USA > Vermont > History of eastern Vermont, from its earliest settlement to the close of the eighteeth century with a biographical chapter and appendixes > Part 56
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
On the 24th of March, a petition from John Foxcroft and " many other persons," proprietors of lands in Vermont, relative to this bill, was read in the Assembly. The petitioners asked to " be indulged with a copy of the said bill," and to ".be heard by themselves or their counsel thereupon." These requests were granted. On the 28th, the counsel for the petitioners appeared before a committee of the Assembly, " entered into a large field of argument" against the bill, and endeavored to show that it was " contrary to the constitution, to the maxims of sound policy, and to the rights of property." His observa- tions were not destitute of weight, and to many of them addi- tional force was given by the fact that they were to a certain degree founded in truth. He was followed by Alexander Hamilton, who in an elaborate address strove to prove, not only that the constitution permitted this measure, but that policy demanded it and justice acquiesced in its adoption. At every point he met his opponent's objections with forcible rea-
554
HISTORY OF EASTERN VERMONT.
[1787, 1788.
soning, and succeeded, in almost every instance, in overturning his positions. His opinion as to the policy of merging Vermont in New York, was expressed in these words :- " For my part, I should regard the reunion of Vermont to this state, as one of the greatest evils that could befall it ; as a source of continual embarrassment and disquietude." The bill, after undergoing many alterations, passed the Assembly on the 12th of April, and was immediately sent to the Senate. Here it was read on the same day, and on its second reading on the 13th, was com- mitted to a committee of the whole. By them it was never returned to the Senate. The admission of Vermont as a four- teenth state was postponed to a later time .*
Though the Legislature of New York had ceased to exercise authority over Vermont, yet, by the constitution of New York, the counties of Charlotte, Cumberland, and Gloucester were still claimed as constituent parts of that state. By the same instrument, power was given to " the future Legislatures" of the state, " to divide the same into such further and other counties and districts," as should be deemed necessary. In conformity with this authority, a law was passed on the 7th of March, 1788, for dividing the state of New York into counties. By this it was enacted, that the county of Cumberland should con- tain " all that part of this state beginning on Connecticut river at the north bounds of the state of Massachusetts, and extend- ing westward along the same until such line shall meet with, and be intersected by, a line proceeding on a course, south ten degrees west from the north-west corner of a tract of land granted under the Great Seal of the late colony of New York, on the 14th day of September, 1770, to James Abeel and nine other persons; and extending from the said point of intersec- tion, north ten degrees east, until such line shall meet with, and be intersected by, another line, to be drawn on a course north, sixty degrees west from the south-west corner of a tract of land granted under the Great Seal of the late colony of New York, on the 13th day of November, in the year of our Lord 1769, and erected into a township by the name of Royalton; and running from the last mentioned point of intersection, south sixty-six degrees, east to Connecticut river ; and so down along the same river to the place of beginning."
* Hamilton's Works, ii. 374-390. Journal Ass. N. Y., 10th session, pp. 116, 117, 123, 155. Journal Senate N. Y., 10th session, pp, 84, 85.
555
17SS.] BOUNDARIES OF GLOUCESTER COUNTY.
By the same enactment, Gloucester county was to contain "all that part of this state bounded southerly by the north bounds of the county of Cumberland ; easterly by the east bounds of this state; northerly by the north bounds of this state ; and westerly by a line to be drawn from the north-west corner of the said county of Cumberland, on a course north ten degrees east, until such line shall meet with, and be intersected by, another line proceeding on an east course from the south bank of the mouth of Otter creek; and from the said last men- tioned point of intersection running north fifty degrees east to the north bounds of this state." On the west side of the Green Mountains the land which had formerly comprised the county of Charlotte, was, by this new division, included within the counties of Washington and Clinton .*
By a resolution of Congress passed on the 28th of September, 1787, the plan of the present constitution of the United States was transmitted to the several state Legislatures, "in order to be submitted to a convention of delegates chosen in each state by the people thereof." During the summer of 1788, it became evident that the constitution would be adopted by eleven of the thirteen states, and the national government established. The attention of the most intelligent men in Vermont was now for- cibly directed to her peculiar situation. Prominent among these was Nathaniel Chipman. His opinion concerning the
controversy in which Vermont had been so long engaged, was, that if the question should ever be brought before an impartial tribunal for decision, the New York title would be adjudged to be better than that of Vermont.+ Holding this view of the case, he felt " extremely anxious" that the jurisdictional dispute should be speedily adjusted. For the purpose of consultation, a number of gentlemen, among whom were Lewis R. Morris and Gideon Olin, met at his house in Tinmouth, in the early part of July. The result of this conference was an agreement that he should write to Hamilton on the subject of a settlement of the controversy.
Agreeable to this determination, Chipman addressed a letter to Hamilton on the 15th of July, in which he briefly alluded to the situation of the larger portion of the landed property of Vermont ;
* Laws of N. Y., 11th session, pp. 133-136.
+ "It is now generally believed, that, should we be received into the Union, the New York grants would, by the federal courts, be preferred to those of Ver- mont." N. Chipman to A. Hamilton, in Life of Chipman, p. 74.
556
HISTORY OF EASTERN VERMONT.
[1788.
suggested certain methods by which Vermont might be brought to accede to the " new federal plan" of government ; and desired to know whether, in case Vermont should be received into the Union, the "federal legislature, when formed," might not be induced, on some terms, "to make a compensation to the New York grantees out of their western lands, and whether those gran- tees might not be induced to accept such compensation." Daniel Chipman, the brother of Nathaniel, and the bearer of this com- munication, delivered it to Hamilton at Poughkeepsie, where that gentleman was then in attendance upon the New York convention for the adoption of the United States' constitution. On the 22d, Hamilton replied, acknowledging Chipman's letter " as the basis of a correspondence" that might be productive of public good. "The accession of Vermont to the confederacy," wrote he, "is doubtless an object of great importance to the whole, and it appears to me that this is the favorable moment for effecting it upon the best terms for all concerned. Besides more general reasons, there are circumstances of the moment which will forward a proper arrangement. One of the first subjects of deliberation with the new Congress will be the inde- pendence of Kentucky, for which the southern states will be anxious. The northern will be glad to find a counterpoise in Vermont. These mutual interests and inclinations will facilitate a proper result." He further informed Mr. Chipman that there would be no distribution of western land to particular parts of the community ; assured him that the public debt of the United States would be provided for by indirect taxation, and by other politic measures; recommended that the state of Vermont should ratify the constitution, upon condition that Congress should provide for the extinguishment of all existing claims to land under grants of the state of New York, which might inter- fere with claims under the state of Vermont ; and declared that it would be wise "to lay as little impediment as possible" in the way of the reception of Vermont into the Union.
In answer to another letter from Mr. Chipman of the 6th of September, Mr. Hamilton referred in general terms to the sub- ject of their correspondence, and reiterated in a more extended form the observations he had previously made. To a sugges- tion of Mr. Chipman, that Vermont would desire to extend her territorial limits before becoming a part of the Union, Mr. Hamilton replied :- " I am sorry to find that the affair of the boundary is likely to create some embarrassment. Men's minds
557
LETTER OF ALEXANDER HAMILTON.
178$.]
everywhere out of your state, are made up upon, and reconciled to that which has been delineated by Congress. Any depar- ture from it must beget new discussions, in which all the pas- sions will have their usual scope, and may occasion greater im- pediments than the real importance of the thing would justify. If, however, the further claim you state cannot be gotten over with you, I would still wish to see the experiment made, though with this clog ; because I have it very much at heart that you should become a member of the confederacy." Referring then to the question of the right of the Legislature of Vermont to decide upon the accession of that state to the Union, he ob- served :- "There is one thing which I think it proper to men- tion to you, about which I have some doubts, that is, whether a legislative accession would be deemed valid. It is the policy of the system to lay its foundation on the immediate consent of the people. You will best judge how far it is safe or practica- ble to have recourse to a convention. Whatever you do, no time ought to be lost. The present moment is undoubtedly critically favorable. Let it, by all means, be improved." During the following winter, Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Chipman had an interview at Albany, " when," observes the biographer of the latter gentleman, " they took a view of the subject some- what different from their opinions which appear in the fore- going correspondence, and agreed on a mode of settling the con- troversy, which was afterwards adopted by the two states."*
The dispute between New York and Philadelphia as to which should be the permanent seat of the federal government, was finally decided in favor of the latter city. This result showed plainly that the western and southern influence was greater in Congress, than the northern. No state felt the force of this fact more severely than New York. Kentucky, whose terri- tory belonged to Virginia, was anticipating a reception into the federal government, as a separate state, at no distant day. The admission of Vermont, it was seen, would tend, in some measure, to equalize representation. Her weight would serve 's a counterpoise to the undue influence of particular sections f the Union. It was known at the north, that the adoption of he constitution of the United States had tended greatly to increase the desire of New York and Vermont, that the latter state should become a part of the Union. The controversy
* Life of Chipman, pp. 70-81.
558
HISTORY OF EASTERN VERMONT.
[1789.
which had so long divided these states, whose interests, but for that, were now almost identical, was the only barrier which prevented the connection. The wisest and best men in both, were ready to make the attempt to remove this hindrance, by concessions that would be just for each .* Such was the wish, also, of those to whom the administration of public affairs was entrusted.
For the purpose of manifesting their willingness to end the controversy, the Legislature of New York, on the 14th of July, 1789, passed an act " appointing commissioners with power to declare the consent of the Legislature of the state of New York, that a certain territory within the jurisdiction thereof, should be formed or erected into a new state." The commissioners named, were Robert Yates, Rufus King, Gulian Verplanck, Robert R. Livingston, Simeon De Witt, Richard Varick, and John Lansing Jr. In the words of the act, they, or "any four or more of them," were vested with full power " to declare the consent of the Legislature of this state, that such district or ter- ritory within the jurisdiction, and in the north-eastern and northern parts thereof, as the said commissioners shall judge most convenient, should be formed and erected into a new state." Special provision was at the same time made, that nothing contained in the act should be construed to give any person claiming lands in the district "to be erected into an independent state," any right to any compensation from the state of New York.t
The tone of public opinion on the subject of the controversy may be deduced, to a certain extent, from the newspapers of that period. The following extract is from Thomas's Spy, No. 831, March 12th, 1789.
" Vermont, Bennington, February 23 [1789].
" Two of the agents of this state, appointed to attend on Congress, to negotiate the admission of this state into the new federal government, have attended the legislature of New York, during their session at Albany, in order to influence that honorable body to recognize our independence; and we learn that a bill for that purpose is now under their consideration, by which the western bounds of this state is affixed at the western bounds of the townships granted by Hampshire.
" We are informed from respectable authority, that many influential members of the legislature of New York, are anxious for the admission of Vermont into the Federal Union, to prevent internal divisions among the American states. The Hon. General Schuyler and others have given it as their opinion, that matters should be compromised amicably and speedily between this state and the New York claimants-the peace of the Union being of far greater value than half a million acres of land."
t This act was sent to Thomas Chittenden, in a letter dated at Albany on the 16th of July, 1789, and signed by all the commissioners except Richard Varick. Laws of N. Y., 1st meeting of 13th session, p. 2. Williams's Hist. Vt., ii. 257, 258.
559
1789,1790.] APPOINTMENT OF BOUNDARY COMMISSIONERS.
On the 23d of: October, 1789, the Legislature of Vermont responded to the advances made by the Legislature of New York, and passed an act, appointing Isaac Tichenor, Stephen R. Bradley, Nathaniel Chipman, Elijah Paine, Ira Allen, Stephen Jacob, and Israel Smith, commissioners in behalf of the state, " with full powers to them, or any four or more of them, to treat with commissioners that now are, or hereafter may be, appointed by the state of New York, and who shall be fully authorized and empowered, by the said state of New York, to ascertain, agree to, ratify, and confirm a jurisdictional or boundary line between the state of New York and the state of Vermont; and to adjust, and finally determine, all and every matter or thing which, in any wise, obstructs a union of this state with the United States." Special provision was at the same time made, that nothing in the act should be construed to give the commis- sioners power, either " to lessen or abridge the present jurisdic- tion" of Vermont ; or to " oblige the inhabitants of the same, or any other person or persons, claiming title to lands" pre- viously granted by Vermont, or "the late province of New Hampshire," to relinquish "their claims under the jurisdiction thereof, or, in any wise, subject the state of Vermont to make any compensation to different persons, claiming under grants made by the late province, and now state, of New York, of lands situate and being in the state of Vermont, and within the jurisdiction of the same."*
Having become satisfied that several omissions had been made in the act of the 14th of July, 1789, by which commis- sioners had been appointed to acknowledge the sovereignty of Vermont, the Legislature of New York, on the 6th of March, 1790, repealed that act, and passed another with a similar title. Robert Yates, Robert R. Livingston, John Lansing Jr., Gulian Verplanck, Simeon De Witt, Egbert Benson, Richard Sill, and Melancton Smith were named as commissioners in the second act. The same authority which had been conferred on the other commissioners was transferred to them, and, in addition to this, they were vested with " full power to treat, conclude, and agree with any person or persons, or any assemblies or bodies of peo- ple," touching the relinquishment of the jurisdiction of the state of New York over a certain portion of her " north-eastern and northern " territory ; and touching " the securing or con-
* Slade's Vt. State Papers, pp. 192, 193. Life of Chipman, p. 82.
560
HISTORY OF EASTERN VERMONT.
[1790.
firming of rights, titles, or possessions of lands within such dis- trict or territory, held or claimed under grants from the state of New Hampshire while a colony, or under grants, sales, or loca- tions made by the authority of the government or jurisdiction now existing, and exercised in the north-eastern parts of this state, under the name or style of the state of Vermont, against persons claiming the same lands under grants from this state while a colony, or since the independence thereof." In an accom- panying proviso, the commissioners were prohibited from sanctioning or countenancing, in any way, the " grants, sales, or locations " made " by or under Vermont," in that portion of the state of New York, to which the name of the Western Union had been once applied by Vermont.
In another section of this act, it was stated, that whatever the commissioners might stipulate to receive, as " a compensa- tion for extinguishing the claims" to lands "within the said district, derived under the late colony of New York," should be for the use of those claimants thus deprived of their grants, although in the stipulations the " compensation should be de- clared to be for the use of this state, or for the people thereof." It was also provided that nothing in this act should be construed to give to any person claiming as above set forth, " any right to any further compensation " from the state, than the compensa- tion which might " be so stipulated as aforesaid."*
In conformity with the terms of this act, and of that passed by the Legislature of Vermont, the commissioners of the two states assembled. "The only point of difficulty and debate," observes Mr. Williams, "related to a compensation for the lands claimed by the citizens of New York, which had been regranted by the government of Vermont." The discussions on this subject were carried on in a most friendly and con- ciliatory manner, and after two or three meetings, "an equitable and amicable agreement " was concluded. On the 7th of October, the commissioners of New York by virtue of . the powers granted to them for that purpose, declared the con- sent of the Legislature of New York, that the state of Vermont should be admitted into the Union of the United States of America ; and that immediately upon such admission, all claims of jurisdiction of the state of New York within the state of Vermont should cease.
* Laws of N. Y., 2d meeting, 13th session, p. 13.
561
SPECIFICATION OF THE BOUNDARY LINE.
1790.]
They further declared that thenceforth, "the perpetual boun- dary line between the state of New York and the state of Ver- mont" should be as follows :- " Beginning at the north-west corner of the state of Massachusetts ; thence westward, along the south boundary of the township of Pownall, to the south -_ west corner thereof; thence northerly, along the western boun- daries of the townships of Pownall, Bennington, Shaftsbury, Arlington, Sandgate, Rupert, Pawlet, Wells, and Poultney, as the said townships are now held or possessed, to the river, com- monly called Poultney river ; thence down the same, through the middle of the deepest channel thereof, to East Bay ; thence through the middle of the deepest channel of East Bay and the waters thereof, to where the same communicates with Lake Champlain ; thence through the middle of the deepest channel of Lake Champlain, to the eastward of the islands called the Four Brothers, and the westward of the islands called Grand Isle and Long Isle, or the Two Heroes, and to the westward of the Isle La Mott, to the forty-fifth degree of north latitude."
With regard to the lands which had been granted by New York, the commissioners, announcing " the will of the Legisla- ture of the state of New York," decreed that, " if the Legisla- ture of the state of Vermont should, on or before the first day of January, 1792, declare that, on or before the first day of June, 1794, the said state of Vermont would pay to the state of New York the sum of thirty thousand dollars, that, imme- diately from such declaration by the Legislature of the state of Vermont, all rights and titles to lands within the state of Ver- mont, under grants from the government of the late colony of New York, or from the state of New York, should cease," those excepted which had been made in confirmation of the grants of New Hampshire. Such was the deliberate decision of the com- missioners upon the topics which had been submitted to them for a final and definitive settlement .*
The plan proposed in this decision met with the approbation of the Legislature of Vermont, and on the 28th of October they passed an act, directing the treasurer of the state to pay the sum of thirty thousand dollars to the state of New York, at or before the time proposed ; adopting the line proposed by the commissioners as the perpetual boundary between the two states ; and declaring all the grants, charters, and patents of
* Williams's Hist. Vt., ii. 258, 259. Slade's Vt. State Papers, pp. 190, 191. Thompson's Vt., Part II. p. 83. Doc. Hist. N. Y., iv. 1023.
36
562
HISTORY OF EASTERN VERMONT.
[1791.
land, lying within the state of Vermont, made by or under the late colony of New York, to be null and void, and " incapable of being given in evidence in any court of law" within the state, those excepted which had been made in confirmation of the grants from New Hampshire. "In this amicable manner," observes Mr. Williams, " was terminated a, controversy which had been carried on with great animosity for twenty-six years."* Both sides were weary of the contest, and, happily for them, the general condition of America was favorable to conciliatory measures. This seems to have been the only period, in which the matter could have been adjusted to the satisfaction of all parties. +
The difficulties with New York having been terminated by these proceedings, the General Assembly of Vermont issued a call for a convention of the people, to take into consideration the expediency of joining the federal union. The convention met at Bennington on the 6th of January, 1791. Among the delegates were Thomas Chittenden, the president, and Moses Robinson, the vice-president of the convention, Nathaniel Chip- man, Stephen R. Bradley, Ira Allen, Ebenezer Allen, Daniel Buck, Jonathan Arnold, Gideon Olin, Jonathan Hunt, John Strong, John Fassett, Timothy Brownson, and many others of sound practical sense, and stern integrity. Of the conflicting opinions which prevailed on this occasion, Mr. Williams remarks :- "The members were not all agreed on the expedi- ency of being connected with the thirteen states, and it was doubted, whether a majority of the people were for the measure. Several members of the convention wished to defer the conside- ration of the question, to a more distant period. It was urged on the other hand, that the safety, the interest, and the honor of Vermont, would be essentially promoted by joining the union of the other states, and that this was the precise time, when it might be done without difficulty or opposition."
Favoring the accession of Vermont to the union, Nathaniel Chipman, distinguished both as an able jurist and an accom- plished scholar, urged the convention to give their assent to the measure, and in a forcible and argumentative speech, advanced his reasons for recommending such a course. In emphatic language, he described the insignificance of the condition to
* The commencement of the controversy is generally fixed at the date of the Order of the King in Council, viz. July 20th, 1764. See ante, p. 130.
+ Williams's Hist. Vt., ii. 259, 260. Slade's Vt. State Papers, pp. 191, 193, 194.
563
VIEWS OF NATHANIEL CHIPMAN.
1791.]
which Vermont would be continually subjected, should she remain a separate state, and foreshadowed her probable fate in case a war should arise between the United States and Great Britain. He showed in what manner learning and science, and manufactures, and the arts, would be patronized in Vermont by means of the Union, and how, as a result of the same cause, the moral and social condition of the state would be exalted. He referred to the different methods that had been adopted in different ages of the world, to bring states similarly situated to act as one confederacy, and declared that the constitution and the federal government of the United States, though almost phenomena in civil polity, were better calculated than any other means that could be adopted, to unite in one body the people of the United States, and to secure " the tranquillity, happiness, and prosperity of the Union."
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.