Black & Jenkins Award,1877,
msa_sc_5330_8_12
, Image No.: 3
   Enlarge and print image (51K)          << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space


 

Black & Jenkins Award,1877,
msa_sc_5330_8_12
, Image No.: 3
   Enlarge and print image (51K)          << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
2 became vested in the State of Maryland at the Revolution. Inasmuch as that State claims under the charter she must claim according to it. . Virginia, by her first constitution, as a free State (.June 29th, 1776) disclaimed all rights of property, jurisdiction, and government over territories contained within the char- ters of Maryland and other adjoining colonies. The force of this solemn acknowledgment is not, in our opinion, diminished by the dissatisfaction which Maryland, as well as other States of the Confederation, afterwards expressed with Virginia's claim to a northern and western border, including all lands ceded by France to Great Britain at the pacification of 1763. Inasmuch as both of the States are bound by the king's charter to Lord Baltimore, and both confess it to be the only original measure of their territory, it becomes a point of the first importance to ascertain what boundaries were assigned to Maryland by that instrument. By what lines was the colony of Maryland divided from those other pos- sessions of the British Crown to which Viginia afterwards succeeded as a result of her independence The original patent delivered to Lord Baltimore by the king is irrecoverably lost, and it is denied-at least it is not admitted-that we have an accurate copy. It was registered in the high court of chancery when it passed the seal, and an attested transcript from the rolls office is produced. It is written in the law Latin of the period to which it belongs and many of the words are abbreviated. Another copy nearly, if not exactly, like that from the rolls was deposited in the colonial ofce and thence re- moved to the British Museum. The latter copy was changed long subsequent to the date of the charter by a person who added some words, and extended others by interlining omitted terminations. This is alleged to have been done for the purpose of making it correspond with the original, which, according to the same allegation, was borrowed from a member of the Calvert family for that purpose. We reject this whole story as apocryphal. The