What might have

been.

What has made America.

be contemplating a community, the very name of which creeps over us at the recollection of Rochelle, Drogheda, Geneva, the Cevennes, and Piedmont. Worse than this: Had America, instead of being inspired by this noble impulse, been indoctrinated with the absolutism, almost Venetian, then existing, she might never have been blessed by the light which now illuminates her path; and freedom of conscience and the liberty of the citizen, the two kindred principles which have made us what we are, might have shaken our dust from off their feet, or passed us by as unworthy of their presence.

Hardly had the liberty-loving

Anglo-Saxons

stepped their feet on the American shores, and made. Beginnings a home in the wilds of New England, before the irre

of American freedom.

The first American.

pressible spirit of liberty which has ever been a characteristic of these peoples, was destined to raise its voice in opposition to the church-state Sunday laws which have descended to us from the dark ages. The Pilgrim Fathers landed in 1620; and before a score of years had passed, the rightfulness of Sunday laws was one of the leading questions of debate in America.

Roger Williams, who has justly been styled "the first American," was the champion against Sunday laws, and the Puritan clergy and government were their defenders. "Roger Williams," says Bancroft, was the first person in modern Christendom to assert in its plenitude the doctrine of the liberty of conscience, the equality of opinions before the law."

66

"A few weeks after his arrival" (February 5, 1631), says his biographer, "Mr. Williams was invited by the church at Salem to become assistant to their pastor, the Reverend Mr. Skelton; but the magistrates of the colony had heard of his opinions, and immediately interposed their remonstrances with the people of Salem to prevent his settlement. One reason of this interference on the part of the authorities, as

alleged in the letter which they addressed to the church at Salem, was that he had declared his opinion that the magistrate might not punish a breach of the Sabbath, nor any other offense that was a breach of the first table.'"

This charge, it will be seen, relates to his declaration of the great doctrine, to the vindication and elucidation of which he was to devote his life. "His doctrine," continues his biographer, "was in direct conflict with both the opinions and the practices of the colony of Massachusetts, whose counselors and elders considered themselves the appointed guardians of the orthodoxy of the people; and in that age they could conceive of no other mode of executing their trust than by inflicting civil penalties upon every one who ventured to dissent even in the most unimportant particulars from the prevailing faith. The opinion of Roger Williams, which was then urged in proof of his unsuitableness to become a minister of the gospel, has long since become the common sentiment of the American people." William Gammell, in "Spark's Library of American Biograph."

Early anti-Sunday

It was fortunate for the anti-Sunday-law cause the cause of liberty — that it had such a man as Roger law cause. Williams to lead out in the agitation for religious. freedom. Bancroft pays him the following high tribute:

"At a time when Germany was desolated by the implacable wars of religion; when even Holland could not pacify vengeful sects; when France was still to go through the fearful struggle with bigotry; when England was gasping under the despotism of intolerance; almost half a century before William Penn became an American proprietary; and while Descartes was constructing modern philosophy on the method of free reflection Roger Williams asserted the great doctrine of intellectual liberty, and made it the corner-stone of a political constitution. It became his glory to found a state upon that principle, and to stamp himself upon its rising institutions, in character so deep that the impress has remained to the present day, and can never be effaced without the total destruction of the work." 1

-

1 Bancroft, volume i, pages 254, 255.

Bancroft's

tribute to Roger Williams.

Advanced

ideas of Williams.

A mooted question.

The claim for Mary. land.

MARYLAND OR RHODE ISLAND, WHICH?

A MOOTED QUESTION CONSIDERED.

To Virginia unquestionably-thanks to the influence and untiring efforts of Jefferson, Madison, the Baptists, Quakers, and Presbyterians belongs the honor of first disestablishing religion in America. But to which colony, Maryland or Rhode Island, belongs the honor of first establishing a commonwealth upon the principle of entire separation of church and state, is a mooted question.

Referring to Maryland's being founded by Roman Catholics, Bishop Spalding, of Peoria, in the "North American Review" for September, 1894, says: "They founded one of the thirteen colonies, and were the first in the New World - the first, indeed, in all the world to make freedom of conscience an organic part of the Constitution of a State."

On the other hand, David Benedict, in his "History of the Baptists," page 446, referring to Rhode Island, says: "Roger Williams justly claims the honor of having been the first legislator in the world that fully and effectually provided for and established a The claim free, full, and absolute liberty of conscience." And

for Rhode

Island.

Both

claims scemingly endorsed.

Sidney S. Rider, in his work "Soul Liberty Rhode Island's Gift to the Nation," page 85, styles Rhode. Island" the first commonwealth in the New World, the first in the world, to make soul liberty the basis of a Constitution for a State."

Conflicting and opposed as are these claims, Montgomery, in his "Beginner's American History," edition 1902, appears to sanction both. On pages 58 and 59 he says: "Maryland was different from the other English colonies in America, because there, and there only, every Christian, whether Catholic or Protestant, had the right to worship God in his own way. In that humble little village of St. Mary's, made up

66

of thirty or forty log huts and wigwams in the woods, religious liberty had its only home in the wide world; while on page 65 he says: Providence was the first settlement in America which offered a home to all men without asking them anything whatever about their religion."

1

So eminent an authority as Bancroft, in the earlier editions of his "History of the United States," stated that the Maryland proprietary "adopted religious freedom as the basis of the state," and said that here religious liberty obtained a home, its only home in the wide world," and "conscience was without restraint." In later editions, however, while not denying that a wide and generous toleration characterized the early Maryland administration, these statements statements. are omitted, and the declaration made that Roger Williams was the first person in modern Christendom to establish civil government on the doctrine of the liberty of conscience." 2

66

What are the facts, and how are we to understand these conflicting claims?

Bancroft's

and later

That there was large freedom in religion in the early history of the Maryland colony, and an absence of religious persecution from its founding in 1634, seems evident. That the proprietary, intent on advancing the interests of his colony, invited the Puritans of Massachusetts to Maryland, offering them lands and privileges, and "free liberty of religion;" and that certain Puritans, expelled from Virginia for noncon- toleration in formity to the established religion of that colony, found refuge in Maryland in 1649, are facts plainly stated by Bancroft. "It is true," says Montgomery, "that Lord Baltimore, holding his charter, as he did

1 Edition 1837, volume i, pages 244, 247, 254.

2 Edition 1888, the author's last revision, page 255.

3 Bancroft's "History of the United States," volume i, pages 165, 169, edition 1888.

A liberal

Maryland.

Conditions favoring toleration.

Legal declarations implying an established

religion.

from the Protestant sovereign of a Protestant nation, could not have safely denied liberty of worship to Protestants; but it is also true that he evidently had no desire in his heart to deny such liberty. The fact that he invited Puritans into the colony and protected them from persecution, shows the man's true spirit."1

Until 1625, or within nine years of the founding of the colony of Maryland, Lord Baltimore was himself a Protestant. He was "a man of such moderation," says Bancroft, "that all parties were taken with him." His chief object in founding the colony, it appears, was commercial and mercenary, rather than religious. From the first, there was a "mixed population," Bancroft informs us, and while "the administration was in the hands of a Catholic," "the very great majority of the people were Protestants."3 Under such circumstances it is not strange that toleration should exist.

It is not true, however, that the colony was founded upon the principle of total separation of church and state and absolute freedom in matters of religion for all men, as was Rhode Island; or that the early laws of the colony were free from all religious interference or preferred and bias. The charter obtained by Lord Baltimore in 1632, provided that "no interpretation be admitted. thereof by which God's holy and true Christian religion, or the allegiance due unto us, our heirs, and successors, may suffer any prejudice or diminution." + This would at least seem to imply or anticipate a favored, if not an established, religion, and state control or supervision of that religion. And one of the first acts of the Maryland Assembly of 1639, reads: "Holy Church within this province shall have all her

1" Leading Facts of American History," by James Montgomery, page 105, edition 1902.

2" Soul Liberty Rhode Island's Gift to the Nation," by Sidney S. Rider, pages 11, 12. 3 Bancroft, volume i, page 166.

4 Hazard's "Historical Collection of State Papers" (1792), volume i, page 327.