Martinsburg gazette and public advertiser. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1826-1833, 1833-01-10

co ni'anytHb papers, 'hat N'" :
,imorc. the then proprietor of Nd. depuied an
agrot Ia attend upoa his part ~ tbs examinations
n9t ,rveD ofthe Potomac rtUcr It's possible he
conceived his interests sufficiently protected
IN the aspect which the controversy had then
assumed between lord Fairfax and the crown.
Certain it is, that no where appears that I've
ever considered himself aggricyed 10y the re
suit of that adjustment. That his govern
ment was fully apprIzed OF what was ~ pre-
gross, can scarcely admit OF rationai oouo''
For 1t is impossible TO conceive that con
troversy so deeply affecting oot only the 10
terests Of lord Baltimore, bat AL VINO were
concerned IN the purchase OF Iand IN mar sec
ton of the country, and conducted w'.h 80
much solemaity and nO;onety, conld nave
extended through Il period oil sixteen years
without attracting the attention oil the gov
ernment of MdryIend--a government ever
Jealous. because ever doubtful OF The orlslhai
tenure Nv Which her charter vas hslu' b4l
had lofd iilitimofe even eonsiderea hiHhsei'
aggricved by the result OF that settlement u
is d,Hi.ult now TO conceive upon what grouhu
be would have excepted TO ats justice or
questioned its yahdity. Could he have saia
that the information upon which the decision
was founded was imperfect? Or that the
proceedings Of the commissioners we're cha
This. the proceedings of that board, still pre-
served, would contradict. FOR never was
there an examination conducted With more
deiiberation -prGsecated with more iaoouF
or scruiinlzed with more Jealous ana anx
ions vigilance. Could he have shewn mat
some other stream ought to have been h2eu
upon as the true head spring OF the potonac'
This, 1t is believed, IS ImpossIolej Tor altho
it NAV he true that the south branch Is a
longer stream, It nevertheless wants those
more important characteristics which were
then considered by the commissioners, and
have been subsequently regarded by esteem
ed geographers as essential IN distinguishing
a tributary from the main branch oi a river
(See FhHts Geography, cot :, p 80 Last
~, would he have questioned the dtth0fby OF
the crown To settle the boundaries oil lord
Fairfax's charter, without having previously
made him party to the proceedings? | have
before shewn the fu,ilitg of such an idea
BESIDES, this would have been at once to
question the authority under which he held
his own grant. For Baltimore held by ylr-
tue of an arbitrary act OF the second CHARLES
His grant was manifestly made in violation
Of the chartered rights Of Virginia, and car
RED into eff ct not only without the argues.
eeuee, but against the solemn and repeated
circumstances of her government was
Virginia consulted in the "dlsuemberment'
of her territory? Was she made a party to
that proceeding, by which, 'Ior the first time
in colonial history, one new province was
created within the chartered limits OF another
by the mere act of the crowGP' But the
fact is. that Charles lord Baltimore, ,cho ltp
ed for sir years after the adjustment OF tins
question, never did contest the propriety OF
the boundary as settled by the commission
ere. bot from all that remains OF bis views
and proceedings, fully acqlesced IN Its ac-
curacy and justice. See Treaty 'cuh the STA
Nations Of Indians, at Lancaster, "a June
I744)
The fret evidence Of Dissatisfaction with
the boundary IA established which the re
searches Of the Maryland writers have era
bled them TO exhibit, are certain instructions
from Frederick lord Baltimore Successor oil
Chares) to governor Sharpe, which were
presented by the latter to his council in Aug
1853. have not been able TO procur co
py Of those instructions. but a recent histo
rian of Maryland, and an ingenious advocate
OF her present claim, referring To them, says,
"His instructions were predicated upon the
supposiilon that the survey might possibly
have been maue aeith the ku0tcledge and con-
carrence Of his predecessor. and hence he
denies the p0leer of The Latter to enter INTO
any arrane ement as to the boundaries. which
could extend beyond his life estate, or con
clude those in remainder. (yW.uahon 5 HIS
tory Of Maryland, p. $50
What were the precise limitations, oil
those Conveyasces made by the propr,eiofs
of Maryland under Thca Frederick lord
Baltimore denies the power OF hs predeces-
sor TO enter into any arrangement as TO the
boundaries, which could extend beyond IN.
life estate, am unable to say-my utmost
researches having failed to furnish me with
acopy ofthem, but they were so far satistacto.
~ to his lordship's legal conceptions as &c
enduce him to resist even the executionoi .
decree pronounced by lord Hardwcke, il
1850. q Pts sen 4446) upon written
compact as to boundaries, which had beer
executed by his predecessor and the Penns
in 1892. TO enforce submission to that de
cree, the Prnns flied bill Of rcvivor in 1884
and after an Intellectual struggle Of SIX yeai'
lord Baltimore was compelled with bat
grace TO submit, and abide by the grange
n.ent as TO the boundaries which had been
made by his predecessor. 10 this cIrcuIn
stance, in all probability, was lord Fairlal
Indebted for hIs exemption from the furthu'
demands Of The proprietor OF Maryland
For lord Frederick no WAYS averse to lttiga
ton, had by this lime doubtless become sa
tistied that The po,ccr of his predecessor die
extend beyond his life estate, and might ever
conclude those IN remainder. Be that as il may
however, certain it is that the records o
MARY land silent upon the subject of ihi,
DreteuslOn from Septtmher II "a until fer