of Goods and Merchandizes at Perth Amboy in East Jersey and in Birdlington [Burlington] in West Jersey, Whereby Directions from the Right Honoble the Lords Comissioners of his Maj'ties Treasury we have Established Officers to Collect the Duties Imposed by the Act made the 25th yeare of the Reigne of King Charles the Second to inspect the Enumerated plantation Com'odities which shall be laden upon shipps bound Directly to this Kingdome and likewise to Attend the Delivery of all European Goods brought from thence, but that such persons will attempt to Runn into private Creeks and harbours where there are noe officers, the better to Cover their Indirect practices. Wee direct that at y! Arrivall in those parts you make it one Cheife part of yo! Care and Endeavour for the Kinge's Service to Oblige all Merchants Masters of Ships and others to load and unload at those appointed and priviledged Ports of Perth Amboy and Birdlington aforesaid, being owned and agreed upon by severall of the proprietors in yo heareing to be sufficient for the trade of both places, and that there may be noe p'tence for Goeing Elsewhere, lett the Officers be Cautioned to give theire Constant and Diligent attendance in those Respective ports for the Dispatch of all Businesse both Inwards and outwards.

We rest yo! Loveing friends,

To Edward Randolph Esqre Surveyor Generall of his Maj'ties Customs in America.

Representation from the Lords of Trade to the Lords Justices, against the right of the Proprietors of East Jersey to establish Ports.

[From P. R. O. B. T. Proprietors, Vol. 25. p. 176.]

TO THEIR EXCELLENCIES Y LDS JUSTICES.

May it please your Excellencies.

In Obedience to your Excelleys order in Council dated ye 23rd of the last Month, that we should Examine the matter of a Petition of the Proprietors of East New Jersey thereunto annexed, and Report to your Excell how we find the same, with our Opinion thereupon; We humbly represent to your Excellencies.

That the said Petitioners having set forth their Title to the said Province, togeth with all Rivers, Bays, Harbours, Waters & leading unto the same, for the free use of Navigation, free Trade and Commerce, as grounded upon a Grant from the late King James, dated the 14th of March 1682, Tho in reallity he were then only Duke of York, and derived his Title thereunto from a preceding Grant from the then King Charles the Second; they do im'ediately in the next words insert the Priviledge of Ports, as a property purchased by them, and as if it had been expressly before mentioned, tho it be not. And thereupon they proceed to complain of their Rights and Properties being invaded by the Govern of New York in compelling their Ships to go up to New York, and denying them the benefit of a Port at Perth Amboy Whereupon they pray for remedy

That in order to Our Information in this whole Matter, we have perused not only the fore mentioned Deed of y said Duke of York, but a Copy also (which they produced to Us) of the fore mentioned Grant of King Charles the second, for a large Tract of Land, in which

the Province of East New Jersey is included, and which Grant of King Charles the Second is recited in the foresaid Deed of the said Duke of York, as the ground and foundation thereof; But not having found in either of the Said Writings any mention of the Priviledge of constituting Ports in the Province of East New Jersey; We then directed the said Proprietors to attend his Majesties attorney & Solicitor Generall therewithall, And we thereupon propounded to his Majesty's said Attorney and Sollicitor Generall the following Queries Viz!

19 What a Port is; and by what means any Place in his Majts Plantations in America may become a Port.

2. Whether by King Charles the Second's Patent to the Duke of York, Power was given to the said Duke, to constitute a Port or Ports in any of the Territories Granted to him.

3. Whether the Duke of York by his Conveyance to the Lord Berkley & S George Carteret, did or could convey the Right of constituting Ports in any of the Lands thereby conveyed.

4. Whether upon the Division which the said Lord Berkley and S George Carteret afterwards made of the Lands conveyed to them, they could convey any such power or right to the respective Proprietors to whom they told their Severall Shares.

5. Supposing the Territories of East and West New Jersey, now divided from New York were formerly united with it under one Government, and that the Citty of New York was then the Port for that whole. Province so United; Whether upon Seperating of East New Jersey from New York, by the sa Duke of York's conveyance to the Earle of Perth and others, there be any right convey'd to them, or their Assignes, of constitut a Port at Perth Amboy or elsewhere at their Pleasure.

6. Whether upon any further Divisions that may hereafter be made of the said Province, by the said Proprietors, each of the Severall Assignees, will also have a Right of constituting a Port or Ports in each of their Divisions?

Unto which Queries we received from his Majesties Atturney and Sollicitor Generall the following Answers Viz!

"1st We are humbly of Opinion That a Port in Our "Law is understood to be a place appointed for the "lading and unlading of Goods and Merchandizes, for "the better Collecting his Majesties Customes and "other duties; and that such Ports (by an Act made "the 25th Carl. 24 Chapter 7th For better Securing the 'Plantation Trade) are to be appointed in the Planta"tions by the Commission's of the Customs in Eng"land by & under the authority and directions of the "Treasurer or Commissioners of the Treasury in the respective Plantations, for the Collecting Such Cus"tomes as are due to his Majesty in those Plantations.

66

"2. That the aforesaid power of appointing Ports "granted to the Com'is of the Customes by the said "Act was not granted to the Duke of York by the said "Letters Patent.

"3. The Duke of York's grant to the Lord Berkley "and St George Carteret, could not convey any such "Power, because he had no such power granted to "him by the Crown.

"The 4 5 & 6 Queries are answered before in the "Answers to the former Queries: For if the Duke of "York had not Such a Power granted to him (as we "conceive he had not) Then his Assignees or any de"riving und! them can'ot have such a power.

Upon this it appearing evident to Us that the said Proprietors have no manner of Right or power to constitute Ports either in East or West New Jersey from

the late King Charles the second, the then Duke of York or any other person deriving authority from either of them; But that a Power of Constituting such Ports in any of his Majesties Plantations is vested by Act of Parliament in the Commissioners of his Majesties Customes, under the direction of the Lords Commission of his Majesties Treasury; We humbly offer to your Excellencies in Order to a determination upon the Expediency of the thing, these following considerations viz

That before the Seperation of the Jerseys from the Province of New York, the Citty of New York was the Com'on Port for both

That it is in no place (that we know of) either in England or elsewhere, usual to have two Ports independent on each other in one and the same River or within the same Capes or outlet into the sea, such a practice being manifestly lyable to great inconveniencies.

That Perth Amboy lies on one side of the mouth of the same River weh runs by the Citty of New York, (that River being divided in the Mouth of it by an Island called Staten Island) and is within the same Capes.

That upon the Seperation of the Jerseys from the Province of New York the Magistrats of that Citty & Govern's of that Province have Severall times complained of the prejudice arising or apprehended to arise from thence unto that Province, Particularly the loss of their Trade; Consequently the loss of their Inhabitants; and the great diminution if not entire loss of his Majesties Customes there.

That in our humble Opinion, if the Proprietors of East new Jersey Should be allowed a free Port (either at Perth Amboy or else where in that Province) their Trade lying up the Same River and into the same Country, amongst the same Indians, as that used by