Introduction. xxxix

directed, but that he enclosed some orders and a " Press-Warrant " which he
expected to use as soon as he found it necessary for him to call out the
Calvert County militia (pp. 441-442).

At the March-May, 1758, session, the Lower House returned to the attack
and on April i, demanded to know by what law the Governor had ordered out
the militia of Queen Anne's, Kent, and Calvert counties (pp. 558-560). The
Governor replied on April 4 that he had sent a message to that house on
September 25, 1756, when he had ordered out the militia of Prince George's
and Baltimore counties to the frontier, and that at that time the Lower House
had returned its thanks to him for having done so, and had made provision
for their payment without questioning his right to so do (pp. 561-562). On
April 15, the house addressed a long remonstrance to the Governor reiterating
its request that it be informed by what law he had recently called out the
militia of Queen Anne's and Kent, and sent them during the depths of winter
to such a great distance, when no invasion of the Province was threatened
(PP- 577-578, 579-588). On May 5, the Governor in an even more lengthy
message, covering sixteen pages of this volume, recited in detail the necessity
for having soldiers on the frontier to protect the inhabitants, and ciied the
acts of 1715, 1719, 1722, and 1733, under which he had authority to order
out the militia when he felt it was necessary (pp. 645-661). On May 8, the
Lower House, by a series of resolves voted 33 to 6, 31 to 8, 31 to 8, 31 to 7,
32 to 7, and 33 to 6 that in the absence of a foreign invasion the Governor
had no authority to compel the county militia to march great distances from
their homes, and that in so doing he had violated the liberty and freedom of
the people. The house showed special resentment to the declaration of the
Governor that if no Supply bill were passed at this session he would be again
compelled to call out the county militia, either to act under the command of
General Forbes on the western campaign or to be left on the frontier for its
protection (pp. 666-672).

The Lord Proprietary, under date of September 30, 1758, in his " Instruc-
tions " to the Governor, directed him " to Suffer no Bill to pass calculated to
weaken the Government of Maryland By my Royal Charter Established .....
[or] presumptiously Invading the King's undoubted Prerogative ..... [or to]
Derogate to the Power Given you by my Commission and the Militia Law of
the Province to compell every individual to march to any Part where you
my Lieutenant Governor may Judge their Service Necessary, [as empowered]
by the provincial Act of 1715, w.^h Act was revived continued & has Dura-
tion by Act of Assembly made by the Legislature of the Province in 1722 "
(Appendix pp. 756-757). An interesting side light is thrown upon this con-
troversy in regard to the calling out of the county militia to defend the frontier
in a recently published memorandum, apparently written by Sharpe, in reply to
a number of queries relating to Maryland affairs which appeared in the London
Chronicle for September 16-19, 1758, written by Benjamin Franklin, appar-
ently to discredit proprietary governments in general. After summarizing the
dispute, the Governor added that the " remonstrances " of the Lower House
had so little effect upon the people, that when soon afterwards at the request