GOV. TRYOn’s

REPORT ON THE PROVINCE OF NEW-YORK.

507

Nor can any Line more favorable to the Massachusetts Colony be hereafter established, withoutsubverting the Principles , and calling in question the Justice of the Royal Decree pronounced in 1740after full hearing of the merits of the Massachusetts claim on the appeal of both parties to the KingPrivy Council ; and which could it now be effected, must not only prove highly injurious to therown in respect to the right of Soil , its Quit Rents & Escheats, but be productive of the greatestdisorder k confusion in that Country.

The Province of Massachusetts Bay ground their claim Westward to the South Sea on the Deed dated^"c'lairnof ^ th March 1627[8 from the Council of Plimouth to Sir Henry Roswell &c. and their asso-mITvvmT"'' c * a tes.—As also on the Charter or Letters Patent of Charles the First dated the 4 MarchKh s e n’ e 162819—The Lands granted are the same in both, being in breadth about Sixty Miles, andfee” ta'fheir'" extending as described in these Instruments “ From the Atlantic and Western Sea and OceanSroii ? on a nnd r ‘ 011 the East part to the South Sea on the West part.”

“f'Sfibl, But the Crown being divested of these Lands by the Grant to the Council of Plimouth in''on,"s)miu‘ 1620, could not pass them by its Charter of 1628|9, which had no other operation than tooia“m lii* form the Massachusetts Bay into a Province , and to invest the same with Powers as a Body

“NorihB„ UI1 . J

<«ry beyond Corporate.

present r

*iS*ie ab “ It became necessary therefore for the Massachusetts Bay after they were incorporated, toProrinclTuiui ebtain a Conveyance to the Corporation of the Lands granted to Roswell &c. and Associ-ates.—-That they obtained such Conveyance has not been pretended.—If they had, theciam!"" 1 the Crown either became reseized of the Lands of the Corporation by the Judgment in 1684Sou11 * Sea ' which Vacated the Letters Patent of 162819 or the Property reverted to the Grantees of theCouncil of Plymouth .

Had the Crown been reseized it might have passed the same Lands to the Massachusetts Pro-vince by the present Charter of 1691. But instead of so extensive and unreasonable a Grant ofThree Thousand Miles in length they obtained, it is true, by that Charter a great addition ofTerritory Eastward, but were confined in their Western limits which extend «towards the SouthSea as far as the Colonies of Rhode Island, Connecticut and the Naragansett Country.” ThisDescription in strict Construction of Law will carry the Massachusetts Bay West no further thanthe Eastern Bounds of Connecticut , and by the most liberal interpretation do not extend their Boun-dary beyond the West Line of Connecticut , then and for some years before determined by Agreementbetween that Colony and New York to be upwards of Twenty Miles East of Hudson’s River.

On the other hand admitting the Massachusetts Bay after their charter of 1628)9, and before itwas vacated in 1684, did not obtain a Conveyance of the Lands granted to Roswell &c. and Associ-ates, the Judgment which vacated that charter did not aifect the Lands but left the Title in Roswell&c. and Associates, and the Crown could not by the Charter of 1691, grant them to the MassachusettsColony ; So that the Title, if any exists, must at this day be vested in the heirs or assigns of Roswell&c. and Associates in their private Right, and not in the Government of the Massachusetts Bay ,unless transferred to or vested in the latter by some act of their Provincial Legislature, it such anAct could possibly have any Eificacy.

It is however presumed no Law of that Tendency has been passed, and if any should hereafter bePresented for His Majesty’s approbation, that it will be objected to (so far as it may countenance theextension of their Northern or Western claims beyond the Limits of their piesent Chartei) as ameasure calculated to divest the Crown of the right of Soil in that very large and extensive Territory,Which lies Westward of the Colony of New York to the South Sea .

This claim had it been considered as well grounded would long since have been prosecuted andbrought to a decision.—The Massachusetts General Court or Assembly assert it in a Resolve theyPassed on the 23d of January 1768, but whether with an intention to maintain it, Time must dis-