religious profession. The
way was thus opened for the Act of Toleration passed in 1649. This law,
after specifying certain speeches against the Trinity, the Virgin, or
the saints as punishable offences, declared that equal privileges should
be enjoyed by Christians of all creeds. Whatever the motives of
Baltimore, his policy was certainly wise and commendable.

A new and troublesome element was now introduced into the colony. Some
Puritans who had not been tolerated among the stanch Church-of-England
inhabitants of Virginia were invited by Governor Stone to Maryland.
Their home here, which they named Providence, is now known as Annapolis.
The new-comers objected to the oath of fidelity, refused to send
burgesses to the assembly, and were ready to overthrow the government
whose protection they were enjoying. Opportunity soon offered.
Parliament had already in 1652 brought Virginia to submission. Maryland
was now accused of disloyalty, and when we notice among the
commissioners appointed by the Council of State, the name of Clayborne,
it is not difficult to understand who was the author of this charge. The
governor was removed, but being popular and not averse to compromise,
was quickly restored. Then came the accession of Cromwell to power as
Protector of England. Parliament was dissolved. The authority of its
commissioners of course ceased. Baltimore seized this opportunity to
regain his position as proprietary. He bade Stone to require the oath of
fidelity to the proprietary from those who occupied lands, and to issue
all writs in his name. He maintained that the province now stood in the
same relations to the Protectorate which it had borne to the royalist
government of Charles I.

[Illustration: Oliver Cromwell.]

So thought Cromwell, but not so Clayborne or the Maryland Puritans. They
deposed Stone, and put in power Fuller, who was in sympathy with their
designs. There resulted a reversal of the acts of former assemblies, and
legislation hostile to the Catholics. The new assembly, from which
Catholics were carefully excluded by disfranchisement, at once repealed
the Act of Toleration. Protection was withdrawn from those who professed
the popish religion, and they were forbidden the exercise of that faith
in the province. Severe penalties were threatened against "prelacy" and
"licentiousness" thus restricting the benefits of their "Act concerning
Religion" to the Puritan element now in power. The authority of the