to Peter Prevost, Esq., and Robert Morris, and also an annuity of £100 to each for their lives. Peter Prevost

married Mrs. Hester Wheland alias Harford, the mother of Henry Harford and Mary Frances Harford; and Robert Morris married Frances Mary Wheland alias Harford, (the illegitimate daughter of Frederick Lord Baltimore), who was at the time only thirteen years of age.

CHAPTER XX.

THE non-importation policy of the colonists had been so generally adopted and so faithfully observed, that very little tea (upon which article alone the duty had been retained,) was imported into the country. One of the great markets of the East India Company being thus closed, a heavy stock of tea accumulated in their warehouses. To relieve them of this, while at the same time maintaining the principle of taxation, seemed to the government a master-stroke of policy; and it was proposed to accomplish this by allowing the company, on tea exported to America, a drawback of the duties paid in England. As this would enable them to sell tea in America, even with the small colonial tariff imposed, cheaper than it could be sold in England, it was not imagined that the colonists would object to this arrangement. Unfortunately for them, the British Government thought-as wiser men than they have done since that supply and demand-shillings and pence-were the only factors in politico-economical problems; aud they were probably as much surprised as chagrined when they discovered their error.

For some months after the concession of this privilege, little was known of the intentions of the company. By some of its members this measure was regarded rather as a scheme for raising revenue than a device to help them out of their difficulties. In August, however, licenses were obtained from the treasury, and several cargoes of tea were despatched to the ports of Boston, Charleston, New York and Philadelphia.

As soon as it was announced in America that the Tea Act was to be carried into effect, it was generally denounced as a scheme to establish the right of parliament to tax the colonies and to give the East India Company the monopoly of their trade. As it bore on all the colonies, it diverted attention from the local issues which had been agitating them during the past three years, to the original question of taxation, and the determination of the Americans was not to pay a tax levied by a body in which they were not represented; and of Maryland in particular to hold fast to the exemption from British taxation guaranteed by her charter.

The scheme roused more indignation than had been created by the Stamp Act. The General Assembly, which adjourned on July 3d, 1773, again assembled in October, and the Lower House immediately took into consideration, the several letters and other communications which had been addressed to it by the Speakers of the Assemblies of Virginia, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island. On the 15th, they unanimously resolved, "most

DESTRUCTION OF THE TEA.

141

cordially" to accept the invitation to a mutual correspondence with the sister colonies, and appointed the following standing committee of correspondence and enquiry: Matthew Tilghman, John Hall, Thomas Johnson, William Paca, Samuel Chase, Edward Lloyd, Matthias Hammond, Josiah Beale, James Lloyd Chamberlaine, Brice Thomas Beale Worthington, and Joseph Sim. This committee was authorized "to obtain the most early and authentic intelligence of all such Acts and Resolutions of the British Parliament or proceedings of administrations, as may relate to, or effect the British Colonies in America, and keep up and maintain a correspondence with our sister colonies respecting these important considerations and the result of such of their proceedings from time to time to lay before this House." On the 29th, the governor, "for many important reasons," prorogued the assembly to the 16th of November following, when it again assembled and was prorogued on the 23d of December.

The legislative committees chosen under the impulse of these acts of British oppression had not as yet exchanged views, much less held a conference in relation to a general plan to baffle the attempt to establish the tea duty. But in all the colonies to which the teas were consigned, strong opinions were expressed that the teas would not be allowed to be sold, even if their landing was permitted. On the 28th of November, 1773, a vessel containing the tea arrived in the harbor of Boston, and in a few days was followed by two others. On December 16, a party disguised as Indians, went on board the vessels, and, warning their officers and those of the custom-house to keep out of the way, opened the hatches, hoisted the chests of tea on deck, cut them open, and hove the tea overboard.1

The vessels intended for Philadelphia and New York were obliged to return to England with their cargoes. In Charleston the tea was landed after much opposition, and stored in a damp cellar, where it rotted.

Intelligence of these transactions soon reached England and created much excitement among all classes. The matter was laid before parliament in a message from the king. Parliament was indignant at the violent and outrageous proceedings, and determined to punish the refractory town of Boston.2

Accordingly, on the 14th of March, 1774, a bill called the "Boston Port Bill" was introduced into the House of Commons, interdicting all commer

1 One of the participants of this exploit, Mr. Joshua Wyeth, says: "Young men not much known in town, and not liable to be easily recognized, were to lead in the business,' and the most of whom lived with Tory masters. He also says that, after the deed was done, the Tories, civil, military and spies, made a great fuss, and called the business divers hard names. Proclamations and rewards to procure detection were all to no purpose. We pretended to be as zealous to find out the perpetrators, as the rest. We often talked with the Tories about it. We were all so close and loyal, that the whole affair

remained in Egyptian darkness."-Flint's Western Monthly Review, July, 1827.

2 On the 25th of March, 1774, Governor Johnstone, in the House of Commons, in the debate upon the " Boston Port Bill," said: "It is vain to say Boston is more culpable than the other colonies. Sending the ships from thence, and obliging them to return to England, is a more solemn and deliberate act of resistance than the outrage committed by persons in disguise in the night when the ship refused to depart." American Archives, 4th series, vol. i., pp. 54-154.