Back More
Salem Press

Table of Contents

Defining Documents in World History: The 17th Century (1601-1700)

Declaration of Protestant Subjects in Maryland

Date: 1689

Authors: Protestant Associators

Genres: Declarative statement, petition

Summary Overview

The late 1680s and 1690s were a time of tremendous upheaval in England and its American colonies. A transition of power from King James II to King William and Queen Mary led to international conflict and, in several of the American colonies, a breakdown of colonial government control as the regimes shifted. Incidents occurred such as Leisler’s rebellion in New York and the power vacuum in Massachusetts that opened the door for the Salem witch hunts. In Maryland, the Catholic leadership of the colony, under the control of Charles Calvert, the third Lord Baltimore had faced resistance from Protestants for several years. In 1689, an armed mass of Protestant Marylanders seized control of the government.

This declaration is the statement of the protestors (who would, eventually, call themselves the Protestant Associators) describing the causes for their armed insurrection. The reasons for the rebellion have their roots in both the religious conflicts that had long existed in the colony between Roman Catholics and Protestants as well as established principles of English government and law with which the colonial government, according to the rebels, refused to conform. In addition to broad principles of political philosophy and religious oppression, the declaration provides specific examples of the perceived abuses of power by the Calvert-controlled government. It also illustrates the ways in which the English colonies were sometimes profoundly affected by political issues in the mother country.

Defining Moment

The roots of Maryland’s Protestant Revolution of 1689—and of the document presented here—lie in three intersecting contexts.

The first is the religious background and makeup of Maryland. The colony of Maryland had, since its beginnings, been something of an anomaly among England’s North American possessions. Established in 1632, Maryland was a proprietary colony. This meant that its colonial charter (the royal “permission” for the colony to exist) was granted to a private proprietor rather than being directly controlled by the crown. While the Kings of England often granted proprietary charters to joint-stock companies, which managed the colony via a board of directors, a few went to individual proprietors who did not have to answer to a board or investors. Maryland’s first proprietor was Cecilius Calvert, the second Lord Baltimore. Calvert wished to establish a haven for English Catholics in North America. This was a highly unusual and provocative political act in the 1630s, as Puritans and Protestants in England feared the alleged Catholic sympathies of their monarch, Charles I—now those sympathies seemed to be extending to the colonies across the Atlantic.

The second factor was the nature of government in colonial Maryland. The initial charter issued by King Charles I granted broad powers to the Calvert family as proprietors. They could declare war, collect taxes and establish a formal nobility or aristocratic class within the colony. In most cases, the proprietor or his appointed governor would have final say on laws and regulation as well as their enforcement in the colony. Despite Maryland’s Catholic origins, the colony’s “Act Concerning Religion” established toleration for Christians of differing sects or denominations, so a large number of Protestants were among the earliest settlers of Maryland, and quickly came to outnumber English Catholic settlers. Nevertheless, Lord Baltimore’s proprietary ownership of the colony meant that the leadership of Maryland was largely in the hands of the minority Catholics.

The final factor contributing to this crisis was the Glorious Revolution of 1688 back in England. This was the largely peaceful overthrow of the Catholic King James II by a cabal of members of Parliament and the installation of William of Orange as King William III and his wife Mary (James II’s Protestant daughter) as Queen Mary II. James II had promoted Catholicism in England, which the English gentry tolerated until his young wife gave birth to a son, a Catholic heir. After the exchange in monarchs took place, Protestants in Maryland, led by John Coode, were afraid that the Catholic government of the colony would remain sympathetic and loyal to the exiled Catholic monarch.

In April 1689, the colonial government had not yet publicly recognized William and Mary as the rightful monarchs of England. Protestants in Maryland had never been satisfied with the leadership accorded to Catholics in the colony, and the revolution at home provided the necessary excuse to hold an armed uprising. John Coode led an army of about 700 soldiers against the colonial government and forced the surrender of Deputy Governor Henry Darnall. Coode took political control of the colony as its governor (although he used the title Commander-in-Chief) from August 1, 1689 to July 27, 1691, when a new Royal Governor, appointed by William and Mary, arrived to take control. In November 1689, they came up with the following declaration of the reasons for their unlawful takeover of the colony’s government.

Author Biographies

While the declaration of the Protestant rebels is unsigned, one of the most prominent leaders the leader of their 1689 revolution was John Coode, who had longstanding conflicts with the Calvert regime and their policies. It is likely that his conflicts and complaints were representative of many of the rebels and reflected in their declaration.

Coode was born in Cornwall, England around 1648 and educated at Oxford University. After becoming a priest in the Church of England, Coode migrated to Maryland in 1672. He married a Maryland woman, Susannah Slye, whose father was embroiled in longstanding disputes with the Calvert family. Coode became increasingly involved in leadership roles in the colony, including service as a militia captain, representative in the legislative assembly and as a judge. In 1681, he was convicted of playing a role in a plot against the colonial government and removed from office. This placed him firmly within the ranks of the enemies of the Calvert regime.

Historical Document

Declaration of Protestant Subjects in Maryland

Although the Nature and State of Affairs relating to the Government of this Province is so well and notoriously known to all Persons any way concerned in the same, as to the People and Inhabitants here, who are more immediately Interested, as might excuse any Declaration or Apology for this present inevitable Appearance: Yet forasmuch as (by the Plots, Contrivances, Insinuations, Remonstrances, and Subscriptions, carried on, suggested, extorted, and obtained by the Lord Baltemore, his Deputies, representatives, and Officers here) the Injustice and Tyranny under which we groan is palliated, and most if not all the Particulars of our Grievances shrouded from the Eye of Observation and the Hand of Redress, We thought fit for general Satisfaction, and particularly to undeceive those that may have a sinister Account of our Proceedings, to Publish this Declaration of the Reason and Motives inducing us thereunto.

His Lordship’s Right and Title to the Government is by Virtue of a Charter to his Father Cecilius, from King Charles the First, of Blessed Memory. How his present Lordship has managed the Powers and Authorities given and granted in the same, We could Mourn and Lament only in silence, would our Duty to God, our Allegeance to his Vicegerent, and the Care and Welfare of our Selves and Posterity, permit us.

In the First Place, In the said Charter, is a Reservation of the Faith and Allegeance due to the Crown of England (the Province and Inhabitants being immediately subject thereunto) but how little that is manifested, is too obvious to all unbiassed Persons that ever had any thing to do here; The very name and owning of that Soveraign Power is sometimes Crime enough to incur the Frowns of our Superiors, and to render our Persons obnoxious and suspected to be Ill Affected to the Government.

The Ill Usage and Affronts to the King’s Officers belonging to the Customs here, were a sufficient Argument of this; We need but instance the Business of Mr. Badcock and Mr. Rousby, of whom the former was forcibly detained by his Lordship from going home to make his just Complaints in England, upon which he was soon taken Sick, and ‘twas more than probably conjectured that the Conceit of his Confinement was the chief Cause of his Death, which soon after happened. The other was Barbarously Mur[d]ered upon the Execution of his Office, by one that was an Irish Papist and our Chief Governor.

Allegeance here, by these Persons under whom We Suffer, is little talk’d of, other then what they would have done and sworn to his Lordship, the Lord Proprietary; for it was very lately owned by the President himself, openly enough in the Upper House of Assembly, That Fidelity to his Lordship was Allegeance, and that the denial of the one was the same thing with refusal or denial of the other. In that very Oath of Fidelity that was then imposed under the Penalty and Threats of Banishment, there is not so much as the least word or intimation of any Duty, Faith, or Allegeance to be reserved to Our Soveraign Lord the King of England.

How the Jus Regale is improved here, and made the Prerogative of his Lordship, is too sensibly felt by us all in that absolute Authority exercised over us, and by the greatest part of the Inhabitants in the Seizure of their persons, Forfeiture and Loss of their Goods, Chattels, Freeholds and Inheritances.

In the next place, Churches and Chappels (which by the said Charter should be Built and Consecrated according to the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Kingdom of England) to our great Regret and Discouragement of our Religion are erected and converted to the use of Popish Idolatry and Superstition. Jesuits and Seminary Priests are the only Incumbents (for which there is a Supply provided by sending our Popish Youth to be Educated at St. Omers) as also the chief Advisers and Councellors in Affairs of Government, and the Richest and most Fertile Land set apart for their Use and Maintenance; while other Lands that are piously intended, and given for the Maintenance of the Protestant Ministry, become Escheat, and are taken as Forfeit, the Ministers themselves discouraged, and no care taken for their Subsistance.

The Power to Enact Laws is another branch of his Lordship’s Authority; but how well that has been Executed and Circumstanced is too notorious. His present Lordship upon the Death of his Father, in order thereunto, sent out Writs for Four (as was ever the usuage) for each County to serve as Representatives of the People; but when Elected, there were Two only of each Respective Four pick’d out and summoned to that Convention, Whereby many Laws were made, and the greatest Levy yet known, laid upon the Inhabitants.

The next Session, the House was filled up with the remaining Two that was left out of the former, in which there were many and the best of our Laws Enacted, to the great Benefit and Satisfaction of the People. But his Lordship soon after Dissolved and Declared the best of those Laws, such as he thought fit, null and void by Proclamation; notwithstanding they were Assented to in his Lordship’s Name by the Governor, in his absence, and he himself sometime Personally Acted and Governed by the same; so that the Question in our Courts of Judicature, in any point that relates to many of our Laws, is not so much the relation it has to the said Laws, but whether the Laws themselves be agreeable to the Approbation and Pleasure of his Lordship? Whereby our Liberty and Property is become uncertain, and under the Arbitrary Disposition of the Judges and Commissioners of our Courts of Justice.

The said Assembly being sometime after Dissolved by Proclamation, another was Elected and met, consisting only of Two Members for each County, directly opposite to an Act of Assembly for Four, in which several Laws, with his Lordship’s Personal Assent, were Enacted: Among the which, one for the Encouragement of Trade and Erecting of Towns. But the Execution of that Act was soon after, by Proclamation from his Lordship out of England, suspended the last Year, and all Officers Military and Civil severely prohibited executing or inflicting the Penalties of the same. Notwithstanding which suspension, being in effect a dissolution and abrogating of the whole Act, the Income of Three Pence to the Government by the said Act, payable for every Hogshead of Tobacco Exported, is carefully Exacted and Collected.

How Fatal, and of what Pernicious Consequence, that Unlimited and Arbitrary pretended Authority may be to the Inhabitants, is too apparent, but by considering, That by the same Reason, all the rest of our Laws, whereby our Liberty and Property subsists, are subject to the same Arbitrary Disposition, and if timely Remedy be not had, must stand or fall according to his Lordship’s Good Will and Pleasure.

Nor is this Nullifying and Suspending Power the only Grievance that doth perplex and bur[d]en us, in relation to Laws; but these Laws that are of a certain and unquestioned acceptation are executed and countenanced, as they are more or less agreeable to the good liking of our Governours in particular; One very good Law provides, That Orphan Children should be disposed of to Persons of the same Religion with that of their deceased Parents. In direct opposition to which, several Children of Protestants have been committed to the Tutelage of Papists, and brought up in the Romish Superstition. We could instance in a Young Woman, that has been lately forced, by Order of Council, from her Husband, committed to the Custody of a Papist and brought up in his Religion. ‘Tis endless to enumerate the particulars of this nature, while on the contrary those Laws that enhance the Grandeur and Income of his said Lordship are severely Imposed and Executed; especially one that against all Sense, Equity, Reason, and Law Punishes all Speeches, Practices, and Attempts relating to his Lordship and Government, that shall be thought Mutinous and Seditious by the Judges of the Provincial Court, with either Whipping, Branding, Boreing through the Tongue, Fine, Imprisonment, Banishment, or Death; all or either of the said Punishments, at the Discretion of the said Judges; who have given a very recent and remarkable Proof of their Authority in each particular Punishment aforesaid, upon several of the good People of this Province, while the rest are in the same danger to have their Words and Actions liable to the Constructions and Punishment of the said Judges, and their Lives and Fortunes to the Mercy of their Arbitrary Fancies, Opinions, and Sentences.

To these Grievances are added,

Excessive Officers Fees, and that too under Execution, directly against the Law made and provided to redress the same; wherein there is no probability of a Legal Remedy, the Officers themselves that are Parties and culpable being Judges.

The like Excessive Fees imposed upon and extorted from Masters and Owners of Vessels Trading into this Province, without any Law to Justifie the same, and directly against the plain Words of the Charter, that say, there shall be no Imposition or Assessment without the Consent of the Freemen in the Assembly: To the great Obstruction of Trade, and Prejudice of the Inhabitants.

The like excessive Fees Imposed upon and extorted from the Owners of Vessels that are Built here, or do really belong to the Inhabitants; contrary to an Act of Assembly, made and provided for the same: Wherein, Moderate and Reasonable Fees are assertained, for the Promoting and Encouragement of Shipping and Navigation amongst our selves.

The frequent Pressing of Men, Horses, Boats, Provisions, and other Necessaries, in time of Peace; and often to gratifie private Designs and Occasions, to the great Bur[d]en and Regret of the Inhabitants, contrary to Law and several Acts of Assembly in that Case made and provided.

The Seizing and Apprehending of Protestants in their Houses, with Armed Force consisting of Papists, and that in time of Peace; then- hurrying them away to Prisons without Warrant or Cause of Commitment, there kept and Confined with Popish Guards, a long time without Trial.

Not only private but publick Outrages and Mur[d]ers committed and done by Papists upon Protestants without any Redress, but rather connived at and Tollerated by the chief in Authority; and indeed it were in vain to desire or expect any help or measures from them, being Papists and Guided by the Counsels and Instigations of the Jesuits, either in these or any other Grievances or Oppression. And yet these are the Men that are our Chief Judges, at the Common Law, in Chancery, of the Probat of Wills, and the Affairs of Administration, in the Upper House of Assembly, and the Chief Military Officers and Commanders of our Forces; being still the same Individual Persons, in all these particular Qualifications and Places.

These and many more, even Infinite Pressures and Calamities, we have hitherto with Patience lain under and submitted too; hoping that the same Hand of Providence, that hath sustained us under them, would at length in due time release us; and now at length, For as much as it has pleased Almighty God, by means of the great Prudence and Conduct of the best of Princes, Our most gracious King William, to put a Check to the great Innundation of Slavery and Popery, that had like to overwhelm Their Majesties Protestant Subjects in all their Territories and Dominions (of which none have suffered more, or are in greater Danger than our selves) we hope[d] and expected in our particular Stations and Qualifications, a proportionable Share of so great a Blessing. But to our great Grief and Consternation, upon the first News of the great Overture and happy Change in England, we found our selves surrounded with Strong and Violent Endeavours from our Governours here, being the Lord Baltemore’s Deputies and Representatives, to defeat us of the same.

We still find all the means used by these very Persons and their Agents, Jesuits, Priests, and lay Papists, that Art or Malice can suggest, to divert the Obedience and Loyalty of the Inhabitants from Their Most Sacred Majesties, to that heighth of Impudence, that solemn Masses and Prayers are used (as we have very good Information) in their Chappels and Oratories, for the prosperous Success of the Popish Forces in Ireland, and the French Designs against England, whereby they would involve us in the same Crime of Disloyalty with themselves, and render us Obnoxious to the Insupportable Displeasure of Their Majesties.

We every where hear, not only Publick Protestation against Their Majesties Right and Possession of the Crown of England, but their most Illustrious Persons villified and aspers’d with the worst and most Traiterous Expressions of Obloquy and Detraction.

We are every day threatned with the Loss of our Lives, Liberties, and Estates, of which we have great Reason to think our selves in Imminent Danger, by the Practices and Machinations that are on foot to betray us to the French, Northern, and other Indians, of which some have been dealt withal, and others Invited to Assist in our Destruction; well remembering the Incursion and Inrode of the said Northern Indians, in the Year 1681, who were conducted into the Heart of the Province by French Jesuits, and lay sore upon us, while the Representatives of the Country, then in the Assembly, were severely press’d upon by our Superiors, to yield them an Unlimited and Tiranical Power in the Affairs of the Militia. As so great a Piece of Villany cannot be the Result but of the worst of Principles; so we should with the greatest Difficulties believe it to be true, if Undeniable Evidence and Circumstances did not convince us.

Together with the Promises, we have, with all due Thinking and Deliberation, considered the Endeavours that are making to Disunite us among our selves, to make and Inflame Differences in our Neighbour Colony of Virginia, from whose Friendship, Vicinity, great Loyalty and Sameness of Religion, we may expect Assistance in our greatest Necessity.

We have considered, that all the other Branches of Their Majesties Dominions in this Part of the World (as well as we could be informed) have done their Duty in Proclaiming and Asserting their undoubted Right in these, and all other Their Majesties Territories and Countries.

But above all, with Due and Mature Deliberation, we have reflected upon that vast Gratitude and Duty incumbent likewise upon us, To our Soveraign Lord and Lady, the King and Queen’s most Excellent Majesties, in which, as it would not be safe for us, so it will not suffer us to be Silent, in so great and General a Jubile[e], withal considering and looking upon our selves Discharged, Dissolved, and Free from all manner of Duty, Obligation, or Fidelity, to the Deputies, Governours, or Chief Magistrates here, as such: They having Departed from their Allegiance (upon which alone our said Duty and Fidelity to them depends) and by their. Ac]Complices and Agents aforesaid endeavoured the Destruction of our Religion, Lives, Liberties, and Properties, all which they are bound to Protect.

These are the Reasons, Motives, and Considerations, which we do Declare, have induced us to take up Arms, to Preserve, Vindicate, and Assert the Sovereign Dominion, and Right, of King William and Queen Mary to this Province: To Defend the Protestant Religion among us, and to Protect and Shelter the Inhabitants from all manner of Violence, Oppression, and Destruction, that is Plotted and Designed against them; which we do Solemnly Declare and Protest, we have no Designs or Intentions whatsoever.

For the more Effectuate Accomplishments of which, We will take due Care that a Free and full Assembly be Called, and Convened with all Possible Expedition, by whom we may likewise have our Condition and Circumstances and our most Dutifull Addresses represented and rendered to Their Majesties: From whose great Wisdom, Justice, and especial Care of the Protestant Religion, We may Reasonably and Comfortably hope to be Delivered from our present Calamities, and for the Future be secured under a Just and Legal Administration, from being evermore subjected to the Yoke of Arbitrary Government, Tyrany and Popery.

In the Conduct of this, We will take Care, and do Promise, That no Person now in Arms with us, or that shall come to Assist us, shall commit any Outrage, or do any Violence to any Person whatsoever, that shall be found Peaceable and Quiet, and not oppose us in our said Just and necessary Designs: And that there shall be Just and due Satisfaction made for Provision, and other Necessaries had and Received from the Inhabitants: And the Soldiers punctually and duely Paid, in such Ways and Methods as have been formerly accustomed, or by Law ought to be.

And we do, Lastly, Invite and Require all manner of Persons whatsoever, Residing or Inhabiting in this Province, as they tender their Allegiance, the Protestant Religion, their Lives, Fortunes and Families, to Aid and Assist us in this our Undertaking.

Given under our Hands in Mary Land,

the 25th Day of July, in the First Year of Their Majesties Reign,

Annoque Domini 1689.

Glossary

aspers’d: harshly criticized

assertained: in this context, meaning assessed or determined, as in the government deciding the amount of a fee

Chattels: personal property besides land

Escheat: to return as property to the state, particularly in the case of land

innundation: a flood or huge amount

Jus Regale: Latin for the “Royal Right,” political or legal powers that belong to the King

popish; popery; Romish: derogatory references to Catholicism

Pressing: coopting private property or people for the use of the state

Document Analysis

The petitioners begin by explaining that despite the “State of Affairs relating to the Government of this Province” being well known to those in the colony, it is important for others elsewhere to understand the conditions that led to Maryland’s Protestants taking up arms. The reason for this, they explain, is that “most if not all the Particulars” of their suffering is not readily visible or understandable to those in power who might assist them. The declaration, then, is a list of their grievances. This is especially important because people outside the colony might have been misled about the situation; the authors of this document which to “undeceive” them.

In the second paragraph, the petitioners explain the origins of Lord Baltimore’s powers, being inherited from his father and embodied in a charter from King Charles I. This charter places Baltimore and the colony under “allegeance” [sic] to the Crown of England but no such obedience is evident. In fact, loyalty to the Crown is considered to be a suspicious activity and in the following paragraph, the petitioners recount the story of two colonists who wished to complain about conditions in Maryland and were forcibly prevented from doing so. One was imprisoned (leading to his death) and the other was murdered by an Irish Catholic (“and our Chief Governor”). Here we have the appearance of fears based on nationality and religion. As we will see, fear of foreign and Catholic subversion and oppression is a recurring theme in the document. The next two paragraphs expand on this theme, alleging that Lord Baltimore had set himself as the supreme authority in the colony with no allegiance to the royal government, requiring an “oath of authority” to the colonial government rather than to the King. Lord Baltimore and his people on the scene had taken royal authority (Jus Regale) for himself and ruled in an absolute and arbitrary manner.

The next six paragraphs provide detailed examples of the ways in which Baltimore and his ruling cabal exercised their authority. The first example is religious in nature, explaining that the government has illegally repurposed Protestant churches to be Roman Catholic ones (“converted to the use of Popish Idolatry and Superstition”). They also express concern about the fact that Jesuit priests are especially prominent as clergy, teachers, and advisers to government officials, and that even more Maryland Catholic children are being educated at the College of St. Omers in France, a Jesuit school set up specifically to maintain a body of English Catholic priests after the Protestant Reformation. These Catholic figures also receive the best farmland while lands belonging to Protestant groups are seized and Protestant clergy are destitute. The colonial government has also manipulated the legislative assembly, allowing only two of the allowed four representatives to be part of the assembly. When the assembly passed laws that were “to the great Benefit” of the people, Baltimore “dissolved” the laws he did not like. A new assembly was called, again not seating as many representatives as the law required. Once more, the petitioners accuse, Baltimore refused to enforce laws he did not like. The tax on tobacco, however, was “carefully Exacted and Collected.” The petitioners fear that these examples of “arbitrary” enforcement of the laws will continue and the entire legal basis of the colony may collapse. They are also concerned with the domination of Roman Catholicism, citing cases in which orphaned Protestant children were placed with Catholic families. This section concludes with the example of people facing horrible punishments for the crime of speaking out against the abuses committed by the government.

The petitioners, up to this point, have discussed their concerns about the government of Maryland in a fairly reasonable way, pointing out where Lord Baltimore and his followers had violated established law and precedent in the colony. The remainder of the petition shifts to a more conspiratorial tone, complaining not only about excessive fees (often to the point of extortion) placed on merchants and the seizure of labor and goods for the leadership’s personal benefit but also allege “publick Outrages and Mur[d]ers” that are committed by Catholics against Protestants without any penalty or punishment, and being actively promoted by those in charge of the colony as well as by Jesuits. For example, at the time of the declaration, the deposed James II had brought a French army to predominantly Catholic Ireland to begin his attempted reconquest of his old dominions; according to the declaration, Jesuits in Maryland churches openly prayed for James’ success. Likewise, a rumor arose in the early 1680s that Lord Baltimore was in league with Jesuits and the native population nearby to foment a false rebellion, such that the governor could demand a militia from his government that he might use to put down Protestants in the colony. The rumor was utterly untrue, but John Coode was among many of the colonists who believed it, a testament to the poor favor in which the government of Maryland was held.

The petitioners call upon King William to intervene on their behalf. They are also careful to explicitly declare how happy they are with the results of the shift in royal power from James II to William—indicating that they are loyal subjects of the rightful King. The final paragraphs of the petition detail the many ways in which the Baltimore regime were not loyal to William and request that they be “delivered” from their suffering and troubles. In the meantime, however, the petitioners have armed themselves and will assert control of the colony to restore proper, lawful government, promising to not do violence to anyone who is “peaceable and quiet” and calling on all other Protestants to come to their aid.

Essential Themes

The Declaration of the Protestant Subjects of Maryland speaks to two key issues. The first of these is the danger of one religious group dominating the political, social, and cultural life of the colony. While the rebels’ complaints about the Roman Catholics among them occasionally veer into conspiratorial areas, there is a strong sense that the rebels are concerned not only about the political power of Roman Catholic leaders but also the way that Catholicism is displacing the various Protestant religions. This is true not only of their churches but also in their concerns about the educational system, the placement of orphaned Protestant children with Catholic families, and their willingness to accept any rumor of Catholic perfidy as being true.

The other issue the rebels raise is one that would echo across the coming century in English North America: concerns over the arbitrary use of government power. According to the rebels, the government of Maryland had imposed fines and fees and committed other acts that were “directly against the Law” and were not subject to legal dispute. Acts of the legislature had been ignored and the colonial legislature itself had been manipulated and marginalized by colonial authorities. One of the key issues in the events leading up the Glorious Revolution had been the primacy of Parliament. Here, the Maryland Protestants asserted the importance of their own legislatures in a similar fashion. In less than one hundred years, colonial rebels from across English North America would raise similar concerns about arbitrary power and the abuse of their colonial legislatures by the government of Great Britain.

—Aaron Gulyas

Bibliography and Further Reading

1 

Brugger, Robert J. Maryland: A Middle Temperament 1634-1980. Hopkins University Press, 1988.

2 

Carr, Lois Green and David William Jordan. Maryland’s Revolution of Government, 1689-1692. Cornell University Press, 1974.

3 

Hoffman, Ronald. Princes of Ireland, Planters of Maryland: A Carroll Saga, 1500-1782. University of North Carolina Press, 2000.

4 

Sutto, Antoinette. Loyal Protestants and Dangerous Papists: Maryland and the Politics of Religion in the English Atlantic, 1630-1690. University of Virginia Press, 2015.

5 

Krugler, John. English and Catholic: The Lords Baltimore in the Seventeenth Century. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004.

Websites

6 

Hardy, Beatriz Betancourt. “Roman Catholics, Not Papists: Catholic Identity in Maryland, 1689-1776.” Maryland Historical Magazine 92 (Summer 1997): 139-162, http://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc5800/sc5881/000001/000000/000367/pdf/msa_sc_5881_1_367.pdf. Accessed 22 Apr. 2017.

7 

“John Coode (c. 1648-1708/9).” Exploring Maryland’s Roots: Library. Maryland Public Television, http://mdroots.thinkport.org/library/johncoode.asp. Accessed 22 Apr. 2017.

8 

Rogers, Roy. “Maryland’s Protestant Revolution and the Problem of Religious Freedom.” The Junto: A Group Blog on Early American History (January 7, 2015), https://earlyamericanists.com/2015/01/07/marylands-protestant-revolution-and-the-problem-of-religious-freedom/. Accessed 22 Apr. 2017.

Citation Types

Type
Format
MLA 9th
"Declaration Of Protestant Subjects In Maryland." Defining Documents in World History: The 17th Century (1601-1700), edited by David Simonelli, Salem Press, 2017. Salem Online, online.salempress.com/articleDetails.do?articleName=DD17C_0043.
APA 7th
Declaration of Protestant Subjects in Maryland. Defining Documents in World History: The 17th Century (1601-1700), In D. Simonelli (Ed.), Salem Press, 2017. Salem Online, online.salempress.com/articleDetails.do?articleName=DD17C_0043.
CMOS 17th
"Declaration Of Protestant Subjects In Maryland." Defining Documents in World History: The 17th Century (1601-1700), Edited by David Simonelli. Salem Press, 2017. Salem Online, online.salempress.com/articleDetails.do?articleName=DD17C_0043.