USA > Vermont > Records of the Governor and Council of the State of Vermont, Vol. V > Part 69
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
Now, pray Gentlemen, consider what an unfavorable light you will stand in with the Confederated States, when you are considered as the abettors at least and accomplices in these scenes of devastation and bloodshed: particularly consider what a fund of Eloquence and Oratory you are laying up in store for the use of New York to be played off against you, whenever your case comes to be candidly discussed before the Continental Congress, (for I am persuaded it must first or last come be- fore that august Assembly) you, in a manner, put words into their mouths, and direct them to address that Venerable Body in such lan- guage as this :- " You now plainly see, Gentlemen, what these men are aiming at; that, however modest and submissive a tone they may, at certain times or on special occasions have assumed, yet, they now begin to throw off the mask, and discover the latent Principle of Malignity which has all along been at the bottom as the animating spring of all that disturbance which they have occasioned. We appeal to facts, Gentlemen; you have a recent instance before you which plainly shows they are for grasping all they can lay hold of, Right or Wrong. They have gone over the Line of New Hampshire, where they had not the least shadow of pretence, to intermeddle, more than in any other of the States of the Confederacy; and have been, at least, accessory towards raising a Storm, which no one knows where or how it will be appeased."
525
Additions and Corrections.
I have but one thing more to add, and that is a hint, that it is pretty well known in New Hampshire, that the disappointments of a small junto of aspiring, avaricious men, in their endeavors to raise themselves and their connections to a degree of importance in the State, far, very far, beyond what their numbers or Estates gave them any pretence to. is the source of all this feud. Now unless the course of nature should change and similar Causes should cease to produce similar Effects, one may venture to predict, that this Spring wont lose its stimulus and change its vibratory nature, by being turned the other way, but will be active in endeavors to embarrass and perplex your Affairs.
I have purposely avoided a particular Address to our Seceding Breth- ren, on the East side of the River Connecticut, because I understand their rash proceeding has so awakened the attention of the State, that it will probably be matter of public enquiry when the General Court meets; and it might appear officious in a private Subject to anticipate a Business which will be much better done by the united Wisdom of the State.
However, that they may not think themselves wholly neglected, if there be any weight in the reasoning and observations in the foregoing Pages, if they will be pleased to read them, they may, with the altera- tion of a few circumstances, apply them to themselves; and they will find many of them, A fortiori, to conclude against their own conduct.
Thus, Gentlemen, I have honestly endeavored to lay before you the Truth respecting an affair not only of great importance in itself, to the Peace and Weel of those immediately concerned in it, but also will, if not seasonably checked, go far in its consequences towards sapping the foundation of the Confederation of the United States; and am your sincere Friend and well wisher, in all honest pursuits. PACIFICUS. July 18, 1778.
For documents succeeding the foregoing in chronological order, see Vol. I, pp. 413-429.
A PUBLIC DEFENCE of the right of the NEW-HAMPSHIRE GRANTS (SO called) on both Sides CONNECTICUT-RIVER, to associate together, and form themselves into an INDEPENDENT STATE.
CONTAINING Remarks on sundry paragraphs of Letters from the presi- dent of the Council of New-Hampshire, to his Excellency Governor Chit- tenden, and the New-Hampshire Delegates at CONGRESS.
DRESDEN: Printed by ALDEN SPOONER, 1779. 1
PURSUANT to a Resolve of the General Assembly of the State of Ver- mont passed October, 20th, 1778, "that a declaration be drawn up, setting forth the political state of the New-Hampshire Grants (so called) on both sides of Connecticut River, &c." the major part of their Committee appointed for that purpose, have agreed to present the following facts and observations, together with two several letters from the President
1 A copy of this pamphlet was furnished by Rev. H. A. HAZEN of Billerica, Mass. Another, supposed to be annotated by Rev. SYLVA- NUS RIPLEY, Professor of Divinity in Dartmouth College, 1782-7, was furnished by Rev. N. BOUTON of Concord, N. H. The last named is used here.
526
Additions and Corrections.
of the Council of New Hampshire, and a report of Col. Ethan Allen, with some remarks on them.
A Grant was made by the Council of Plymouth March 4th 1628-9, of the Colony of the Massachusetts-Bay; the Northern Line of which was " from three miles northward of any and every part of Merrimack River " to extend west indefinitely. A Grant was afterwards made (in the same year) to John Mason of London Esq; containing a traet of land be- tween Merrimack and Piscataqua rivers, sixty miles up each river, and these to be bounded by a line across from river to river. This Grant (although expressed in a loose manner) when compared with the Mas- sachusetts Grant, is limited with the greatest precision, southerly and westerly by a line three miles northward of any and every part of Mer- rimack River, sixty miles up the river-and northerly by a line drawn from the place where the said sixty miles are finished to Piscataqua River, sixty miles distant from the mouth of it.1 On this Mason tract sundry towns were formed and considerably settled. And the Inhabitants in the year 1679, petitioned King Charles the 2ยช that they might be erected into a separate Government by the name of New- Hampshire; in compliance with which request a commission was made out to John Cutts Esq; whereby a President and Council were estab- lished for ruling and governing said New Hampshire which was in said commission bounded as follows viz. "lying and extending from three miles northward of Merrimack River or any part thereof unto the prov- inee of Main."3 And in the same commission is this further clause, viz. "And it appearing unto us that the ancestors of Robert Mason Esq; ob- tained Grants from our Great Council of Plymouth for the traet of land aforesaid, and were at great expense upon the same &c." By which it elearly appears that President Cutts' commission was intended to extend no farther than the western extent of the Mason claim or the Mason line (so called)-and jurisdiction was exercised agreeable thereto with little variation, untill a commission was granted to Benning Wentworth Esq; to preside as Governor of New-Hampshire; by which commission his jurisdiction was extended and exercised over the whole of the Grants, on both sides of Connecticut River; or at least he was empow- ered to extend jurisdiction to the limits of other Governments, grant lands &e. And by virtue of that general elause in his commission, and the determination of the King in Council A. D. 1739.3 he did actually
1 If the Massachusetts North line begins three miles north of Merri- mack, and continues three miles distant from it to three miles north of the fork or croteh where Merrimack and Pemegawasset rivers meet, and thence extends due west, as their Charter points out, they will cover considerable part of the Grants now in' question. A line drawn dne west from the place where those rivers meet will interseet Connecticut river about fifteen miles north of Charleston (No. 4) Meeting house, and thence continued across the New Hampshire Grants will come near to Fort Ann on the head of Wood Creek (as these places are delineated on the Maps) which line will include upwards of fifty of the towns on said Grants within the limits of the Massachusetts Charter. Although there was a determination of the King in Council A D 1739 that the North line of the Massachusetts should run west from Patucket falls it seems that they did not acquiesce in the determination; as they refused to join New Hampshire in a survey conformably thereto.
2 The boundaries of New Hampshire as described in this Commission coincide with the Massachusetts line as described in their Charter before mentioned.
3 See Douglass Summary, Vol. I. page 422.
527
Additions and Corrections.
extend jurisdiction, and granted the most of the vacant lands as far westward as to the line between Massachusetts and New-York. But New-York, not discouraged from endeavoring to extend jurisdiction eastward, by two unsuccessful struggles, first with Connecticut, and aft- erwards with the Massachusetts-Bay, now attempt to effect it against the New-Hampshire commission and the beforementioned determination of the King in Council. And here we find them under peculiar advantage to what they were in their former endeavors to encroach on the juris- diction of the other Governments. In those the people who owned the soil were interested in the jurisdiction: but here the Grantees of the lands had no concern with the jurisdiction. That prerogative was re- tained solely in the King's hand, and, exercised by whatever servant the royal mandate should point out. Neither the people in New-Hamp- shire or New-York had much concern in the exercise of jurisdiction. In New-Hampshire especially the royal prerogative was so extensive and the privileges of the people so small, that their Assembly declined as- sisting the Governor in any way whatever for the establishment of the line. And accordingly under the influence of sundry false declarations in favor of New York, a decree was passed by the King in Council A. D. 1764, that the western bank of Connecticut River should be the bound- ary between New-York and New-Hampshire: and the Grantees and In- habitants living on those lands, not being in capacity to defend against the unreasonable claim and pursuit of New-York in endeavoring to obtain jurisdiction over them, were under necessity of falling a prey.
In this situation of affairs, a considerable part of the people in the south westerly part of the Grants have utterly refused submission to the jurisdiction of New-York, from the time that said line was established as aforesaid, by reason that they not only claimed the jurisdiction but the right of soil also; which was before granted to the settlers and oth- ers by the Governor of New Hampshire. All which is more fully set forth in sundry pamphlets, wrote and published by Col. Ethan Allen, relative to the New-York claim. On other parts of the Grants, that were by said decree subjected to the jurisdiction of New-York, the people thro' fear of losing their interests and being turned out of possession of their all, in some measure submitted. And at exorbitant prices ob- tained regrants of their lands from the Governor of New-York-which he presumed to make out, notwithstanding the express inhibition of the King.
In this situation the people on the Grants continued, untill the late glorious revolution. And upon the declaration of Independence the peo- ple on the Grants on both sides of Connecticut River, seeing the kind hand of providence in releasing them thereby from the galling yoke of bondage under which they had been held, began now to look out for themselves, and assert their natural rights and privileges in common with their brethren in the American States.
And as the circumstances of the Grants on the two sides of the river were (on account of the jurisdictional line settled in 1764) circumstan- tially different, in respect to their connections with New-York and New- Hampshire, the Grants on the west side were fully determined (as they imagined by the proceedings of the Conventions and Assembly of the State of New-York that they had little or nothing better to expect from the new mode of government of that State than they had from the for- mer) not to connect with them; but to form themselves into a distinct State with the whole of the Grants, so soon as time aud circumstances would admit: and accordingly overtures were made by a Convention of the Grants on the west side to those on the east side of the river as early as September 1776. But those towns on the east side having transacted
?
528
Additions and Corrections.
some affairs with New-Hampshire from the time that hostilities were first committed by Britain to the time of Independence relative to the war &c .- and by reason of some disputes then subsisting between New- Hampshire and them, they were not prepared to enter into a con- federacy with the people on the west side of the river, untill the latter had formed their plan of Government.
But in pursuit of the original object (viz. to be all united together in one political body, in case they could not agree to connect with New- Hampshire) a considerable number of towns on the Grants on the east side of the [River], in the month of March 1778, by a Committee ap- pointed for that purpose, proposed to the Assembly of the Grants on the west side, articles of union and confederation; which proposals were ac- cordingly by order of said Assembly laid before the towns on the west side, for their consideration and approbation. And at the Assembly held at Bennington in the month of June last, said towns on the cast side of the river were received into union and confederacy with those on the west side, with equal rights and privileges, by a solemn act and resolve of said Assembly; and leave for other towns on the Grants east of the River to join; by virtue of which some others have since united. And they have since acted together as a distinct State, untill an unhappy dispute arose in the Assembly at their sessions in October last, relative to the manner of defending the State, against the claim of New-Hampshire to the Grants on the east side of the river included in said union; occasioned by the following letters and report which were then laid before the Assembly, viz.
1. A copy of a letter from President Weare to Governor Chittenden.1
2. A Copy of a Letter from President Weare to the New Hampshire Delegates at Congress; which is as follows, viz.2
3. A Report of Col. Ethan Allen, which is as follows, viz.3
The foregoing letters, report &c. were all taken into consideration by a Committee of Governor, Council and Assembly; on which the follow- ing proposals were reported to the Assembly, and by them approved, viz.4
In observing upon said letters, &c. will be shown the right of the whole of the Grants to unite and confederate together as before related.
The State of the Massachusetts notwithstanding their undoubted right by charter to a considerable part of those Grants, by their neglect to challenge them as part of that State since the revolution, have tacitly relinquished that right to the people who inhabit them, and not to New- York or New-Hampshire, or either of them; and the right of organizing government among themselves must of course be acknowledged as be- ing vested in the inhabitants until the Massachusetts assert and vindi- cate their claim; which may be done on much more rational principles than those of New-York or New-Hampshire; and consequently those States must be forever debarred from jurisdiction over those towns, were the matter to be rested on this single point.
As to New-Hampshire; all their right may justly be supposed to be comprised in the two letters from President Weare before recited, as they are the result of the wisdom of the Council and Assembly of that State after near three years dispute on the subject. But before we pro-
1 For this letter, see Vol. I, p. 414.
3 For this letter see Vol. I, p. 413.
8 For the report see Vol. I, p. 415; also p. 417, note 1.
4 For proposals see Vol. I, p. 418.
529
Additions and Corrections.
ceed to take notice of those letters, we would observe that the people in New-Hampshire never were formed into a political body, until the com- mission to President Cutts as before mentioned. Under which form of Government they continued (with very small variations) until the com- mission to Benning Wentworth, Esq .; anno 1740 After which a com- mission was made out to John Wentworth, Esq; who continued in the exercise of his government until the present revolution.
These commissions are all the Grants or Charters (if they may be so called) which either gave jurisdiction or combined the people together, and whereby they become connected in any way or manner whatsoever. These two last mentioned commissions were made out merely at the will and pleasure of the Crown, and constructed as sovereignty saw fit. By these alone the inhabitants on the Grants were connected with the peo- ple within the Mason claim. These were imposed on the people with- out their previous knowledge or consent, and were continued for such time and liable to such alterations at all times and in such way or man- ner as the King should see cause, both as to extent of jurisdiction and mode of government. By these commissions the people were subjected without power of chusing or refusing. And the whole of the Grants, by virtue thereof only, remained connected with the people settled on the Mason claim, until the regal power was exercised in an arbitrary manner in 1764, by passing an order or decree in privy council, that the western bank of Connecticut River should be the line or boundary be- tween New-York and New-Hampshire as before mentioned.
This stretch of arbitrary power (obtained by undue influence) gave rise to and has been the occasion of the continuance of all the political disputes and troubles that have subsisted in this part of the country ever since. And the strenuous efforts of New- York and New-Hampshire to establish and maintain that unjust and arbitrary line are the only cause of the present dispute, which must be decided,1 it seems (if we believe New-Hampshire) by the point of the sword.' For the people on the Grants, especially on each side of the river, on account of their situation and other circumstances, are utterly averse from being divided.
But to return to those royal mandates-We find that unbounded pre- rogative is not satisfied with this act in 1764; but has since ('tis said) made great part of the Grants with other territories a distinct province;2 but this was too late done to take effect.
Now we candidly ask the the [apparent repetition of " the "] question, which of those five lines (before mentioned) it is that New-Hampshire mean when they say, " Are they not within the lines thereof as settled by the King of Great Britain in Council prior to the present Aera ?"
Certainly it cannot be the first, for that takes off considerable part of the Grants to the Massachusetts; nor the second, for there is no pre-
1 Red. It is supposed that the lines in Italic in this paper were mark- ed in red by Prof. Ripley. 1
2 By a commission to Governor [Philip] Skeene for a government on said Grants &c. made out a little before the commencement of the pres- ent [revolutionary ] war.
In Vol. II, pp. 239-'40, note 1, is Ira Allen's statement that Skene was appointed governor of a territory comprising Crown Point and Ticon- deroga. This is confirmed by the obituary notice of Skene in The Gen- tleman's Magazine, [London.]-See Docs. relating to the Colonial History . of New York, Vol. VIII, p. 416, at the close of the note.
34
530
Additions and Corrections.
tence that the Mason line includes them; nor the third, for that includes all the Grants; and that New-Hampshire, has been utterly adverse to, notwithstanding they have been repeatedly requested thereto. Neither may we suppose it to be the last; because that will not answer their purpose. It must then be the line of 1764. But by what rule of right or reason they can make their choice, is beyond our perception to deter- mine-for certainly if they would consider those acts of the King in the nature of grants, the former must have the presidence; but if in the na- ture of wills, then the line described in Governor Skeen's commission takes place: as that was the last will and testament which George the third made relative to jurisdiction over these territories before his death, unless the Grants were included within the province of Canada, as extended by the Quebec bill, as some have imagined-But, thanks to Heaven. the legatees have never accepted the legacy since the death of the testator. Nor do they mean ever to accept either the will in 1764 or the last. Nor have either of those wills been yet proved or approved, or over can be, on account of the insanity of the testator.
However, as it appears evident that the line pointed out in the decree of 1764. is the line they mean to maintain, as best suiting their designs (viz.) for each one to have so much and no more than what they can manage to their purpose, and as this line is their capital bulwark and main strength, we will further consider the force of it.
It was obtained, in the first place, by the intercession of the govern- ment of New-York, by false representation, that it was the desire of the people living on the lands, to be annexed to New-York-that it would greatly commode them in trade and commerce &'c. also by undue influence by that Province, and some principal men in New-Hampshire. And the poor Inhabitants (who alone must suffer the evil consequences) were forsaken of New Hampshire, and consequently under no circumstances to make any defence, or even to be known in court, of necessity fell a sacrifice. But the King being thus deceived the decree is in its nature void 1-much less have the parties right to take advantage thereby of their own wrong, to subjugate the Grants to their sinister designs and purposes: Nay, it is void as to all parties .? Therefore the jurisdiction of New-Hampshire (so long as there was any under the Crown) ought to have taken place as before said decree in 1764 passed.
Again. If the State of New-Hampshire had any right to exercise jurisdiction over the Grants, they have (by refusing or neglecting to ex- ercise it over the whole) forfeited their right to any and every part; for by the right or authority chey may have heretofore had to exercise juris- dietion over the whole, they cannot exercise it over a part only; as that would be a different exercise from what they would in that case be em- powered to.
Further. Supposing, for argument sake, that the decree, in the time of it, was ever so legal and binding on the people; yet New-Hampshire, under its present circumstances, can claim nothing by it; because that power which the government had by virtue of his commission (when the commission became null and void) never averted to or became vested in the people by virtue of the commission, any more than though it never had been; and consequently New-Hampshire can have no right to exercise government over the Grant-, on account of the latter having
Notwithstanding it is said that the King can do no wrong, yet it is a settled maxim that the King being deceived his acts or grants are thereby made void.
2 Red.
531
Additions and Corrections.
been connected with the former in the Governors commission, any more than though they never had been thus connected. When the King's authority was thrown off and rejected by the declaration of Indepen- dence of the United States, the royal commission became a mere nullity, and was to the people as though it never had been, for it contained noth- ing more than a positive command to the Magistrate therein named to govern, and a requisition or command to the people to obey. Nothing was contained in it reciprocal between the King and people. Nothing that the people could claim as a grant or benefit, not even so much as the continuance of the commission itself: but it rested wholly at the pleasure of the crown. Now as the commission altogether ascertained the extent as well as power of jurisdiction, when the commission was once removed out of the way, there were no more any limits of jurisdiction left than there was power of exercising it.' Consequently there never hav- ing been any confederacy of the people,1 either by themselves or by any grant or charter from the crown or otherwise, whereby they ever were incorporated and united in a political body, whenever that compulsive power (which alone held them together) ceased, they became uncon- nected, and so will remain until by their own act they unite and confed- erate together,1 as much as the thirteen United States were before they entered into a confederacy. Nay the people never were at liberty to unite together or not unite until that despotie power which alone held them together, was thrown off; which was done by the declaration of In- dependence.1
And as New-Hampshire have not as yet settled any permanent plan of government, or confederated together any other way than by a consid- erable part of the towns (and those principally in the old Mason claim) acting together only for the purposes of carrying on the war, and in the meantime to guard against criminal offences, and have therefore never as yet ascertained what and where New Hampshire is or shall be; they are rather too early in making their challenges of jurisdiction, and threatening war and devastation upon those towns who have dared to assert their rights, and who have never acted with them since Indepen- dence took place, (but have remonstrated against their proceedings from the first setting up government in the manner they have done) except as to the affairs of the war merely; which will be more particularly con- sidered hereafter.
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.