University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
The History Collection

Page View

Kaminski, John P.; Saladino, Gaspare J.; Moore, Timothy D. (Historian); Lannér-Cusin, Johanna E.; Schoenleber, Charles H.; Reid, Jonathan M.; Flamingo, Margaret R.; Fields, David P. (ed.) / Ratification of the Constitution by the states: Maryland (1)
(2015)

Introduction,   pp. xxi-lvi


Page xxvii

INTRODUCTION
rightful role, as well as a challenge in the long-standing battle over the
limits of proprietary power.14
Dulany, who as secretary of the colony was a clear political insider,
emerged as a champion of the governor's authority to set such fees. In
the absence of legislative action, Dulany regarded the governor's action
as necessary to good government. To defend the governor's action,
Dulany composed a debate between two fictitious citizens, which was
published in the Annapolis Maryland Gazette. The first citizen was little
more than a straw man introduced by Dulany to show the superior
reasoning of the second, who spoke to Dulany's concerns for order in
government. Dulany used the second citizen to argue against more
extreme elements in the country party. Dulany presumed these men's
motives were selfish. They were the same men who resisted paying the
public debt and had neglected their obligations to pass necessary to-
bacco inspection legislation. Such men, despite their protestations to
the contrary, were not friends to Maryland's constitution. By the dia-
logue's conclusion, the first citizen had been won over to the second's
arguments and foreswore listening to dubious politicians in the fu-
ture.15 Dulany's staged dialogue did not go without a response. Another
Marylander, Charles Carroll of Carrollton, took up the debate in ear-
nest under the pseudonym "First Citizen." In his first response, Carroll
used Dulany's earlier Considerations pamphlet (1765) as grist for the
mill. There was no love lost between the Dulanys and the Carrolls.
Despite the pseudonyms, the two men's identities were no secret to
readers of the Gazette.16
The debate would last from 7 January 1773, when Dulany drafted his
original piece, through 1 July, when Carroll penned his fourth letter
as "First Citizen." Each man contributed four pieces to the Gazette.
Carroll pursued the debate as a matter of natural rights, while Dulany
approached the exchange legally and constitutionally. Like Dulany,
though almost a generation younger, Carroll studied law and benefitted
from wealth and privilege. Both men had been educated abroad. Car-
roll came from one of the richest families in the American colonies
and would, as a Maryland delegate to Congress, sign the Declaration
of Independence. He was also a Catholic, meaning that he was disen-
franchised in the colony. Not only could Carroll not vote or hold po-
litical office, but the colony also deprived him of the right to practice
his religion in public. The matter may seem irrelevant to the politics
of fees, but the debate that ensued between "First Citizen" and "An-
tilon," the pseudonym assumed by Dulany, resurrected the colony's
history with religion. Dulany, who had championed the colonies' right
to internal taxation during the Stamp Act controversy, seemed to be
XXV11


Go up to Top of Page