The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-06-04

oflaws affecting religious liberty; and as Dr. Hughes
is willing to rest the case with Mr. Bancroft, we
will begin with him. The reader will perceive that
ho very strangely ascribes the act Of King Charles
tho First-tLat is, the charter, or grant-to Sir
George Calvert, the first Baron of Baltimore, and
father Of Cecius, to whom the grant was made
The charter is said to have been intended for Sir
George. but he died before it was executed. That
it was drawn up by him is mere conjecture. Mr..
Bancroft says
Sc Sir George Calvert was Roman Catholic; vet,
far from guarding his territory against any but
those of his own persuasion as he had taken from
himself and bis successors all arbitrary power by
establishing the legislative franchises Of the people
so be took from them the means of being intolerant
in religion" (lIist. U. S, vol, ], PIP 242-i3.)
The fact is, the people Of the colony could pass
no law without the concurrence Of tho lord pro-
prietary or his lieutenant general, or governor act
ing for him and the means of being intolerant
were take from him, also, by the same power-the
King-in the charter which took them from the
people, q 10 ,,orv &c u.rr,,ns +o,.r.,on 5, 60. y.
Hon. j. Z. Kennedy, in his discourse on the life and
character of George Calvert, :" which has been 50
fruitful theme Of panegyric to American histo-
rians, is truly IN the charter 81 There is more
freedom Of conscience-moro real liberation, hun
drcd fold-in this charter of q Protestant Prince
to Catholic nobleman, than in that act (of l6f9)
so often recalled to our remembrance" 9 The
glory Of Maryland liberation is in the charter, not
in the act of 1919" Again. no says" Maryland
Christians were invited freely within its borders.
They found there written covenant OF security
against all encroachment on their rights Of CON
scisnce BY tho lord proprietary or his government"
In the foregoing quotations the charter is di-
reetly and specially alluded to as the restraining
power. In the following. from Mr.. McMahon's
History of Maryland. No. 2iI there is allusion to
the circumstances OF the times in both the colony
and the mother country, we'll as to the charter,
as a combination Of restraining Causes
"Of all the scots and parties which havo ever
divided man, how few are there who, in that hour
-the hour Of power and triumph, Of which he
had just been aking)-beholng their adver-
saries prostrate at their feet have wholly forgiven
the injuries of the past, or have stopped TO assage
their SORROWS and to win them from their errors by
the language Of kindness and persuasion. The pro-
pnetaly dominion had meyer known thas hour.
The Protestant religion was the established religion
OF the mother country, and any effort the part Of
the piopriearies to Cypress its followers would have
Drawn down destruction upon their own govern
ment The great body of the coonists were them
selves Proestants. and, by their numbers and their
participation in the legislative power. they were
fully equal to their protection, and too power
tui tor the proprietaries in the event Of an open
collision. The safety Of the latter was, therefore,
identified with system of religious tolcration.'
From these quotations it is manifest that Mr..
Bancroft, MIR. Mcmahon, aud Mr.. Kennedy (and
they are not all could cite) entertained tho opinion
that any legislation tavorng religious intolerance
was prohibited by the charter If this was the
caso-and doubtless it was-what honor is due to
the Roman Catholics of the colony for the religious
liberty there enjoyed!
| wonder if il has never occurred to Archbis hop
Hughes how very strange it is, if that religious
liberty which practiced in Maryland was the off
spring of Romanism that it should have ceased from
that time, in all the wide world, to produce any
this mystery! Has genuine Roman Catholicism
died out! Or has it become barren Of such fruits,
from age and decay
perceive, sir, that will be utterly impossible for
IN oil eJ
Gle. without extending it to an inordinate length
therefore crave your indulgence for n continuance;
and in my next will show from undenable historic
cal facts, that the security of the interests Of the
lord proprietary. and Of his Catholic colonsts re-
qured OF Thorn the practice of religious toleration-
and that had there been absence of all those re-
strants. and they had possessed the disposition to
prosecute, it was not in their power to make such
laws, or to enforce them had any such been made.
Very respectfully, your obedicns servant,
JOSIAH +. Polk