The Kansas herald of freedom., 1856-02-09
CuAPTEE III.

The royaldecree by which the division
line between New Hampshire and New
York was established, was regarded very
differently by the different parties CON
cerned. The settlers on the New Hamp-
shire grants considered shat it only plac-
ed them hereotter unLer the jurisdiction
of New York, and to this they were
willing to submit; but they had no idea
that their titles to their lands, or that any
past transactions, could be at sced by it.
Had the government of New York given
the royal decision the same lnterpreta-
ton, dno controversy would ever have
arisen. The settlers would have ac-
knowledyed its jurisdiction and submit
ted TO It's authority without murmur.
But that government gave the decisio a
very different construction. Il contend
ed that the order had a retrospe fi0e ope-
ration, and decided not only what should
thereafter be, but what had always been,
the eastern limit OF New York, and con-
'equently, that the grants made by New
Hampshire were illegal aud void.
With these views, the government OF
New York proceeded to extend its juris-
diction over the New Hampshire grants.
The settlers were called upon to surrender
their charters, and re- purchase theirl lands
under grants from New York. Some OF
them complied with this order. but most
of them peremptorily refused. The
lands of those who did not comply were
therefore granted to others, in whose
names actions of ejectment were com
mcnced in the courts at Albany, and
| judgments invariably OBJ aimed against
the settlers and original propretors.
The settlers soon found that they had
n9ihing to hope from the customary forms
of law, and therefore determined upon
resistance to the unjust and arbitrary de-
cisions of the court. till his Maesty's
pleasure should be further known. Hav-
lug fairly pure a$ed their lands of one
royal governor, they were determined
not willingly to submit and re-purchase
them, at an exorbitant price, of another;
and when the executive officers of New
York came to eject the inhabitants from
their possessions, they met with avowed
opposition, and were not suffered to pro-
ceed in the execution of their business.
For the purpose OF rendering their re-
sistance more effeciual, various asSocia.
tions were formed among the settlers
and, at length, convention OF repre-
seuta;ives from the several towns on the
west side OF the mountains was called
This convention met in the fall of 1766,
and, after mature deltbera.ion, appointed
SAMUEL RoBISsoN, of Bennington, al
aren't to represent, to the Court OF Greal
B ain, the grievances OF The settlers.
and to obtain, ii possible, confirmation
of the New Hampshire grants. The &C
tons OF ejectment We're, however, still
roing on in the courts al Albany, but nc
attention was paid to them by the set
tiers, nor was any defence made; ba'
1.-The settlers were very careful that none
Iof the decisions of the curt should be
carried into execution.
On the Sd of July, i76S, the colonia
assembly OF New York had passed an &C
lerecting portion OF the territory cover
led by the New Hampshire grants into
tnew county, by the name of Gamber
Hand, and making provisions for building
therein court house and jaA. to be loca
tied at Chester; but in consequence Q
the representations made by Mr. Robin
SON at The Brush Court, his Majesty il
Icouncil, was pleased. ON the 26th ofJune
Il767, to issue an order annullins TIM
act OF the provincial legislature and ol