USA > Vermont > Early history of Vermont, Vol. II > Part 15
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
Governor Wentworth in his letter of March 23. 1750, to the Board of Trade, said "the Com-
-
- -
- - -
235
OF VERMONT.
missioners from the Crown have settled the boundary between New York and Connecticut at twenty miles east of Hudson River. The Massa- chusetts Bay have allowed the government of New York to extend their claim to twenty miles east of Hudson River and have carried on their settlements in conformity thereto;" and said, in his letter, "it will be necessary to inform your Lordships that the government of New York was founded on a grant made by the Crown to the Duke of York and that it was to commence at the sea and run sixty miles north into the country, which line will cross Hudson River about twenty miles south of the city of Albany."
In the report of his Majesty's Council of the province of New York and the Commissioners ap- pointed to examine into the eastern boundaries of that province to the Lieutenant-Governor thereof, they said "Governor Wentworth is pleased to cx- press himself thus: "presuming it will be his Maj- esty's pleasure that a north and south line should divide both Massachusetts and New Hamp- shire from the government of New York, on which we observe, that, had Governor Wentworth been informed, as we believe the truth is, that a north and south line from the north-west corner of Con- necticut Colony would have crossed Hudson River some miles southward or below the city of Albany, and would leave that city and a great part of Hudson River to the eastward of that line, he could have no reason for advancing that pre- sumption, and the rather, had he been informed, as the fact is, that the Dutch settled Albany by
236
EARLY HISTORY
the name of Fort Orange, and had a fort and gar- rison there about 140 years ago, and many years before the grant to the Council of Plymouth under which Massachusetts Bay had their first claim."
"Governor Wentworth is pleased to say, that I have extended the western boundary of New Hampshire as far west as the Massachusetts Bar have done theirs, that is within twenty miles of Hudson River, on which we beg leave to observe that his having done so, after being informed of the boundaries of this province by the Minute of Council of the 3d of April, 1750, before mentioned, and by the Minute of June 5th, 1750, that the Massachusetts settlements westward of those boundaries were made by intrusion, is very extra- ordinary ; and we are further of opinion that the intrusions of Massachusetts Bay within this pro- vince could be no good reason for Governor Went- worth to commit the like." They concluded their report by advising that the whole matter be laid before the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations.
On December 28, 1763, Lieutenant-Governor Colden, to counteract the action of Governor Wentworth in granting townships of land west of Connecticut River, and to prevent persons from purchasing land under said grants, issued his proc- lamation, setting forth the New York claim under letters patent and grant to the Duke of York, and commanding all judges, justices and other civil of- ficers to continue to exercise jurisdiction in their respective functions as far as the banks of Connec- ticut River notwithstanding any contrariety of
237
OF VERMONT.
jurisdiction claimed by the government of New Hampshire, and enjoined the High Sheriff of the County of Albany to return to him or the Com- mander-in-Chief the names of all persons who, un- der the grants of the government of New Hamp- shire, do or shall hold the possession of any lands west of Connecticut River, that they might be proceeded against according to law.
Lieutenant Governor Colden in his letter to the Board of Trade of January 20, 1764, represented in substance that both Governor Clinton and Governor Wentworth had agreed not to com- mence a dispute as to the rights of their respective governments, respecting the western boundary of New Hampshire, until his Majesty's pleasure should be known, and that each should make a representation of the matter to his Majesty, and the copy of their respective representations should be exchanged, and complained that Governor Wentworth had failed to make such exchange, and said that the government of New York con- fided that New Hampshire would not venture to make any further grants until his Majesty should be pleased to determine the limits between the . two provinces, as such grants must interfere with those of New York and would be a nullity; and claimed that the government of New York was surprised to discover that New Hampshire had proceeded, notwithstanding the assurances of Governor Wentworth, to grant a large number of townships westward of Connecticut River.
And complained that the granting of such townships had, probably, been concealed from the
-
238
EARLY HISTORY
knowledge of the government of New York, but they incidentally had learned by the grantees or „ from persons employed by them, who had trav- eled through the New York Province and the neighboring Province of New Jersey, "publicly of- fering lands for sale at such low rates as evince the claimants had no intention of becoming set- tlers, either from inability, or conscious they could derive no title to the lands under the grants of New Hampshire;" and that therefore he issued the proclamation referred to above. And then again set forth the grounds of their claim to the lands to Connecticut River which have heretofore been given.
He argued that because "the government of New York first in 1664, and afterwards in 1683, yielded to Connecticut the lands westward, to the distance of 20 miles of Hudson River, and that Massachusetts Bay had taken and held possession to within 20 miles of that river by intrusion, could be no reason why New Hampshire should grant lands west of Connecticut River." And then said, "the lands in question lay more conven- ient to be included within New York than New Hampshire, Hudson River being navigable by ves- sels of considerable burthen to Albany, the trade of that part of the country will probably center there, to which place the transportation or car- riage will be much easier than to the ports of New Hampshire, and where the inhabitants are likely to meet with a better market for their produce. The revenue to the Crown if the lands are settled under this Province, will be greater than if
1
239
OF VERMONT.
granted under New Hampshire, in proportion of the difference of quit rent. * * * There is another circumstance of some weight at this juncture. The preference given to this government from its evident superiority, has induced a great number of reduced offiers to claim here the bounty his Maj- esty has been pleased by his proclamation of the 7th of October last, to extend to those who have served in North America during the late war, (English and French) and many have located their spots within the claim of New Hampsihre; indeed, if they had not, it would have been impossible for this government to have found lands enough for them, clear of dispute and not reserved to the Indi- ans; but they absolutely decline any application to New Hampshire for lands westward of Connecti- cut River." And then insisted that if his Majesty should, on any consideration extend the limits of New Hampshire westward of Connecticut River, he presumed to hope the right of property and the right of jurisdiction will be saved to this Province in respect to all lands before granted by this government.
Lieutenant Governor Colden again in his letter to the Board of Trade of February S, 1764, said "the Governor of New Hampshire, I am told, has lately granted 160 townships, of six miles square, on the west side of Connecticut River. A man in appearance no better than a peddler, has lately traveled through New Jersey and this Province, hawking and selling his pretended rights of 30 townships on trifling considerations. The whole proceedings of the government of New Hampshire,
-
240
EARLY HISTORY
in this case, if what is told me is true, are shame- ful and a discredit to the King's authority under which they act."
In reply to the proclamation and letters emin- ating from the New York authorities, Governor Wentworth on March 13, 1764, issued his procla- mation setting forth in substance that New York had no title to the lands granted by him, and that the patent to the Duke of York under which New York claims, is obsolete, and that New York can- not convey any certain boundary to New York, as plainly appears by the boundary lines of the Jer- sey's on the west and the colony of Connecticut on the east, and exhorted that the grantees now set- tled on those lands not to be intimidated, hin- dered or obstructed in the improvement of their lands, and to maintain his Majesty's government of New Hampshire westward far enough to in- clude the Grants, and encouraging the Grantees to be industrious in clearing and cultivating their lands, and commanding all civil officers to be dili- gent in exercising jurisdiction under the govern- ment of New Hampshire, and to deal with any person or persons that may presume to interrupt the inhabitants or settlers on said lands, notwith- standing the proclamation of Lieutenant Gov- ernor Colden.
New York on July 20, 1764, at the Court of St. James obtained the following order from his Maj- esty and Council, viz: "that the western banks of the river Connecticut, from where it enters the Province of Massachusetts Bay as far north as the fifty-fifth degree of north latitude, to be the
·
241
OF VERMONT.
boundary line between the said two provinces of New Hampshire and New York for the time being." On August 17, 1764, Har. Schuyler, a New York sheriff, reported to Lieutenant Gov- ernor Colden that the New Hampshire people had turned out Creiger from his land, drove off his cat- tle and carried away a parcel of Indian corn and compelled Creiger to pay forty-five dollars to re- deem his cattle, and that he had arrested four of the New Hampshire people and lodged them in jail in Albany.
On September 4, 1764, Governor Wentworth hy letter demanded their release, and added that it would be an act of cruelty to punish individuals for disputes between two governments, and that as to the question of jurisdiction he was willing to submit it to the King.
The Governor and Council of New York at a Council held at Fort George in the City of New York on June 6, 1766, ordered all persons holding claims under grants from New Hampshire to ap- pear and produce their instruments of conveyance by which they derived their title or claim to the lands, before his Excellency in Council; and if such person should not appear and support their title within three months their claims would be re- jected. These proceedings appear to have been called to the attention of Lord Shelburne, for in his letter to Governor Moore of New York of April 11, 1767, Lord Shelburne said that two petitions had been presented to the King in Council, one by the Society for the propagation of the Gospel and the other by Samuel Robinson of Bennington for
242
EARLY HISTORY
himself and more than a thousand other grantees of lands on the west side of Connecticut River un- der grants from the Governor of New Hampshire, praying for redress of grievances. And his Maj- esty commands that you make no new grants of these lands and not molest any person in the quiet possession of his grant who can produce good and valid deeds under the seal of the Province of New Hampshire until he receive further orders.
Lord Shelburne stated in the above letter that he had in his letter of December 11, 1766, directed him to "take care that the inhabitants be not mo- lested on account of territorial differences or dis- puted jurisdiction, for whatever province the set- tlers may be found to belong to, it should make no difference in their property provided that their title to their lands should be found good in other respects, or that they have been long in the unin- terrupted possession of them." And closes his let- ter as follows, viz: "the unreasonableness of oblig- ing a very large tract of country to pay a second time the immense sum of thirty three thousand pounds in fees according to the allegations of this petition for no other reason than its being found necessary to settle the line of boundary between the colonies in question is so unjustifiable that his Majesty is not only determined to have the strict- est inquiry made into the circumstances of the charge, but expects the clearest and fullest answer to every part of it."
In Governor Moore's reply to Lord Shelburne's letter and order bearing date June 9, 1767, which is too long to be inserted here, denies the truth of
243
OF VERMONT.
the allegations in petitions of the Society for the propagation of the Gospel and of Samuel Robin- son and those represented; and denied there were more than a quarter of the number of actual set- tlers on the disputed territory as represented by those petitions or that he received a large amount of money for fees in granting land; or that he had deprived the grantees of their rights; and he declared it would be his highest pleasure to have the strictest inquiry made into the charges made against him in the petitions.
The letter from Lord Shelburne above referred to dampened the ardor of the New York author- ities to interfere with the grantees under New Hampshire. At the Conrt of St. James July 24, 1767, the King with the advice of his Council, having the matter in controversy under consider- ation did, "require and command that the Gov- ernor or Commander in Chief of his Majesty's Province of New York, for the time being, do not (upon the pain of his Majesty's highest dis- pleasure) presume to make any grant whatever of any part of the lands, until his Majesty's further pleasure shall be known concerning the same."
This order was construed to prohibit only the granting of such of the lands as had been actually granted by the government of New Hampshire. The Legislature of New York about the year 1769 passed an act for the partition of certain land called Wallumschock that had been granted to James DeLancey and others under letters patent bearing date July 15, 1739, and were located in the County of Albany and included land east of
244
EARLY HISTORY
the 20 mile line. And commissioners and survey- ors were sent to make partition of the land with the expectation that it would augment his Maj- esty's quit-rents.
The surveyors and commissioners from Albany in running the line met with some opposition from the settlers. Thereupon Lieutenant Governor Colden issued his proclamation commanding the Sheriff of the County of Albany to apprehend and take James Breckenridge, Samuel Robinson. Moses Robinson and several others, that he called rioters and offenders, and commit them, and that they be dealt with according to law. Com- plaints were made by Governor Wentworth to Colden that William Deane and others of Windsor in the County of Cumberland in the Province of New York were trespassing against his Majesty by cutting, felling and destroying white pine trees off from lands in the town of Windsor whereby the trespassers had forfeited the lands that had been granted to them, and said land for that rea- son had become vested in the Crown.
For a while after the King in Council on July 20, 1764, had declared that the New York Prov- ince extended to Connecticut River, New Hamp- shire ceased to make claim to lands west of Con- necticut River or to protect the inhabitants of the New Hampshire Grants from the encroachments of the New York authorities on their rights and possessions. In consequence of the withdrawal of any claim to the territory known as the New Hampshire Grants by New Hampshire, many of the people inhabiting the said Grants began to
245
OF VERMONT.
assert their independence and resist any New York interference.
New York sympathizers, to the number of 436, residing in the Counties of Cumberland and Glou- cester, on November 1, 1770, petitioned to the King, setting forth that anciently the Colony of New York was bounded on the east by Connecti- cut River; that the government of New Hamp- shire was limited, and confined in its extent west- ward to his Majesty's other governments, and that notwithstanding this clear designation of boundary to each Province, New Hampshire con- tinued to make grants westward of that river till finally on July 20, 1764, the Royal order deter- mined and declared the western bank of the Con- necticut River was the boundary line between the Provinces of New Hampshire and New York; and complaining that in June 1770, a number disor- derly persons of Windsor in the County of Cum- berland, in a riotous manner and by threats ob- structed the proceedings of the Court of Common Pleas, and claimed that no obedience was due to magistrates and civil officers, and their action was unauthorized; and that the jurisdiction belonged to the government of New Hampshire; and that said riotous persons eluded public justice by flight into New Hampshire; and said rioters and others had signed a petition to have the jurisdiction changed from New York to New Hampshire; and all of this was done to elude the punishment due to transgressors; to promote the interests of in- dividuals who have made a traffic of the New Hampshire titles and to aggrandize the family of
246
EARLY HISTORY
the late Governor Wentworth, for whose benefit reservations of land were made in all the numer- ous grants which he thought proper to pass.
On December 3, 1770, four hundred and eight persons, representing themselves inhabitants of certain lands on the west side of the Connecticut River in the Province of New York made petition to John Earl of Dunmore, Captain General and Governor-in-Chief in and over the Province of New York, setting forth that an uuhappy controversy had existed for some years between the govern- ments of New York and New Hampshire rela- tive to the validity of the grants issued by the lat- ter, which has proved extremely detrimental to the Crown and the country; that they had settled on the lands granted them and cultivated and im- proved them, conceiving their title to be good till the Royal Order of July 20, 1764, determining that New York extended to the western bank of the Connecticut River ; that they now were desirous of holding the same under New York and asked for a confirmation of the title of their lands under New York for a moderate fee; and that the lands that were not improved might be granted on the usual terms.
On January 27, 1771, a petition signed by many person's residing in the territory known as the New Hampshire Grants, was presented to the King, setting forth that they were faithful, obedi- ent subjects, whose only hope of relief from imme- diate poverty, distress and ruin, with their helpless wives and children, depended upon his Majesty's lenient and paternal interposition, that they were
247
OF VERMONT.
within jurisdiction of New York which was for- merly in his Majesty's Province of New Hamp- shire; that they in good faith settled, cultivated, inhabited and improved the lands granted to them under the patent issued to them by Benning Wentworth, and lexpended their whole fortune and all their labor on the premises so granted to them. The jurisdictional line having been re- moved they, therefore, were included in New York, which "is and forever will be highly detrimental and disagreeable to them, both in their property and good government;" and since the change of jurisdiction, their possessions have been granted to other people under the great seal of New York; that writs of ejectment have been brought, their property wrested from them; their persons im- prisoned and their whole substance wasted in fruitless law suits merely to enrich a few men in said Province of New York; that many of the pe- titioners were soldiers in his Majesty's army in the English and French war in North America ; and asked to be preserved from impending evils by being re-annexed to New Hampshire.
Lord Dunmore from New York wrote Lord Hillsborough March 9, 1771, respecting the trou- bles in the New Hampshire Grant territory. He said "this is a fine country, capable of great culti- vation, and of subsisting many thousands of useful subjects."
He claimed that the disorders there owe their origin and progress to the intrigues of persons in power in the Province of New Hampshire, with aims of enhancing their private fortunes, out of
24S
EARLY HISTORY
the Crown lands, and in the vain hope that his Majesty may be moved to annex this territory to the Province of New Hampshire under which their grants were obtained. He claimed that a great majority of the settlers were averse to a change, but well disposed to a peaceable submission to the decision of his Majesty of 1764, and there would be no established tranquility in that quarter till the revocation of the late order by which the grants of this province were suspended.
On March 4, 1771, Alexander Colden, Surveyor General of lands for the Province of New York, made his certificate that on May 22, 1765, he re- ceived a copy of an order of the Lieutenant-Gov- ernor dirceting him, until further orders, not to make return of any warrant of survey, then al- ready, or which might thereafter come to his hand, of any lands actually settled by persons under the grants of the government of New Hampshire westward of Connecticut River and eastward of Hudson River, unless for persons in actual pos- session thereof, and that he had complied with such order.
CHAPTER XV.
THE NEW YORK VIEW OF THE CONTRO- VERSY BETWEEN THAT STATE AND NEW HAMPSHIRE. CONTINUED.
The adherents of New York continued to send in their complaints to the authorities of that State accompanied by many affidavits, claiming that the inhabitants of the Grants were fomenting disorder; that they had become purchasers of land under the New Hampshire grants after the proclamation of Governor Colden of December 28, 1763, in which he claimed that New York claimed jurisdiction to Connecticut River; that such set- tlers purchased their lands on condition never to pay the purchase money except the New Hamp- shire title be made good; they do not submit to the laws, customs or usages of the government of New York; they choose selectmen for the town- ships and hold frequent town meetings pursuant to their charters, and make the laws of New Hamp- shire the rule of their conduct; they declare they have tied up and publicly whipped persons who had settled under titles derived from New York; and they have threatened to serve every person in like manner who should come there on the like errand ; that proprietors under New York have al- ways been disposed to treat the settlers under
,2491
250
EARLY HISTORY
New Hampshire with tenderness and forbearance which they have construed to arise solely from the proprietors under New York doubting the validity of their own title, and it has increased the spirit of opposition of the New Hampshire Grants, and they assert that the suits of ejectment brought against them under the authority of New York were simply to frighten them; that the New York officers were resisted by armed inen when they came to serve writs of possession against the de- fendants in the ejectment suits; that the settlers under New Hampshire were animated with hopes that the Royal order of July 20, 1764, might be rescinded; that had it not been for the encourage- ment given to the settlers by the Governor of New Hampshire that they would be soon annexed to New Hampshire, they would have submitted to the laws and jurisdiction of New York, and the disputes concerning land titles would have been at at an end.
John Munroe represented in his affidavit that the settlers in the vicinity of Shaftsbury, since his Majesty's order in Council of July 20, 1764, had increased five-fold, and purchased, for a small consideration, titles under New Hampshire, when they knew the land had been granted by the gov- ernment of New York, and that the people regu- lated themselves by the laws of New Hampshire and the charters granted by Governor Went- worth; that a number of persons disguised, res- cued from a Constable, Moses Robinson whom the Constable had in charge as a prisoner, and when the Constable commanded them to disperse and
251
OF VERMONT.
surrender up his prisoner and telling them they were acting against law, they "damned the laws of New York and said they had better laws of their own," and obliged the Constable and his assist- ants to fly for their lives; that the claimants un- der New Hampshire had in general confederated to resist by force of arms the execution of the laws of New York; that the Sheriff undertook to serve a writ of possession on one Isaiah Carpenter. The Sheriff found Carpenter and some of his neigh- bors in the house armed to resist, one gun loaded with powder and bullets and one with powder and kidney beans.
The affidavit of one Simeon Stevens who claimed to be an inhabitant of Charleston in the Province of New Hampshire, taken at New York City, stated, that he understood and believed that Governor Wentworth granted all the lands on the west side of Connecticut River without the advice of his Council in granting the respective tracts, but did obtain their general advice for making the grants.
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.