USA > Vermont > The history of Vermont, from its discovery to its admission into the Union in 1791. By Hiland Hall > Part 8
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
4. Another grant to Godfrey Dellius, of a tract seventy miles in length by twelve in width on the east side of Hudson's river, bounded
67
.
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
on the south by the north bounds of Saratoga, the rent to the crown being one raccoon skin per annum. By the same act the Rev. Mr. Dellius for alleged fraud in deluding the Indians to execute a grant of the Mohawk lands to him and his associates, and for other frau- dulent practices, was declared suspended from his clerical functions.
This act was not however passed without considerable opposition, especially in the council, where the vote stood tliree and three, and was only carried by the casting voice of the governor, the three opponents of the bill holding some of the largest remaining grants in the province." They were Stephen Van Cortland, who had a patent for eighty-six thousand acres in the present county of West- chester ; constituting the tract into a manor or lordship, with a hereditary right of representation in the colonial assembly ; Robert Livingston, proprietor of the manor of Livingston, situated on the east side of Hudson river in the present county of Columbia, covering as it was afterwards surveyed and held over one hundred and sixty thousand acres, who also had the right of representation in the assembly ; and William Smith, who had a patent of all the vacant land on Long Island lying between the bounds of former grants, supposed to be not less than fifty square miles.
Besides these, there were several other grants of a most extraordi- nary character, which were not included in the annulling act, some of them patented by Gov. Fletcher and some by other governors. Among these the following may be mentioned, viz :
One tract to Col. Peter Schuyler and Herman Ganzevort, four miles in breadth along the east side of Hudson river by twenty in length. Another to Col. Henry Beekman, of a tract of the same breadth and length along the east side of the same river. And a third tract to Col. Caleb Heathcote, also on the east side of tlie Hudson, twenty miles in length along the river by five in breadth. Among these extraordinary grants must also be reckoned that of the princely manor of Rensselaerwick, granted by Gov. Dongan in 1685. This was originally understood to be twenty-four miles square, with Albany at the centre ; but it was finally construed to extend twenty- four miles east and as many west of Hudson's river, and to include a tract forty-eight miles in length by twenty-four in breadth, with an area of eleven hundred and fifty-two square miles, embracing most of the land in the present counties of Albany and Rensselaer. This manor had also the right of representation in the assembly.
The passage of the act vacating a portion of these extravagant grants aroused a strong opposition to Lord Bellamont among the large landed proprietors, who had great influence in the colony, and
68
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
efforts were immediately made to prevent its approval by the king, for which purpose Mr. Dellius and others repaired to England. The Earl of Bellamont dying, was succeeded in 1702, by Lord Cornbury, who though of noble descent and cousin to Queen Anne, was one of the most profligate and corrupt, as well as tyrannical of colonial governors. He is said to have exceeded all of his prede- cessors in the extent and improvidence of his grant, and it is stated on apparently good authority, that he had contracted with two gentlemen, to grant them all the lands in the province in a lump, and that the only thing which prevented the grants froin passing the scals, was the fear of the intended grantees, that it would create so many enemies that they should not be able to hold it.
The first assembly which Lord Cornbury had called, in 1702, had passed an act, with his connivance, repealing the annulling act of 1699. Neither of those acts, however, was effective without the approval of the crown; both remained in the colonial office without being acted upon until after Lord Cornbury was removed from the government, when, in 1708, the subject was brought before the queen in council and the Earl of Bellamont's annulling act was thereupon confirmed and the act repealing it disapproved.
The selfish and profligate conduct of the king's governors in dis- posing of the public lands solely for their own individual emolument was productive of many apparent evils besides that of depriving the crown of an anticipated" some. These extravagant grants were objectionable, not only on account of their immense extent, but for being situated for great distances along the banks of rivers, with com- paratively narrow widths into the interior, thus comprising and monopolizing the most convenient and desirable lands in the colony, and leaving only those of difficult access and less value, to be after- wards disposed of. The grants being made without any condition for their cultivation or improvement, and being in the hands of a few men who desired to people them with a dependent tenantry, but not in general to sell them, were almost completely locked up from settlement, by which the growth of the colony was greatly obstructed. It was another serious evil that the boundaries of these grants were frequently so vaguely described as to render their real position and extent quite uncertain, and to make it difficult if not impossible to determine what land had been actually granted and what remained to the crown.
When Lord Bellamont's annulling act was approved by the queen, in compliance with the recommendation of the board of trade, efforts appear to have been made to prevent the recurrence of the like
69
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
abuses in future. By instructions to Lord Lovelace, Cornbury's successor, he was directed to make no grants of more than two thousand acres to any one person, and always to reserve a yearly quit rent to the crown of two shillings and six pence for every one hundred acres, and also to insert in his patents a condition of forfeiture if at least three acres in every fifty were not cultivated within three years. And in order to prevent a monopoly of all the good lands in the hands of the first patentees, it was provided that the governor, the collector of the customs, the secretary of the province and the surveyor general, or any three of them, of which the latter officer was to be one, who were to " set out all lands should constitute a board, to be thereafter granted and that therein they should have regard to the profitable and unprofitable acres, so that cach grantor may have a proportionable number of one sort and the other, as likewise that the length of each tract to be hereafter granted do not extend along the banks of any river, but into the mainland, that thereby the said grantees may have each a convenient share of what accommodation the said rivers may afford, for navigation or otherwise." These in- structions were continued to all succeeding governors, the only material change being that in 1753 the quantity which might be granted to any one individual was reduced from two thousand to one thousand acres, and so it ever after remained. 1
This effort of the crown to effect a reform in the granting of lands was but partially successful. The peremptory direction in regard to the reservation of quit rents appears to have been complied with by subsequent governors, though their payment was very generally in some way evaded by influential proprietors. The governors also caused to be inserted in their patents a condition of forfeiture for nonimprovement within three years, agrecably to their instructions ; but this provision was seldom or never enforced, and was thus practically a nullity. Under these instructions surveys of lands previous to the issuing of patents scem to have been required, thus rendering less uncertain the boundaries of the tracts granted. The provision in relation to the granting of lands in strips along rivers, and of a proportionable share of good and poor lands was but little regarded, and that which was designed to prevent the accumulation of large tracts in the hands of a few persons, was wholly inoperative, both under the first limitation of two thousand
1 Col. Ilist. N. Y., vol. 3, 381 ; vol. 4, 397, 510, 622, 813 ; vol. 5, 21 - 26, 54, 141, 650-4 ; vol. 6, 790 ; vol. 7, 743. Doc. Hist. N. Y., vol. 1, 377-381. Van Schaick's Statutes, p. 32.
.
70
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
acres to a single person, and of one thousand at a subsequent date. If an individual desired to obtain a tract to himself of twenty or thirty thousand acres or more, he had only to apply for it in the name of himself and such number of other individuals, with whom he had previously contracted for that purpose, as might in the whole be entitled to receive the required quantity, and provided he had access to the grunting ear of the governor, he would readily obtain a patent of the whole to the applicants as tenants in common, the only remaining thing to be done to complete his title being to have a conveyance made to himself by his nominal associates, in accordance with their previous agreements. This mode of obtaining extensive tracts of land through the instrumentality of nominal grantees continued through the whole colonial period, and was practised with the knowledge and connivance of most if not all of the governors, many of them thus openly and shamefully obtaining for themselves princely estates, in plain violation of the spirit of their instructions, and in fraud of the crown and the public, as will hereafter be more fully seen.
A more direct and legitimate source of revenue to the governors, derived from the granting of lands, was the money received on issuing the patents, termed patent fees. Until after the approval by the crown of the New York act annulling the Dellius and other extrava- gant grants, there does not appear to have been any attempt to regulate the amount which might thus be taken. The governors seem to have made the best terms they could with the grantees, in effect selling them the fee of the king's land for their own personal benefit, and reserving to the crown the mere nominal quit rent of a beaver, an otter, or a raccoon skin for an almost unlimited number of acres. It is impossible to ascertain with any degree of accuracy what sums were secured by the governors during this period. Gov. Dongan admitted that he received two hundred pounds for the grant of the manor of Rensselaerwick before mentioned. It was esti- mated by Lord Dellamont that his predecessor, Col. Fletcher, during
1 A large map of the province of New York, prepared under the direction of Gov. Tryon, showing the state of the province at the beginning of the revolution, was published in England in 1779, of which there is a copy in the New York State Library, and also, on a reduced scale, in the first volume of the Documentary History of New York. It purports to exhibit the division of its territory into "counties, manors, patents and townships," and also " all the private grants of lands in the province." An examination of this map will show that a great portion of the territory was covered by these private grants, and that those which ranged from ten to one hundred thousand acres each were quite numerous.
71
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
his term of office, had received not less than four thousand pounds for his grants ; and there is no doubt that Lord Cornbury received and squandered all he could possibly obtain.
Soon after Gov. Hunter's appointment in 1710, a bill of fees to be taken on the granting of lands, was under instructions from the crown adopted by ordinance of the governor and council, which is believed to have been the only authoritative regulation ever made on the subject in New York during the colonial period.
This regulation was, however, soon departed from, and the allow- ances specified were enormously increased. By the council minutes of Feb. 5, 1772, the following bill of fees is admitted to have been usually exacted on the issuing of a patent for 1,000 acres.
By the Governor,. $31.25
Secretary of the Province,
10.00
Clerk of the Council, 10.00
Auditor, . . 4.62
Receiver General,
14.88
Attorney General, 7.50
Surveyor General,
12.50
Total amount for 1,000 acres, $90.25
And the same amount was taken for any additional thousand acres included in the same patent. Thus, if the patent was for two thousand acres the fees would be twice that sum, and at that rate for any larger quantity. The fees were not, however, reduced in the like proportion for a smaller quantity of land, but they amounted to nearly the same, however small the grant, and they exceeded eighty dollars for a patent of one hundred acres. The progressive increase of fees for every thousand acres included in the same patent was defended by Colden on the ground that the fees were not intended merely as a compensation for actual services , but as per- quisites of office. 1
By the adroit exercise of this power of granting lands most of the governors previous to the time of Mr. Colden, had contrived to amass large fortunes. Mr. Smith in his history of New York (vol. 2, p. 82), says of Mr. Clarke who had held office many years, and was lieutenant governor from 1736 to 1743, that "by his offices of secretary, clerk of the council, councilor and lieutenant governor, he had every advantage of inserting his own name, or the name of some other person in trust
1 Council Minutes, vol. 26, p. 275-7. Col. IIist., vol. 7, p. 921-7. 2 Smith's N. Y., 366. Colden's Letter to the Lords of Trade, Oct. 13, 1764.
------- --
72
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
for him in the numerous grants, which he was in a condition for near half a century to quicken or retard ; and his estate, when he left us, by the rise of his lands and the population of the colony, was esti- mated at one hundred thousand pounds." Of Gov. Clinton, whose term extended for ten years from 1743, the assembly, in an address to the crown, offered to prove " that he granted extravagant tracts of land, and exacted twelve pounds and ten shillings, for every thousand acres, in the remote parts of the colony, besides reserving considerable shares in the grants to himself, by inserting fictitious names." And Mr. Smith (vol. 2, p. 191-2, and 202) says of him that "he set the precedent for the high fees since demanded for land patents, and boldly relied upon the interests of his patrons to screen him from reprehension," and that "it was supposed he re- turned to England with a fortune very little less than eighty-four thousand pounds sterling."
The policy of treating the charters issued by the governor of New Hampshire as nullities began under the administration of Cadwala- der Colden, then holding the office of lieutenant governor. He was of Scotch birth, and by profession a physician, had emigrated to Philadelphia, and afterwards removed to New York, where, in 1720, he was appointed surveyor general of the province, and two years later a member of the executive council, both of which offices he held for over forty years. On the death of Lieut. Gov. De Lancey in August, 1761, he was called to administer the government, by virtue of being the senior member of the council, and was soon afterwards appointed lieutenant governor, and as such continued at the head of the affairs of the province, with the exception of about a year, while Gen. Monckton was governor, until November, 1765, when he was superseded by the arrival of Sir Henry Moore from England. On the death of Gov. Moore in Sept. 1769, he again came into power, and exercised the office of chief magistrate for over a year until he was succeeded by Lord Dunmore in October, 1770. He held his commission as lieutenant governor until his decease in 1776, and once more occupied the position of chief magis- trate during the absence of Gov. Tryon in England, from April, 1774 to July, 1775. Mr. Colden was possessed of considerable talent, learning and industry, and for a large portion of his time had inuch influence in the colony, which was often exercised for benc- ficial purposes. He was. as has been before stated, of high tory principles, sustaining with all his might the most odious measures of the British ministry for establishing an unlimited power of the crown and parliament over the colonies. Nor could he be said to
ยท
73
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
have been destitute of that keen love of money and office, which Junius declared to be peculiarly characteristic of his countrymen. He was always, indeed, quite willing to enrich himself and his numerous family at the expense of the public, and not a little ingenious in devising ways to accomplish it. From the zcal with which, while urging the establishment of Connecticut river as the boundary of his province, he had declaimed against the selfishness and favoritism of Gov. Wentworth, in making his land grants, it might perhaps have been inferred that he himself was wholly above being influenced by such paltry personal considerations. Such an in- ference would, however, have been quite erroneous. It will, indeed, be found that he was no less greedy of the gains to be derived from the granting of lands, than was his New Hampshire rival, and that in fact, his avaricious cupidity, coupled with his desire of power and patronage, laid thic foundation for the long and bitter controversy which followed, and for the consequent independence of the territory of Vermont, which might otherwise have formed a part of New York.
At the time Mr. Colden came to the head of affairs, the official income from the granting of lands had much decreased. Nearly all of the desirable lands in the colony which were not subject to the Indian title, had been covered by patents of former governors, and even the territory of the natives had been largely encroached upon. Taking advantage of their ignorance and credulity, the land specu- lators had often induced them to execute what were dignified with the name of " Indian deeds," which, under the interpretation of the grantees, sanctioned by the ruling authorities of the province, who were the recipients of the patent fees, and often of a considerable portion of the lands, were found to embrace territory of immense extent, and frequently to include Indian plantations and cherished hunting grounds - lands with which the Indians never had a thought of parting.1 These fraudulent encroachments had been so numerous as to create extensive dissatisfaction among the Mohawks and other tribes of the six nations, and greatly to weaken the hold of the English upon their friendship. In fact many of the Indians, influ- enced mainly by these intrusions, had emigrated to Canada and put themselves under the protection of the French, while those who remained were in a state of uneasiness and irritation. The disaffec- tion occasioned by these oppressive practices was viewed with appre-
1 It would appear from representations made to Lieut. Gov. DeLancey in 1753, that it was customary for the governors to have as their share, one- third of the lands purchased of the Indians. Col. Ilist., vol. 6, p. 818.
10
74
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
hension and alarm in England as well as in New York. The conduct of the rulers of the province in allowing them was not only severely censured by the board of trade, but they had made it one of the standing instructions to the governors to put in requisition every means in their power to break and annul several of the most obnox- ious of them, either by acts of the assembly or by judicial proceed- ings. But as governors, legislators, and judges were all either directly or indirectly interested, to maintain the sanctity of the grants, the instructions were of course inoperative.1
Such being the character and position of Lieut. Gov. Colden, it is not perhaps matter of great wonder that he should, on coming into power, have abandoned his former views of the limited extent of the province of New York to the eastward, and under the influ- ence of anticipated patent fees, and power to be derived from the annexation to New York of the territory, now Vermont, should have obtained new light on the subject, and to use his own language, should have become " clearly convinced that the province of New York extends eastward as far as Connecticut river ; " nor that when he had obtained a decision of the crown making that river the bound- ary, he should have been willing to construe it as annulling all pre- vious grants made in the territory by New Hampshire."
1 Doc. Hist. N. Y., vol. 2, 1821. Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. 4, p. 720, 345 ; vol. 5, p. 569, 650, 549, 472 ; vol. 6, p. 851, 962; vol. 7, p. 77, 87, 117, 130, 169, 260, 301, 677, 701, 576.
75
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE SETTLERS AND CLAIMANTS UNDER NEW HAMPSHIRE.
1763-1766.
Colden's proclamation against the settlers of December, 1763 -Counter proclamation of Wentworth -Notice to the settlers of the annexation of the territory to New York in April, 1765 -Colden issues patents of lands which had been previously granted by New Hampshire - Nearly all of them on the west side of the Green mountains, and why - His further issue of patents suspended by the stamp act, Nov. 1, 1765 - Also sus- pended by Sir Henry Moore - His character and measures in regard to the New Hampshire grantees.
W HIILE Lieut. Gov. Colden was urging the British ministry to make Connecticut river the eastern boundary of his province, the territory of which he desired to obtain jurisdiction was being rapidly occupied by New England men, who were fast transforming the wilder- ness into cultivated fields, and making it their permanent habitation. This excited his alarm for the success of the measure he had so ardently at heart, and he determined to do all in his power to prevent the further settlement of the country. For this purpose he issued a proclamation, bearing date December 28, 1763, setting forth in strong and positive language the claim of New York to extend eastward to Connecticut river by virtue of the charter of king Charles the second to the Duke of York, declaring that the government of New Hampshire without having any jurisdiction whatever to the westward of that river, had granted lands beyond it and within the jurisdiction of the government of New York, and that " sundry persons, ignorant that they could not derive a legal title under such grants had attempted a settlement of lands included therein ;" warning all persons against purchasing titles or making settlements under the char- ters of that province ; commanding " all judges, justices and other civil officers within the same to continue to exercise jurisdiction in their respective functions as far as to the bank of Connecticut river ;" and enjoining the high sheriff of the county of Albany to return to him the names of all persons who under the grants of New Hampshire, did or should hold the possession of any lands westward of Connecticut river, "that they might be proceeded with according to law."1
1 For a copy of this proclamation see Doc. Ilist. N. Y., vol. 4, p. 558. See also Slade's Vt. State Papers, p. 16.
76
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
Whatever may be thought of other portions of this proclamation, there is no doubt of the truth of that part of it which affirms that the settlers under New Hampshire " were ignorant that they could not derive a legal title" under their grants. They fully believed their titles to be good, and there is no reason to doubt that this proclamation gave them the first information they received that the validity of their charters would be called in question. It is true that the claim of New York had been asserted to Gov. Wentworth by letter from Gov. Clinton, in 1750, as has been before mentioned, but the correspondence which had taken place between the two governors does not appear to have been published, and was wholly unknown to the settlers. 1
One of the noticeable features of this proclamation is the formal and apparently serious manner in which the lieutenant governor commands and requires civil officers " to continue to exercise juris- diction as far east as the banks of the Connecticut river," when no New York officer whatever had as yet begun to exercise any juris- diction over the people of that territory. The New Hampshire charters had conferred corporate authority on the inhabitants of the townships, and they had organized themselves and appointed their local officers in conformity to the laws of that province. No New York judge, justice of the peace, or other officer had ever been appointed within the territory, or had attempted to exercise any authority therein. By New Hampshire these town organizations had been authorized and recognized. and the necessary machinery for the exercise of judicial authority had been provided by the appoint- ment of justices of peace on both sides of the Green mountain .?
Prior to this proclamation, one hundred and twenty four of the one hundred and thirty charters granted by Gov. Wentworth had been issued; only six of the whole number bearing date after December, 1763.
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.