was master of. "The old fool," said the king, "has taken away more lives in that naked land than I for the murder of my father." His disappointment and mortification were too much for the proud man, and he died soon after his arrival in England.

The failure of Bacon's rebellion brought many serious misfortunes to Virginia. The insurrection was made the excuse by the king for refusing a liberal charter, and the colony was made dependent for its rights and privileges entirely upon the royal will. The assembly was composed almost exclusively of royalists, and at once proceeded to undo the work of the popular party. All the laws of Bacon's assembly were repealed; the right of suffrage was restricted to freeholders, and the iniquitous taxes were reimposed. All the abuses that had led to the rebellion were revived.

In 1677 Lord Culpepper, one of the favorites to whom Charles II. had granted Virginia, was appointed governor of the colony for life. The new governor regarded his office as a sinecure, and while receiving its emoluments desired to remain in England to enjoy them. In 1680, however, the king compelled him to repair to his government in person. He brought with him authority from the sovereign to settle all past grievances, but he used this power for his own profit. He extorted money from all parties, and when he had acquired a considerable sum returned to England, having spent less than a year in Virginia. He left the colony in the greatest distress. The Virginians, robbed of the profits of their labors for the enrichment of their rulers, were reduced to despair. Riots took place in various places, and the whole colony was on the verge of insurrection.

Rumors of these disturbances having reached England the king ordered Culpepper to return and reduce the colony to obedience. He did so, and caused several influential men to be hanged as traitors, and used the power intrusted to him to wrest from the council the last remnant of its authority to control his outrages upon the people. This accomplished he proceeded to force the settlers of the Northern Neck to surrender their plantations to him, or pay him the sums he demanded for the privilege of retaining them. He found his residence among a people he had come to plunder very disagreeable, and in the course of a few months returned to England amid the bitter curses of the Virginians. The council reported the distress of the province to the king, and appealed to him to recall the grant to Culpepper and Arlington. Arlington surrendered his rights to Culpepper, whose patent was rendered void by a process of law, and in July, 1684, Virginia became once more a royal province. Lord Howard, of Effingham, was appointed to succeed Culpepper, but he was a poorer

and more grasping man than his predecessor, and the change afforded no relief to Virginia.

In 1685 James II. came to the throne of England, and in the same year occurred the insurrection in England known as Monmouth's rebellion. A number of prisoners were taken in this struggle by the royal forces, and many of these were sent out to the colonies of Virginia and Maryland to be sold as servants for a term of ten years. Many of them were men of education and family. The general assembly of Virginia refused to sanction this infamous measure, and, in spite of the prohibition of King James, passed a law declaring all such persons free. Indeed at this time the practice of selling white servants in America had become so profitable that quite a thriving business was carried on between the west of England and Virginia and Maryland. Not only persons condemned for crime, but innocent people were kidnapped and sold in the colonies for a term of years for money. "At Bristol," says Bancroft, "the mayor and justices would intimidate small rogues and pilferers, who, under the terror of being hanged, prayed for transportation as the only avenue to safety, and were then divided among the members of the court. The trade was exceedingly profitable-far more so than the slave-tradeand had been conducted for years.'

One of the last acts of Charles II. with reference to Virginia was to forbid the setting up of a printing press within the limits of the colony. James II. continued this prohibition. Effingham endeavored to take from the colony the few privileges left to it. The result was that the party of freedom increased rapidly. Many of the aristocratic party seeing that the king and the governor menaced every right and privilege they possessed went over to the popular side. The assembly began to assert the popular demand for self-government, and became so unmanageable that in November, 1686, it was dissolved by royal proclamation. A new assembly was convened, which met in April, 1688, a few months. before the British revolution. The governor and council found this body more indisposed to submit to the aggressions of the crown than its predecessor had been. The people sustained their delegates, and a new insurrection was threatened. Effingham was in the midst of a hostile population, without troops to enforce his will, and was obliged to conduct himself with moderation. The royal authority was never stronger in Virginia than during this reign, but it was found impossible to establish it upon the ruins of the liberties of the colony. The result of all the long years of oppression we have been considering was simply to confirm the Virginians in their attachment to their liberties, and in their determination to maintain them at any cost. Virginia remained to the end an aristocratic colony, but it was none the less "a land of liberty."

The revolution of 1688 in England did not change affairs in Virginia materially as regarded the forms of the colonial government. The liberties of the colony were established by law too securely to be any longer at the mercy of an individual, but the power of the governor was still very great. Every department of the colonial administration, the finances, and even the management of the church, was made subject to his control. He had the power to dissolve the assembly at pleasure, and was sure to exercise it if that body manifested too great a spirit of independence. He also appointed the clerk of the assembly, who was for this reason a check upon its freedom of debate. The only means of resistance to the measures of the government which the assembly retained was to refuse to vote supplies in excess of the permanent revenue. This right was sometimes exercised, and the governor was prevented from carrying out unpopular measures by the lack of the necessary funds.

Soon after the accession of William and Mary to the throne an effort was made to establish a college in Virginia, although the printing press was still forbidden. Donations were made by a number of persons in England, and the king bestowed several liberal grants upon the proposed institution. The measure was carried through to success by the energy of the Rev. James Blair, who was sent out by the Bishop of London as commissary, "to supply the office and jurisdiction of the bishop in the outplaces of the diocese." The college was established in 1691, and was named William and Mary, in honor of the king and queen. Mr. Blair was its first president, and held that office for fifty years.

The ministry did not approve the action of the king in granting even the very moderate endowments which he bestowed upon the college. They regarded Virginia merely as a place in which to raise tobacco for the English market, and cared nothing for the interests of the people. They treated the colony with injustice and neglect in everything. The planters could sell their tobacco only to an English purchaser, who regulated the price to suit himself, and supplied the planters in return with the wares they needed at his own prices.

CHAPTER IX.

THE COLONIZATION OF MARYLAND.

Extent of the Territory of Virginia-Clayborne's Trading Posts established-Sir George Calvert, Lord Baltimore-Becomes interested in American Colonization-Obtains a Grant of Maryland-Terms of the Charter-A Colony sent out-Arrival in the Chesapeake-St. Mary's Founded-Character of the Colony-Friendly Relations established with the Indians-First Legislature of Maryland-Trouble with Clayborne-Rapid Growth of the Colony-Progress of Popular Liberty-Policy respecting the Treatment of the Indians-Clayborne's Rebellion-Law granting Religious Toleration enacted— Condition of Maryland under the Commonwealth-The People declared SupremeLord Baltimore recovers his Proprietary Rights-Characteristics of the Colony-Rapid Increase in Population-Charles Calvert, Governor-Death of the second Lord Baltimore-Roman Catholics disfranchised-Maryland becomes a Royal Province-Triumph of the Protestants-Annapolis made the Seat of Government-Restoration of the Proprietary Government-Continued Prosperity of Maryland.

HE second charter of Virginia granted to that province the country north of the Potomac as far as the headwaters of the Chesapeake bay. This grant included the territory of the present State of Maryland. The discoveries of Captain John Smith had brought the region along the head of the bay into notice, and other explorers had confirmed his statements as to its value. A very profitable trade was established with the Indians of this section, and, in order to develop its advantages, William Clayborne, a man of great resolution and of no mean abilities, a surveyor by profession, was employed by the Governor of Virginia to explore the region of the upper Chesapeake. His report was so favorable that a company was formed in England for the purpose of trading with the Indians. Under authority from this company, Clayborne obtained a license from the colonial government of Virginia, and established two trading stations on the bay; one on Kent island, opposite the present city of Annapolis, and one at the mouth of the Susquehanna. These posts were established in the spring of 1631.

In the meantime efforts were being made in England to secure the settlement of the same region. Sir George Calvert, a man of noble character, liberal education and great political experience, had become at an early day deeply interested in the question of colonizing America. Having embraced the Roman Catholic faith, he relinquished his office of

Secretary of State, and made a public acknowledgment of his conversion. His noble character commanded the confidence of King James, and he was retained as a member of the Privy Council, and was made Lord Baltimore in the Irish peerage. He was anxious to found a colony in America, which might serve as a place of refuge for persons of the Catholic faith, and obtained a patent for the southern part of Newfoundland. That region was too bleak and rugged to admit of the success of the enterprise, and the attempt to settle it was soon abandoned.

Lord Baltimore next contemplated a settlement in some portion of Virginia, and in October, 1629, visited that colony with a view to making arrangements for his plantation. The laws of Virginia against Roman Catholics were very severe, and immediately upon the arrival of so distinguished a Catholic the assembly ordered the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to be tendered him. Lord Baltimore proposed a form which he was willing to subscribe, but the colonial government insisted upon that which had been ordered by the English Parliament, and which was of such a character that no Cath

olic could accept it. There was nothing left for Calvert but to withdraw from Virginia, and his reception there convinced him that that province was not the place for the plantation he wished to establish.

The region north of the Potomac was still uninhabited, and seemed to promise advantages equal to Virginia. Calvert applied to Charles I. for a patent for this region, and was given a territory corresponding very nearly to the present State of Maryland in extent. The king granted him a liberal charter, which, while it provided for his interests as proprietor, secured the liberties of the colonists. In this it was simply the expression of the wishes of Lord Baltimore, who desired to establish a settlement of freemen. The country embraced in the grant was given to Lord Baltimore, his heirs and assigns, in absolute possession. They were required to pay an annual tribute to the crown of two Indian arrows and one-fifth of all the gold and silver which might be found. The colonists were to have a voice in making their own laws, and they were to be entitled to all the rights and privileges of Englishmen. No taxes were to be imposed upon them without their consent, nor was the authority of the proprietor to extend to their lives or property. It was enjoined that the exercise of the faith and worship of the established Church of England should be protected in the colony, but no uniform