hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Hon. J. L. M. Curry , LL.D., William Robertson Garrett , A. M. , Ph.D., Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 1.1, Legal Justification of the South in secession, The South as a factor in the territorial expansion of the United States (ed. Clement Anselm Evans) 1 1 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in Hon. J. L. M. Curry , LL.D., William Robertson Garrett , A. M. , Ph.D., Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 1.1, Legal Justification of the South in secession, The South as a factor in the territorial expansion of the United States (ed. Clement Anselm Evans). You can also browse the collection for May 21st, 1779 AD or search for May 21st, 1779 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 1 result in 1 document section:

Hon. J. L. M. Curry , LL.D., William Robertson Garrett , A. M. , Ph.D., Confederate Military History, a library of Confederate States Military History: Volume 1.1, Legal Justification of the South in secession, The South as a factor in the territorial expansion of the United States (ed. Clement Anselm Evans), The South as a factor in the territorial expansion of the United States. (search)
up. Maryland refused to become a member of the Confederation unless the articles should be amended to contain a provision in conformity to her views in reference to the western country. She seemed to persist in her course, notwithstanding that she had been defeated at every step. December 15, 1778, her legislature adopted A declaration and a letter of instructions to her delegates in Congress, both of which were devoted to the subject of the western lands and were laid before Congress May 21, 1779. (Journals of Congress, vol. 2, pp. 601-605; vol. 3, pp. 281-2-3, 289. Henning's Statutes of Virginia, vol. 10, appendix.) These documents reiterate the former claims and arguments of Maryland, extending and elaborating them. They complain that the alterations and amendments proposed by our delegates to the Confederation in consequence of the aforesaid instructions by us to them given, were rejected, and no satisfactory reason assigned for the rejection thereof. They declare that