Maryland didn't secede, because Lincoln threw virtually the entire Legislature in jail. That is the ONLY reason. Missouri would have seceded, but for Lyons and his Army, running the legislature and Governor out of town.
That is a stretch of the truth. Some folks ended up being "delayed", but they weren't exactly in dungeons. As to the sentiments, the majority of Marylanders were definitely pro-Union, but as in most Southern States, the Slave Powers called a lot of shots due to their Gerrymandering of legislative districts.
Lincoln, and his men did what they had to do to keep Washington from being cut off from the rest of the Union. All in all, I'd say they were remarkable restrained considering the seriousness of the threat they faced in the Spring of 61. There were surly no mass hangings of secessionists as happened to Unionists in your home state at the same time.
If not for southron myth you people would have nothing to post, would you? Five minutes, five minutes on the web showed your post to be the lie that it is. Maryland didn't secede because the legislature, which met in May, refused to consider an ordinance of secession or call a secession convention to consider one. Winfield Scott proposed steps to prevent the Maryland legislature from voting on the matter, prompting this letter from Lincoln:
Washington
April 25, 1861
Lieutenant General Scott:
My dear Sir:
The Maryland Legislature assembles tomorrow and Anapolis; and, not improbably, will take action to arm the people of that State against the United States. The question has been submitted to, and considered by me, whether it would not be justifiable, upon the ground of necessary defence, for you, as commander in Chief of the United States Army, to arrest, or disperse the members of that body. I think that it would not be justifiable, nor, efficient for the desired object.
First, they have a clearly legal right to assemble; and, we cannot know in advance, that their action will not be lawful, and peaceful. And if we wait until they shall have acted, their arrest, or dispersion, will not lessen the effect of their actions.
Secondly, we cannot permanently precent their action. If we arrest them, we can not for long hold them as prisoners; and when liberated they will immediately re-assemble, and take their action. And, precisely the same if we simply disperse them. The will immediately re-assemble in some other place.
I therefore conclude that is is only left to the commanding General to watch, and await their action, which, if it shall be to arm their people against the United States, he is to adopt the most prompt, and efficient means to counteract, even, if necessary, to the bombardment of their cities - and in the extremest necessity, the suspension of the writ of Habeas Corpus.
Your obedient servant,
Abraham Lincoln
The arrest of members of the Maryland legislature did not come until September, when members proposed joining those in armed rebellion against the United States, and who were, in fact, proposing treason. Under those circumstances what response did you expect?
Missouri would have seceded, but for Lyons and his Army, running the legislature and Governor out of town.
More nonsense. The people of the state of Missouri, assembled in convention, voted against secession in Feburary-March, 1861. The governor and a minority of the legislature had no authority to take the state out of the Union once the people had spoken. Their actions were contrary to the will of the people of Missouri, and actions taken to keep the state in the Union were justified.