THAT your Memorialists have been informed, that his Excellency Sir CHARLES HARDY, Knight, has lately laid before this Honourable House, an additional In­struction from his Majesty, requiring him to apply to this Honourable House, for a Provision on the Part of this Colony, to defray One-half of the Expence that may accrue upon a Settlement of a Line of Partition, between this Colony and New-Jersey, by Commissioners to be hereafter appointed by his Majesty for that Purpose.

That your Memorialists have also been informed, that in Consequence thereof, a Proposal has been made in this Honourable House, to subject your Memorialists, and the other Persons interested in the said Patents of Minisink and Wawayanda, and the other Patents ranging with them in this Colony, (a Part whereof only falls within the exorbitant Claim of the Pro­prietors of East New-Jersey,) to One-half, or some other considerable Proportion of the Sum to be provided on the Part of this Colony, for defraying such Expence as aforesaid: Which Proposal, should it take Effect, would, as your Memorialists conceive, and hope they will be able to evince to this Honourable House, be a Burden too heavy and unequal, considering the proportionably small Interests of your Memorialists, and those whom your Memorialists represent in this Matter, to be imposed on them.

In order whereto, your Memorialists beg Leave to elucidate the following Points, viz▪

1 st. That the Claim of this Colony in Behalf of the Crown, and the Right of the private Owners of the abovementioned Patents, which only in Part interfere with the New-Jersey Claim, are intirel [...] distinct in their Natures; and that the former, extending a great many Miles more Southerly upon the Pretensions of New-Jersey than the latter, the Crown is prin­cipally, nay, almost wholly, interested in the Determination and Event of the Controversy.

2 dly. That the Persons, holding Lands under the Government of this Colony, in V [...]rtu [...] of the abovementioned Patents, did obtain their Titles to the same, in a Dependance on certain public Acts of Government and Legislature; and therefore ought to be supported in their Rights by the Legislature of this Colony.

3 dly. That the interest of his Majesty, and the general Interest of this Colony, are greatly concerned in the Event of the Controversy: And, therefore, that the Expences on our Part, ought to be defrayed by the Colony, and not by any particular Number of its Inhabitants.

4 thly. That the true Interest of his Majesty, and of the Inhabitants of this Colony in general, requires, that the respective Jurisdictions of the two Colonies be ascertained; and as a Deter­mination of that Point (which ought doubtless to be at the public Expence) will naturally in­duce a Settlement, with Relation to private Property, it would be a Hardship to tax any par­ticular Persons, (however consequentially interested in such Determination) for paying the Charges, on the Part of this Colony, to accrue thereon.

5 thly. If the Line should finally be settled in Favour of this Colony, the private Owners of the abovementioned Patents would gain nothing thereby; and if the Settlements should turn in Favour of the New-Jersey Claim, would necessarily be considerable Losers. For which Reason also, your Memorialists humbly conceive, they ought not to be taxed towards such Settlement.

[Page 4]6 thly. That the Patentees of Minisink and Wawayanda, by Reason of the Encroachments of New-Jersey, have already been put to very great Expence; and are, by that [...] to bear so great a Charge, as the subjecting them to One-half, or any other considerable Part of the Provision to be made on the Part of this Colony, towards defraying the Charges that may accrue on the final Settlement of the said Partition Line, would necessarily create.

7 thly. That by Reason of the complicated Situation of the Rights in the Patents of Minisink and Wawayanda, (which are the Patents chiefly concerned in the Controversy) it would be impossible for this Honourable House, equitably to adjust the respective Quota of the Person [...] interested in them, for defraying such Expence as aforesaid.

8 thly. That it would be impracticable to raise a Sum sufficient for the Purpose, by Sale of unappropriated Lands in Minisink and Wawayanda: There being no considerable Quantity in either of the said Patents, that remains unlocated at this Day, and clear of Controversy.

9 thly. That the said two Patents are largely encroach'd on by the Owners of other circum­jacent Patents within this Colony: And as the former have originally purchased of the Na­tive Indians to their utmost Bounds, and at great Expence; they must either lose all the Lands so encroach'd on, or recover them at Law: In which Method they must unavoidably expend very large Sums of Money; and therefore, are unable to contribute to the final Settlement of the Line.

And, in Support of the first Point, your Memorialists beg Leave to relate to this Honour­able House,

1 st. That his late Majesty King Charles the II. by his Letters Patent, bearing Date the 12th of March, 1663-4, did (among other Tracts of Land mentioned in the said Letters Patent; Hacklai [...]'s Voyages, 3 ^d Vol. printed in 1000, from page 4, to page 11, and pages 172, 173. Salmon's Mod. Hist. vol. 30. p. 392, &c. and in Right of his Sovereignty, Seignority and Property of and in the same, gained by the Discovery thereof by Sebasti [...]n Cab [...]t, in 1497, who was their in the Service of the English Crown) gra [...] unto his Brother James, Duke of York, after­wards King James the IId. all that Part of the Main Land, &c. Together with Hudson 's River, and all the Lands from the West-Side of Connecticut River, to the East-Side of Delaware Bay.

2 dly. That at the Time of granting the said Letters Patent, the Dutch were in Possession of all the Lands described in the said recited Boundaries; to wit, The Lands on the West-Side of Connecticut River, and from thence Southwardly to the East-Side of Delaware Bay, together with Hudson 's River, as far up as it is at this Day known by that Name. Of which they had so possess'd themselves (soon after the Discovery of Hudson's River, in 1610, by Henry Hudson, J. De La [...]t's Hist. p. 100.101. Og [...]ib [...]'s America, p. 168. V [...]derd [...]k ▪s Hist. p. 3. Gov. St [...]vesandt's Letter to Nicholls, &c. in Secre­tary's-Office. Another Letter from Gov. St [...]ve [...]sandt, in An­swer to one from Boston. Dutch Book of Voyages last, page 34. printed to 1651. then in the Service of the Dutch,) as some say, by Permission of the Crown of England, tho' according to the Dutch Writers, they claimed the Country by Preoccupancy. And as an Evidence of the Extent of such their Possession, they, in the Year 1614, built Fort-Orang [...] at Albany, claiming the whole River, and Country bordering on it, in the Name of the States General▪ and soon after they built another Fort, which they called Fort Good-Hope, at the Place now called Hartford, on the West Banks of Connecticut River, about 50 Miles from its Mouth: At the same Time extend­ing their Claim to all the Country between the two Rivers, and as far South as Delaware Bay; at the Head of which they built ano­ther Fort, and named it Fort Cas [...]ir. Which three Forts were doubtless erected, as Testimonials of the Extent of their Right by actual Possession.

3 dly. That the very Lands actually possess'd by the Dutch, and no other, were intended by the Crown to pass by the Words of the Boundaries above described, will not only appear from the exact Parity between them, which is evident in the minutest Circumstances, even upon the most severe Inquiry, but is also further supported by the Arrival of Sir Robert Carr, within a few Months after the Date of the said Lett [...]rs Patent, who dispossess'd the Dutch, by Order of King Charles II. and enabled the Duke of York to begin the Settlement and Improvement of those his Territories, granted to him by the Words above recited.

4 thly. That therefore it appears, that the Crown never intended to grant to the Duke of York, any Lands along Delaware, higher than the Head of Delaware Bay; if any Dependance can be placed on the abovementioned Train of Facts, which are prior, in Point of Time, to the Duke's Grant; and upon which, that Grant, or at least as much of it as is above describ­ed, seems clearly and indisputably to be founded.

Having ranged in some sort of Order, a few striking Facts, to shew the real Intent of the Crown, in the very Instant of granting the said Letters Patent; your Memorialists beg Leave to evince that Intent from the Words of the Grant itself; and upon such a Construction of [Page 5] those Words, as will be warranted, not only by Reason, but also, as your Memorialists are informed, by the clearest Rules of law: And in order thereto, your Memorialists beg Leave again to observe, that Part of the Boundaries of the Duke of York's Patent, as far as relates to the Colonies of New-York and New-Jersey; or in other Words, to the Possessions of the Dutch at, and before the Date of that Patent, is conceived in these Words, viz. Together with the said River called Hudson's River, and all the Lands from the West-Side of Connecticut River, to the East Side of Delaware Bay.

Upon which your Memorialists beg Leave to observe, That Reason will dictate one or other of the two following Constructions on those Words, viz.

1 st. As Delaware Bay, undoubtedly, has a more Southern Commencement at the Ocean, and a less Northern Extent into the Continent than Connecticut River, the Words from the West Side of Connecticut River, to the East Side of Delaware Bay, will, in their rational Con­struction, pa [...] the Lands contained between Delaware Bay, the Ocean, Connecticut River, and a Line drawn from the Head of the latter, to the Head of Delaware Bay, together with the whole Extent of Hudson's River beyond that Line: Or,

2 dly. They will pass (what is still more liberal to the Grantee) the Lands contained within the following Boundaries, viz. Delaware Bay, the Ocean, the whole West Side of Connecticut River, a Line from the Head of that River, to the Head of Hudson's River, a Line thence along the West-Side of Hudson's River▪ till it intersect the aforesaid Line from the Head of Delaware Bay, to the Head of Connecticut River, and from thence such Part of the [...] Line, as would extend from the Point of such Intersection, to the Head of Delaware Bay; which last Construction will depend upon Hudson's River being mentioned in the Description. Your Memorialists say, that they humbly conceive, one or other of those Construction [...] Reason will naturally dictate; but that it would be highly irrational to give the Boundaries any Ex­tent along Delaware River, because Reason, and the proper Use of Terms, will never permit the Word Bay to be construed River, (which are Things as different in their Geographical Meaning, as Bay and Ocean;) and that the more especially, when there is no Necessity of such a Construction to give Sense to the Grant; a great Quantity of Land being evidently included within those Boundaries, upon either of the above Constructions.

Having thus considered what Reason would dictate in Construction of the abovementioned Boundaries, your Memorialists beg Leave to observe what Aspect the Law will have on them: In order the more clearly to do which, permit your Memorialists to mention what your Me­morialists are inform'd, are some of the known Rules of Law for the Construction of Crown-Grants, and which are as follows, viz.

1 st. The King's Grant shall not enure to any other Intent, than is express'd in the Grant; that is, it shall not enure to any implied Intent, tho' it may to several Intents, if they be all expressed.

2 dly. The Words of a Grant (even in the Case of a Subject, and the rather in that of the Crown) shall be construed according to a reasonable and easy Sense; and not strained to Things unlikely and unusual.

3 dly. Where the Words are so doubtful, as to admit of several Intents, that Intent shall govern which is most in Favour of the Crown.

To apply these Rules to the Words Delaware Bay, in the present Case, it seems clear, that the express Inten [...] of the Word Bay, is Bay; and therefore, even were it possible to put the im­plied Intent, or Meaning of River upon the Word Bay, yet the Words Delaware Bay, must mean Delaware Bay, and not Delaware Bay and River.

So also by the second Rule, if the natural and easy Sense of the Word Bay is Bay, then De­laware Bay can never mean Delaware Bay and River.

In like Manner, if it should even be thought doubtful [...]hether Delaware Bay in the Patent, means only Delaware Bay, or both the Bay and River; yet by the third Rule, the former Construction will doubtless govern, because it is most advantageous for the Crown.

And therefore▪ your Memorialists humbly conceive, that the most liberal Construction in Favour of New-Jersey, will give no other Sense to the Words Delaware Bay, than what is com­monly and naturally meant by the Terms. As to the other Boundaries, and their Relation to Delaware Bay, your Memorialists do conceive, that in Favour of the Crown, the Law, by the 1st Rule abovementioned, will absolutely reject such a Construction as will pass all the Land between Connecticut River and Hudson's River; because a Line from the Head of Connecticut River to the Head of Delaware Bay, would exclude a great Part of those Lands; and because also the Words are, all the Lands FROM the West Side of Connecticut River, TO the East Side of Delaware Bay; that is, all the Lands that lie in a Course or Direction between both, and con­sequently those Lands that are excluded by a Line, from the Head of Connecticut River to the Head of Delaware Bay; or in other Words, that do not lie, in a Direction between the said River and Bay, are without the Duke's Patent. But even were this Matter doubtful, the [Page 6] latter Construction must, by the 3d Rule abovementioned, clearly govern, because it will pass a less Quantity of Land than the other, and therefore be most in Favour of the Crown. However, as either of those Constructions will include the Latitude of 41° on Hudson's River, it is not of much Moment to the Subject of this Memorial, if either of them be admitted.

Your Memorialists do therefore humbly conceive, that altho' the said Duke of York, after obtaining the said Letters Patent, did, by Lease and Release, dated the 23d and 24th of June, 1664, grant unto JOHN Lord BERKLEY, and Sir GEORGE CARTARE [...], all that Tract now called New-Jersey, and did in Part describe it as follows, viz. ‘ And extending Southward to the Main-Ocean, as far as Cape-May, at the Mouth of Delaware, and to the Northward, as far a [...] the Northwardmost Branch of the said Bay, or River, which is in 41°, 40′, Lat. and [...] thence in a str [...]ight Line to the Lat. of 41°, on Hudson's River:’ Yet, as the Duke of York himself, was bounded at the Head of Delaware Bay, his Grantees cannot, as your Me­morialists conceive, take by the said Lease, and Release, any higher on Delaware than the Head o [...] Delaware Bay, (unless the River has such a Course from thence, as to coincide with, or be included within a streight Line, from the Head of Delaware Bay, to the Lat. of 41° on Hud­son's River: For, Nemo plus juris in alium transferre potest, quam ipse [...]abet; A Man cannot grant that which he hath not, nor more than he hath.

From what your Memorialists have already related to this Honourable House, it is hop'd, that not only the Facts abovementioned, upon which the Grant to the Duke of York is appa­rently founded, but also▪ the plain Dictates of Reason, and the known Rules of Law, (upon Construction of the very Words of the Grant) do conspire to limit its Extent on Delaware, to the Head of Delaware Bay; and consequently, the ne plus ultra of New-Jersey, to a Line from the Head of Delaware Bay, to the Latitude of 41°, on Hudson's River. But as a further Proof of such Const [...]ction, your Memorialists beg Leave to observe, That, considering the Antiquity of that Grant to the Duke of York, it ought reasonably to be supposed, that its true Intent and Meaning, as far as concerns its Boundaries, were better understood at, or shortly after the Time of its Date, than at this Day; and accordingly, the Government of this Colony, so soon after the Date of the said Letters Patent, as in the Year 1683, did construe their Extension up Delaware, as for only, as the Head of Delaware BAY. The Evidence of this Matter is con­tained in the ancient Minutes of the Council of this Colony, and bears Date the 16th February 1683, whereby it appears, that at a Council then held at Fort JAMES, at which were present, not only the Governor, Mr. Flypse [...], Capt. A. Br [...]ch [...]ss, Mr. Stephen Courtlandt, and J. Spragg, but also Capt. Matthias Nicolls, Capt. J. Palmer, and Mr. James Graham, Recorder, who attended upon special Request, ‘The Patent of his Majesty King CHARLES II. &c. (mean­ing the said Letters Patent) to his Royal Highness JAMES Duke of York, &c. was read; and also his Royal Highness his Letters Patent to the Proprietors of East NEW-JERSEY, (meaning the said Lease and Release to BERKLEY and CARTARET,) were read, and Mr. GRAHAM said, that the Clause, [whole in the Premises] was to be understood whole in the Tract of Land;’ and the other Clause, [as far as in him lieth] ‘made a Doubt whether the Duke had Authority so far:’ Which Construction of Mr. Recorder, together with the Gover­nor's Opinion, viz. ‘That the Council, Mayor, and Aldermen, should draw up an Address to his Royal Highness, to shew the Inconveniency of suffering East New-Jersey to come up the River,’ plainly intimate, 1 st. That they had the Boundaries between the two Colo­nies, then under Consideration. 2 d. That they took the most rational Means to arrive at the Truth; to wit, by considering the Grants under which the Proprietors of East New-Jersey did Claim, and giving them their proper Construction. 3 d. That upon a Perusal of those Grants, it appeared that the Claim of the then Proprietors, could not be supported by those Grants; or in other Words, that [...]ey could have no Right to extend their Boundaries up Delaware River, because it was doubtfu [...] whether the Duke himself had Authority so far. Which Consideration, your Memorialists conceive, could, indeed, even [...] that Day, admit of no Doubt; altho' the Question was between Subject and Subject, viz. The Duke of Yo [...]k, and those to whom he had granted: For that the Law even in such a Case, will not, by the second Rule abovementioned, allow a Construction to be put upon any Words in a Grant, even in a Case between Subject and Subject, contrary to their reasonable and easy Sense. And altho' wherever the Meaning of a Term in a Grant from one Subject to another, i [...] doubtful, the Law will interpret it most strongly in Favour of the Grant [...]; yet if what is absolutely certain in the Duke of York's Patent, respecting Delaware Bay, was indeed doubtful, as in that Case the Doubt would be concerning a Crown Grant, under which both Parties claim, no Construction could be given in Favour of one or the other Party, but such as would be con­sistent with the Interest of the Crown.

And thus your Memorialists Construction of the Words Delaware Bay, in the Duke of York's Patent, appears to be founded upon a firm Connection of preceding Facts, the united Voices of Reason and Law upon the Words of the Patent, and the Suffrages of Men of high [Page 7] Character in Life, who all lived at the Time of the Grant, and put the same Construction upon it as your Memorialists do; and who, considering the Time of such their Construction, may be supposed, to have better understood what was really intended to pass by the Grant, than any Set of Men in the present Day. Add to this, that such [...] Construction can be no Hardship on the Proprietors of New-Jersey, seeing, that upon [...] o [...] the best Maps, it evidently appea [...]s, that a Line from the Head of Delaware Bay, to the Latitude of 41° on Hudson's River, will give them a prodigious Tract of Land; for which the Duke of York did formerly, and the Crown does now, receive the trifling Quit-Rent of twenty Marks, or some­thing near that Sum. Upon the whole, therefore, of what your Memorialists have above related, tho' the Duke has extended his Grant to the Proprietors of New-Jersey, as far as the Norther­most Bran [...]h of Delaware Bay or River, which is in 41°, 40′ Latitude; yet they can extend their Boundaries no higher than Delaware Bay, and from thence cross over in a streight Line to the Latitude of 41°, on Hudson's River. It is true indeed, that in the Year 1674, the Duke obtained a new Grant, Douglass's Summary▪ vol. 2d. p. 223▪ 224. upon the Surrender of the Country to the Crown by the Dutch, who had conquer'd it in the then late [...] War. See also Record in Se­cretary's Office. But as that Grant was in tatidem verbis, as was the first, it could only operate with equal ex­tent: And therefore, the Boundaries of New-Jersey, must be such as are above related, notwithstanding any After-grant from the Duke of York, that may be insisted on by the Proprietors of New-Jersey.

But if, notwithstanding the above related, so evident a Right in the Crown to confine the Boundaries of New-Jersey, on Delaware, to the Head of Delaware BAY, it should still be sup­posed, that the Duke had a Right to extend his Grant to the Proprietors of New-Jersey up Delaware RIVER; thus much however is undoubtedly certain, that they cannot go beyond the Words of their Grant; which, as your Memorialists [...]ope they shall be able to shew, con­fines itself to the FORKS of Delaware. In order whereto, your Memorialists beg Leave to premise;

1 st. That as they are to go UP Delaware RIVER, AS FAR AS the Northermost Branch, &c. they are to go to some Part or other of that, which is the Northermost Branch.

2 dly. That the Proprietors of East New-Jersey insist, and your Memorialists may suppose, that the East, and not the West Branch, is the Northerm [...]st Branch of Delaware RIVER.

3 dly. That the East Branch commences at the FORKS of Delaware.

Which several Facts your Memorialists beg Leave to take for granted for the present, because they never have been, and doubtless never will be, disputed, by those concerned on the Part of New-Jersey, seeing, that they are the only Matters upon which they claim a Right to extend their Boundaries to the Latitude of 41°, 40′, at [...].

The only Question therefore, as your Memorialists conceive, that remains to be resolved is, on what Part of the East Branch of Delaware, the Station on Delaware shall be fixed? Whether at the Forks, or in other Words, at the Mouth of the East Branch, or at the Latitude of 41°, 40′ upon that Branch; [...] at the Place of its utmost Extent? For, if the Words which is in the La­titude of 41°, 40′. are limiting and not designatory Terms; that is, if they are designed to limit the Extent of the Boundary on Delaware, and not to designate the particular Branch of Delaware, some Part of which is the proper Boundary; then the Boundary cannot stop at the Beginning of the East Branch, nor be carried to the utmost Extent of it, but must be limited to that Latitude on the Branch; and if the Latitude is not a [...] Term, or the Terminus ad quem, then (it being supposed, that the East Branch is the Northermost Branch) the Lati­tude is quite out of the Question, and the Terminus ad quem. must be either the Mouth, or the ut [...]st Extent of the East Branch.

But your Memorialists clearly conceive, that the Latitude of 41°, 40′, is only d [...]scriptio [...] of the Branch, as i [...] obvious from the Relative, which, the Antecedent whereof, is the Norther­most Branch; and therefore, the plain Meaning of the Words is, as far as the Northermost Branch thereof, which Northermost Branch is (or lies) in the Latitude of 41°, 40′: And the Rea­son that induces your Memorialists to give the Terms this Construction, is not only, that it is the natural Sense which arises from the Ordo verborum, or the Arrangement of the Words themselves; but also, because there are no other Words than the Northermost Branch, whereto the Word which can possibly relate. For Example, it cannot mean which Bay, or which Ri­ver, because neither the one nor the other lies in that Latitude▪ besides, in such Case, the Words as far as the Northermost Branch, would be senseless, for the Branch is beyond the Bay and River: and therefore in that Sense, would be beyond the Latitude. Neither do your Me­morialists conceive that the Words which is, can be rejected, because your Memorialists are informed, that if any Sense can be put upon those Words, which it is plain there can, the Law will not allow of their being rejected: Besides, if the Intent of the Grantor had been, to give the Latitude as a Limit, he would naturally have expressed himself thus " and to the [Page 8] Northward up the said Bay or River, and the Northermost Branch thereof as far as to the Latitude of 41°, 40′, or, upon the Northermost Branch of the said River, as far as the Latitude of 41°, 40′, or, as far up the Northermost Branch thereof as to &c. Further, if the Latitude be supposed to be limitive, your Memoriali [...] do conceive, that as the Words are, as far as the Northermost Branch of the said Bay or River; they must also be supposed to imply, either, that the Mouth, or the utmost Extent, and not any intermediate Part of the North Branch, was conceived to lie in that Latitude; the first of which, as your Memorialists are informed, is consistent with the Geography of that Day▪ For if the Latitude be supposed to be at any Distance above the Mouth of the Branch, and below the utmost Extent of it, and yet not descriptive but limitive, the Words import this Absurdity, viz. That as far as the northermost Branch of the said Bay or River, to the Latitude of 41°, 40′, (which would then be their natural Construction) mean up the Branch, and to the Latitude, which they cannot clearly, by the most chimical Distor­tions, be made to intend: Because the Words as far as, relate to the Branch, and not to the Latitude; and if the Latitude is a limiting Term, then to the Latitude is necessarily implied, therefore the Construction must be as far as the Branch, and to the Latitude, which is impossible, because, that to proceed to the Mouth of the Branch only, and not to the Latitude, would not satisfy the Terms; and yet, to proceed up the Branch, and only to the Latitude, would also be inconsistent with them, seeing that the Words as far as, must in like Manner be satisfied; which could not be done, if the Boundaries were carried one Inch above the Mouth, but by carrying them to the utmost Extent of the Branch; in which Case they would exceed the Latitude, and therefore contradict the Terms. And thus your Memorialists conceive it is evident, that the Latitude cannot be limitive, even by straining the Words to their utmost Extent; which Method, if indeed it could work the Effect, would be contrary to the second abovementioned Rule in Law, which directs, That Words in a Grant shall be construed according to a reasonable and easy Sense, and not strained to Things unlikely and unusual. From all which, your Memori­alists conclude, that the Words which is in the Lat. of 41°, 40′, are descriptive, and not limi­tive.

As therefore the Latitude is not limitive, but only descriptive, and as the East Branch is for the present, supposed to be the Northermost Branch, your Memorialists conceive, for Clearness and Perspicuity Sake, the Latitude may for a While be rejected, and then the Words will be, And to the Northward as far as the Northermost Branch of the said Bay or River. Upo [...] which Words the Question, in Consequence of the Terms as far as, will be as your Memorialists above observed, whether the Terminus ad quem, that is, the terminating Station or Point of the Boundaries of New-Jersey on Delaware, shall be construed to be at the Mouth of the East Branch; or in other Words, at the FORKS; or whether it shall be deemed to be at the utmost Extent of that Branch.

The proper Answer to this Question, your Memorialists conceive to be clearly this, That the FORKS of Delaware, or MOUTH of the East Branch, is in such Case the ne plus ultra, or utmost Extent of the Boundaries of New-Jersey, on Delaware; and that for the following Reasons.

1 st. The Words, as far as, are comparative Terms, used generally either in describing simple comparative Distances; as for Example, How far is it from Rome to Paris? Answer. As far as it is from Paris to London: Or they are used in describing comparative Distances in Progres­sion; as, How far are you travelling? Ans. As far as Boston: In which latter Sense, the Tra­veller not only compares the Length of his Journey to the Distance between the two Places, but also does it progressively, by saying, I am travelling as far as Boston: And thus the Word [...] as far as, in the Grant to BERKLEY and CARTARET, are used. And therefore, they necessarily suppose two Stations, viz. The Locus a quo, or the Place where the Progression be­gins, and the Locus ad quem, or Place where the Progression ends.

But the Words as far as, not only suppose two Stations, they also require both a Subject and an Object of Comparison; which Object is either at a Distance from the Locus a quo, or begins the Progression at that Place, in Conjunction with the Subject of Comparison: If the former is the Case, then the Words as far as, mean, as far as to, and suppose the Progression to end at the Object of Comparison; if the latter, then the Words as far as, intend, as far as the Ob [...]ect of Comparison goes; and therefore the Progression ceases with, and not before the Course of the Object of the Comparison ends; that is, the Subject of Comparison, goes as far a [...] does the Object of Comparison. This Reasoning is, as your Memorialists conceive, agree­able to sound Grammar, and the proper Use and Sense of Words. And to apply it to the present Case, the Ocean as far as Cape-May▪ at the Mouth of Delaware Bay or River, is the Locus [...] quo, from whence the Boundaries are extended Northward AS FAR AS the Norther­m [...]t Branch of the said Bay or River; the Beginning of which Northermost Branch, being the Object of Comparison, is at a Distance from the Locus a quo, or the Ocean at Cape-May; and therefore the Boundary, which is the Subject of Comparison, cannot have its Progression [Page 9] Northward with the Northermost Branch, nor go as far as that Branch extends, but only to the Branch; or, in other Words, to the Beginning of the Branch. Indeed, there is an Excep­tion to this Rule; which is, that, notwithstanding the Object of Comparison be at a Distance from the Locus a quo, if there were explanatory Words, to shew that the Intent is as far as the Object of Comparison goes, then the Boundary or Subject of Comparison would extend the same Length. As for Example, if the Words had been as far as the Northermost Branch to Chas [...]icktonk, then the Boundary, notwithstanding the Impropriety of the Expression, would extend beyond the Beginning of that Branch, as far as to Chas [...]icktonk, because the Words are express, and could not be satisfied by any other Construction: Or (rather to use an Example taken from the Boundaries themselves) the Southern Extent of New-Jersey, is there declared to be to the Ocean as far as Cape-May, at the Mouth of Delaware-Bay; in which Case, the Words to the Ocean, and the Words at the Mouth of Delaware-Bay, would explain in what Sense the Words as far as Cape-May ought to be understood, did not the Word Cape alone explain the Matter, which means the very extreme Point of a Promontory, or Body of high Land, stretching itself into the Sea; and therefore, that Point having no Extent, the Progres­sion can only be to it, and not along with it. Therefore, instead of the Cape, supposing (in or­der to make the Example more applicable) the Word Promontory had been inserted, th [...]n the Words would have been, to the Ocean, as far as the Promontory at the Mouth of Delaware-Bay. In this Case, the Terms of the Boundary could not be complied with, but by an Extension to the extreme Point of the Promontory; any Thing short of that not being sufficient to satisfy the Words, to the Ocean at the Mouth of Delaware-Bay. But were those latter Words omitted, as in that Case it would be, and to the Southward as far as the Promontory; the Southern Extent must necessarily be limited to the Place where the Promontory unites with the Main-Body of the Continent; and so with Respect to the Northern Extension, it must be limitted to the Beg [...]nning of the Northermost Branch. This Matter your Memorialists conceive, will be ren­dered still more evident, by reversing the Courses; that is, if instead of the Words extending Southwardly to the Ocean, &c. and to the Northward, as far as the Northermost Branch, &c. it had been extending Northerly from the Ocean, &c. and Southerly, from the Northermost Branch, &c. Your Memorialists observe, that in such Case, unless that were express'd, which there is no Evidence to prove, is implied in the Words as far as, viz. from the utmost Extent of the Northerly Branch; the Words as far as, in such Reversion of the Courses, being turned into [...] would evidently mean, from the Mouth or Beginning of the Branch; and yet it is cer­ [...]ain, that in such Reversion, the Words as far as the Northermost Branch, could not be tur­ned into any other Phrase or Mode of Expression, than from the Northermost Branch, without adding something, which is far from being implied in the Terms as far as, viz. the utmost Extent of such Branch.

And thus, your Memorialists conceive it appears clearly, that the Words as far as, &c. in their plain, natural, easy, common and grammatical Sense, do mean, as far as TO the Northermost Branch, that is, to the Mouth or Beginning of that Branch, and therefore cannot be construed to intend the utmost Extent of that Branch: Such Construction being undeniably strained, and con­trary to the 2d Rule of Law abovementioned. Nor indeed could such Construction as would carry the Boundary to the utmost Extent of the Branch, take Place, even were the Meaning of the Words doubtful; because, tho they are Part of a Grant from Subject to Subject, yet, as the Duke of York's Right, by his Letters Patent, is now vested in the Crown, your Memorialists conceive, that the same Rule should now take Place in the Construction of his Grant to BERKLEY and CARTARET, (the Dispute being at present between them and the Crown) a [...] if they had held immediately under the Crown; and therefore, that the Words, as far as, even were the Meaning doubtful, ought to be construed, as far as to the Mouth, or Beginning of the Northermost Branch; seeing that such Construction would be most in Favour of the Crown, which is now vested of this Colony.

Whence your Memorialists conceive, that the Reasons in Favour of such Construction may be reduced to the following syllogistic Form, in order to shew their Force in a more pointed Light, viz.

The Boundaries of the Grant to BERKELEY and CARTARET, on Delaware, are to extend to the Northward, as far as the Northermost Branch of Delaware Bay or River, which is in Lat. 41°, 40′.

But the East Branch is the Northermost Branch; therefore those Boundaries are to extend as far as the said East Branch, which is in Lat. 41°, 40′.

Again;

As those Boundaries are to extend as far as the East Branch, which is in Lat. 41°, 40′, they are to extend either to the Mouth of that Branch, or to the Lat. of 41°, 40, on that Branch, or to its utmost Extent.

But for the Reasons abovementioned, the Latitude is not limitive, or expressive of the Locus ad quem, but only designates the Branch; and the Words as far as, do not, for Reasons above alledged, intend as far as the Branch extends, but only mean, as far as to the Branch.

[Page 10]Therefore, the Words a [...] far a [...] the Northermost Bran [...]h, &c. must intend, a [...] far as to the M [...]uth or Beginning of the East Branch of Delaware.

And the Mouth of this Branch being, confessedly, at the Place now called the FORKS of Delaware, Your Memorialists do therefore necess [...]ly conclude, that the [...] of De [...]ware, [...] N [...] [...]US ULTR [...] of New-Jersey, e [...]en if the Duke of [...] Right did extend higher on Delaware, than the Head of Delaw [...]re Bay: The Contrary whereo [...], however, your Memorialists hope they have indisputably p [...]o [...]ed.

But in order the more fully to confirm the above Reasoning, your Memorialists humbly pray to be indulged by this Honourable House, in producin [...] [...] remarkable Fact, to which the Duke of York, and Sir GEORGE CARTARET, one of his Grantees, were Parties, and pe [...]y. Which Fact, as it occurred within a few Years after the Date of the sa [...] Lease and Release from his said Royal Highness to Lord BERKLEY, and Sir GEORGE CARTARET, your Memo­rialists hope, will be admitted to be good Evidence of the Intent of the abovementioned Par [...]es to the said Lease and Release, with Respect to the above Words, as far as, &c.

And the better to introduce this Fact, your Memorialists beg Lea [...]e to p [...]mise, that the Duke of York, having, on account of the above related Conquest of his Territories by the Dutch, for his own Safety, obtained the abovementioned second Letter [...] Pate [...] f [...]om his Bro­ther King CHARLES II. to whom those Territories were again surrendered by Treaty; Sir GEORGE CARTARET▪ (my Lord BERKLEY being then dead) took the same Preca [...]tion; and accordingly, your Memorialists further relate to this Honourable House, that the said Sir GEORGE CARTARET, did obtain of the said Duke of York, a sec [...]d Grant of EAST New-Jersey, in Severalty, by Lease and Release, bearing Date the 28th and 29th of July, 1674: (but about ten Years after the first Lease and Release) The B [...]aries of which said [...] Lease and Release, are as follow, viz. ‘ALL that Tract of Land adjacent to New-Englan [...], and lying and being to the Westward of Long-Island and [...]-Island, bounded on the East, Part by the Main-Sea, and Part by Huds [...]'s- River; and extends Southward as far as a certain Creek called [...], being about the Middle between [...] and Cape-May; and bounded on the West, in a streight Line from the said Creek called [...], to a certain Creek in Delaware River, next adjoining to, and below a certain Creek in Delaware River, called Ran [...]a [...]us [...]; and from then [...]e up the sa [...]d Delaware River, TO the Northermost Branch thereof, which is in the Latitude of 41°, 40′▪ and on the [...] crosseth thence in a streight Line to Hudson's River, in 41° of Latitude.’

For the Truth of this Fact, your Memorialists appeal to a Bill in Chancery, filed some few Years ago by the Proprietors of East New-Jersey, against the People of Elizabeth-Town.

Whereupon your Memorialists observe,

1 st. That tho' the Duke of York and CARTARET, were under no Necess [...]ty of obtaining new Grants, in order to revest them of their Lands (they being reve [...]ed J [...]re [...],) yet, both the said second Letters Patent to the Duke of York, and the said second Lease, and Re­lease to CARTARET, were evidently designed for that Purpose: For the Truth of which Ob­servation, your Memorialists also refer to the said Bill in Chancery▪ And therefore, your Memorialists conclude, that the Boundaries both of the first and second [...] of Grants, [...] as they extend with each other, were intended to be the same, and not diff [...]ent.

2 dly. That tho' CARTARET was, by the said second Lease and Release, [...]ested of [...]ast New-Jersey, in Severalty; and tho' also they were afterwards (as it is said) surrendered by CARTA­RET, yet, your Memorialists conceive, the Boundaries in the first Lease and Release in BERK­LEY and CARTARET, and the second Lease and Release to CARTARE [...] alone, to be inten­tionally the same, as far as relates to the Station on Delaware, between this Colony and New-Jersey: Whence your Memorialists do infer, that the Words, as far as the Northermost Branch of the said Bay or River, in the first Lease and Release, and the Words, to the Northermost Bran [...]h thereof, in the second Lease and Release, must mean the same Thing; and therefore, that▪ as to [...] Branch, cannot intend up to the Head of that Branch, not up to any Part of or Latitude on such Branch; but only up to the Mouth [...] Beginning of that Branch; there­fore, the Mouth or Beginning of that Branch, that is▪ of the East Branch, must be in [...]ended by the Words, as far as the No [...]hermost Branch, &c. in the first Lease and Release.

If, after all, it should be thought that the West, and not the East Branch, is the Nor [...]her­most Branch of Delaware: yet it is certain, that the above Reasoning will effectually limit the Ne plus ultra of New- [...]r [...]ey, at the Forks of Delaware, because the Mouth or Beginning of that Branch, as well as of the East Branch, is at that Place. Nor can it be insisted, that the Words, Northermost Branch, mean a Branch of a Branch, because the Locus ad quem, must, for the Reasons abovementioned, be at the Mouth, or Beginning of the East or West Branch, one or other o [...] of them plainly lying in the Latitude of 41°, 40′: And therefore, even if any Branch of a B [...]anch should lie in that Latitude, yet, the Locus ad quem, must be at the Forks of Delaware ▪

[Page 11] [...]

[...]

[...]

[...]

[...]

[...]

4 thly. That, therefore, were the Boundaries of New-Jersey, originally [...] no farthe [...] on Delaware, than the Head of Delaware Bay, o [...] the Forks of Delaware, (which has been already shewn) yet those who claim under the said Patents within this Colony, cannot extend their Claim beyond such Settlement in 1686.

5 thly. That tho' it did appear to the said Committee of this Honourable House, at what Place the Station on Hudson's River, was then fixed, viz. [...] West of the [...] Yo [...]ker 's [...] ▪ yet, with Regard to the Station on Delaware, it only appeared to them to have been, at that Time, fix'd at the Lat. of 41°, 40′, on the then esteemed Northermost Branch of Delaware; but that it did not appear to them which was such Branch, or where the said Latitude on such Branch was▪ Yet,

6 thly. That M [...]nis [...]k on Delaware, (a Place well known) and the Lands to the Northward thereof, had been held under this Colony, (by Letters Patents granted by the Government of this Colony) for near Seventy Years, being described in such Letters Patents, to be bounded Southwardly by New-Jersey. Wherefore, in order to shew that a Line between those Stations would cross at the lower End of Great M [...]nisink Island, in the said East Branch of De [...]aware, your Memorialists beg Leave to observe▪

7 thly. That the several Patents of [...], dated 24th March, 1686; [...] and [...], 29th June, 1697; Chee [...]e [...]ks, 25th March, 17 [...]7▪ Wawayanda, 20th April, 1703; and M [...]nisink, 28th August, 1704, do all lie in a Range from Hudson's River to Delaware; and are the most Southwardly Lands which the Crown has hitherto granted, as lying in this Colony, between the said two Rivers.

8 thly. That all those Patents are either expressly or implicativel [...], bounded Southwardly up­on what was then esteemed to be the Boundary between New-Jersey and th [...] C [...]l [...]ny; as by the said Patents, all of Record in the Secretary's Office of this Colony, may appear.

[Page 12]9 thly. That the said Patent of Minisink, is expressly bounded in its most Southern Extent on Delaware, by the South End of GREAT MINISINK Island aforesaid.

10 thly. That as no Settlement of the Stations between New-Jersey and this Colony, did ever intervene between the Settlement of 1686, and the Time of the Da [...]e of the latest of the abovementioned Patents; and as the most Southerly Boundary of the said Patent of Minisink on Delaware, is at the lower End of Great Minisink Island aforesaid; and also, as the said Patent, and all the other Patents ranging with it, are either expressly or implicatively bounded South­wardly on New-Jersey; therefore your Memorialists conceive, that both the Gover [...]ment of this Colony, and the several Patentees of those respective Patents, conceived, that wherever the Station on Delaware might have been fixed, yet a Line between the Station of [...]6 [...]6, would run from the lower End of Great Minisink Island, to the Latitude of 41′ on Hudson 's River, [...] West of the Lower Yonkers Mills: But your Memorialists proceed.

11 thly. To offer some Evidence, to shew where the Station on Delaware was fix'd in 1686. to wit, on a then supposed West Branch of Delaware, and at the Lat. of 4 [...]°, 40′, on such Branch. In order whereto, your Memorialists beg Leave to refer to two Maps, the first of which is Lewis Evans's Map of the Middle British Colonie [...] in America, published in 1799, a Map of great Weight in some Part of it, with the Proprietors of East New-Jersey: The La­bours of some of whom, have added greatly to the Composition. On the Face of which Map, your Memorialists beg Leave to observe,

1 st. That a Stream of Water is laid down on the said Map, and distinguish'd by the Name of the East Branch of Susquehanna.

2 dly. That the West Branch of Delaware, (of which perhaps the said Stream of Water i [...] a Part) nearly approaches that Stream in its Delineation on the said Map.

3 dly. That the said Stream, in its Course, trenches North-Easterly, so as very nearly to ap­proach the Extre [...]es of the East Branch of Delaware: Its nearest Approximation thereto, being opposite to the Bend of the Mohawk Branch, (a Branch of the East Branch of Delaware,) in the Lat. of 42°, 10′.

4 thly. That the said Stream (as it is delineated on the said Map,) divides itself exactly in the Latitude of 41°, 40′, into two considerable Branches.

5 thly. That a Line drawn from that Lat. and Place of the Insertion of those two Branches, into the said Stream, to the Latitude of 41° on Hudson's River, will cross the East Branch of Delaware, exactly at Minisink Island, which is also delineated in the said Map.

6 thly. That the Seat of the Delaware Indians, is laid down in the said Map, on the West Side of the said Stream of Water.

7 thly. That there is a Place on the said Stream, below the said Brant [...]ing in the said Map, called Ma [...]has [...]ng. The other Map (which is now in your Memorialists Hands, ready to be produced to this Honourable House) was printed at Amsterdam, and visibly bears the Marks of great Antiquity; but when it was made, your Memorialists do not know, it having no Date. Upon which Map, your Memorialists observe,

1 st. That what appears in the said Map to be the West Branch of Delaware, is extended Northward, with a considerable Easterly Bend or Curve, till it unites with the East Branch of Delaware, in the Lat. of 42°, 10′, and therefore, probably is the same Water that in Evan [...] his said Map is described, as Part of the East Branch of Susqu [...]hanna, in its nearest Approxi­mation to the Mohawks Branch in 42°, 10′.

2 dly. That on the said Dutch Map, that Stream, which is there described as the West Branch of Delaware, branches out into two Streams, (the Eastermost of which unites with the East Branch of Delaware, in Manner aforesaid,) which Branching is in the Lat. of 41°, [...]0′, and is extremely similar in its Form, to that which is laid down in the same Lat. in Ev [...] his Map, as a Branch of the East Branch of Susquehanna.

3 dly. Upon the said West Branch of Delaware, in the said Map, is laid down a Place called Me [...]tche [...]k, which is probably what is called M [...]tchasa [...]ing, on the said East Branch of Susqu [...] ­hanna, in Evans his Map. From which Parity in the two Maps, your Memorialists do con­clude, that what is laid down as a Branching of the East Branch of Susquehanna, in Evans his Map, in the Lat. of 41°, 40′, is that Branching of the West Branch of Delaware, which, in the said Dutch Map, is laid down in the said Lat. And, as a Line drawn from that Branch­ing of the East Branch of Susquehanna, in Evans his Map, to the Lat. of 41°, on Hudson's River, will cross at Minisink Island, your Memorialists conceive, that at such Branching, the Station on Delaware, of 1686 was fix'd: But whether such Branching is Part of the East Branch of Susquehanna, or the West Branch of Delaware, (the latter of which may probably be the Case, if it be considered, that the Seat of the Delawares, is, as above is observed, on the West Banks thereof) your Memorialists, for Want of some late actual Survey that may be relied on, (which it is impossible to obtain at present) cannot take upon them to determine.

That the Station of 1686, on Delaware, was fix'd, at such Branching, your Memorialists conceive, will appear from these Circumstances.

[Page 13]1 st. That [...] Map, (which was said before the said Committee of this Honourable House, and which was then [...] to be made in Consequence of the said Station [...] of 1686▪ [...] so [...] that a Line drawn from [...], the Suc [...] [...] Pa [...], between East and West-Jersey, [...] Northermost [...] P [...]int, which, in the said Map, is located [...]n a West [...] of Delaware, [...] the Lat. of 41°, 40′, will have a Course N. N. West 50 [...], [...], which is agreeable to the said [...] Line of Division, between East and West-Jersey, as described in an Act of Assembly of the Colony of New-Jersey, passed in 1719, [...] Act for [...] and ascertaining the Line of [...] and Division, [...] the Eastern and Western Division of the Province of New-Jersey. Which Act was also had be­fore the said Committee of this Honourable House.

2 dly. That [...] Li [...]e drawn from Li [...]e Egg-Harbour [...]foresaid, to the said Branching of the West Branch of Delaware, in the said Dutch Map, will have almost exactly the same Course, whence your Memorialists do conclude, that the Station was fix'd in 1686, at that Place in the Dutch Map, which appears to be the same with the abovementioned Branching of the East Branch of Susquehanna, in Lat. of 41°, 40′, in Evans his Map: And as a Line drawn from thence to Lat. of 41°, on Hudson's River, will cro [...] at the lower End of Great Minisink [...] ▪ which is the utmost Southern Extent of the Patent of Minisink, on Delaware; that therefore a Line drawn from the South End of the said Island, to the Latitude of 41°, on Hudson's River, will be the Boundaries of the Patents ranging with the said Patent of Minisink, between Hudson's and Delaware Rivers, agreeable to what was supposed to be the Boundary between th [...] Colony and New-Jersey, at the T [...]e of the respective Dates o [...] those several Patents, and there­fore, that such Line will be the utmost Southern Extent of those Patents, notwithstanding that on a final Settlement, New-Jersey will, probably, be confined on Delaware, to the Head [...] Delaware Bay, or the For [...]s of Delaware.

Wherefore, upon the Whole of the above Matters, your Memorialists beg Leave to draw the following Inferences, in Support of the first Point above advanced, viz.

1 st. That the true Boundary between this Colony and New-Jersey, must be a Line either from the H [...]d of Delaware Bay, or at least, from the For [...]s of Delaware, to the Latitude of 41°, on Hudson's River.

2 dly. That the true Boundary of the said Patents of Minisink and Wawayanda, and the other Patents ranging with them, between Hudson's and Delaware Rivers, must be a Line from the lower End of the said Minisink Island, to the Latitude of 41°, on Hudson's River.

3 dly. That therefore the Claim of this Colony, in Behalf of the Crown, and the Right of the Owners of the said Patents are entirely distinct, and that a vast Tract of Crown Land be­ing in this Colony, lies between the Southern Boundaries of the said Patents, and the [...] Boundaries of New-Jersey. And,

4 thly. That therefore the Controversy concerning those Boundaries, is, properly, between the Crown, and the Proprietors of New-Jersey; and that for this Reason, the Expences which may accrue on the Part of this Colony, in settling the said Boundaries, ought, wholly, to be borne by the Publick, and no Part thereof by the Owners of the said Patents, notwithstanding, that the idle Construction which the Proprietors of New-Jersey, give their Boundaries, partly affects the said Patents: It being clear, that upon any reasonable Construction of those Boun­daries, they cannot be extended as far Northward as to the said Patents. And in order the better to explain your Memorialists Sentiments on the first Point, a Copy of so much of Evan [...] ▪ his said Map, as relates to the Controversy, is hereunto annexed, with the several Lines abovementioned, delineated on the same.

In Support of the second Point, your Memorialists observe, that, from what has been already related, the abovementioned Patents, appear to have been taken up in a Dependance on the Settlement of the Station [...] in 1686, in Virtue of the Authority of this Government, uniting with that of New-Jersey: And as in further Evidence of the Validity of those Stations, th [...]e Act▪ of the Legislature of this Colony, were passed in 1691, 1701, and 1709, relating to the Boun­daries of the Counties, and the Regulation of Elections in this Colony; (in one of which Acts, the Right of Jurisdiction in the Government of this Colony over Great Minisink Island, [...] strongly implied, and in the other two, is clearly asserted:) The Owners of the said Patents, (whereof the Legislature of this Colony did thereby claim a Jurisdiction) have had the highest Reason to expect a Protection from the Government of this Colony: Seeing, that as a Submis­sion in the governed, to the Authority of Government, ought always to be compensated by that Authority, with a due Protection, not only of their Persons, but also of their Estates, it would not, as your Memorialists conceive, be consistent with the true Ends of such Submis­sion, to impose the Charge of defending those Estates that lie within this Colony, and yet are claimed, as within a Foreign jurisdiction, upon the particular Persons that hold them. But, [...] the contrary, such exterior Claim, evidently rendering the Controversy publick in its Nature; the whole Community ought to defray the Expences to accrue on the Part of this Colony, in [Page 14] procuring a final Settlement thereof. Besides which, such Claim not only affects private Pro­perty, but also tends, as your Memorialists conceive, to infringe the Jurisdiction of the Govern­ment of this Colony ▪ And whenever an Affront is offered, by any exterior Power, to the Dignity of Government, your Memorialists humbly conceive it to be the Duty of that Community, which [...]ee [...] the bene [...]cial Influences of a due Exertion of its Authority, to contribute, by pub­lic A [...], to its Maintenance and Support; and not to suffer so heavy a Burthen to fall upon those Individuals, whose Estates being most intangled in the Controversy, are least able to sup­port a Tax for repe [...]ing the Injury.

No [...] will the 3d Point appear less evident, as your Memorialists conceive, upon a due Con­sideration of the above State of the Controversy. For, if the Boundary between the two Co­lonies should hereafter be settled, as yo [...]r Memorialists conceive it ought to be, viz. By a Line from the [...] of Del [...]are Bay, or, from the For [...]s of Delaware, to the Latitude of 41°, on Hudson 's River; and [...] the said Patents are bounded, as is above related, by a Line from the [...] End of Great Minisink Island, to the Latitude of 41°, [...] Hudson 's River; a prodigious Tract of Land will, in either Ca [...]e, vest in the Crown, as Part of this Colony: For which the Possessors of such Parts as are settled, and those who would hereafter possess themselves of such as are not yet settled, would be obliged to obtain new Patents; and by this Means, the Royal [...] in this Colony, would be v [...]stly increased, by the annual Quit-Rents of those new Patents; and the Extent, Riches, and Number of its Inhabitants be proportionably augmented But to reduce those Advantages, that would thus accrue [...] his Majesty, and this Community, to that Degree of Certain [...]y, that a rough Computation will admit of, your Me­morialists further beg Leave to relate to this Honourable House; that the Tract included be­tween the Course [...] Delaware, from the lower End of Great Minisink Island, to the Falls of De­lawar [...] River, (w [...]ere a Line from the Lat. of 41°, on Hudson's River, to the Head of Dela­ware Bay will pa [...]) and a Line from the said Falls, to the aforementioned Latitude on Hud­son's River, and a Line from thence to the lower End of Great Minisink Island, will contain, on a [...]ugh Comp [...]tation, by the Scale o [...] Evans his Map, at least 2500 square Miles, 1,600000 Acres of Land, which, at Two Shillings and Six-pence Sterling, per 100 Acres for the Quit-Rent, would amount to £.2000 Sterling per [...]; and the Value of the Lands, at the mo­derate Rate of £. [...]0 per 100 Acres, New-York Currency, would amount to £.640000. And the Number of Inhabitants who might possess that Tract, upon the large Computation of 500 Acres pe [...] Family, would amount to 3200 Families; which State of the Matter, would, in the Course of some Years, be actually answered; or, if even the Boundary of New-Jersey, on Delaware, should be extended to the For [...]s of Delaware; yet, in that Case, above One-half of the said Tract of Land would fall within this Colony, and the Advantages to his Majesty, and this [...], be proportionably great. The Interest of his Majesty and of this Colony, be­ing, therefore, so importantly concerned in the final Settlement of a Partition Line, be­tween th [...] Colony and New-Jersey, whether the Expences of such Settlement to accrue on the Part of th [...] Colony, ought, in whole or in P [...]rt, to be defrayed by the Colony in general, or by the Ow [...]rs of those Patents, which are bounded on a Line, from the lower End of Great Minisink Island, to the Lat. of 41°, on Hudson's River, in particular; is a Question, which your Me­morialist [...], most readily, submit to the Wisdom of this Honourable House to determine.

In Proof of the 4th Point, your Memorialists beg Leave, briefly, to mention the public Dis­orders that have arisen in process of Time, from the unsettled State of the Jurisdiction of the two Colonies, to the Disadvantage of his Majesty's Interest in Breach of his Peace, and to the manifest Injury of this Colony in general. And,

1 st. It appears by a Letter from Governor HAMILTON, of East Jersey, to Governor FLET­CHER, of this Colony, dated February 13, 1693-4, and produced also to the said Committee of this Honourable House, That by Reason of the unsettled State of the Boundaries, between the two Colonies; and, consequently, of their Jurisdiction; the respective Governments were un­able to make such Detachments, [...] his Majesty's Service, and the Defence of the Frontiers against the Enemy then required, ‘There being several Plantations near the Line of Partition, (that is, near the Place where, as it was then esteem'd, it ought to run) which pretended an Exemption from a Detachment in either Government.’

2 dly. That altho' from the Time of the Settlement of the Stations in 1686, till the Year 1719, the Government of this Colony, gave full Evidences of a Jurisdiction, as nearly as pos­sible, agreeable to those Stations, by the Acts of Assembly abovementioned, by levying of Taxes, and appointing Officers, both Civil and Military, and by granting of Patents, with a Reference to those Stations; and altho' none of the Counties of New-Jersey, except B [...]rg [...]n, and the most extreme Part of Morris County, (as your Memorialists conceive, will appear, on Examination of the Acts of Assembly, erecting the several Counties in New-Jersey,) did, in their Boundaries, approach near to a direct Line, from the South End of Gr [...]t-Minisink Island, to the Latitude of 41°, on Hudson's River, until the late Erection of the new County in New-Jersey, [Page 15] called Sussex; yet the Want of such Line, or in other Words, the Neglect, effectually to settle the respective Jurisdictions, by running such Line, was declared in an Act of the Le­gislature of New-Jersey, passed in the Year 1718, for running and ascertaining the Division Line between that Colony, and this Colony of New-York, to have occasioned many Disputes be­tween the Owners of the Lands in the two Colonies lying near such Line, as well as between the Officers of the Governments, and a Number of lawless Men, who [...]luded the Laws of both Govern­ments, and paid Taxes and Obedience to neither, under Pretence of being situated in each of them.

3 dly. That the Want of such a Line was, as your Memorialists conceive, the only Occa­sion of passing the said Act, (there being not the least Mention in it of the Settlement of Sta­tions) as also of a Clause in an Act of the Legislature of this Colony, passed in 1717, for paying the Debts of the Colony, whereby a Provision was made for defraying the Expences of run­ning such Line, and an implied Authority given to the Governor, with the Advice of Coun­cil, to appoint Commissioners and Surveyors for that Purpose: And therefore, that had a Line been originally run, agreable to the Stations of 1686, it would have fully settled the Juris­diction of the two Colonies; and consequently prevented the flagrant Abuses, which have been made of the said Acts, by the Proprietors of East New-Jersey, in Contempt of the Go­vernment and Jurisdiction of this Colony. Which, as they are well known, your Memorialists only beg Leave, concisely, to collect them in the following Manner, viz.

1 st. Governor HUNTER, at that Time, being Governor of both Colonies, and notorious [...]y under the Influence of some of the Proprietors of East New-Jersey, was prevailed upon, in Quality of Governor of New-Jersey, and in Consequence of the Power given him by the said Act of New-Jersey, to appoint two Commissioners, with the Advice of Council, most, if not all of which Board, were then Proprietors of East New-Jersey: Which Commissioners, in Conjunction with the Surveyor General, were to be impowered, by Commission under the Great Seal of the said Colony, to join with such Commissioners and Surveyors, as should be appointed on the Part of this Colony, for running the said Line: Your Memorialists say, that, in Consequence thereof, the said Governor HUNTER, was induced to appoint Dr. John John­ston, and George Willocks, Commissioners, and James Alexander, Esq Surveyor General of New-Jersey, Persons all greatly interested in the Eastern Division of that Colony, and Men of great Sagacity, to execute the said important Trust. And this was the first Abuse.

2 dly. The same Governor HUNTER, in the Quality of Governor of this Colony, was in­duced, contrary to the Advice of the Council, excepting the said John Johnston, who was also of the Council of this Colony, and without the Consent of his Majesty, or of the private Owners of the Land on the Part of this Colony, and contrary to the said Act of Assembly, See the Petition hereafter mentioned to have been sign­ed by upwards of [...]orty of the Owners of the said Pa­tents within this Colony. to appoint two Gentlemen of this Colo­ny, viz. Col Isaac Hicks, and Capt. Robert Wal [...]ers, Persons no ways interested in the said Patents within this Colony; and tho' of unspotted Reputations, yet by no Means qualified for such Em­ployments, in Conjunction with Allin Jarret, Surveyor General of this Colony, to run the said Line on the Part of this Colony. And this was the second Abuse. In Consequence of such unwarrantable Appointments, little else could be expected, than the utmost Stretch of Authority, in Favour of New-Jersey. And, accordingly,

3 dly. That in the Year 1719, the said Commissioners and Surveyors, instead of running a Line agreable to the Stations of 1686, or to the true Boundaries above related, of the Grants to the Proprietors of New-Jersey, having, for Reasons best known to themselves, determined the East Bra [...]ch of Delaware, to be the Northermost Branch, without any actual Attempt made by them, (which the Duty of their Offices however required) to discover a more Nor­therly Branch, if any such there were; and that the Boundary ought to be (in open Defiance to common Sense and the Rules of Law) in the Lat. of 41°, 40′, on that Branch: And hav­ing also, by an Instrument, much too small for the Purpose, and undoubtedly erroneous, found that the Lat. of 41°, 40′, on the said East Branch, was at Cashicktonk; therefore, least New-Jersey should be deprived of the Benefit of so advantageous a Discovery, the said Commissioners and Surveyors took Care, immediately, to execute an Indenture tripartite, pur­porting the Settlement of the Station on Delaware, to be at Cashicktonck aforesaid. As by the said Indenture, surreptitiously entered of Record in the Secretary's Office of this Colony, in the Manner hereafter mentioned, may appear. Which was the third Abuse.

4 thly. That in endeavouring to fix the Station on Delaware, (in the Absence of the Com­missioners of New-York,) the Instrument was found to be erroneous; and our Surveyor refused to attempt any Thing further with it: And did thereupon, prefer his Petition to Peter S [...]uy­ler, Esq then President of this Colony, and to the Council, setting forth the Reasons which incapacitated him for proceeding compleatly to execute his Commission; and therefore, pray'd further Directions of the Council Board. Which Petition was back'd with anothor Petition to the like Purpose, signed by above forty Persons, interested on the Part of New-York. And being referred to a Committee of the Council, they, upon the whole Matter, reported, that [Page 16] they could not ad [...]ise his Honour to give any farther Instructions to our Surveyo [...], to proceed with so erroneous an Instrument: but on the Contrary, ‘That he should be directed to set forth, and certify, by some Writing under his Hand and Seal, that the Station pretended to be fix'd at the Fish-Kill, was wrong and erroneous. To the End this Colony might not, at any Time thereafter, receive any Prejudice by the aforesaid tripartite Indenture, & [...].’ As by the said Petition [...] and Report in the Secretary's Office of this Colony, may appear. And tho' the Proprietors of East and West Jersey, did, some Time after, in a Memorial presented to Governor MORRIS of New-Jersey, combat the Reasons alledged on the Part of New-York, concerning this Matter; yet the two Governments never came to any final Determination. And thus the erroneous Station of 1719, at Cashickt [...]nk, remained unconfirmed, until the Year 1738▪ this Colony still continuing the Exercise of its ancient Jurisdiction. In which Year, an Act o [...] Assembly was passed in New-Jersey, erecting Morris County; Part of which included some of the Lands lying within the ancient Jurisdiction of this Colony at Minisink. Which Act, being passed in Defiance of such ancient Jurisdiction of this Colony, and in Consequence of one erroneous Station, fix'd by Persons, some of whom were Parties interested, and others in­capable, and not qualified according to Law, (and therefore, had no Authority to act) and opposed, before its Confirmation, by the Government; Surveyor, and Inhabitants of this Colony; is the fourth Abuse of the abovementioned Acts of both Colonies.

5 thly. That George Clarke, Esq Lieutenant Govern [...]r of this Province, did assert the ancient Jurisdiction of this Colony, as soon as Encroachments were made on it, in Virtue of the Erection of Morris County aforesaid; and did, by a Letter dated July 7th, 1740, and direct­ed to William C [...]l, William Cartract, and Peter Cickendall, Esqrs. then Justice [...] of the Peace in Orange County, require them to exercise their Authority, in repelling those Encroachments, and in asserting their Jurisdiction, in the same Manner as they had done for twenty Years past. From which Time until this Day, many Acts of Violence have ensued, on the Exercise of Jurisdiction, by both Governments against each other. Which, as your Memorialists con­ceive, are chargeable to the Account of New-Jersey, as arising from their Infringement of the Settlement of 1686, and their Encroachments on the ancient Jurisdiction of this Colony, un­der Colour of one erroneous Station, fix'd at Cashickt [...]ck aforesaid not warranted by the said Acts of Assembly, and rejected by the Government of this Colony. And this is the fifth Abuse.

6 thly. That, in order the better to countenance the unjustifiable Claims of New-Jersey, and in manifest Opposition to the very Spirit and Design of the above related Report of the Coun­cil of this Colony, the said tripartite Indenture, so long after its Date as in the Year 1744, appears on the public Records of this Colony; the Hand-writing of which Entry, were it necessary, could be very easily proved; as well as the Interests, Connections, and Relations in Life of the Person who wrote it. Thus much however is certain, that it was neither en­tered by the proper Officer, nor warranted by any Act of Government; and is, therefore, a Record, which must necessarily be disown'd by the Government of this Colony, as being an evident Piece of Forgery. Your Memorialists, indeed, conceive it dishonourable, to the highest Degree, even to cite such a Record as Evidence; and yet, the Proprietors of East New-Jersey, have not been ashamed to do it in their Memorial to Governor BELCHER. And this concludes the sixth Abuse.

7 thly. That, not even content with this, the Proprietors of New-Jersey, in 1747-8, ob­tained an Act of that Colony, for giving a Sanction to the aforementioned Abuses, by running a Line Exparte, if this Colony should not think proper to acquiesce in their unreasonable Proposals: And therefore, upon their not meeting with the Concurrence of the Legislature of this Colony, they sent home the Act for his Majesty's Royal Assent. And such was the seventh Abuse. The Fate of the said Act, however, at the Board of Trade, is well known to this H [...]urable House; and is now fully determined by his Majesty's said Instruction: Whereby, it is plain, that the Crown intends to settle the Boundaries between the two Colonies, by Commission.

8 t [...]ly. That, in Consequence of the said erroneous Station at Cashicktonk, and in Contempt of the ancient Jurisdiction of this Colony, the Government of New-Jersey, taking Advantage of the Necessity to which both Colonies are reduced of fortifying their Frontiers along Delaware, against the Irruptions of the savage and perfidious Indians; have, as your Memorialists are informed, made an Offer of extending their Chain of Block-Houses, as far as C [...]shicktonk; and generously leaving a smaller Extent of Country to be fortified by this Colony. A plausible Pretext this, to oust the Government of this Colony of its ancient Jurisdiction; and indubi­tably designed, as a colourable Reason, for a Determination of the Controversy in their Fa­vour; upon a Supposition, that those who will resolutely defend the Lands in Controversy, in a Time of general Danger, are best intituled to reap the happy Fruits of their own Valour! But your Memorialists have the utmost Reason to rest assured, that a Disguise so thin, will be easily penetrated, by the Wisdom of this Honourable House. And this evinces the eighth Abuse. The further to demonstrate which, your Memorialists beg Leave to mention a single [Page 17] Fact, of which they are informed, by one of the Members of this Honourable House, viz. That Richard Gardner, the principal Agent for the Proprietors of East New-Jersey, in their Encroachments on this Colony, and who lives in the very Heart of the Controversy, on a Plan­tation formerly held under, and lately wrested from this Colony, not more than 7 or 8 Miles from Goshen, and about 20 Miles from the Frontiers of the two Colonies on Delaware; having, some Time ago, met with a Party of Jersey Men, who were sent to garrison the Fron­tiers of New-Jersey, did, in Virtue of an Order of Government▪ direct the said Party to return to his House, which [...]e employed them in fortifying, by incircling it with Stockadoes, at the public Expence of that Colony. Which Fortification, by Reason of its distant Situation from the Frontiers, and its being in the Heart of the Controversy, is, probably, designed principally, to support the Encroachments of New-Jersey, on this Province; especially, if it be considered, that the Command of it is given to the chief Agent of the Proprietors of East New-Jersey; to whom they are greatly indebted for their late unjustifiable Acquisitions.

From all these Matters adduced in Support of the fourth Point, your Memorialists conceive, that, for the Want of a Settlement of the Jurisdiction of the two Colonies, agreable to the Stations of 1686, His Majesty's Interest, the Honour of his Government of this Colony, the Jurisdiction and public Peace and Tranquility thereof, and the Rights of its Inhabitants, have been, in many Instances, unlawfully invaded and trampled upon, even by the Government of New-Jersey; and that upon the most idle Pretences.

These are Evils of a public Nature; to repel which, demands the unite [...] [...]fforts of the whole Colony: Wherefore, as it is necessary for the public Weal, that the Jurisdiction of this Colony should be properly ascertained; so also, as it is a Matter of general Concern, your Memorial­ists do humbly conceive, it ought to be at the general Expence. That altho' some particular Persons, unfortunately feel the evil Effects of the Encroachments of New-Jersey, on the Ju­risdiction of this Colony, more immediately than any other Members of the Community; yet, as the Matter concerns the Honour of this Government, all those who enjoy the happy Consequences of its Care and Protection, ought to contribute to its Support, by asserting and maintaining its rightful Jurisdiction. And therefore, that altho' by determining the Line of Jurisdiction, the Question of Property, will, consequentially, be determined; yet the public, and not the private Owners of the controverted Lands, ought equitably to bea [...] the Burthen.

In Support of the fifth Point, your Memorialists beg Leave to observe, that if upon a final Determination of the Boundary between the two Colonies, New-Jersey should be confined by a Line from the Head of Delaware Bay, or from the Forks of Delaware to the Lat. of 41°, on Hudson's River; yet those Patents in this Colony, that range along a Line from the lower End of Great Minisink Island to that Latitude, (which was formerly supposed to be the Boundary) will have no greater Extent of Land, than what they purchased of the native Indian Proprietors, and for which they obtained those Patents: And how much soever the Crown, or the Public, may be Gainers by the vacant Lands, in such Case, the Owners of those Patents being confin'd by the last mentioned Line, will have no more than is really their own: Besides, as the Government of this Colony conceived, and by the said Patents, did, in Effect, declare, the Lands granted by them, to be within this Colony; if that should actu­ally appear to be Truth, upon a final Settlement, your Memorialists conceive, the Owners of the said Patents, are clearly intituled to hold them, without any further Charge, than what accrued on the obtaining of those Patents. And, on the contrary, should the Station on De­laware, be extended to Cashicktonk, they must necessarily be great Losers. In which Case, as they settled the said Lands under the Government of this Colony, it will be a sufficient Hard­ship for them to be deprived of Part of those Lands, without being obliged to pay One-half, or any other great Proportion of the Expence of a final Settlement, out of their own Pockets. So that, seeing they cannot be benefited, but may possibly be prejudiced, by a final Settlement, and seeing that the Controversy is public in its Nature, the whole Burthen of it ought, as your Memorialists conceive, to be born by the Colony in general, and no Part of it by the Owners of those Patents in particular.

To what Difficulties the Owners of the Patents of Minisink and Wawayanda have already been reduced, by the lawless Encroachments of New-Jersey, is well known, and fully insisted on, in the abovementioned Report of the Committee of this Honourable House. To support their Possessions against Encroachments, back'd by the Authority of the Government of New-Jersey, was a Task too severe for any Persons in their private Capacity to undertake; and yet, heavy as it was, they have been obliged, for many Years, to submit to it, as the only Expe­dient left, to prevent the Proprietors of East New-Jersey, from seizing whatever they thought proper to claim. In Consequence of which, many of them have been taken by Violence, thrust into New-Jersey Goals, and loaded with excessive Costs, arising both from those Pro­secutions, and their own Defence against them. While▪ others have been obliged to abandon the Improvement of their Lands, to the utter Ruin of themselves and their Families; and that [Page 18] barely for defending what they held under the Government of this Colony. Means therefore being necessary to defray the Expences arising from those Encroachments, and the only Means whereby those Expences can be defrayed, consisting in the Sale of some of the unlocated Lands within those Patents, to raise a Sum of Money sufficient to answer the Purpose; your Memo­rialists have for this Reason, procured a Bill to be brought in to this Honourable House, to warrant such Sale. As, therefore, it was absolutely necessary, to oppose the unjustifiable En­croachments of New-Jersey; as such Opposition could not be made without very great Ex­pence; and as the Owners of those Patents have never [...]ued for any Assistance from the Pub­lic on this Head; but on the Contrary, have, by applying for an Act to warrant such Sale as aforesaid, chearfully submitted the uncontroverted Parts of their Lands, to the Expence of defending themselves, in the lawful Possession of such Part as is claimed by New-Jersey, and that against Foreign Encroachments, which concern the whole Community; your Memoria­lists humbly conceive, it would be adding too much to the Weight of their Misfortunes, to subject them to the Expences to accrue on the Part of this Colony, in the final Settlement of the Controversy, (which principally concerns the Crown, and this Community) beyond the Amount of their Proportion, of a general Tax, or Contribution for that Purpose. Thus much in Maintenance of the sixth Point.

Nor do your Memorialists conceive it possible, to lay the Owners of the Patents of Minisink and Wawayanda, (which are principally affected by the Controversy) under an equitable and proportionate Contribution, for defraying any Part of the Expence of a final Settlement; be­cause the Property of those Patents, in Virtue of which they would be compelled to such Contribution, does, in many Instances, consist in undivided Rights: Some of which, as also great Part of the located Lands, do belong to Feme Coverts, Infants, and Persons beyond Sea; and the whole State of Property, in general, is so complicated, that till each Person's Right is adjusted, and clearly settled, it would be impossible, in a Method of this Kind, to do equal Justice to all Parties. Besides, many Rights may be, and, doubtless, are controverted: Fo [...] which Reason, also, it would be impracticable to determine, where the Burthen ought, in such Cases, to be laid. And this Supports the seventh Point.

To shew the Reasonableness of the eighth Point; even should it, in the Wisdom of this Honourable House, be thought proper, to raise a Sum by Sale of unlocated Lands, your Me­morialists doubt not, but that it will be found, upon a strict Enquiry, that if the abovemen­tioned Bill be passed into a Law of this Colony, it will be difficult to find a sufficient Quan­tity of unlocated Lands, in the Patents of Minisink and Wawayanda, to answer the Ends of that Act. For tho' there are some Rights, to which no adequate Locations have been made, yet many Persons having taken up much greater Quantities of Land than their Rights could possibly entitle them to, have left those unlocated Rights, to be located on the Lands in Con­troversy: And therefore, there is very little Land, a [...] your Memorialists conceive, left unlo­cated, and clear of Dispute, in the said Patents of Minisink and Wawayanda: Which Patents are principally involved in the Controversy. And therefore, as it is absolutely reasonable, that the Expences which have accrued to some particular Persons, in opposing the Encroach­ments of New-Jersey, should, by a Sale of Lands, be proportionably imposed on all Parties interested; there will, as your Memorialists conceive, be no Room for a Provision by a fur­ther Sale of Lands, in those two Patents, to defray any Part of the Charges of a final Settle­ment.

But your Memorialists humbly conceive, that an Elucidation of the last Point, will further shew the Hardship, of submitting the Owners of those Patents, to any Part of such Expence as aforesaid. The Patents of Minisink and Wawayanda, (which are the Patents most consider­ably affected by the extravagant Claims of New-Jersey, are beset with Encroachments, arising from the Patents that surround them, within this Colony. By which Means, the Owners of those Patents are kept out of the Possession of many Thousand Acres of Land, which they think do justly belong to them. In order, therefore, to procure Justice to themselves, in this Instance, they will be obliged to resort to the Courts of Law within this Colony. This Me­thod, considering the Number of Possession [...] gained against them, will necessarily create a Multiplicity of Suits; the Prosecution of which, will subject them to vast Charge and Ex­pence. And in this Case, your Memorialists conceive, they cannot expect the least Assistance from the Public; because those Controversies are of a private Nature, and one Party would have an equal Right with the other, to claim such Assistance. And therefore, the Owners of those two Patents, must either cede what they conceive to be their Right, or defend it at a great Expence; which disables them to support any Part of the public Controversy with New-Jersey, beyond their Quotas of a public Tax.

If after all those Reasons, the Authority of a Precedent may be admitted to be urged, your Memorialists beg Leave, humbly, to remind this Honourable House, that the Charge that has already accrued on the Part of this Colony, for settling the Controversy between this Colony [Page 19] and the Massachusetts-Bay, has by the Legislature of this Colony, been laid on the Publi [...]. Wherefore, as your Memorialists conceive, they cannot expect nothing less, from the Wis­dom, Candour, and Impartiality of this Honourable House, than an equal Distribution of its Favours, to all its Constituents; they are induced to hope, that in this Controversy, as well as in the other, the Provision to be made on the Part of this Colony, will be raised at the public Charge: To which your Memorialists, and those whom they represent in the Premises, will, as Members of this Community, chearfully contribute their respective Proportions.

However, as your Memorialists dare not presume to determine, what Weight the Reasons above alledged, against submitting the Owners of the said Patents to any considerable Propor­tion of the Expence of a final Settlement of the Controversy, may, in the Wisdom of this Honourable House, be thought to merit: Therefore, lest they should be deemed insufficient to answer the Purpose for which they are adduced, (the Contrary of which, however, your Memorialists earnestly hope for) your Memorialists humbly intreat, that, even if they, and those whom they represent in the Premises, should be obliged to bear any great Part of that Expence, it may be imposed on them in such Manner, as will be the most easy and tolerable: And in such Case, do humbly propose, that as, for the Reasons above urged, an immediate Subsidy cannot be levied, (either by subjecting the Parties interested to a proportionate Contri­bution, or by Sale of Lands) sufficient for the Purpose, that a Sum may be raised, out of some or other of the public Funds, to be replaced by a future Tax, o [...] the whole Lands included between the Claims of the two Colonies; or, on so much thereof, as shall, upon a final Settlement, be included within this Colony: Or, that a Sum, proportionate to what may be thought to be the Interest of the Owners of the Patents of Wawayanda and Minisink, out of the Sum intended to be raised by each of the said Patents, by the abovementioned Bill, now before this Honourable House, may, by a Clause in the said Bill, be applied towards the Charges of a final Settlement.

Notwithstanding what has been urged by your Memorialists, to shew, that the Crown and the Public are more concerned in the Event of the Controversy, than the Owners of the above­said Patents within this Colony; yet, the latter are so much affected thereby, as to induce your Memorialists, humbly to lay before this Honourable House, their Sentiments concerning the Manner of settling the Boundaries between the two Colonies; which your Memorialists humbly conceive, may be done most [...] to Law and Equity, by his Majesty's Appoint­ment of some Persons of eminent Character and Capacities in England, to determine the Mat­ter there. This Method will not only admit of a Nomination of Persons in the highest Rank of Importance, (which the Nature of the Contrversy seems to require) but will, in other Re­spects, be attended with no Inconveniences; seeing that a Settlement of the Controversy, must be founded on a proper Construction, of the Patent to the Duke of York, and his Grant to Lord BERKLEY, and Sir GEORGE CARTARET; which may as well be made in England, as in America. After which, it will require no great Skill; neither will there be much Danger of Error or Partiality, in running a simple direct Line between two Stations, agreeable to such Determination. Besides which, should Commissioners be appointed in England, and sent over to settle the Controversy, it may reasonably be supposed, that they will not be Persons of so distinguished an Eminence, as some who might be appointed to settle the Matter there: And moreover, the Expences of such a Commission, would be prodigiously aggravated, by the ne­cessary Charges, attending the Removal of Men of considerable Character, from England to America, and their Stay in this Part of the World, until the compleat Execution of their Commission. Neither would there be the highest Security, of a Decision perfectly agreeable to the true Merits of the Controversy, from such an Appointment. And should Commissioners be nominated in the Colonies, your Memorialists humbly apprehend, there might be Dan­ger of a partial Judgment, as well on account of the Disputes between this Colony, and seve­ral other Colonies on the Continent, concerning their Boundaries, as the Acquaintance and Connections between Persons in the other Colonies, and the Parties to the Controversy.

Wherefore, upon the Whole, your Memorialists humbly supplicate this Honourable House, that the Methods to be taken, for providing for the Expence of a final Settlement, may be made as easy to Your Memorialists, and those whom they represent in the Premises, as the Nature of the Case can possibly admit of; and that this Honourable House, would be pleased to use its Interest, in procuring such Settlement, in a Manner most con­sistent with Justice, and the Rights of all the Parties interested in the Event of the Con­troversy: And also, that, as your Memorialists, and those whom they represent in the Premises, labour under great Disadvantages, by Reason of the Power of the Proprie­tors of East New-Jersey, and their Enjoyment of most of the Posts, of the highest Im­portance in New-Jersey, and in particular, by the great Authority of JAMES ALEXAN­DER, Esq a principal Proprietor in East New-Jersey, and of his Majesty's Council in [Page 20] both Colonies; who imagining the said Proprietors to have a Title to all the Lands, as far Northward as the said erroneous Station, at Cashightonck, has, from Time to Time, endeavoured to obstruct your Memorialists in their Prosecution of those Measures, which to them seemed most advancive of their true Interest; as will appear by the Interview between him and Col. DEKAY, an Inhabitant of this Province, mentioned in the above remembered Report of the Committee of this Honourable House; and also, by his Reasons, entred the last Sessions, in the Minutes of the Council of this Colony, against the passing of a Bill, of the same Tenor with the abovementioned Bill, now before this Honourable House. That therefore, in Tenderness to the Owners of the said Patents within this Colony, this Honourable House would [...]e pleased, by the great Weight of its Authority and Influence, to urge forward, with all possible Expedition and Justice, the final Settlement of a Controversy, so apparently injurious to a vast Number of its Constituents. And thus your Memorialists humbly beg Leave to conclude this their long Memorial; with praying the Excuse of this Hono [...]rable House, for trespassing so much on their Time, seeing, that to have aimed at more Brevity, in the Hurry with which it has been drawn up, might have been attended with some f [...]al [...].

NEW-YORK, the 10 th February, 1756.