ing of the treaty between England and France peace and quiet returned to the western part of Maryland, and the settlers returned to their deserted homes. Many of them, however, were in almost a destitute condition. Not only had their crops been destroyed and their domestic animals driven off or killed, but, in many cases, all their buildings with their contents had been burned. Then, too, many of them had fallen in arrears in the payment of their rents, so that their situation was deplorable. Their poverty was emphasized by the fact that there were constant demands upon them for fees and taxes. The British government, at the close of the French and Indian

War, found itself staggering under an immense debt, and as it had been incurred in a war in America, although the underlying principles which led to it had their foundations at home, it was speciously assumed that the colonies should defray the expenses of the war, and steps were taken to bring this about.

In March, 1765, the Stamp Act was passed. This provided that all bills, bonds, leases, notes, ships' papers, insurance policies, and legal documents, to be valid in the courts, must be written on stamped paper. The passage of this act was instantly resented by the colonists, and nowhere were the indignation and determination to resist the enforcement of the law more pronounced than among the German settlers in western Maryland. Indeed, the first open stand against the use of the stamped paper and the determination to transact business without the use of stamps was made in Frederick county, which at that time included the whole of western Maryland.

Zachariah Hood, a native of Maryland, and a merchant of Annapolis, who was in England at the time, was appointed stamp distributor for the province of Maryland. So intense was the feeling of the inhabitants of Maryland that when Hood returned with the stamps and a cargo of goods he was not allowed to land. Knowing that the open threats of the people to burn the stamps if they were brought on shore would be carried out, the authorities deemed it advisable that no opportunity should be given for such proceedings, and the stamps were kept on board ship and finally taken to Virginia, where they could be held under the protection of a British ship of war. In the meantime business of all kinds was held up. There were many legal papers which could not be issued except on stamped paper, and there were no stamps in the colony.

Indignation meetings were held everywhere and resolutions were passed condemning the passage of the Stamp Act and refusing to use the stamps, and in many places Zachariah Hood, the stamp distributor, was burned in effigy. The matter was brought to a head in Frederick county. At a meeting of the Frederick county court, on November 18, 1765, Judges Joseph Smith, David Lynn, Charles Jones, Samuel Beall, Joseph Beall, Peter Bainbridge, Thomas Price, Andrew Hugh, William Blair, William Luckett, James Dickson and Thomas Beatty being present, the following order was made:

Upon application of Michael Ashford Dowden, bail of James Veach, at the suit of a certain Stephen West to surrender said James Veach in discharge of himself, which the court ordered to be done, and an entry of the surrender to be made accordingly, which John Darnall, Clerk of the Court, refused to make, and having also refused to issue any process out of his office, or to make the necessary entries of the Court proceedings, alleging that he conceives there is an Act of Parliament imposing stamp duties on all legal proceedings, and therefore that he cannot safely proceed in exercising his office without proper stamps,

It is the unanimous resolution and opinion of this Court that all the business thereof shall and ought to be transacted in the usual and accustomed manner, without any inconvenience or delay to be occasioned from the want of Stamped Paper, Parchment, or Vellum, and that all proceedings shall be valid and effectual without the use of Stamps, and they enjoin and order all Sheriffs, Clerks, Counsellors, Attorneys, and all officers of the Court to proceed in their several avocations as usual, which Resolution and Opinion are grounded on the following and other reasons:

Ist. It is conceived that there has not been a legal publication yet made of any Act of Parliament whatever imposing a Stamp Duty on the Colonies. Therefore this Court are of opinion that until the existence of such an Act is properly notified, it would be

culpable in them to permit or suffer a total stagnation of business, which must inevitably be productive of innumerable injuries to individuals, and have a tendency to subvert all principles of civil government,

2d. As no Stamps are yet arrived in this Province, and the inhabitants have no means of procuring any, this Court are of opinion that it would be an injustice of the most wanton oppression to deprive any person of a legal remedy for the recovery of his property for omitting that which it is impossible to perform.118

The clerk of the court, to protect himself, refused to comply with this order, whereupon the Court ordered

That John Darnall, clerk of this Court, be committed to the custody of the sheriff of this county for a contempt of the authority of this court, he having refused to comply with the foregoing order of this Court relative to the execution of his office in issuing processes and making the necessary entries of the Court's proceedings; and that he stands committed for the above offense until he comply with the above mentioned order.119

On the issuance of this order the clerk submitted to the order of the court, paid the costs and was discharged. This was the beginning of the overthrow of the Stamp Act, and on November 30 a celebration in honor of the decision of the court was held at Frederick. The Maryland Gazette of December 16, 1765, gives an extended account of this celebration, which is quoted by Scharf.120 The action taken in Frederick county was followed in other parts of the province, so that so far as Maryland was concerned the Stamp Act was absolutely disregarded. The law was repealed on March 18, 1766.

The next year, however, a law was passed imposing

118 Scharf's "History of Western Maryland," Vol. I., p. 122.

119 Ibid.

120 History of Western Maryland, Vol. I., p. 122.

duties on glass, paper, pasteboard, white and red lead, painters' colors, and tea imported into the colonies. The passage of this act quickly revived the opposition of the colonists, and associations were formed to oppose the collection of the taxes, the members pledging themselves to non-importation. These pledges were generally strictly adhered to, although occasionally some merchant, seeing a chance to make a good profit, violated the conditions of the agreement. But the punishment for such actions was swift and sure, and the instances of it were rare. "In October, 1769, a number of wagons of contraband goods, valued at three hundred pounds, were shipped from Pennsylvania to Frederick, and not being accompanied with the proper certificates, they were stored at the risk and cost of the owners.

"121

Meetings to protest against the imposition of these taxes were held in all the counties. The Maryland Gazette gives an account of a meeting held in Frederick county on August 28, 1770. The place of meeting was a school house, near Troxell's mill, on Tom's creek. Among those present were William Blair, James Shields, Sr., William Shields, Charles Robinson, Patrick Haney, Robert Brown, Henry Hockersmith, William Elder, son of Guy, Samuel Westfall, Moses Kennedy, Alexander Stewart, William Curran, Jr., Charles Carroll, William Koontz, Christian Hoover, John Smith, Daniel McLean, John Faires, John Long, Arthur Row, John Crabs, Moses Ambrose, George Kelly, Walter Dulany, Thomas J. Bowie, James Park, Robert Agnew, John Corrick, Frederick Troxell, Rudolf Nead, Octavius S. Taney, George Ovelman, Dominick Bradley, Thomas Hughes, Philip Weller, Jacob Valentine, William Brawner, Thomas Martin, Daniel Morrison, William Munroe, and 121 Scharf's "History of Western Maryland," Vol. I., p. 124.