USA > Delaware > History of Delaware : 1609-1888 > Part 30
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87
1 " Colonial Recorda of Penn.," vol. iv., p 300.
Susquehanna, reaching the Kittochtinny Hills, t! being the limit of the land as yet bought from t: Indian -. '
This was the famous " temporary line," and w a source of great good in effectually checking !! riot and bloodshed which for a half-century h .. . been, at frequent interval-, carried on along t! borders of the two provinces. There was, pract cally, no further encroachment on either side, and nothing occurred in the controversy worthy .: particular note, until the announcement of tl .. deeres in the chancery case, which was issued b: Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, in May, 1750. It developed nothing novel in the case, but was a simple ratification of the agreement of May 10. 1732, in favor of the Penns. No more solemn rebuke could have been brought upon the head .; Lori Baltimore than the declaration of the Lor ! Chancellor that " in America the defendant's com- mi-siones behaved with great chieane." Cap. Fenlapen is decided to be situated as given by Lord Baltimore on his original map, and not, :- he claimed later, identical with Cape Corneliu -. The deeree provided for the appointment of com- missioners on both sides within three months, and operations were to be begun in November." The Chancellor reserved the right to decide any question- which might arise in the execution of the decree. a provision which was soon proved to be a grave necessity. The commissioners assembled at New Castle on November 15, 1750. The New Castle eirele being the first matter discussed, the Court- House was fixed upon as the centre of the eirek. but the Marylanders at once began their former tacties by insisting that the twelve-mile radius- should be drawn superficially, in the face of the fact that in the measurement of 1739 they had objected to this method, when it opposed their own interests. The Pennsylvanians protested, and in- sisted on the horizontal measurement, but it w: - necessary to apply to the Chancellor before Lord Baltimore's commissioners would yield. Consider- able delay was thus caused, but the work was quickly resumed and the position of Cape Henlopen determined at a point one hundred and thirty nine perches from the cape on the northern portion of Fenwick's Island. A line was then run westward across the peninsula, but another dispute here are ... as to its western termination, the Marylander- claituing they had reached the bay, when in trut !! they had only gone as far as Slaughter's Creek. which was more than three miles east of the Chesapeake.6 Another suit in chancery followed. and matters were further complicated by the death of Charles, Lord Baltimore, and the succession of
" Penne. Morphine, vol. i . p. 201.
8 Penne, Mignonne, vol. i . p. 202.
4 " Memory of the Historical Society of Penna., " vol. I., p. les
5 McMahon's ". Ilist, of Maryland, " p. 42. 6 McMahon, p. 43.
123
BOUNDARY DISPUTES AND SETTLEMENTS.
his son Frederick, the last Lord Baltimore. While the suit was pending the French and Indian War occupied the attention of the people to too great an extent to permit them to renew their border fights. Almost nothing is heard of the boundary question, and the only intercourse between the authorities of the provinces had reference to the war or the Indians.
The year 1760 stands out as an important epoch in our story. Frederick, Lord Baltimore, had long grown tired of the fight which, it appeared more than probable, would again be decided against him. He consequently entered into an agreement with the Penns on July 4. 1760, accepting as a basis the articles already drawn up in 1732, and afterwards set forth in the Chancellor's decree of 1750. The twelve-mile radius from New Castle was measured horizontally, and the line across the peninsula from Cape Henlopen to the Chesapeake was drawn to the full length of sixty-nine miles, two hundred and ninety eight perches, as was originally elaimed by the Pennsylvania commis- sioners in 1751. The articles of agreement are most minute in every detail, and oceupy thirty-four printed pages in the Pennsylvania Archives.1 The boundaries of the lower counties were thus practi- eally settled in their present form.
To carry the agreement into effeet, commissioners were appointed on both sides, those for Maryland being Governor Sharpe, Benjamin Tasker, Jr., Edward Lloyd, Robert Jenkins Henry, Daniel Dulany, Stephen Bordley and the Rev. Alexander Malcolm, and those for Pennsylvania being Hon. James Hamilton, William Allen, Richard Peters, Benjamin Chew, Lynford Lardner, Ryves Holt and George Stephenson. They met at New Castle on November 19, 1760, and at onee began to draw the boundary lines. In August, 1763, Lord Balti- more and Messrs. Thomas and Richard Penn employed Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon, of England, to " mark, run out, settle, fix and deter- mine all such parts of the eirele, marks, lines and boundaries as were mentioned in the several articles or commissions, and were not yet completed." They undertook the work and carried it out success- fully, finishing their task in December, 1767. It was thus that the boundary between Pennsylvania and Maryland came to receive the famous name of the Mason and Dixon's line. The final report was submitted by the commissioners on November 9, 1768, and gives an exact account of the work in the following terms :
" We have complotely run out, settled, fixed and determined a straight line beginning at the exact middle of the due rast and west line men- trend in the articles of the fourth day of July, one thousand seyou hundred and sixty, to have been run by other conmus-toner-, formerly appointed by the sail Charles, Lord Baltimore, and the sound Thom is Pent And Richard Fenn, across the peninsula from Cape lienlopen to Cheat- Funke Bay, the exact middle of which sind east and west life is at the distance of thirty-four miles and three hundred and mine perches from
1 Vol. iv., pp. 2-36.
the verge of the main ocean, the eastern end or beginning of the mid dur east and west line ; and that we have extendr I the sand -fraught hne englity -one miles seventy eight charts and thirty links up the pement, until it touched and middle a tangent to the western part of the periphery of ariple drawn at the horizontal distance of twelve Enzhsh statute notes from the centre of the town of New Castle, and have marked, do- & :bed and perpetuated the sort straight or tangent Inte, by setting up atel eres ting ono reatorkalite stone at the place of beginning thereof, in the . xmet middle of the aforesaid due rast and west line, accunling to the angle made by the sand due west hine and the sand tangent hine, which stage, on the inward sales of the same Lo ing towards the past and towards the north, bath the army of the saint Thomas Pran and Ru hard Pohn grated thereon, and on the ontwatd soles of the sam ,, facing towards the west and towar la the south, hath the art of the said I tedruck, Lord Baltimore, graved therat ; and have alsoerected and set upin the sand straight or tangent line, from the said plave of beginning to the tangent point, remarkable state - at the end of every mile, eich stone at the distatre or end of every five nab's being particularly thatmignished by having the atteof the sat i Frederick, Lord Balmore, grived on the side thereef turning towards the west, and the Jums of the end Thomas Penn and Rich ud Penn graved on the spie thereof turning towards the east, and all the offer intermediate -times are marked with the letter P on the sidey and with the letter M on the sides facing towards the west, and have fixed in the tangent point a stone with the arms of the said Frederick, Lord Baltimine, graved on the side faring towards the west, and the aris of the sand Thomas Penn and Richard Penn graved on the suite facing towards the east.
hold. That from the riul of the sud straight line or tangent point, we have run out, settled, fixed and determined a dne north line of the length of five miles one chain and fitty links to a parallel of latitude htteen unles die south of the most southern part of the city of Philadelphia, which said dne north line intercepted the said circle drawn at the distance of twelve English statute miles from the centre of the town of New Castle, one mile thirty-x chains and five links from the said tangent point, and that in order to mark and perpetuate the saul due north line, we have erected and set up one unmarked stone at the point where the said line interserts the soul circle, three other stones at a mile distance from each other graved with the letter P on the sides facing the enst, and the letter M on the sides facing the west, between the said place of intersection of the said circle and the sand parallel of latitude, which last stone un the eides facing towards the north and east bath the arms of the said Thomas Peut and Richar I Penn giaved thereon, and on the sides facing towards the youth and west hath the arms of the sand Frederick, Lord Baltimore, graved thereon.
"3d. That we have run out, settled, fixed and determined such part of the said circle as hrs westward of the said dne north line and have marked and perpetuated the same by setting up and electing four stones in the periphery thereof, one of which, at the meridian distance of one mile from the tangent point, is marked with the letter Pon the east and the letter M on the west sides therent."
The fourth seetion goes on to describe the run- ning of the east and west line, which formis the boundary for the north of Maryland and south of Pennsylvania. This line was carried to a distance of over two hundred and eighty miles, when the Indians prevented them from proceeding, and it was afterwards carried to its present length. So far as the lower counties were concerned, this termi- nated the border troubles, but in the northeastern counties of Maryland, and the counties in Penn- sylvania adjoining them, occasional riots were still heard of at long intervals. John Penn had veca- sion to complain, in 1769, of Cecil County ruffians who had committed outrages in Pennsylvania, and even as late as 1774 the entire trouble had not been smoothed over. The outrages of earlier times had ceased, however, and what misunderstandings now vecurred were of a peacecable nature, and grew out of attempts to settle the details of the dispute beyond all cavil. The final proclamation of the Governor of Pennsylvania announcing the comple- tion of the work was not is-ned until April 8, 1775. In order to render obedience to its behests as little difficult as possible, a special act was passed by the territorial Assembly of the three lower counties on Delaware, expressly stating the boundaries of
124
HISTORY OF DELAWARE.
Kent, Sussex and New Castle Counties, and dechir- February 1, 1884, one Charles Pickering report ing that all persons who had resided in the disputed territory, but now acknowledged citizens of the lower counties, should enjoy all rights and privi- leges therein, as though no controversy had ever existed. To this act, passed on September 2d. a supplement was added on October 28th. The supplement was intended for the benefit of ereditors who held judgments taken out in Maryland courts against persons residing on the land in dispute. Great confusion had arisen when the settlement of the boundary question placed the debtors ir the lower counties. For the relief and security of the ereditors, the Assembly enacted a law making it a valid proceeding to docket transcripts of the judg- ments formerly obtained in the Maryland courts against persons resident on lands which had fallen within the lower counties on the determination of the houndary lines. With this aet, the history of the dispute over the boundaries of Delaware came to an end.
CHAPTER XII.
COLONIAL HISTORY, 1704-75.
THE history of Delaware during the period covered by the present chapter, stands out as a bold anomaly in the colonial history of America. After a long series of wrangles and dissensions with the other counties of the province of Pennsylvania, in 1704 the " territories," or the "three lower coun- ties," or the " counties of New Castle, Kent and Sussex upon Delaware," as they were then variously called, seceded from the enunties of the provinee. They were to be governed by a separate Assembly consisting of representatives from the three coun- ties, but still acknowledged the authority of the provincial Governor of Pennsylvania. This eon- tinued to be the form of government until the adoption of a separate Constitution by the State of Delaware, in 1776.
The lower counties had hardly been annexed to the province, 'n 1682, when the controversies and disagreements began which finally led to a separa- tion. The Council dealt liberally with the new counties, agreeing to assume a large share of their expenses as an obligation on the whole province, and as early as 1654 they complied with the request of the territorial representatives by holding a part of their meetings at New Castle. One effective cause for these early differences is to be traeed to the agents sent over by the Marylanders. It was a part of Lord Baltimore's plan for the success of hi- covetous designs on Penn's territory to stir up ill feeling in the lower counties. At a meeting of the Council, held at Philadelphia, on
that it was his belief that most of the people , Kent County were ready to revolt because Goverr. Penn had unt kept his promise to enter and clean all vessels at New Castle, and in the event of sur . out'renk they were assured of the support of Lord Baltimore. At the same time Francis Whitw ..!! John Wildtard wsl John Richardson, the repr. sentatices from Kent, refused to attend the Council and committees were sent to inquire into the can-, of theis absence, as well as that of the general disadection While no serious outbreak resulted from this, the government of the lower counti .. proved to be a soiree of mueh annoyance to the Council. Reports were continually brought to them complaining of the manner in which the officials performed their duties. The sheriff's could not be relied upon, and the decisions of the ju-tier . were frequently appealed from, as being unjust and partial. Matters began to take a more serious turn in 1690. Jealousies, based on loeal prejudices, had increased, and the lower counties asserted that they were not fairly treated in the appointment of oficers. In the year mentioned Thomas Lloyd had been duly elected president of the Council. The territorial members, fearing that they would not receive their fair proportion of officez, convened a secret meeting without notifying the president or any member of the Council. The six members present were William Clark, Luke Wat-on, Griffith Jones, John Brinkloe, John Cann and Johannes D'Haes, who appointed and commissioned six judges without the knowledge and consent of the other members. When the regular Council learned of the affair, they promptly declared the appoint- ments to be illegal, and severely reprimanded the unrely members for their clandestine action. 1 demand was then made that the judges and other officers of the lower counties should be appointed by the nine representatives from those counties, but this was not allowed.
In 1691 what was evidently intended by the proprietor as an indulgent privilege proved only a means of widening the breach between the two sections of the province. Penn had fett to the choice of the Council three different forms for the executive management of the government. It was to be either through a Deputy-Governor, a commis- sion of five or the Council itself. A majority of the Council favored the first of these methods. This brought forth a formal protest from seven member- for the lower counties-William Clark. John Cann, John Brinkloe, John Hill, Richard Halliwell, Albertus Jacobs and George Martin. They declared that the appointment of five com- missioners was the method most agreeable to them, and their second choice would be the commission of the Council itself, but that they could not accept the choice of a Deputy-Governor, since it placed ali
125
COLONIAL HISTORY.
appointments in the hands of a single per-on, and firm certain acts pas-ed at a meeting previously held al-o on account of the expense required for his -upport. They agreed, however, to accept the government of the Council, on condition that no officers should be appointed to positions in the three lower counties without the consent of the members of Council for these counties. They then withdrew from the Council. President Lloyd, who had been chosen Deputy-Governor, dispatched John Simcock, John Bristow, John Delavall and David Lloyd to New Castle after the seceding members, with the promise that they need have no apprehension on the points raised by them, as he would occupy the chair without expense to them, unless they voluntarily agreed to contribute toward his support, and, moreover, he would make no changes in the offices of the lower counties until the proprietor's pleasure were known, and none should be removed without their consent. This did not satisfy the representatives from the three lower counties, and they finally zeceded, William Markham, the secretary, who had joined them, being chosen Lieutenant-Governor for the counties of New Castle, Kent and Sussex. Penn was much grieved when he heard of the disunion of the province, and attributed the trouble to Lloyd's ambition. This charge seemed unjust, however, as Lloyd had only accepted his office after much reluctance, and at the earnest solicitation of most of the colonists. -
The province continued under this double gov ernment for two years, when Governor Fletcher assumed control in 1693, and again succeeded in uniting them." The union that was thus restored continned for a while without anything to disturb the peaceful conduct of government. In 1700 there occurred a slight dispute over the proportion of expenses to be born by the upper and lower counties, but this was soon adjusted. In the fol- lowing year several contests were begun, which led to the final separation, three years later. Ever since the act of union, in 1682, the lower counties had always acted with great unanimity. In 1701, when the King forwarded a request to Penn, ask- ing for three hundred and fifty pounds sterling for the maintenance of fortifications near New York, they entered their protest as a body, explaining that they were unable to provide defen-es for that colony, as they themselves badly needed protection. On the 10th of October, of the same year, the mem- bers from the lower counties, considering that the measures then pending before the Assembly were highly prejudicial to their interests, abruptly left that body. On the 14th the members from New Castle and Kent Counties, with John Hill for Sus- sex, appeared before the Governor to set forth their grievances. At the meeting hell on the 10th the objectionable measure was a bill to con-
1 Proud's " History of Pennsylvania," vol. i., p 351, et. seq
at New Castle. The dissenting members urged that as the laws had been duly passed by the Assembly, they could see no reason why they should be re- enacted at Philadelphia. The act of union had provided that the lower counties were to have equal privileges with the upper in all things rela- ting to the government, and to say that measures passed at New Castle required to be confirmed at Philadelphia would discourage any further visits to New Castle as a place for holding meetings of the A-sembly. Moreover, they failed to understand that the laws would be binding if the lower coun- ties acted at Philadelphia in conjunction with the upper, unless it could be shown that there is greater authority than when the two parties act in conjunction at Newcastle, This protest was signed by John Brinkloe, William Rodeney, John Walker, William Morton, Luke Wat-on, Jr., Jasper Yeates, Richard Halliwell, Adam Peterson and John Donaldson. The Governor explained that this was a mere matter of form, to avoid any misunderstandings during his absence, and added that he was deeply hurt at what he considered a personal slight. On behalf of the others, Jasper Yeates assured the Governor that no insult was intended, and that they cherished the greatest respect for him, but that they only acted in ac- cordance with the best interests of those whom they represented. The Governor then suggested that they should adjourn for one hour, until he could send for the rest of the Assembly, and at the appointed time they again met. A full discussion of the matter took place, in which both sides spoke very plainly. The territorial members held that the union had been from the first burdensome and objectionable to them, and they were no longer willing to remain a party to it. Penn argued with them, and expressed his sorrow at being compelled to carry such ill reports to England on his ap- proaching voyage, but finally agreed to let them withdraw from the union, stipulating in positive terms that the separation should be on amicable terms, and that they must first settle the laws. Some further difficulties occurred, and on the fol- lowing day the proprietor addressed a note to them, reiterating his pleas and admonitions. Rich- ard Halliwell, Jasper Yeate- and William Rod- eney returned to the Assembly, but soon appeared before the proprietor and assured him that they coubl no longer sit in that body, but mu-t at once proceed to their homes. The other members con- tinned in their obstinate refusal to recognize the privileges consistent with the honor and interest of the lower counties, that it was incumbent upon the members to leave. Penn, with a liberal use of his persuasive powers, at length brought them to terms, after several messages had been ex- changed with the Council and Assembly, and they
126
HISTORY OF DELAWARE.
agreed to return and make another effort to reach an understanding. On October 28th the new charter of privileges which Penn bad for some time been preparing was submitted to the Coun- cil. This was the occasion for another outbreak. The charter provided, in the usttal terms. for the enjoyment of liberty and happiness by the inhabit- ants of the province, and a single Assembly to consist of four members from each county ; but, seeing that a separation had now come to be iney- itable, Penn added the following proviso :
" Notwithstanding any clause or clanses in the above-mentioned charter, obliging the province and territories to join together in large- Iation, I am content, and do hereby declare. that if the topresentatives of the province and territories shall not, heredter, agri to juin together in legislation, and that the same shall be aquired to me, or moy deputy, in open assembly, or otherwise from under the hands and seals of the representatives for the time being, at the province and territories, or the major part of either of them within three years from the date hereof, that, in such case, the inhabitantsof each of the three counties of this province shall not have less than eigt prisons to represent them in the assembly for the province ; atol the inhabitants of the town of Philadelphia (when the sand town is incorporated) tw. persons to represent them in assembly ; and the inhabitants of each county in the territories shall have as many per-ous to represent their, in a distinct assembly, for the territories, as shall be by them reymeted, as afuresandd.
" Notwithstanding which separation of the province and territories, in respect of legislation. 1 do hereby promise, grant and declaire, that the inhabitants of both province and territories shall separately enjoy all other liberties, privileges, and benefits granted jointly to them, in th + charter, any law, usage or custom of this government heretofore mitde and practiseit, or any Low made and passed by the general assembly to the contrary hereof notwithstanding."
The Governor then issued a number of com- missions, appointing Andrew Hamilton Deputy-
JAMES LOGAN.
Governor, and James Logan secretary of the prov- ince, and clerk of the Council, and also nominated members of the Council, and incorpor- ated the city of Philadelphia. He then sailed for England, leaving the province in a restless and dissatisfied condition. The incorporation of Phila- delphia which gave the Provincial Assembly two additional members, was sufficient to show the territorial members that this was only the first
step towards the gradual increase of the provin mendes, while their own number would renten stationary. With the offer of the long-dein separation plar f before them in the charter o: privileges, it was not likely that they should main tain the nion agy longer than was absolutel: neves-ary. But as they were granted three year- in which ro At vide, they tarried a little to hear the arguments and exhortations of the Governor and provincial members, who made every effort to r ... tain them. Towards the chee of the year 1702 the contest suddenly assumed a new shape. . 1 number of the provincial members grow weary of the annovaace caused by the continual agitation of the territorial members, and they demanded a separate Assembly, accor ling to the terms of the charter. The Governor remonstrated that such a step could only produce the most direful result-, in encumbering the commercial relations then smoothly maintained with the mother country ; but. most important of all, as the proprietor wa- then in England for the purpose of securing hi- title to the lower counties, which had been disputed by others, a separation at that moment might prove especially disastrous by weakening his elann. Moreover, the application had been made on the 8tl: of October, and as the charter required all elections to begin on October 1st, the Governor insisted that a new Assembly could not be elected until the 1st of October should again recur. They replied that this difficulty could easily be avoided by the issuing of the Governor's writs, but this official pointed out that the lower counties would now complain that they had been thrown out without notice, and the objecting members prom- ised to postpone further action until a conference could be held with the Council. At the conference it was again argued that, as the lower counties had not yet elected members of the Assembly. thereby signifying that they would not accept the charter, it would be better to give them an oppor- tunity to issue write of election, which would re- quire very little time, before they were abruptly cast off, so that their members might be heard. The dissenting members of the province agreed to reconsider their determination, provided the Gov- ernor would adjourn them for one month. Thi- was accordingly done, and the Council rea-sembled on November 16th. In the mean time members of the Assembly had been elected for the lower counties, but those who had reached Philadelphia informed the Governor that they could under no circumstances sit with the member- elected for the province. The provincial members had been elected under a charter which the territorial mem- bers refused to recognize, and for their own eler- tion writs had been issued. Considerable time was spent in arguing, but without result. When the representatives tuet in the afternoon at Samuel
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.