COLDEN TO THE LORDS OF TRADE AND PLANTATIONS.

MY LORDS,

NEW YORK Sept 26th 1763

Since General Monckton left this Government, I have seen the copy of a Representation made to him by five gentlemen of the Council, relating to the boundaries of this His Majesty's Province, which in my humble opinion, were it to take effect, would be pernicious to his Majesty's rights and revenue; and therefore as the affairs of the Colonies may probably at this time, come under the consideration of his Majesty's ministers, and this Representation may be laid before them, I think it my duty to make remarks upon it, to shew the mistakes these gentlemen have fallen into.

Had I been apprised of it before it was made, I presume I should have been able to have prevented the mistakes. I have been 40 years at the Council Board, and in that time have been more conversant in publick affairs than any man now living in this Province. These gentlemen, all of them, except Mr Horsmanden, have had seats only a few years at the Council Board, and it is impossible they can be fully informed without the assistance of others. They have neglected likewise to consult the minutes of Council, when the same matter had been formerly under the consideration of the Council, who after long and mature deliberation, and after consulting the principal officers of government, and every other person who they thought could inform them, came to Resolutions very different from the sentiments of these gentlemen, as will appear in the minutes of Council of the 18th of October 1751; and more fully and clearly in the minutes of the 2a of March 1753. I had likewise the honor to write to your Lord

ships predecessors in office on the same subject the 28th February 1761.

The motives to the Representation are certainly just viz. the preventing tumults and disorders on the Borders; and I join heartily in opinion with them, that it is greatly for his Majesty's interest, and for the benefit of this and the neighbouring Colonies, that an end be put as soon as possible to these disputes; but at the same time, I hope to shew by what follows, that this may be done without giving up His Majesty's rights, or encouraging intrusions, which have been made, or hereafter may be made on the Kings lands, and without in the least distressing His Majesty's subjects, who have settled on these lands and cultivated them.

That I may not too much trespass on your Lordships' patience, I shall pass over several mistakes in this Representation, that I may come to the principal error upon which the whole is founded with respect to the Massachusetts Bay. It is this.

The Gentlemen, as they say, "have been informed that in the Year 1664, Commissioners were appointed by King Charles the Second, to settle the Boundaries between this and the adjacent Colonies, who determined that a Line parallel to Hudson's River, and at twenty miles distant from it on the East side thereof should divide the two Provinces of New York and Massachusetts Bay from each other, to which the Legislature of the latter agreed as appears by the Record of this transaction at the Plantation Office. But this settlement was never carried into effect, has been rejected or not insisted on by the Massachusetts Bay, is not mentioned in any of the Publick Records or Papers here, nor was introduced in the debates on this subject at the Congress or Meeting of Commissioners from both Provinces, at Albany in the Year 1754, and till very lately hath been utterly unknown to us."

In consequence of this new discovery, they conclude,

that a line at twenty miles distance from Hudson's River would be an equitable boundary, not only between New York and Massachusetts Bay, but likewise between New York and New Hampshire.

There is great reason to doubt of some mistake in this information. That the whole of that settlement of boundary related to Connecticut only, and not to the Massachusetts Bay; for as to Connecticut it appears on the Records of New York, but in no shape as to Massachusetts Bay. It is unaccountably odd, if this information be true, that in so long a time, the people of Massachusetts Bay should at no time avail themselves of it, unless it be supposed, that they are convinced of its being now of no force.

If the equity be considered, by which the settlement of boundary with Connecticut was made, it will appear that the equity did in no manner extend to the Massachusetts Bay.

Before the Duke of York received his grant, and while the Dutch were in possession of New York, the people of Connecticut had their principal towns and settlements on the West side of Connecticut River (which is the Eastern boundary of the Province of New York) and had

even extended their settlements on the sea coast within ten miles of Hudson's River; but the Massachusetts Bay (as I have been informed and believe) had made no settlements so far West as Connecticut River. It was in consideration of these settlements made by Connecticut, that the boundary between New York and Connecticut was fixed 20 miles from Hudson's River, reserving however to Connecticut the settlements actually made though within less than ten miles from Hudson's River; for which they were to allow an equivalent in the inland parts where they had no settlements. By this equivalent the distance between Hudson's River and Connecticut in the upper parts is above 22 miles. The not considering the want of equity in the Massachusetts Bay, which Connecticut

evidently has, produced an essential error in the judgment which the gentlemen formed of this matter.

About the year 1675 (if I mistake not the year) the charter of the Massachusetts Bay was, by decree in Chancery declared void. This decree was never reversed and remains in force at this day. Thereby the Duke's title to the lands on the West side of Connecticut River became indisputable; and this decree put an end to all settlement of boundary with Massachusetts Bay, if any there were. While the Duke was thus seized of his Province of New York, as far as Connecticut River, he succeeded to the Crown of England, and thereby the Province of New York became part of the Crown Lands, and has ever since passed with the Crown.

As

After the Revolution, the Colony of Massachusetts Bay obtained a new charter from King William, by which that Colony is to extend as far Westward as Connecticut. it nowhere appears that the King had any intention to grant any part of his Province of New York to the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, the word Connecticut must mean the River Connecticut and if the people of Massachusetts Bay had made no settlement at that time on the West side of Connecticut River, as I am confident they had not, their charter can receive no other construction, either in law or equity, than that the Colony of Massachusetts Bay extends as far westward as Connecticut River and no farther. By inspecting any general Map of the Northern Colonies, it appears that the Colony of Massachusetts Bay cannot be bounded to the westward by the Colony of Connecticut.

In my humble opinion no reason of any weight can be given, why the King should not affirm his right to the lands on the West side of Connecticut River, and to the northward of the Colony of Connecticut, unless it be that many families who have unadvisedly settled on the West side of Connecticut River, would thereby be ruined. But if the King shall think fit to confirm their possessions to

them, on their paying the Quitrent established in his Province of New York, they cannot in any shape be distressed, or have any just reason of complaint.

As the Province of New Hampshire is bounded to the Westward by the Eastern boundary of his Majesty's other Governments, the Governor of New Hampshire can have no pretence for extending his claim on the West side of Connecticut River which is the boundary Eastward there of the Province of New York, especially after repeated remonstrances had been made to him, by the Government of New York, on this head. Notwithstanding of this the Governor of New Hampshire continues to grant lands far to the Westward of Connecticut River, to numbers of people who make a job of them, by selling shares in the neighbouring Colonies, and have even attempted it in the City of New York, and perhaps not without success. The Quitrents in New Hampshire, as I am informed, are much lower than in New York, this is made use of as an inducement to purchase under New Hampshire, rather than to settle under New York grants.

The most surprising part of the Representation of these Gentlemen is that they should propose only a saving of the grants in New York which extend above 20 miles from Hudson's River and were made before the second charter to Massachusetts Bay, when it is clear that the second charter cannot extend beyond Connecticut River, and it is not so that the first did not.

In the last place I cannot conceive on what principles of justice, policy or public utility these gentlemen advise the settling the boundary between His Majesty's Province of New York, and the Colonies of Massachusetts Bay and New Hampshire at 20 miles East from Hudson's River.

If all the lands in the Province of New York from 20 miles of Hudson's River to Connecticut River, were given up, the Crown would be deprived of a Quitrent amounting yearly to a large sum, in my opinion, greater than the amount