The Portland daily press., 1889-05-08

credit which Bishap Healy denies to 1t; and
at the date which Bishop Healy seletcs, 1868,
the people of Rhode Island, according to Hill
dreth, Bishop Healy's authority, "still ad-
hered to the great principle of which Roger
Williams had been so conspicuous an advo-
cate. not Of liberation merely, but Of religious
freedom and equality" Bishop Healy on
this point loses his case by the mouth of his
own witness.
Bishop Healy next declares that the
''charter of Maryland was not the reason nor
cause of the freedom there granted.
The liberty of conscience was the act OF the
proprietor-Lord Baltimore-eoncurred in by
the freemen of the colony" And in his
third proposition he declares that the Prot
estants had mo share in this grant Of liber-
ty, because they had no votes In the mat
ter"
Bancroft in Chap. VII. of Vol. /. of the
Centenary edition of his History, states very
clearly the tenor of the first Lord Balti-
more's charter, which descended to his heirs,
as follows:
The country thus described was given to Lord
Baltimore his heirs and assigns as to its abso
lutte lord and proprietary, 10 be holden bv the
indian "a arrows and ft Of ali gold @ and IS silver w
ore which might be found Yet absolute authori.
" was conceded to him rather with reference to
the crown than the colonsts. The charter like
the constitution of Virginia, of July 1921, pro
vlded for resident council of State; and like his
patent, which, in April, 1928, had passed the
great seal for Avalon, secured to The emigrants
themselves an Independent share In the legislation
OF the province, of which the statutes were to be
established with the advice and appreciation of a
majority of the freemen or their deputies. Au-
thority was intrusted to the proprietary, from
time to time, to constitute fit and wholesome ordi-
nances provided they were consonant to reason
and the laws Of England, and did not extend to
the life. freehold or estate of any emigrant. q
land, was protected; but the patronage and al
yOwsons OF churches were vested In the proprie.
lary; and. as there was not an English statute
on religion In which America was specially
named, silence left room for the settlement of re-
lgious affairs by the colony.
Thus it will be seen the charter secured to
the emigrants themselves an independent
share in the legislation of the province,
And to what religious sect did the emigrants
beong2 Bancroft tells us a little further on
In the same chapter. Describing the landing
of Lord Baltimore's expedition, he says:
On the twenty-nfth, the day of the Annuncia-
tion, in the island at which their great shiD the
Ark, lay moored, a Jesuit priest who was of the
party offered the sacrifice Of mass, which ia that
region OF lhe world had never been celebrated
before. This being ended he and his assistants
took upon their shoulders the great cross hich
they had hewn from tree, and going In procession
TO the place that had been designated the Gov
ernor and other Catholics and some Protestants
as well participating in the ceremony they erected
tt as trophy TO Christ, the Saviour, while the
litany of the holy cross was chanted humbly on
grants, Of phona bv far the larger number acre
Professionals took quiet possession of the land
which the Governor had bought.
The facts then are briefly these: Lord
Baltimore, Catholic. obtained from the
Protestant King of Great Britain at a time
when feeling against the Catholics in that
country was very bitter. charter to tract
of land in Maryland which made his govern
ment of the new colony practically indepen-
dent of the crown. but secured to the emil
grants who accompanied him an Independent
share in the legislation of the province.
Aud the great majority" of these emigrants,
Bancroft tells us, were Protestants. Now it
Is perfectly true that Lord Baltimore never
showed any disposition to persecute the
ProtestaDts, he was tolerant proprietor,
but it is also true that the instinct of self
preservation alone would have been sufi-
cient to restrain him from any attempt to
restrict the religious liberty of the Protes
tants. for the great majority of his colonists
were of that faith, they were in close prox-
unity to another colony which was under
the control of the Protestants, and his char
ter practically left questions of religion to
be settled by the colonists themselves.
Whatever tolerance Lord Baltimore showed.
and we have no disposition to belittle it in
the least, was purely personal on his part
and reflects no particular credit on the Cath
Ollie church. Indeed there is evidence that
Lord Baltimore did not get along well with
the Jesuits. Mr.. John Culinary Shea in his
history of "The Catholic Church in Colonial
Days" says:
HIS GSecretary Lewgar'sl letter, to Lord Balt
more seem to have excited that nobleman SO
to abandon the mission. He declared the gram
OF land by the Protestant king null and void and
objected TO further acquisition of land Ly the
missionaries.
Subsequently the Jesuits were forced oul
of the Province. But, through the interyen,
ti0n of Mrs. Peasley. a reconciliation was
effected and they were allowed to come back,
though under very severe conditions. What
these conditions were are related in a note to
Mr.. Shea's "The Church in the Colonies" as
follows:
They resigned all claim TO the lands ceded by
the Indian King, and agreed TO take no others
they accepted tne English statutes against pious
uses, as IN force in.Maryland, and agreed to take
up no lands except by special permission Of Lord
baltimore; the missionaries were to.claim no ey-
esmptaaons paa or privileges in Maryland not legally al
ishment was not To be Inflicted on any missionary
except for capital offence. No missionary was
of Lord Baltimore; any missionary then in the
colony, or subsequently sent, was to be recalled
within year at the request OF Lord Baltimore.
NO missionary was to be allowed in the colony
VINO DID not take an oath of allegiance to him as
lord proprietor.
Under these stringent conditions" says
Mr.. Shea ''two Jesuit Fathers were proposed
to Lord Baltimore. and, receiving his sane.
tion, sailed for Maryland in 1642. But
though harmony was restored the missiona-
ries must have felt discouraged and ham
pered, and the new conditions Of settlement
issued by Lord Baltimore bear the impress
Of great jealousy of the church, reviv-
ing the English idea of mortmain, and mad
vertently paving the way to direct persecu
tion of the whole Catholic body"
Here is pretty direct charge of intoler.
ance made against Lord Baltimore by Mr.
Shea himself-intoleranc to a branch of his
own religious sect. Had he been under the
control of the Catholic church, had thai
church been inspiring his Maryland policy
this instance of intolerance would not have
occurred. The truth evidently is, that Lord
Baltimore proclaimed religious liberty not
for its own sake, but for the effect it would
have in building up his colony. Mr.. Shea
furnishes the explanation Of it in note on
page 50 of his history as follows:
After the charter was thus granted to Lord
Baltimore, VINO was tfen Roman Catholic, his
lordship emitted his proclamation to encourage
the settlement of his province, promising there
In, among other things, liberty of conscience and
an equal exercise OF religion to any denomination
OF Christians who would ira sport their stores
and reside in his province, and that he would pro-
cure law TO be passed for that purpose after
ward.
Hildreth whom Bishop Healy cites IN his
letter elsewhere published, doubtless dis
closes the whole secret of the tolerance OF
Lord Baltimore's government in this para
graph:
IL was quite as much as the state of feeling i'm
england would permit that the public exercise OF
the catholic religion should be allowed in the col
ony - never 1colud haze been, permitted that
pTotestdntasDl should be excluded. baltimore qgos
no Se0tothl great object was to procure settlers
ahu ne presently sent agents for that purpose
tnougn without success, even to Puritan New
The facts all point to the conclusion that
the Catholic church is not entitled to the
credit of the tolerance which existed in
Maryland. That tolerance was due chiefly to
two facts: First, that the conditions were
such in the colony and in England as to