VOLUME XVII SLICE IV Magnetite to Malt (continued 6)

The legislature meets biennially at Augusta, the capital, and is composed of a Senate of thirty-one members and a House of Representatives of one hundred and fifty-one members. Members of each house are elected for a term of two years: one senator from each senatorial district and one to seven representatives (one for a population of 1,500, and seven for a population of 26,250) from each township, or, where the township or plantation has less than 1,500 inhabitants, from each representative district, according to its population. There is a new reapportionment every ten years, counting from 1821. Every senator and every representative must at the beginning of his term have been for five years a citizen of the United States, for one year a resident of the state, and for three months next preceding his election, as well as during his term of office, a resident of the township or district which he represents; and every senator must be at least twenty-five years of age. All revenue bills must originate in the House of Representatives, but to such bills the Senate may propose amendments provided they relate solely to raising revenue. Other bills may originate in either house. In September 1908 a constitutional amendment was adopted providing for referendum and initiative by the people. Any bill proposed in the legislature or passed by it must be referred to popular vote before becoming law, if there is a referendum petition therefor signed by 10,000 voters; and a petition signed by 12,000 voters initiates new legislation.

At the head of the department of justice is the supreme judicial court, which consists of a chief justice and seven associate justices appointed by the governor and council for a term of seven years. When it sits as a law court, at least five of its justices must be present, and it holds three such sessions annually: one at Augusta, one at Bangor, and one at Portland. But only one of its justices is required for a trial court, and trial courts are held two or three times a year in each county for the trial of both civil and criminal cases which come before it in the first instance or upon appeal. In Cumberland and Kennebec counties there is a superior court presided over by one justice and having extensive civil and criminal jurisdiction; and in each of the counties there are a probate court for the settlement of the estates of deceased persons and courts of the trial justice and the justice of the peace for the trial of petty offences and of civil cases in which the debt or damage involved does not exceed $20.

The principal forms of local government are the town (or township), the plantation, the county and the city. As in other parts of New England, the town is the most important of these. At the regular town meeting held in March the electorate of the town assembles, decides what shall be done for the town during the ensuing year, elects officers to execute its decisions with limited discretion, and votes money to meet the expenses. The principal officers are the selectmen (usually three), town clerk, assessors, collector, treasurer, school committee and road commissioner. A populous section of a town, in order to promote certain financial ends, is commonly incorporated as a village without however becoming a governing organization distinct from the town. Maine is the only state in the Union that retains what is known as the organized plantation. This is a governmental unit organized from an unincorporated township having at least 200 inhabitants,5 and its principal officers are the moderator, clerk, three assessors, treasurer, collector, constable and school committee. The county is a sort of intermediate organization between the state and the towns to assist chiefly in the administration of justice, especially in the custody of offenders, and in the making and care of roads. Its officers are three commissioners, a treasurer, a register of deeds, a judge and a register of probate, and a sheriff. They are all elected: the commissioners for a term of six years, one retiring every two years, the register of deeds and the judge and the register of probate for a term of four years, and the others for two years. Among other duties the commissioners care for county property, manage county business and take charge of county roads. Maine has no general law under which cities are chartered, and does not even set a minimum population. A town may, therefore, be incorporated as a city whenever it can obtain from the legislature a city charter which a majority of its electorate prefers to a continuance under its town government; consequently there is much variety in the government of the various cities of the state.

By the laws of Maine the property rights of a wife are approximately equal to those of a husband. A woman does not lose nor a man acquire right to property by marriage, and a wife may manage, sell, or will her property without the assent of her husband. She may even receive as her own the wages of her personal labour which was not performed for her own family. In the absence of a will, bar or release, there is no legal distinction between the rights of a widower in the estate of his deceased wife and those of a widow in the estate of her deceased husband. The grounds for divorce in the state are adultery, impotence, extreme cruelty, desertion for three consecutive years next preceding the application, gross and confirmed habits of intoxication, cruel and abusive treatment, or a husband’s gross or wanton refusal or neglect to provide a suitable maintenance for his wife.

Under the laws of Maine a householder owning and occupying a house and lot may hold the same, or such part of it as does not exceed $500 in value, as a homestead exempt from attachment, except for the satisfaction of liens for labour or material, by filing in the registry of deeds a certificate stating his desire for such an exemption, provided he is not the owner of an exempted lot purchased from the state; and the exemption may be continued during the widowhood of his widow or the minority of his children. A considerable amount of personal property, including apparel, household furniture not exceeding $100 in value, a library not exceeding $150 in value, interest in a pew in a meeting-house, and a specified amount of fuel, provisions, tools or farming implements, and domestic animals, and one fishing boat, is also exempt from attachment.

Maine was the first state in the Union to enact a law for prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors. An act for restricting the sale of such liquors was passed in 1846; the first prohibitory act was passed, largely through the influence of Neal Dow, in 1851; this was frequently amended; and in 1884 an amendment to the constitution was adopted which declares the manufacture of intoxicating liquors and their sale, except “for medicinal and mechanical purposes and the arts,” forever prohibited. By the law enacted for enforcing this prohibition the governor and council appoint a state liquor commissioner from whom alone the selectmen of a town, the mayor or aldermen of a city, are authorized to receive the liquors which may be sold within the exceptions named in the amendment, and the selectmen, mayor or aldermen appoint an agent who alone is authorized to sell any of these liquors within their jurisdiction and who is forbidden to sell any whatever to minors, Indians, soldiers and drunkards. But the law labours under the disadvantage of all laws not vigorously sustained by general public sentiment, and is grossly violated. For the most part it is executed to the degree demanded by local sentiment in the several municipalities, thus operating in practice much the same as a “local option” law. The law looks to checking the demand by preventing the supply; and since habitual reliance on the stringency of law tends to the neglect of other influences for the removal of evils from the community, the citizens seem to absolve themselves from personal responsibility, both for the execution of the law and for the existence of the evil itself. There has been a strong movement for the repeal of the law, and the question of prohibition has long been an important one in state politics.

The death penalty was abolished in Maine in 1876, restored in 1883, and again abolished in 1887.

Penal and Charitable Institutions.—The state penal and reformatory institutions consist of the state prison at Thomaston, the state (reform) school for boys at South Portland, and a state industrial school for girls at Hallowell, established in 1875 and taken over by the state in 1899. The two schools are not places of punishment, but reformatory schools for delinquent boys (from 8 to 16 years of age) and girls (from 6 to 16 years), who have been committed by the courts for violations of law, and, in the case of girls, who, by force of circumstances or associations, are “in manifest danger of becoming outcasts of society.” The prison is in charge of a board of three inspectors and a warden, and each of the other two institutions is in charge of a board of trustees; the inspectors, warden, and trustees are all appointed by the governor and council. Convicts in the prison are usually employed in the manufacture of articles that are not extensively made elsewhere in the state, such as carriages, harness, furniture and brooms. The inmates of the state school for boys receive instruction in farming, carpentry, tailoring, laundry work, and various other trades and occupations; and the girls in the state industrial school are trained in housework, laundering, dressmaking, &c. Paupers are cared for chiefly by the towns and cities, those wholly dependent being placed in almshouses and those only partially dependent receiving aid at their homes. The charitable institutions maintained by the state are: the military and naval orphan asylum at Bath, the Maine institution for the blind at Portland, the Maine school for the deaf (established in 1876, and taken over by the state in 1897) at Portland, the Maine insane hospital at Augusta, the Eastern Maine insane hospital at Bangor, and a school for the feeble-minded (established in 1907) at West Pownal, each of which is governed by trustees appointed by the governor and council, with the exception of a part of those of the orphan asylum, who are appointed by the corporation. Besides the strictly state institutions, there are a number of private charitable institutions which are assisted by state funds; among these are the eye and ear infirmary at Portland, the Maine state sanatorium at Hebron for the treatment of tuberculosis, and various hospitals, orphanages, &c. The national government has a branch of the national home for disabled volunteer soldiers at Togus, and a marine hospital at Portland.

Education.—The school-district system was established in 1800 while Maine was still a part of Massachusetts and was maintained by the first school law passed, in 1821, by the state legislature; but, beginning in the next year, one town after another received the privilege of abolishing its districts, and in 1893 the system was abolished by act of the legislature. A state board of education, composed of one member from each county, was established in 1846, but for this was substituted, in 1852, a commissioner of schools for each county, appointed by the governor, and two years later a state superintendent of schools was substituted for the county commissioners. County supervision by county supervisors was tried in 1869-1872. Since these several changes the common school system has been administered by towns and cities subject to an increasing amount of control through enactments of the state legislature and the general supervision of the state superintendent. The town officers are a superintending school committee of three members and a superintendent. The members of the committee are elected for a term of three years, one retiring every year, and women as well as men are eligible for the office. The superintendent may be elected by the town or appointed by the committee, or towns having not less than twenty or more than fifty schools may unite in employing a superintendent. In cities the committee is usually larger than in towns and is commonly elected by wards. Since 1889 each town and city has been required to furnish textbooks, apparatus and supplies, without cost to the pupils. The minimum length of the school year is fixed by a statute of 1893 at twenty weeks; the average length is about twenty-eight weeks. A compulsory education law, enacted in 1901, requires the attendance at some public or approved private school of each child between the ages of seven and fifteen during all the time that school is in session, except that necessary absences may be excused. For the maintenance of the common schools each town is required (since 1905) to raise annually at least fifty-five cents per capita, exclusive of what may be received from other sources, and to this is added the proceeds of a state tax of one and a half mills on a dollar, one-half the proceeds of the tax on savings banks, a 6% income from the permanent school fund (derived mainly from the sale of school lands), and state appropriations for the payment in part of the superintendence in towns that have united for that purpose. Any section of a town may establish and maintain a high school provided there be not more than two such schools in one town, and the state makes appropriations for the support of such schools equal to one-half the cost of instruction, but the maximum grant to any one such school is $250.

The state maintains five normal schools: that at Farmington (established 1864), that at Castine (1866), that at Gorham (1879); that at Presque Isle (the Aroostook state normal school, 1903), and the Madawaska training school at Fort Kent, each of which is under the direction of a board of trustees consisting of the governor, the state superintendent of schools, and five other members appointed by the governor and council for not more than three years. At the head of the public school system is the university of Maine, near the village of Orono in Orono township (pop. in 1900, 3257), Penobscot county. This institution was founded in 1865 as the state college of agriculture and the mechanic arts; in 1897 the present name was adopted. It embraces a college of arts and sciences, a college of agriculture, a college of technology (including a department of forestry), a college of law (at Bangor), and a college of pharmacy. The most conspicuous of its twenty-five buildings is the library, built with funds contributed by Andrew Carnegie. In 1908-1909 the university had 104 instructors and 884 students, of whom 113 were in the college of law at Bangor and 420 in the college of technology. The university is maintained with the proceeds of an endowment fund derived chiefly from public lands given by the national government in accordance with the land grant, or Morrill, Act of 1862 (see Morrill, Justin S.) and from the bequest ($100,000) of Abner Coburn (1803-1885); by appropriations of Congress under the second Morrill Act (1890), and under the Nelson Amendment of 1907, by appropriations of the state legislature, and by fees paid by the students. Connected with the university is an agricultural experiment station, established and maintained under the Hatch Act (1887) and the Adams Act (1906) of the national Congress. The government of the university is entrusted, subject to inspection of the governor and council, to a board of eight trustees. Among the important institutions of learning which have no official connexion with the state are Bowdoin College (opened in 1802), at Brunswick; Colby College (Baptist, opened in 1818), at Waterville; and Bates College (originally Free Baptist but now unsectarian; opened in 1863), at Lewiston. In 1900 5.1% of the state’s inhabitants ten years of age and over were illiterate (i.e. could neither read nor write, or could read but not write); of the native whites within this age limit 2.4% were illiterate, of the foreign whites, 19.4%. Of the foreign-born whites 15.7% were unable to speak English.

Finance.—The chief sources of the state’s revenue are a general property tax and taxes on the franchises of corporations, especially those of railway and insurance companies and savings banks; among the smaller sources are licences or fees, a poll tax, and a collateral inheritance tax. The general property tax for state and local purposes is assessed by local assessors, but their work is reviewed for the purpose of equalization among the several towns and counties by a board of state assessors, which also assesses the corporations. This board of three members (not more than two of whom may be of the same political party) is elected by a joint ballot of the two houses of the legislature for a term of six years, one member retiring every two years. The state is prohibited by the constitution from creating a debt exceeding $300,000 except for the suppression of a rebellion, for repelling an invasion, or for war purposes; and every city and town is forbidden by an amendment adopted in 1877 from creating one exceeding 5% of the assessed value of its property. But the state was authorized by an amendment adopted in 1868 to issue bonds for the reimbursement of the expenses incurred by its cities, towns, and plantations on account of the Civil War, and these bonds, with those issued by the state itself during the Civil War, constituted the largest part of the state’s bonded indebtedness. The bonded debt, however, is rapidly being paid; in January 1901 it was $2,103,000, and in January 1909 only $698,000.

History.—During the 16th century and the early part of the 17th, the coast of Maine attracted various explorers, among them Giovanni da Verrazano (1524), Estéban Gomez (1525), Bartholomew Gosnold (1602), Martin Pring (1603), Pierre du Guast, Sieur De Monts (1604), George Weymouth (1605), and John Smith (1614), who explored and mapped the coast and gave to the country the name New England; but no permanent English settlement was established within what are now the borders of the state until some time between 1623 and 1629. In 1603 De Monts received from Henry IV. of France a charter for all the region between 40° and 46° N. under the name of Acadie, or Acadia, and in 1604 he built a fort on Neutral Island at the mouth of the Saint Croix river. This he abandoned in 1605, but some of his followers were in the vicinity a few years later. In the same year George Weymouth explored the south-west coast, kidnapped five Indians, and carried them to England, where three of them lived for a time in the family of Sir Ferdinando Gorges, who soon became the leader in founding Maine. In 1607 the Plymouth Company, of which he was an influential member and which had received a grant of this region from James I. of England in the preceding year, sent out a colony numbering 120 under George Popham (c. 1550-1608), brother of Sir John Popham, and Raleigh Gilbert, son of Sir Humphrey Gilbert. The colony established itself at the mouth of the Kennebec river in August, but, finding its supplies insufficient, about three-fifths of its number returned to England in December; a severe winter followed and Popham died; then Gilbert, who succeeded to the presidency of the council for the colony, became especially interested in his claim to the territory under his father’s charter,6 and in 1608 the colony was abandoned. In 1609 the French Jesuits Biard and Masse established a fortified mission station on the island of Mount Desert, and although this as well as the remnant of De Monts’ settlement at the mouth of the Saint Croix was taken in 1613 by Sir Samuel Argall (d. 1626), acting under the instructions of the English at Jamestown, Virginia, some of these colonists returned later. In 1620 the Council for New England, the successor of the Plymouth Company, obtained a grant of the country between latitude 40° and 48° N. extending from sea to sea, and two years later Gorges and John Mason (1586-1635) received from the Council a grant of the territory between the Merrimac and the Kennebec rivers for 60 m. inland under the name of the Province of Maine. In 1629 they divided their possession, Gorges taking the portion between the Piscataqua and the Kennebec. Numerous grants of land in this vicinity followed within a few years; and in the meantime permanent settlements at York, Saco, Biddeford, Port Elizabeth, Falmouth (now Portland) and Scarborough were established in rapid succession. The Council for New England surrendered its charter in 1635. In the division of its territory Gorges retained the portion previously granted to him, and the region between the Kennebec and the Saint Croix north to the Saint Lawrence, though still claimed by the French as part of Acadia, was conveyed to Sir William Alexander (1567?-1640); later, in 1664, this was conveyed to the duke of York, afterwards James II. of England.

Gorges named his tract the County of New Somersetshire, and immediately began the administration of government, setting up in 1635 or 1636 a court at Saco under the direction of his kinsman William Gorges. In 1639 he procured for his province a royal charter modelled after that of Maryland, which invested him with the feudal tenure of a county palatine and vice-regal powers of government. He called into existence a formidably large number of officers to govern it, but his charter was in conflict with the other (mutually conflicting) grants of the Council for New England, east of the Piscataqua; and Gorges and his agents met with a determined opposition under the leadership of George Cleeve, the deputy-president of the Lygonia, or “Plough” Patent, which extended along the coast from Cape Porpoise to Casco, and in issuing which the Council for New England had granted governmental as well as territorial rights. Moreover, Puritan Massachusetts, which was naturally hostile to the Anglicanism of Gorges and his followers, interpreted her charter so as to make her northern boundary run east and west from a point 3 m. north of the source of the Merrimac river, and on this basis laid claim to practically the whole of Maine then settled. The factional quarrels there, together with the Commonwealth government in England, made it easy for Massachusetts to enforce this claim at the time, and between 1652 and 1658 Maine was gradually annexed to Massachusetts. In 1672 Massachusetts extended her boundary eastward as far as Penobscot Bay. Ferdinando Gorges, a grandson of the original proprietor, brought before parliament his claim to Maine and in 1664 a committee of that body decided in his favour; but Massachusetts successfully resisted until 1677, when the king in council decided against her. She then quietly purchased the Gorges claim for £1,250 and held the province as a proprietor until 1691, when by the new Massachusetts charter Maine was extended to the Saint Croix river, and was made an integral part of Massachusetts.

The French still claimed all territory east of the Penobscot, and not only was Maine an exposed frontier and battleground during the long struggle of the English against the Indians and the French, but its citizens bore a conspicuous part in the expeditions beyond its borders. Port Royal was taken in May 1690 by Sir William Phipps and Louisburg in June 1745 by Sir William Pepperell, both these commanders being from Maine. These expeditions were such a drain on Maine’s population that Massachusetts was called upon to send men to garrison the little forts that protected the homes left defenceless by men who had gone to the front. During the War of Independence, the town of Falmouth (now Portland), which had ardently resisted the claims of the British, was bombarded and burned, in 1775; in the same year Benedict Arnold followed the course of the Kennebec and Dead rivers on his expedition to Quebec; and from 1779 to 1783 a British force was established at Castine. The embargo and non-intercourse laws from 1807 to 1812 were a severe blow to Maine’s shipping, and in the War of 1812 Eastport, Castine, Hampden, Bangor and Machias fell into the hands of the British.

Maine was in general well governed as a part of Massachusetts, but a geographical separation, a desire to be rid of the burden of a large state debt, and a difference of economic interests as well as of politics (Maine was largely Democratic and Massachusetts was largely Federalist) created a desire for an independent commonwealth. This was felt before the close of the War of Independence and in 1785-1787 conventions were held at Falmouth (Portland) to consider the matter, but the opposition prevailed. The want of protection during the War of 1812 revived the question, and in 1816 the General Court in response to a great number of petitions submitted to a vote in the towns and plantations of the District the question: “Shall the legislature be requested to give its consent to the separation of the District of Maine from Massachusetts, and the erection of said District into a separate state?” The returns showed 10,393 yeas to 6501 nays, but they also showed that less than one-half the full vote had been cast. Acting upon these returns the legislature passed a bill prescribing the terms of separation, and directed another vote of the towns and plantations upon the question of separation and the election of delegates to a convention at Brunswick which should proceed to frame a constitution in case the second popular vote gave a majority of five to four for separation; but as that vote was only 11,969 yeas to 10,347 nays the advocates of separation were unsuccessful. But a large source of opposition to separation was removed in 1819 when Congress, dividing the east coast of the United States into two great districts, did away with the regulation which, making each state a district for entering and clearing vessels, would have required coasting vessels from the ports of Maine as a separate state to enter and clear on every trip to or from Boston; as a consequence, the separation measures were carried by large majorities this year, a constitution was framed by a convention which met at Portland in October, this was ratified by town meetings in December, and Maine applied for admission into the Union. Owing to the peculiar situation at the time in Congress, arising from the contest over the admission of Missouri, the question of the admission of Maine became an important one in national politics. By an Act of the 3rd of March 1820, however, Maine was finally admitted into the Union as a separate state, her admission being a part of the Missouri compromise (q.v.).

The boundary on the north had not yet been ascertained, and it had long been a subject of dispute between the United States and Great Britain. The treaty of 1783 (Article II.) had defined the north-east boundary of the United States as extending along the middle of the river St Croix “from its mouth in the bay of Fundy to its source” and “due north from the source of St Croix river to the highlands; along the said highlands which divide those rivers that empty themselves into the river St Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean, to the north-westernmost head of Connecticut river; thence down along the middle of that river to the forty-fifth degree of north latitude.” Great Britain claimed that the due north line was 40 m. long and ran to Mars Hill in Aroostook county, and that the highlands ran thence westerly 115 m. to the source of the Chaudière; the United States, on the other hand, claimed that the northerly line was 140 m. long, running to highlands dividing the Ristigouche and the tributaries of the Metis; and there was a further disagreement with regard to the side of the highlands on which the boundary should be, and as to what stream was the “north-westernmost head of Connecticut river.” The fifth article of the Jay treaty of 1794 provided for a commission to decide what the St Croix river actually was, and this commission in 1798 defined the St Croix, saying that its mouth was in Passamaquoddy bay and that the boundary ran up this river and the Cheputnatecook to a marked monument. The treaty of Ghent in 1814 (Article IV.) referred the question of the ownership of the islands in Passamaquoddy bay to a commission which gave Moose, Dudley and Frederick islands to the United States; and the same treaty by Article V. provided for the survey (which was made in 1817-1818) of a part of the disputed territory, and for a general commission. The general commissioners met at St Andrews, N.B., in 1816, and in New York City in 1822, only to disagree; and when the king of the Netherlands, chosen as arbitrator in 1829 (under the Convention of 1827) rendered in 1831 a decision against which the state of Maine protested, the Federal Senate withheld its assent to his decision. In 1838-1839 the territory in dispute between New Brunswick and Maine became the scene of a border “war,” known as the “Aroostook disturbance”; Maine erected forts along the line she claimed, Congress authorized the president to resist any attempt of Great Britain to enforce exclusive jurisdiction over the disputed territory, and an armed conflict seemed imminent. General Winfield Scott was sent to take command on the Maine frontier, and on the 21st of March 1839 he arranged a truce and a joint occupancy of the territory in dispute until a satisfactory settlement should be reached by the United States and Great Britain. The Webster-Ashburton treaty of 1842 was a compromise, which allowed Maine about 5500 sq. m. less than she had claimed and allowed Great Britain about as much less than her claim; all grants of land previously made by either party within the limits of the territory which by this treaty fell within the dominions of the other party were to be “held valid, ratified and confirmed to the persons in possession under such grants, to the same extent as if such territory had ... fallen within the dominions of the party by whom such grants were made”; and the government of the United States agreed to pay to Maine and Massachusetts7 “in equal moieties” the sum of $300,000 as compensation for the lands which they had claimed and which under the treaty they were called upon to surrender. The long controversy, which is known in American history as “The North-East boundary dispute,” was not finally settled however until 1910.

It was the Democratic majority in the district of Maine that effected the separation from Massachusetts, and from the date of that separation until 1853 Maine was classed as a Democratic state, although it elected a Whig governor in 1838 and in 1840, and cast its electoral vote for John Quincy Adams in 1824 and 1828 and for W. H. Harrison in 1840. As a result of the slavery question, there was a party disintegration between 1850 and 1855, followed by the supremacy of the Republican party from 1856 to 1878. In 1878, of the 126,169 votes cast in the election for governor, Selden Connor (b. 1839), re-nominated by the Republicans, received 56,554; Joseph L. Smith (“National” or “Greenback”), 41,371; Alonzo Garcelon (1813-1906) (Democratic), 28,218; as no candidate received a majority of the votes, the election was left to the legislature.8 The vote of the House eliminated Connor, and Garcelon was chosen in the Senate by a Democratic-National fusion. Again there was no election by popular vote in 1879, and Garcelon and his council, to secure the election of a fusion government, counted-in a fusion majority in the legislature by evident falsification of the returns. On the 3rd of January 1880 the Supreme Court declared the governor and council in error in counting in a fusion majority, but on the 7th the governor swore in a legislature with 78 fusion and only two Republican members, and, the governor’s term having expired, the president of the Senate, James D. Lamson, became governor, ex-officio. On the 12th the legislative chambers were seized by the Republicans, whose organized legislature was declared legal by the Supreme Court, and who chose as governor Daniel Franklin Davis (1843-1897); whereupon, on the 17th, Joshua L. Chamberlain, to whom the peaceful solution of the difficulty had largely been due, retired from the task assigned him by Garcelon on the 5th of January “to protect the public property and institutions of the state” until Garcelon’s successor should be duly qualified. In 1880 the Democrats and Greenbacks united and elected their candidate, but after 1883 Maine was strongly Republican until 1910.

The governors of the state have been as follows:—

William King Democrat 1820

William Durkee Williamson (acting) ” 1821

Benjamin Ames (acting) ” 1821

Albion Keith Parris ” 1822

Enoch Lincoln ” 1827

Nathan Cutler (acting) ” 1829

Jonathan G. Hunton ” 1830

Samuel Emerson Smith ” 1831

Robert Pinckney Dunlap ” 1834

Edward Kent Whig 1838

John Fairfield Democrat 1839

Edward Kent Whig 1841

John Fairfield Democrat 1842

Edward Kavanagh (acting) ” 1843

Hugh J. Anderson ” 1844

John Winchester Dana ” 1847

John Hubbard ” 1850

William George Crosby Whig and Free Soil 1853

Anson Peaslee Morrill Republican 1855

Samuel Wells Democrat 1856

Hannibal Hamlin Republican 1857

Joseph H. Williams (acting) ” 1857

Lot Myrick Morrill ” 1858

Israel Washburn ” 1861

Abner Coburn ” 1863

Samuel Cony Republican 1864

Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain ” 1867

Sidney Perham ” 1871

Nelson Dingley ” 1874

Selden Connor ” 1876

Alonzo Garcelon Democrat 1879

Daniel F. Davis Republican 1880

Harris Merrill Plaisted Democrat-Greenback 1881

Frederick Robie Republican 1883

Joseph R. Bodwell ” 1887

Sebastian S. Marble (acting) ” 1887

Edwin C. Burleigh ” 1889

Henry B. Cleaves ” 1893

Llewellyn Powers ” 1897

John Fremont Hill ” 1901

William T. Cobb ” 1905

Bert M. Fernald ” 1909

Frederick W. Plaisted Democrat 1911

See S. L. Boardman, Climate, &c., of Maine (Washington, 1884); Walton Wells, The Water Power of Maine (Augusta, 1869); G. H. Hitchcock, General Report on the Geology of Maine (Augusta, 1861); G. H. Stone, The Glacial Gravels of Maine and their Associated Deposits (Washington, 1899); T. Nelson Dale, The Granites of Maine (Washington, 1907), being Bulletin 313 of the U. S. Geological Survey; B. F. De Costa, Sketches of the Coast of Maine and Isle of Shoals (New York, 1869); H. D. Thoreau, The Maine Woods (Boston, 1881 ); L. L. Hubbard, Woods and Lakes of Maine (Boston, 1883); T. S. Steele, Canoe and Camera, a Two Hundred Mile Tour through the Maine Forests (New York, 1882); William MacDonald, The Government of Maine, Its History and Administration (New York, 1902); Maine Historical Society Collections (Portland, 1831- ); W. D. Williamson, History of the State of Maine (Hallowell, 1832); J. P. Baxter, Sir Ferdinando Gorges and his Province of Maine (Boston, 1890) and George Cleeve of Casco Bay (Portland, 1885); George Folsom, History of Saco and Biddeford, with notices of other Early Settlements and of the Proprietary Governments in Maine (Saco, 1830); J. L. Chamberlain, Maine, Her Place in History (Augusta, 1877); E. S. Whitin, Factory Legislation in Maine (New York, 1908).

1 This condition results from the fact that Maine and the adjacent region were worn down nearly to sea-level by stream erosion, except certain peaks and ridges inland; then the region was elevated and numerous river valleys were cut down below the general erosion surface formed before. Thus we have a general “upland surface,” above which the mountain remnants tower, and below which the rivers have been entrenched.

2 This name is applied to a chain of lakes (the Rangeley, or Oquossoc, the Cupsuptic, the Mooselookmeguntic, the Molechunkamunk or Upper Richardson, the Welokenebacook or Lower Richardson, and the Umbagog) in Franklin and Oxford counties, in the western part of the state; the Umbagog extends into New Hampshire and its outlet helps to form the Androscoggin River. These lakes are connected by straits, have a total area of between 80 and 90 sq. m., and are from 1200 to 1500 ft. above the sea. They are sometimes called the Androscoggin Lakes.

3 The census of 1905 was taken under the direction of the United States census bureau, but the statistics for hand trades were omitted.

4 According to previous censuses the population was as follows: (1790) 96,540; (1800) 151,719; (1810) 228,705; (1820) 298,335; (1830) 399,455; (1840) 501,793; (1850) 583,169; (1860) 628,279; (1870) 626,915.

5 An unincorporated township containing less than 200 inhabitants may, on the application of three resident voters, be organized as a plantation, but does not pay state or county taxes unless by special legislative order. Other unincorporated districts, especially islands along the coast, are called “grants,” “surpluses,” “gores” or “tracts.”

6 By this charter, issued in 1578, Sir Humphrey Gilbert was entitled to all territory lying within two hundred leagues of any colony that he might plant within six years; although it had long since lapsed, Raleigh Gilbert seems not to have been aware of it.

7 An article in the Act relating to the separation of Maine from Massachusetts stipulated that the lands within the District of Maine which prior to the separation had belonged to Massachusetts should after the separation belong one-half to Maine and one-half to Massachusetts. In 1826 the wild lands of Maine were surveyed and divided between the two states; and in 1853 Maine acquired from Massachusetts, for $362,500, all of this land still remaining in possession of the latter state.

8 According to Art. V. of the constitution a majority of the total number of votes cast was required for election; in case no candidate should receive a majority, it was prescribed that the “House of Representatives shall, by ballot, from the persons having the four highest numbers of votes on the lists, if so many there be, elect two persons and make returns of their names to the Senate, of whom the Senate shall, by ballot, elect one, who shall be declared the governor.” An amendment, which became a part of the constitution on the 9th of November 1880, provided that a plurality of the total number of votes cast should be sufficient for election.

MAINE DE BIRAN, FRANÇOIS-PIERRE-GONTHIER (1766-1824), French philosopher, was born at Bergerac, on the 29th of November, 1766. The name Maine he assumed (some time before 1787) from an estate called Le Maine, near Mouleydier. After studying with distinction under the doctrinaires of Périgueux, he entered the life-guards of Louis XVI., and was present at Versailles on the memorable 5th and 6th of October 1789. On the breaking up of the gardes du corps Biran retired to his patrimonial inheritance of Grateloup, near Bergerac, where his retired life preserved him from the horrors of the Revolution. It was at this period that, to use his own words, he “passed per saltum from frivolity to philosophy.” He began with psychology, which he made the study of his life. After the Reign of Terror Maine de Biran took part in political affairs. Having been excluded from the council of the Five Hundred on suspicion of royalism, he took part with his friend Laîné in the commission of 1813, which gave expression for the first time to direct opposition to the will of the emperor. After the Restoration he held the office of treasurer to the chamber of deputies, and habitually retired during the autumn recess to his native district to pursue his favourite study. He died on the 20th (16th, or 23rd, according to others) of July 1824.

Maine de Biran’s philosophical reputation has suffered from two causes—his obscure and laboured style, and the fact that only a few, and these the least characteristic, of his writings appeared during his lifetime. These consisted of the essay on habit (Sur l’influence de l’habitude, 1803), a critical review of P. Laromiguière’s lectures (1817), and the philosophical portion of the article “Leibnitz” in the Biographie universelle (1819). A treatise on the analysis of thought (Sur la décomposition de la pensée), although sent to press, was never printed. In 1834 these writings, together with the essay entitled Nouvelles considérations sur les rapports du physique et du moral de l’homme, were published by Victor Cousin, who in 1841 added three volumes, under the title Œuvres philosophiques de Maine de Biran. But the publication (in 1859) by E. Naville (from MSS. placed at his father’s disposal by Biran’s son) of the Œuvres inédites de Maine de Biran, in three volumes, first rendered possible a connected view of his philosophical development. At first a sensualist, like Condillac and Locke, next an intellectualist, he finally shows himself a mystical theosophist. The Essai sur les fondements de la psychologie represents the second or completest stage of his philosophy, the fragments of the Nouveaux essais d’anthropologie the third.

Maine de Biran’s first essays in philosophy were written avowedly from the point of view of Locke and Condillac, but even in them he was brought to signalize the essential fact on which his later speculation turns. Dealing with the formation of habits, he is compelled to note that passive impressions, however transformed, do not furnish a complete or adequate explanation. With Laromiguière he distinguishes attention as an active effort, of no less importance than the passive receptivity of sense, and with Butler distinguishes passively formed customs from active habits. He finally arrived at the conclusion that Condillac’s notion of passive receptivity as the one source of conscious experience was not only an error in fact but an error of method—in short, that the mechanical mode of viewing consciousness as formed by external influence was fallacious and deceptive. For it he proposed to substitute the genetic method, whereby human conscious experience might be exhibited as growing or developing from its essential basis in connexion with external conditions. The essential basis he finds in the real consciousness, of self as an active striving power, and the stages of its development, corresponding to what one may call the relative importance of the external conditions and the reflective clearness of self-consciousness he designates as the affective, the perceptive and the reflective. In connexion with this Biran treats most of the obscure problems which arise in dealing with conscious experience, such as the mode by which the organism is cognized, the mode by which the organism is distinguished from extra-organic things, and the nature of those general ideas by which the relations of things are known to us—cause, power, force, &c.

In the latest stage of his speculation Biran distinguishes the animal existence from the human, under which the three forms above noted are classed, and both from the life of the spirit, in which human thought is brought into relation with the supersensible, divine system of things. This stage is left imperfect. Altogether Biran’s work presents a very remarkable specimen of deep metaphysical thinking directed by preference to the psychological aspect of experience.

The Œuvres inédites of Maine de Biran by E. Naville contain an introductory study; in 1887 appeared Science et psychologie: nouvelles œuvres inédites, with introduction by A. Bertrand. See also O. Merton, Étude critique sur Maine de Biran (1865); E. Naville, Maine de Biran, sa vie et ses pensées (1874); J. Gérard, Maine de Biran, essai sur sa philosophie (1876); Mayonade, Pensées et pages inédites de Maine de Biran (Périgueux, 1896); G. Allievo, “Maine de Biran e la sua dottrina antropologica” (Turin, 1896, in Memorie dell’ accademia delle scienze, 2nd ser., xlv, pt. 2); A. Lang, Maine de Biran und die neuere Philosophie (Cologne, 1901); monographs by A. Kühtmann (Bremen, 1901) and M. Couailhac (1905); N. E. Truman in Cornell Studies in Philosophy, No. 5 (1904) on Maine de Biran’s Philosophy of Will.

MAINE-ET-LOIRE, a department of western France, formed in 1790 for the most part out of the southern portion of the former province of Anjou, and bounded N. by the departments of Mayenne and Sarthe, E. by Indre-et-Loire, S.E. by Vienne, S. by Deux-Sèvres and Vendée, W. by Loire-Inférieure, and N.W. by Ille-et-Vilaine. Area, 2786 sq. m. Pop. (1906), 513,490. Maine-et-Loire is made up of two distinct regions, the line of demarcation running roughly from north to south along the valley of the Sarthe, then turning south-west and passing Brissac and Doué; that to the west consists of granites, felspars, and a continuation of the geological formations of Brittany and Vendée; to the east, schists, limestone and chalk prevail. The department is traversed from east to west by the majestic valley of the Loire, with its rich orchards, nurseries and market-gardens. The highest altitudes are found in the south-west, where north-east of Cholet one eminence reaches 689 ft. Elsewhere the surface is low and undulating in character. The department belongs entirely to the basin of the Loire, the bed of which is wide but shallow, and full of islands, the depth of the water in summer being at some places little more than 2 ft. Floods are sudden and destructive. The chief affluent of the Loire within the department is the Maine, formed a little above Angers by the junction of the Mayenne and the Sarthe, the latter having previously received the waters of the Loire. All three are navigable. Other tributaries of the Loire are the Thouet (with its tributary the Dive), the Layon, the Evre, and the Divatte on the left, and the Authion on the right. The Mayenne is joined on the right by the Oudon, which can be navigated below Segré. The Erdre, which joins the Loire at Nantes, and the Moine, a tributary of the Sèvre-Nantaise, both rise within this department. The climate is very mild. The mean annual temperature of Angers is about 53°, slightly exceeding that of Paris; the rainfall (between 23 and 24 in. annually) is distinctly lower than that of the rest of France. Notwithstanding this deficiency, the frequent fogs, combined with the peculiar nature of the soil in the south-east of the department, produce a degree of moisture which is highly favourable to meadow growths. The winter colds are never severe, and readily permit the cultivation of certain trees which cannot be reared in the adjoining departments.

The agriculture of the department is very prosperous. The produce of cereals, chiefly wheat, oats and barley, is in excess of its needs, and potatoes and mangels also give good returns. Extensive areas in the valley of the Loire are under hemp, and the vegetables, melons and other fruits of that region are of the finest quality. Good wine is produced at Serrant and other places near Angers, and on the right bank of the Layon and near Saumur, the sparkling white wine of which is a rival of the cheaper brands of champagne. Cider is also produced, and the cultivation of fruit is general. Forests and woodland in which oak and beech are the chief trees cover large tracts. The fattening of cattle is an important industry round Cholet, and horses much used for light cavalry are reared. Several thousand workmen are employed in the slate quarries in the vicinity of Angers, tufa is worked in the river valleys, and freestone and other stone, mispickel, iron and coal are also found. Cholet, the chief industrial town, and its district manufacture pocket-handkerchiefs, as well as linen cloths, flannels, cotton goods, and hempen and other coarse fabrics, and similar industries are carried on at Angers, which also manufactures liqueurs, rope, boots and shoes and parasols. Saumur, besides its production of wine, makes beads and enamels. The commerce of Maine-et-Loire comprises the exportation of live stock and of the various products of its soil and industries, and the importation of hemp, cotton, and other raw materials. The department is served by the railways of the state and the Orléans and Western companies. The Mayenne, the Sarthe and the Loir, together with some of the lesser rivers, provide about 130 m. of navigable waterway. In the south-east the canal of the Dive covers some 10 m. in the department.

There are five arrondissements—Angers, Baugé, Cholet, Saumur and Segré, with 34 cantons and 381 communes. Maine-et-Loire belongs to the académie (educational division) of Rennes, to the region of the VIII. army corps, and to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. Angers (q.v.), the capital, is the seat of a bishopric and of a court of appeal. Other principal places are Cholet, Saumur, and Fontevrault, which receive separate treatment. For architectural interest there may also be mentioned the châteaux of Brissac (17th century), Serrant (15th and 16th centuries), Montreuil-Bellay (14th and 15th centuries), and Ecuillé (15th century), and the churches of Puy-Notre-Dame (13th century) and St Florent-le-Vieil (13th, 17th, and 19th centuries), the last containing the fine monument to Charles Bonchamps, the Vendean leader, by David d’Angers. Gennes has remains of a theatre and other ruins of the Roman period, as well as two churches dating in part from the 10th century. Ponts-de-Cé, an interesting old town built partly on islands in the Loire, is historically important, because till the Revolution its bridges formed the only way across the Loire between Saumur and Nantes.

MAINPURI, or Mynpooree, a town and district of British India, in the Agra division of the United Provinces. The town has a station on a branch of the East Indian railway recently opened from Shikohabad. Pop. (1901), 19,000. It consists of two separate portions, Mainpuri proper and Mukhamganj. Holkar plundered and burned part of the town in 1804, but was repulsed by the local militia. Since the British occupation the population has rapidly increased and many improvements have been carried out. The Agra branch of the Grand Trunk road runs through the town, forming a wide street lined on both sides by shops, which constitute the principal bazaar. Mainpuri has a speciality in the production of carved wooden articles inlaid with brass wire. The American Presbyterian mission manages a high school.

The District of Mainpuri lies in the central Doab. Area, 1675 sq. m. Pop. (1901), 829,357, an increase of 8.8% in the decade. It consists of an almost unbroken plain, intersected by small rivers, with a few undulating sand ridges. It is wooded throughout with mango groves, and isolated clumps of bábul trees occasionally relieve the bareness of its saline usar plains. On the south-western boundary the Jumna flows in a deep alluvial bed, sometimes sweeping close to the high banks which overhang its valley, and elsewhere leaving room for a narrow strip of fertile soil between the river and the upland plain. From the low-lying lands thus formed a belt of ravines stretches inland for some 2 m., often covered with jungle, but affording good pasturage for cattle. The district is watered by two branches of the Ganges canal, and is traversed by the main line of the East Indian railway.

Mainpuri anciently formed part of the great kingdom of Kanauj, and after the fall of that famous state it was divided into a number of petty principalities, of which Rapri and Bhongaon were the chief. In 1194 Rapri was made the seat of a Moslem governor. Mainpuri fell to the Moguls on Baber’s invasion in 1526, and, although temporarily wrested from them by the short-lived Afghan dynasty of Shere Shah, was again occupied by them on the reinstatement of Humayun after the victory of Panipat. Like the rest of the lower Doab, Mainpuri passed, towards the end of the 18th century, into the power of the Mahrattas, and finally became a portion of the province of Oudh. When this part of the country was ceded to the British, in 1801, Mainpuri town became the headquarters of the extensive district of Etawah, which was in 1856 reduced by the formation of Etah and Mainpuri into separate collectorates. On the outbreak of the Mutiny in 1857 the regiment stationed at Mainpuri revolted and attacked the town, which was successfully defended by the few Europeans of the station for a week, until the arrival of the Jhansi mutineers made it necessary to abandon the district.

MAINTENANCE (Fr. maintenance, from maintenir, to maintain, support, Lat. manu tenere, to hold in the hand). The action of giving support, supplying means of subsistence, keeping efficient or in working order. In English law maintenance is an officious intermeddling in an action that in no way belongs to one by maintaining or assisting either party, with money or otherwise, to prosecute or defend it. It is an indictable offence, both at common law and by statute, and punishable by fine and imprisonment. It invalidates all contracts involving it. It is also actionable. There are, however, certain cases in which maintenance is justifiable, e.g. any one who has an interest, even if it be only contingent, in the matter at variance can maintain another in an action concerning the matter; or several parties who have a common interest in the same thing may maintain one another in a suit concerning the same. Neither is it reckoned maintenance to assist another in his suit on charitable grounds, or for a master to assist his servant, or a parent his son, or a husband his wife. The law with regard to the subject is considered at length in Bradlaugh v. Newdegate, 1883, 11 Q.B.D. 1. See also Champerty. For the practice of “livery and maintenance” see English History, §§ v. and vi.

A CAP OF MAINTENANCE, i.e. a cap of crimson velvet turned up with ermine, is borne, as one of the insignia of the British sovereign, immediately before him at his coronation or on such state occasions as the opening of parliament. It is carried by the hereditary bearer, the marquess of Winchester, upon a white wand. A similar cap is also borne before the lord mayor of London. The origin of this symbol of dignity is obscure. It is stated in the New English Dictionary that it was granted by the pope to Henry VII. and Henry VIII. It is probably connected with the “cap of estate” or “dignity,” sometimes also styled “cap of maintenance,” similar to the royal symbol with two peaks or horns behind, which is borne as a heraldic charge by certain families. It seems originally to have been a privilege of dukes. Where it is used the crest is placed upon it, instead of on the usual wreath.

MAINTENON, FRANÇOISE D’AUBIGNÉ, Marquise de (1635-1719), the second wife of Louis XIV., was born in a prison at Niort, on the 27th of November 1635. Her father, Constant d’Aubigné, was the son of Agrippa d’Aubigné, the famous friend and general of Henry IV., and had been imprisoned as a Huguenot malcontent, but her mother, a fervent Catholic, had the child baptized in her religion, her sponsors being the duc de la Rochefoucauld, father of the author of the Maxims, and the comtesse de Neuillant. In 1639 Constant d’Aubigné was released from prison and took all his family with him to Martinique, where he died in 1645, after having lost what fortune remained to him at cards. Mme d’Aubigné returned to France, and from sheer poverty unwillingly yielded her daughter to her sister-in-law, Mme de Villette, who made the child very happy, but converted or pretended to convert her to Protestantism. When this was known an order of state was issued that she should be entrusted to Mme de Neuillant, her godmother. Every means was now used to convert her back to Catholicism, but at the last she only yielded on the condition that she need not believe that the soul of Mme de Villette was lost. Once reconverted, she was neglected and sent home to live with her mother, who had only a small pension of 200 livres a year, which ceased on her death in 1650. The chevalier de Meré, a man of some literary distinction, who had made her acquaintance at Mme de Neuillant’s, discovered her penniless condition, and introduced his “young Indian,” as he called her, to Scarron, the famous wit and comic writer, at whose house all the literary society of the day assembled. Scarron took a fancy to the friendless girl, and offered either to pay for her admission to a convent, or, though he was deformed and an invalid, to marry her himself. She accepted his offer of marriage, and became Mme Scarron in 1651. For nine years she was not only his most faithful nurse, but an attraction to his house, where she tried to bridle the licence of the conversation of the time. On the death of Scarron, in 1660, Anne of Austria continued his pension to his widow, and even increased it to 2000 livres a year, which enabled her to entertain and frequent the literary society her husband had made her acquainted with; but on the queen-mother’s death in 1666 the king refused to continue her pension, and she prepared to leave Paris for Lisbon as lady attendant to the queen of Portugal. But before she started she met Mme de Montespan, who was already, though not avowedly, the king’s mistress, and who took such a fancy to her that she obtained the continuance of her pension, which put off for ever the question of going to Portugal. Mme de Montespan did yet more for her, for when, in 1669, her first child by the king was born, Mme Scarron was established with a large income and a large staff of servants at Vaugirard to bring up the king’s children in secrecy as they were born. In 1674 the king determined to have his children at court, and their governess, who had now made sufficient fortune to buy the estate of Maintenon, accompanied them. The king had now many opportunities of seeing Mme Scarron, and, though at first he was prejudiced against her, her even temper contrasted so advantageously with the storms of passion and jealousy exhibited by Mme de Montespan, that she grew steadily in his favour, and had in 1678 the gratification of having her estate at Maintenon raised to a marquisate and herself entitled Mme de Maintenon by the king. Such favours brought down the fury of Mme de Montespan’s jealousy, and Mme de Maintenon’s position was almost unendurable, until, in 1680, the king severed their connexion by making the latter second lady in waiting to the dauphiness, and soon after Mme de Montespan left the court. The new amie used her influence on the side of decency, and the queen openly declared she had never been so well treated as at this time, and eventually died in Mme de Maintenon’s arms in 1683. The queen’s death opened the way to yet greater advancement; in 1684 Mme de Maintenon was made first lady in waiting to the dauphiness, and in the winter of 1685-1686 she was privately married to the king by Harlay, archbishop of Paris, in the presence, it is believed, of Père la Chaise, the king’s confessor, the marquis de Montchevreuil, the chevalier de Forbin, and Bontemps. No written proof of the marriage is extant, but that it took place is nevertheless certain. Her life during the next thirty years can be fully studied in her letters, of which many authentic examples are extant. As a wife she was wholly admirable; she had to entertain a man who would not be amused, and had to submit to that terribly strict court etiquette of absolute obedience to the king’s inclination, which Saint-Simon so vividly describes, and yet be always cheerful and never complain of weariness or ill-health. Her political influence has probably been exaggerated, but it was supreme in matters of detail. The ministers of the day used to discuss and arrange all the business to be done with the king beforehand with her, and it was all done in her cabinet and in her presence, but the king in more important matters often chose not to consult her. Such mistakes as, for instance, the replacing of Catinat by Villeroi may be attributed to her, but not whole policies—notably, according to Saint-Simon, not the policy with regard to the Spanish succession. Even the revocation of the edict of Nantes and the dragonnades have been laid to her charge, but recent investigations have tended to show that in spite of ardent Catholicism, she at least opposed, if not very vigorously, the cruelties of the dragonnades, although she was pleased with the conversions they procured. She was apparently afraid to imperil her great reputation for devotion, which had in 1692 obtained for her from Innocent XII. the right of visitation over all the convents in France. Where she deserves blame is in her use of her power for personal patronage, as in compassing the promotions of Chamillart and Villeroi, and the frequent assistance given to her brother Comte Charles d’Aubigné. Her influence was on the whole a moderating and prudent force. Her social influence was not as great as it might have been, owing to her holding no recognized position at court, but it was always exercised on the side of decency and morality, and it must not be forgotten that from her former life she was intimate with the literary people of the day. Side by side with this public life, which wearied her with its shadowy power, occasionally crossed by a desire to be recognised as queen, she passed a nobler and sweeter private existence as the foundress of St Cyr. Mme de Maintenon was a born teacher; she had so won the hearts of her first pupils that they preferred her to their own mother, and was similarly successful later with the young and impetuous duchess of Burgundy, and she had always wished to establish a home for poor girls of good family placed in such straits as she herself had experienced. As soon as her fortunes began to mend she started a small home for poor girls at Ruel, which she afterwards moved to Noisy, and which was the nucleus of the splendid institution of St Cyr, which the king endowed in 1686, at her request, out of the funds of the Abbey of St Denis. She was in her element there. She herself drew up the rules of the institution; she examined every minute detail; she befriended her pupils in every way; and her heart often turned from the weariness of Versailles or of Marly to her “little girls” at St Cyr. It was for them that Racine wrote his Esther and his Athalie, and it was because he managed the affairs of St Cyr well that Michel Chamillart became controller-general of the finances. The later years of her power were marked by the promotion of her old pupils, the children of the king and Mme de Montespan, to high dignity between the blood royal and the peers of the realm, and it was doubtless under the influence of her dislike for the duke of Orleans that the king drew up his will, leaving the personal care of his successor to the duke of Maine, and hampering the duke of Orleans by a council of regency. On or even before her husband’s death she retired to St Cyr, and had the chagrin of seeing all her plans for the advancement of the duke of Maine overthrown by means of the parliament of Paris. However, the regent Orleans in no way molested her, but, on the contrary, visited her at St Cyr and continued her pension of 48,000 livres. She spent her last years at St Cyr in perfect seclusion, but an object of great interest to all visitors to France, who, however, with the exception of Peter the Great, found it impossible to get an audience with her. On the 15th of April 1719 she died, and was buried in the choir at St Cyr, bequeathing her estate at Maintenon to her niece, the only daughter of her brother Charles and wife of the maréchal de Noailles, to whose family it still belongs.

L. A. la Beaumelle published the Lettres de Madame de Maintenon, but much garbled, in 2 vols. in 1752, and on a larger scale in 9 vols. in 1756. He also, in 1755, published Mémoires de Madame de Maintenon, in 6 vols., which caused him to be imprisoned in the Bastille. All earlier biographies were superseded by Théophile Lavallée’s Histoire de St Cyr, reviewed in Causeries du lundi, vol. viii., and by his edition of her Lettres historiques et édifiantes, &c., in 7 vols. and of her Correspondance générale, in 4 vols. (1888), which latter must, however, be read with the knowledge of many forged letters, noticed in P. Grimblot’s Faux autographes de Madame de Maintenon. Saint-Simon’s fine but biased account of the court in her day and of her career is contained in the twelfth volume of Chéruel and Regnier’s edition of his Mémoires. See also Mademoiselle d’Aumale’s Souvenirs sur Madame de Maintenon, published by the Comte d’Haussonville and G. Hanotaux (Paris, 3 vols., 1902-1904); an excellent account by A. Geffroy, Madame de Maintenon d’après sa correspondance authentique (Paris, 2 vols., 1887); P. de Noailles, Histoire de Madame de Maintenon et des principaux évènements du règne de Louis XIV. (4 vols., 1848-1858); A. de Boislisle, Paul Scarron et Françoise d’Aubigné d’après des documents nouveaux (1894); É. Pilastre, Vie et caractère de Madame de Maintenon d’après les œuvres du duc de Saint-Simon et des documents anciens ou récents (1907); A. Rosset, Madame de Maintenon et la révocation de l’édit de Nantes (1897).

(H. M. S.)

MAINZ (Fr. Mayence) a city, episcopal see and fortress of Germany, situated on the left bank of the Rhine, almost opposite the influx of the Main, at the junction of the important main lines of railway from Cologne to Mannheim and Frankfort-on-Main, 25 m. W. of the latter. Pop. (1905), 91,124 (including a garrison of 7500 men), of whom two-thirds are Roman Catholic. The Rhine, which here attains the greatest breadth of its upper course, is crossed by a magnificent bridge of five arches, leading to the opposite town of Castel and by two railway bridges. The old fortifications have recently been pushed farther back, and their place occupied by pleasant boulevards. The river front has been converted into a fine promenade, commanding extensive views of the Taunus range of mountains, and the “Rheingau,” the most favoured wine district of Germany. Alongside the quay are the landing-places of the steamboats navigating the Rhine. The railway, which formerly incommoded the bank, has been diverted, and now, following the ceinture of the new line of inner fortifications, runs into a central station lying to the south of the city. The interior of the old town consists chiefly of narrow and irregular streets, with many quaint and picturesque houses. The principal street of the new town is the Kaiserstrasse, leading from the railway station to the river.

The first object of historical and architectural interest in Mainz is the grand old cathedral, an imposing Romanesque edifice with numerous Gothic additions and details (for plan, &c. see Architecture: Romanesque and Gothic in Germany). It was originally erected between 975 and 1009, but has since been repeatedly burned down and rebuilt, and in its present form dates chiefly from the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries. The largest of its six towers is 300 ft. high. The whole building was restored by order of Napoleon in 1814, and another thorough renovation was made more recently. The interior contains the tombs of Boniface, the first archbishop of Mainz, of Frauenlob, the Minnesinger, and of many of the electors. Mainz possesses nine other Roman Catholic churches, the most noteworthy of which are those of St Ignatius, with a finely painted ceiling, of St Stephen, built 1257-1328, and restored after an explosion in 1857, and of St Peter. The old electoral palace (1627-1678), a large building of red sandstone, now contains a valuable collection of Roman and Germanic antiquities, a picture gallery, a natural history museum, the Gutenberg Museum, and a library of 220,000 volumes. Among the other principal buildings are the palace of the grand duke of Hesse, built in 1731-1739 as a lodge of the Teutonic order, the theatre, the arsenal, and the government buildings. A handsome statue of Gutenberg, by Thorwaldsen, was erected at Mainz in 1837. Mainz still retains many relics of the Roman period, the most important of which is the Eigelstein, a monument believed to have been erected by the Roman legions in honour of Drusus. It stands within the citadel, which occupies the site of the Roman castrum. A little to the south-west of the town are the remains of a large Roman aqueduct, of which upwards of sixty pillars are still standing. The educational and scientific institutions of Mainz include an episcopal seminary, two gymnasia and other schools, a society for literature and art, a musical society, and an antiquarian society. The university, founded in 1477, was suppressed by the French in 1798.

The site of Mainz would seem to mark it out naturally as a great centre of trade, but the illiberal rule of the archbishops and its military importance seriously hampered its commercial and industrial development, and prevented it from rivalling its neighbour Frankfort. It is now, however, the chief emporium of the Rhenish wine traffic, and also carries on an extensive transit trade in grain, timber, flour, petroleum, paper and vegetables. The natural facilities for carriage by water are supplemented by the extensive railway system. Large new harbours to the north of the city were opened in 1887. The principal manufactures are leather goods, furniture, carriages, chemicals, musical instruments and carpets, for the first two of which the city has attained a wide reputation. Other industries include brewing and printing. Mainz is the seat of the administrative and judicial authorities of the province of Rhein-Hessen, and also of a Roman Catholic bishop.

History.—Mainz, one of the oldest cities in Germany, was originally a Celtic settlement. Its strategic importance was early recognized by the Romans, and about 13 B.C. Drusus, the son-in-law of Augustus, erected a fortified camp here, to which the castellum Mattiacorum (the modern Castel) on the opposite bank was afterwards added, the two being connected with a bridge at the opening of the Christian era. The Celtic name became latinized as Maguntiacum, or Moguntiacum, and a town gradually arose around the camp, which became the capital of Germania Superior. During the Völkerwanderung Mainz suffered severely, being destroyed on different occasions by the Alamanni, the Vandals and the Huns. Christianity seems to have been introduced into the town at a very early period, and in the 6th century a new Mainz was founded by Bishop Sidonius. In the middle of the 8th century under Boniface it became an archbishopric, and to this the primacy of Germany was soon annexed. Charlemagne, who had a palace in the neighbourhood, gave privileges to Mainz, which rose rapidly in wealth and importance, becoming a free city in 1118. During the later middle ages it was the seat of several diets, that of 1184 being of unusual size and splendour. In 1160 the citizens revolted against Archbishop Arnold, and in 1163 the walls of the city were pulled down by order of the emperor Frederick I. But these events did not retard its progress. In 1244 certain rights of self-government were given to the citizens; and in 1254 Mainz was the centre and mainspring of a powerful league of Rhenish towns. Owing to its commercial prosperity it was known as goldene Mainz, and its population is believed to have been as great as it is at the present day. But soon a decline set in. In 1462 there was warfare between two rival archbishops, Diether or Dietrich II. of Isenburg (d. 1463) and Adolph II. of Nassau (d. 1475). The citizens espoused the cause of Diether, but their city was captured by Adolph; it was then deprived of its privileges and was made subject to the archbishop. Many of the inhabitants were driven into exile, and these carried into other lands a knowledge of the art of printing, which had been invented at Mainz by Johann Gutenberg in 1450. During the Thirty Years’ War Mainz was occupied by the Swedes in 1631 and by the French in 1644, the fortifications being strengthened by the former under Gustavus Adolphus; in 1688 it was captured again by the French, but they were driven out in the following year. In 1792 the citizens welcomed the ideas of the French Revolution; they expelled their archbishop, Friedrich Karl Joseph d’Erthal, and opened their gates to the French troops. Taken and retaken several times during the next few years, Mainz was ceded to France by the treaty of Campo Formio in 1797, and again by the Treaty of Lunéville in 1801. In 1814 it was restored to Germany and in 1816 it was handed over to the grand duke of Hesse; it remained, however, a fortress of the German confederation and was garrisoned by Prussian and Austrian troops. Since 1871 it has been a fortress of the German Empire. There were disturbances in the city in 1848.

See Brühl, Mainz, geschichtlich, topographisch und malerisch (Mainz, 1829); C. A. Schaab, Geschichte der Stadt Mainz (Mainz, 1841-1845); K. Klein, Mainz und seine Umgebungen (1868); C. G. Bockenheimer, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Stadt Mainz (1874); Neeb, Führer durch Mainz und Umgebung (Stuttgart, 1903); and O. Beck, Mainz und sein Handel (Mainz, 1881).

The Archbishopric of Mainz, one of the seven electorates of the Holy Roman Empire, became a powerful state during the middle ages and retained some of its importance until the dissolution of the empire in 1806. Its archbishop was president of the electoral college, arch-chancellor of the empire and primate of Germany. Its origin dates back to 747, when the city of Mainz was made the seat of an archbishop, and a succession of able and ambitious prelates, obtaining lands and privileges from emperors and others, made of the district under their rule a strong and vigorous state. Among these men were Hatto I. (d. 913), Siegfried III. of Eppstein (d. 1249), Gerhard of Eppstein (d. 1305), and Albert of Brandenburg (d. 1545), all of whom played important parts in the history of Germany. There were several violent contests between rivals anxious to secure so splendid a position as the electorate, and the pretensions of the archbishops occasionally moved the citizens of Mainz to revolt. The lands of the electorate lay around Mainz, and were on both banks of the Rhine; their area at the time of the French Revolution was about 3200 sq. m. The last elector was Karl Theodor von Dalberg. The archbishopric was secularized in 1803, two years after the lands on the left bank of the Rhine had been seized by France. Some of those on the right bank of the river were given to Prussia and to Hesse; others were formed into a grand duchy for Dalberg. The archbishopric itself was transferred to Regensburg.

For the history of the electorate see the Scriptores rerum moguntiacarum, edited by G. C. Joannis (Frankfort, 1722-1727); Schunk, Beiträge zur Mainzer Geschichte (Frankfort, 1788-1791); Hennes, Die Erzbischöfe von Mainz (Mainz, 1879); Ph. Jaffé, Monumenta moguntina (Berlin, 1866), and J. F. Böhmer and C. Will, Regesta archiepiscoporum moguntinensium (Innsbruck, 1877-1886).

MAIRET, JEAN DE (1604-1686), French dramatist, was born at Besançon, and baptized on the 10th of May 1604. His own statement that he was born in 1610 has been disproved. He went to Paris to study at the Collège des Grassins about 1625, in which year he produced his first piece Chriséide et Arimand, followed in 1626 by Sylvie, a “pastoral tragi-comedy.” In 1634 appeared his masterpiece, Sophonisbe, which marks, in its observance of the rules, the beginning of the “regular” tragedies. Mairet was one of the bitterest assailants of Corneille in the controversy over The Cid. It was perhaps his jealousy of Corneille that made him give up writing for the stage. He was appointed in 1648 official representative of the Franche-Comté in Paris, but in 1653 he was banished by Mazarin. He was subsequently allowed to return, but in 1668 he retired to Besançon, where he died on the 31st of January 1686. His other plays include Silvanire ou la Morte-vive, published in 1631 with an elaborate preface on the observance of the unities, Les Galanteries du duc d’Orsonne (1632), Virginie (1633), Marc-Antoine (1635), and Le Grand et dernier Solyman (1637).

See G. Bizos, Étude sur la vie et les œuvres de Jean de Mairet (1877). Sophonisbe was edited by K. Vollmöller (Heilbronn, 1888), and Silvanire by R. Otto (Bamberg, 1890).

MAISTRE, JOSEPH DE (1754-1821), French diplomatist and polemical writer, was born at Chambéry on the 1st of April 1754. His family was an ancient and noble one, enjoying the title of count, and is said to have been of Languedocian extraction. The father of Joseph was president of the senate of Savoy, and held other important offices. Joseph himself, after studying at Turin, received various appointments in the civil service of Savoy, finally becoming a member of the senate. In 1786 he married Françoise de Morand. The invasion and annexation of Savoy by the French Republicans made him an exile. He did not take refuge in that part of the king of Sardinia’s domains which was for the time spared, but betook himself to the as yet neutral territory of Lausanne. There, in 1796, he published his first important work (he had previously written certain discourses, pamphlets, letters, &c.), Considérations sur la France. In this he developed his views, which were those of a Legitimist, but a Legitimist entirely from the religious and Roman Catholic point of view. The philosophism of the 18th century was Joseph de Maistre’s lifelong object of assault.

After the still further losses which, in the year of the publication of this book, the French Revolution inflicted on Sardinia, Charles Emmanuel summoned Joseph de Maistre to Turin, and he remained there for the brief space during which the king retained a remnant of territory on the mainland. Then he went to the island of Sardinia, and held office at Cagliari. In 1802 he was appointed envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary at St Petersburg, and journeyed thither the next year. Although his post was no sinecure, its duties were naturally less engrossing than the official life, with intervals of uneasy exile and travelling, which he had hitherto known, and his literary activity was great. He only published a single treatise, on the Principe générateur des Constitutions; but he wrote his best and most famous works, Du Pape, De L’église gallicane and the Soirées de St Pétersbourg, the last of which was never finished. Du Pape, which the second-named book completes, is a treatise in regular form, dealing with the relations of the sovereign pontiff to the Church, to temporal sovereigns, to civilization generally, and to schismatics, especially Anglicans and the Greek Church. It is written from the highest possible standpoint of papal absolutism. The Soirées de St Pétersbourg, so far as it is anything (for the arrangement is somewhat desultory), is a kind of théodicée, dealing with the fortunes of virtue and vice in this world. It contains two of De Maistre’s most famous pieces, his panegyric on the executioner as the foundation of social order, and his acrimonious, and in part unfair, but also in part very damaging, attack on Locke. The Du Pape is dated May 1817; on the Soirées the author was still engaged at his death. Besides these works he wrote an examination of the philosophy of Bacon, some letters on the Inquisition (an institution which, as may be guessed from the remarks just noticed about the executioner, was no stumbling-block to him), and, earlier than any of these, a translation of Plutarch’s “Essay on the Delay of Divine Justice,” with somewhat copious notes. After 1815 he returned to Savoy, and was appointed to high office, while his Du Pape made a great sensation. But the world to which he had returned was not altogether in accordance with his desires. He had domestic troubles; and chagrin of one sort and another is said to have had not a little to do with his death by paralysis on the 26th of February 1821 at Turin. Most of the works mentioned were not published till after his death, and it was not till 1851 that a collection of Lettres et opuscules appeared, while even since that time fresh matter has been published.

Joseph de Maistre was one of the most powerful, and by far the ablest, of the leaders of the neo-Catholic and anti-revolutionary movement. The most remarkable thing about his standpoint is that, layman as he was, it was entirely ecclesiastical. Unlike his contemporary Bonald, Joseph de Maistre regarded the temporal monarchy as an institution of altogether inferior importance to the spiritual primacy of the pope. He was by no means a political absolutist, except in so far as he regarded obedience as the first of political virtues, and he seldom loses an opportunity of stipulating for a tempered monarchy. But the pope’s power is not to be tempered at all, either by councils or by the temporal power or by national churches, least of all by private judgment. The peculiarity of Joseph de Maistre is that he supports his conclusions, or if it be preferred his paradoxes, by the hardest and heaviest argument. Although a great master of rhetoric, he never makes rhetoric do duty for logic. Every now and then it is possible to detect fallacies in him, but for the most part he has succeeded in carrying matters back to those fundamental differences of opinion which hardly admit of argument, and on which men take sides in consequence chiefly of natural bent, and of predilection for one state of things rather than for another. The absolute necessity of order may be said to have been the first principle of this thinker, who, in more ways than one, will invite comparison with Hobbes. He could not conceive such order without a single visible authority, reference to which should settle all dispute. He saw that there could be no such temporal head, and in the pope he thought that he saw a spiritual substitute. The anarchic tendencies of the Revolution in politics and religion were what offended him. It ought to be added that he was profoundly and accurately learned in history and philosophy, and that the superficial blunders of the 18th-century philosophes irritated him as much as their doctrines. To Voltaire in particular he shows no mercy.

Of the two works named as his masterpieces, Du Pape and the Soirées de St Pétersbourg, editions are extremely numerous. No complete edition of his works appeared till 1884-1887, when one was published at Lyons in 14 volumes. This had been preceded, and has been followed, by numerous biographies and discussions: C. Barthélemy, L’Esprit de Joseph de Maistre (1859); R. de Sézeval, Joseph de Maistre (1865), and J. C. Glaser, Graf Joseph Maistre (same year); L. I. Moreau, Joseph de Maistre (1879); F. Paulhan, Joseph de Maistre et sa philosophie (1893); L. Cogordan, “Joseph de Maistre” in the Grands écrivains français (1894); F. Descostes, Joseph de Maistre avant la révolution (1896), and other works by the same writer; J. Mandoul, Un Homme d’état italien: Joseph de Maistre et la politique de la maison de Savoie (1900); and E. Grasset, Joseph de Maistre (1901).

(G. Sa.)

MAISTRE, XAVIER DE (1763-1852), younger brother of Joseph de Maistre, was born at Chambéry in October 1763. He served when young in the Piedmontese army, and wrote his delightful fantasy, Voyage autour de ma chambre (published 1794) when he was under arrest at Turin in consequence of a duel. Xavier shared the politics and the loyalty of his brother, and on the annexation of Savoy to France, he left the service, and took a commission in the Russian army. He served under Suvarov in his victorious Austro-Russian campaign and accompanied the marshal to Russia. He shared the disgrace of his general, and supported himself for some time in St Petersburg by miniature painting. But on his brother’s arrival in St Petersburg he was introduced to the minister of marine. He was appointed to several posts in the capital, but also saw active service, was wounded in the Caucasus, and attained the rank of major-general. He married a Russian lady and established himself in his adopted country, even after the overthrow of Napoleon, and the consequent restoration of the Piedmontese dynasty. For a time, however, he lived at Naples, but he returned to St Petersburg and died there on the 12th of June 1852. He was only once in Paris (in 1839), when Sainte-Beuve, who has left some pleasant reminiscences of him, met him. Besides the Voyage already mentioned, Xavier de Maistre’s works (all of which are of very modest dimensions) are Le Lépreux de la cité d’Aoste (1811), a touching little story of human misfortune; Les Prisonniers du Caucase, a powerful sketch of Russian character, La Jeune Sibérienne, and the Expédition nocturne, a sequel to the Voyage autour de ma chambre (1825). His style is of remarkable ease and purity.

His works, with the exception of some brief chemical tractates, are included in the collections of Charpentier, Garnier, &c. See Sainte-Beuve’s Portraits contemporains, vol. iii.

MAITLAND, EDWARD (1824-1897), English humanitarian writer, was born at Ipswich on the 27th of October 1824, and was educated at Caius College, Cambridge. The son of Charles David Maitland, perpetual curate of St James’s Chapel, Brighton, he was intended for the Church, but his religious views did not permit him to take holy orders. For some years he lived abroad, first in California and then as a commissioner of Crownlands in Australia. After his return to England in 1857 he took up an advanced humanitarian position, and claimed to have acquired a new sense by which he was able to discern the spiritual condition of other people. He was associated with Mrs Anna Kingsford (1846-1888), the lady-doctor and supporter of vegetarianism and anti-vivisectionism, who, besides being one of the pioneers of higher education for women, had become a devotee of mystical theosophy; with her he brought out Keys of the Creeds (1875), The Perfect Way: or the Finding of Christ (1882), and founded the Hermetic Society in 1884. After her death he founded the Esoteric Christian Union in 1891, and wrote her Life and Letters (1896). He died on the 2nd of October 1897.

MAITLAND, FREDERIC WILLIAM (1850-1906), English jurist and historian, son of John Gorham Maitland, was born on the 28th of May 1850, and educated at Eton and Trinity, Cambridge, being bracketed at the head of the moral sciences tripos of 1872, and winning a Whewell scholarship for international law. He was called to the bar (Lincoln’s Inn) in 1876, and made himself a thoroughly competent equity lawyer and conveyancer, but finally devoted himself to comparative jurisprudence and especially the history of English law. In 1884 he was appointed reader in English law at Cambridge, and in 1888 became Downing professor of the laws of England. Though handicapped in his later years by delicate health, his intellectual grasp and wide knowledge and research gradually made him famous as a jurist and historian. He edited numerous volumes for the Selden Society, including Select Pleas for the Crown, 1200-1225, Select Pleas in Manorial Courts and The Court Baron; and among his principal works were Gloucester Pleas (1884), Justice and Police (1885), Bracton’s Note-Book (1887), History of English Law (with Sir F. Pollock, 1895; new ed. 1898; see also his article English Law in this encyclopaedia), Domesday Book and Beyond (1897), Township and Borough (1898), Canon Law in England (1898), English Law and the Renaissance (1901), the Life of Leslie Stephen (1906), besides important contributions to the Cambridge Modern History, the English Historical Review, the Law Quarterly Review, Harvard Law Review and other publications. His writings are marked by vigour and vitality of style, as well as by the highest qualities of the historian who recreates the past from the original sources; he had no sympathy with either legal or historical pedantry; and his death at Grand Canary on the 19th of December 1906 deprived English law and letters of one of their most scholarly and most inspiring representatives, notable alike for sweetness of character, acuteness in criticism, and wisdom in counsel.

See P. Vinogradoff’s article on Maitland in the English Historical Review (1907); Sir F. Pollock’s in the Quarterly Review (1907); G. T. Lapsley’s in The Green Bag (Boston, Mass., 1907); A. L. Smith, F. W. Maitland (1908); H. A. L. Fisher, F. W. Maitland (1910).

MAITLAND, SIR RICHARD (Lord Lethington) (1496-1586), Scottish lawyer, poet, and collector of Scottish verse, was born in 1496. His father, Sir William Maitland of Lethington and Thirlestane, fell at Flodden; his mother was a daughter of George, Lord Seton. He studied law at the university of St Andrews, and afterwards in Paris. His castle at Lethington was burnt by the English in 1549. He was in 1552 one of the commissioners to settle matters with the English about the debateable lands. About 1561 he seems to have lost his sight, but this did not render him incapable of attending to public business, as he was the same year admitted an ordinary lord of session with the title of Lord Lethington, and a member of the privy council; and in 1562 he was appointed keeper of the Great Seal. He resigned this last office in 1567, in favour of John, prior of Coldingham, his second son, but he sat on the bench till he attained his eighty-eighth year. He died on the 20th of March 1586. His eldest son, by his wife Mary Cranstoun of Crosbie, was William Maitland (q.v.): his second son, John (c. 1545-1595), was a lord of session, and was made a lord of parliament in 1590, with the title of Lord Maitland of Thirlestane, in which he was succeeded by his son John, also for some time a lord of session, who was created earl of Lauderdale in 1624. One of Sir Richard’s daughters, Margaret, assisted her father in preparing his collection of old Scots verse.

The poems of Sir Richard Maitland, none of them lengthy, are for the most part satirical, and are principally directed against the social and political abuses of his time. He is chiefly remembered as the industrial collector and preserver of many pieces of Scots poetry. These were copied into two large volumes, one in folio and another in quarto, the former written by himself, and the latter by his daughter. After being in the possession of his descendant the duke of Lauderdale, these volumes were purchased at the sale of the duke’s library by Samuel Pepys, and have since been preserved in the Pepysian Library, Magdalene College, Cambridge. They lay there unnoticed for many years till Bishop Percy published one of the poems in his Reliques of English Poetry. Several of the prices were then transcribed by John Pinkerton, who afterwards published them under the title of Ancient Scottish Poems (2 vols., 1786.)

For an account of the Maitland Folio MS. see Gregory Smith’s Specimens of Middle Scots, 1902 (p. lxxiii.). The Scottish Text Society has undertaken an edition of the entire manuscript. Maitland’s own poems were reprinted by Sibbald in his Chronicle of Scottish Poetry (1802), and in 1830 by the Maitland Club, named after him, and founded for the purpose of continuing his efforts to preserve the remains of early Scots literature. Sir Richard left in manuscript a history of the family of Seton, and a volume of legal decisions collected by him between the years 1550 and 1565. Both are preserved in the Advocates’ Library, Edinburgh; the former was published by the Maitland Club, in 1829.

MAITLAND (Maitland of Lethington), WILLIAM (c. 1528-1573), Scottish statesman, eldest son of the preceding, was educated at St Andrews. At an early age he entered public life and began in various ways to serve the regent, Mary of Lorraine, becoming her secretary of state in 1558. In 1559, however, he deserted her and threw in his lot with the lords of the congregation, to whom his knowledge of foreign, and especially of English, politics and his general ability were assets of the highest value. The lords sent him to England to ask for assistance from Elizabeth, and his constant aim throughout his political career was to bring about a union between the two crowns. He appears to have feared the return of Mary Queen of Scots to Scotland, but after her arrival in 1561 he was appointed secretary of state, and for about six years he directed the policy of Scotland and enjoyed the confidence of the queen. His principal antagonist was John Knox; there were several tussles between them, the most famous, perhaps, being the one in the general assembly of 1564, and on the whole Maitland held his own against the preachers. He was doubtless concerned in the conspiracy against David Rizzio, and after the favourite’s murder he was obliged to leave the court and was himself in danger of assassination. In 1567, however, he was again at Mary’s side. He was a consenting party to the murder of Darnley, although he had favoured his marriage with Mary, but the enmity between Bothwell and himself was one of the reasons which drove him into the arms of the queen’s enemies, among whom he figured at Langside. He was one of the Scots who met Elizabeth’s representatives at York in 1568; here he showed a desire to exculpate Mary and to marry her to the duke of Norfolk, a course of action probably dictated by a desire to avoid all revelations about the Darnley murder. But this did not prevent him from being arrested in September 1569 on account of his share in the crime. He was, however, delivered from his captors by a ruse on the part of his friend, Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange, and was brought into Edinburgh Castle, while his trial was put off because the city was thronged with his adherents. Maitland now became the leader of the remnant which stood by the cause of the imprisoned queen. Already a physical wreck, he was borne into Edinburgh Castle in April 1571 and with Kirkcaldy he held this fortress against the regent Morton and his English auxiliaries. The castle surrendered in May 1573 and on the 7th or the 9th of June following Maitland died at Leith, there being very little evidence for the theory that he poisoned himself. “Secretary Maitland” was a man of great learning with a ready wit and a caustic tongue. He was reputed to be the most versatile and accomplished statesman of his age, and almost alone among his Scottish contemporaries he placed his country above the claims of either the Roman Catholic or the Protestant religions. Among the testimonies to his great abilities are those of Queen Elizabeth, of William Cecil and of Knox. By his second wife, Mary Fleming, one of Queen Mary’s ladies, whom he married in 1567, he had a son and daughter. His son James died without issue about 1620.

See John Skelton, Maitland of Lethington (1894); A. Lang, History of Scotland, vol. ii. (1902).

MAITLAND, EAST and WEST, adjoining municipalities in Northumberland county, New South Wales, Australia, 120 m. by rail N. of Sydney. Pop. (1901), West Maitland, 6798; East Maitland, 3287. These towns are situated in a valley on the Hunter River, which is liable to sudden floods, to guard against which the river is protected by stone embankments at West Maitland, while there are flood-gates at East Maitland. Maitland is the centre of the rich agricultural district of the Hunter Valley, which produces maize, wheat and other cereals, lucerne, tobacco, fruit and wine; excellent coal also is worked in the vicinity. East Maitland is the see of a Roman Catholic bishop, whose cathedral (St John’s), however, is situated in the larger town. Besides this, West Maitland contains several handsome public and commercial buildings.