Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1912-11-22
Montpelier, Nov. 20.

Montpelier, Nov. 20
The following joint resolution was
offered by Senator Babbitt of Windham
in the Senate this morning. providing
that proceedings be Instituted in the
supreme court of the United States to
determine the boundary line between
Vermont and New Hampshire. This
question rises over certain mills and
canals in Bellows Falls as to whether
they are in Vermont or New Hampshire.
The town of Walpole in New Hamp-
shire claims they are in New Hamp-
shire and insists on taxing them. The
claim maintained by New Hampshire Is
that the low water mark on the New
Hampshire side is the boundary line
instead of the centre of the river. 1t
is also claimed that the original grants
sets the boundary mark at the point
where vegetation ceases to grow on the
west bank. This is an important matter
for the boundary line extends from the
Massachusetts line to Canada. The mills
at Bellows Falls have been built out
into the stream a little and the state OF
New Hampshire claims they are in New
Hampshire. 1t is quite an important
thing because New Hampshire is taxed
on all its water powers. The new dam
recently built at Vernon has caused the
water in the river to be set back and
make a new water line along the river.
The Resolution.
Whereas. the controversy existing be-
tween this state and the state of New
Hampshire as to the location of the
boundary between the two states, the
state of Vermont claims that the
boundary was fixed by Congress when
Vermont was admitted to the union in
1871 at the eastern boundary of the
original grants of land on the territory
called the New Hampshire Grants and
the western boundary of the original
grants in the Province of New Hamp-
shire, the same being the thread of the
stream of the Connecticut river, and
Whereas, the officials acting under and
by the authority of the laws of the
state of New Hampshire have re-
Gently asserted and now are asserting
a claimed right to levy and collect taxes
on lands and property situated on the
west of the Connecticut river and are
now threatening to enforce such levy
of taxes upon property by force of legal
proceedings under the authority of the
state of New Hampshire to the great
damage and loss to the citizens of this
state, and in defiance of the justifica-
ton of this state now exercised ana
Whereas, the government of this state
mas heretofore from time to time at
tempted to negotiate with the state of
New Hampshire for the determination
and location of the true boundary line
between the two states but which at
tempts have been futile because the
state of New Hampshire has refused to
so do, now
Therefore, in order that the contro-
Versy may be for all time settled ana
the true boundary line between this
state and the state of New Hampshire
as fixed by Congress be determined, the
Attorney General of the state of VerS
mont is hereby authorized and directed
TO institute and prosecute such actions
and proceedings in the supreme court
OF the United States in the name of
this state against the state of New
Hampshire as may be necessary for
the settlement of demarkation of such
boundary.
This resolution was adopted on the
part of the Senate.