Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1856-05-29

1.-THE DAY STAR" SC.

make somewhat particular examination of
the contents of The Day-Star of American
Freedom" The title of the work it seems
to me is sufficiently poetical and attractive
Its style and execution, rhetorical and easy
and the book as a whole, undeniably read
able and interesting. Nevertheless, with
the light [ now have before me, could not
by any possibility consent to many Of its
bold and startling assertions to some
of the conclusions, to which Mr.. Davis la
bours, with logged industry and perse-
verencc, and with no little ingenuity, to
conduct the minds of his readers. In the
brief and temperate discussion upon the SUBJ
iect which I now offer for your columns, l
claim only the right and the privilege Of
every American freeman. am ready alone
to bear the whole responsibility of the un
dcrtaking-and [ am inclined to believe. sir,
that none other than the most narrow MUD
cd bigot and proscriber could hold you to be,
in any wise, implicated, or identified with
me, in the matter of this discussion. At
all events, Mr.. Wells, BE just, and fear
not! Let all the ends, thou aimst at, be
thy Countrys. thy Gods and Truths
The grand problem of Mr., Davis..s book
is liberation under the proprietary govern
ment Of the Colony of Maryland-and this
Mr.. D. frankly admits was secured by the
Charter for Maryland" OF which he ssys
truly enough that it ''was a compact between
member of the English aid disciple of
the Roman Church--netween an Anglo
Catholic King, and Roman Catholic
Prince-between Charles the First Of Eng
land, and Cecilius the second Baron of Bal
timore, and the first Lord Proprietary of
Maryland TO the confessors of each faith,
At was pledge Of religious freedom GA
freedom of conscience not aNowed but eract-
eez' And this charter and ''pledge," be it
ever remembered, was the generous grant
or gift of ga Protestant King, of Protest
ant country with a thoroughgoing Protest.
ant Privy Council But it has been said
that the charter was penned by Lord Balti-
more himself-and it is supposed to have
been transcript with no other alteration
than the localities required) from that which
before had been granted by James the fa-
Their Of Charles the First) to Sir George
Calvert for the Province Of Avalon. And
upon these suppostttons a cunning and des-
perate attempt has been made to wrest from
a Protestant monarch and his Protestant
abettors and advisers honor (Which so
justly belongs to then,) on account of the
liberty of conscience mot only allowed,
but demanded and cxacted' at the hands of
the Proprietary and his agents toward all
others. To this groundless assumption of
the chief merit for the reputed author of the
charter, it has been ably and sufficiently re-
piled. that ..it is not to be supposed that it
l.!--i--lko Kings signature and seal
(which alone gave it life and efect) without
undergoing the scrutiny Of the Priry Coun-
ca, or his oacn inspection. Sir George CAL
vert had been near the crown long enough,
and he well enough understood the sensi-
tiveness of Charles, in relation to his prero-
gative, and also the state Of the public mind,
to know hoay to limit his demands. Never
theless, 10 one knows that his original draft
of the Charter did not contain articles which
were rejected by the Privy Council-and
that others were not substituted which he
would rather had been omitted" Mr. Davis
however has an expedient of his own for
avoiding this dilemma. ''The grant of the
Charter" says he, s'marks the era of a spe-
ciiaJ federation, x * the action of
the Assembly in 1870 advocates of
republican government the most important
phasis in the history of a general federation. r"
Again he says: "a freedom however of a
wider sort springs forth at the birth of the
Tolony-not demanded by that instrument,
o. e. the Charter, but permitted by it," &c.
Upon this point ''the Hon. John P. Ken
nedy, whose various contributions to our
literature have conferred (says Mr.. Davis
a lasting obligation upon the friends Of has
tos.icd learning;" directly joins issue with
him and affirms THAT the glory of Mary
land liberation is an the Charter and not IN
the act Of 1912 am inclined to this lat
ter opinion against the view of Mr.. Davis
by his own admission, that the widest and
most general liberation Cif not in his view,
IN totiolem rerbis enjoined in the Charter)
was at least permitted by it''-and there
fore encouraged. But the more strongly,
by the letter and spirit Of the Charter itself,
which seem to me to be much more liberal
than the construction of our ingenious au-
thor Take, for example, the following ex-
tract from the 10th section Of said Charter:
I'VE will also, and of our more abundant
grace, for us, our heirs and successors, do
firmly charge, constitute, ordain and COM
mand that the said Province be of our aNe-
glance; and that all and singular the sub
iects and liege men of us, our heirs, and
successors, transplanted or hereafter to be
transplanted, into the Province aforesaid,
and the children of them, and Of others their
descendants, whether already born there or
hereafter to be born, be and shall be natives
md liege men of us, our heirs and success
sers, Of our kingdom Of England and Ire
land-and in all things shall be held, treat
cd, reputed and esteemed as the faithful
,iege n1ca Of as and our heirs and successors