Slike strani
PDF
ePub

Hampshire and Maine (see p. 77), but also that between New Hampshire and Massachusetts, and the commissioners appointed by the two Provinces having been unable to agree, New Hampshire appealed to the King, who ordered that the boundaries should be settled by a board of commissioners appointed from the neighboring colonies. The board met at Hampton in 1737 and submitted a conditional decision to the King, who in 1740 declared in council * that the northern boundary of the province of Massachusetts be a similar curve line, pursuing the course of the Merrimack river, at three miles distance, on the north side thereof, beginning at the Atlantic Ocean, and ending at a point due north of Pautucket falls [now Lowell), and a straight line drawn from thence, due west, till it meets with his Majesty's other Governments.

New Hampshire had claimed her southern boundary to be a line due west from a point on the sea 3 miles north of the mouth of the Merrimack River. Massachusetts had claimed all the territory within 3 miles north of any part of the Merrimack River. The King's decision gave to New Hampshire a strip of territory more than 50 miles in length and of varying width in excess of that which she claimed. This decree of the King was forwarded to Mr. Belcher, then governor of both the Provinces of New Hampshire and Massachusetts Bay, with instructions to apply to the respective assemblies to unite in making the necessary provisions for running and marking the line comformably to the said decree, and if either assembly refused, the other was to proceed ex parte. Massachusetts Bay declined to comply with this requisition. New Hampshire therefore proceeded alone to run and mark the line.

George Mitchell and Richard Hazzen were appointed by Governor Belcher to survey and mark the line. Pursuant to this authority, in February, 1741, Mitchell ran and marked the line from a point on the seacoast about 3 miles north of the mouth of the Merrimack River to a point about 3 miles north of the Pawtucket Falls, and Hazzen, in March following, ran and marked a line from the point 3 miles north of Pawtucket Falls across the Connecticut River to the supposed boundary line of New York, on what he then assumed to be a due west course from the place of beginning. He was instructed by Governor Belcher to allow for a westerly variation of the needle of 100.5 The report of the surveyors has not been preserved, but the journal of Hazzen has been found and published.

Subsequent investigation has proved that Hazzen's line was not run on a due west course, the allowance for the westerly variation of the needle being too large, throwing the line north of west. This mistake seems to have been known prior to the Revolution. In 1774

Slade, William, jr., Vermont State papers, p. 9, J. W. Copeland, printer, 1823.
5 New Hampshire H. R. Jour., 1826, p. 303.
e New England Hist. and Geneal. Register, July, 1879, p. 323.

8

calculations were made by George Sproule, founded upon actual surveys and accurate astronomical observations, from which he determined that Hazzen's line was so far north of west as to lose to the State of New Hampshire a tract of land computed at 59,872 acres."

In 1825 commissioners were appointed by the States of New Hampshire and Massachusetts to ascertain, run, and mark the line between the two States, under the proceedings of which New Hampshire asserted her claim to a due west line, conformable to the decree of 1740, it being apparent by a survey made by the commissioners that the original line was north of west. The Massachusetts commissioners refused to run such a line, alleging that they were empowered only to ascertain and mark the original line.

On March 10, 1827, the Legislature of Massachusetts passed a resolution providing for the erection of durable monuments to preserve the boundary line between the States of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, as the same had been run and ascertained by the commissioners, and monuments were erected accordingly.

In 1885 the joint commission appointed by the States of New Hampshire and Massachusetts re-ran and marked the curved portion of the boundary following the course of the Merrimack River, chang. ing it only to a trifling extent. This commission was, however, unable to agree upon the boundary west of Pawtucket Falls. The matter dragged along until finally in 1894 this commission, together with a commission representing Vermont, agreed to maintain the Hazzen line, and this line was retraced and re-marked from Pawtucket Falls to the northwest corner of Massachusetts.

Under the King's decree of 1740 the Province of New Hampshire claimed jurisdiction as far west as the territory of Massachusetts and Connecticut extended, thus including the present State of Vermont. New York claimed all the country west of the Connecticut, under the charters of 1664 and 1674 to the Duke of York. A bitter controversy ensued. In 1749 the Governor of New Hampshire wrote to the Governor of New York as follows:

PORTSMOUTH, November 17, 1749. I think it my duty

to transmit to your Excellency the description of New-Hampshire, as the King has determined it in the words of my commission,

In consequence of His Majesty's determination of the boundaries between New Hampshire and Massachusetts, a surveyor and proper chainmen were appointed to run the western line from 3 miles north of Pautucket Falls; and the surveyor, upon oath, has declared that it strikes Hudson's River, about eighty poles north of where Mohawk's River comes into Hudson's River.

[ocr errors]

B. WENTWORTH,

7 New Hampshire H. R. Jour., 1826. p. 304; see also Williams, Sanruel, Natural and civil history of Vermont, p. 379, Walpole, N. H., 1794, for list of magnetic declinations in Eastern States of America, 1646–1788.

8 See Massachusetts Legislature Resolves, 1827. Slade, William, jr., op. cit., p. 10.

The following is the description of the south boundary of New Hampshire as given by King George II to Benning Wentworth when Wentworth was appointed governor, July 3, 1741:10 province of New Hampshire, within our Dominions of New England in America, bounded on the south side by a simular Curve line pursuing the Course of the Merrimac River at three miles distance, on the North side therof, beginning at the Atlantick Ocean & ending at a point due North of a place called Pautucket Falls, and by a Straight Line drawn from thence due West Cross the said River 'till it meets with our other Governments,

The south boundary of New Hampshire as surveyed between 1885 and 1898 is marked by 50 large cut-granite monuments at irregular intervals. The initial point of this survey is the southwest corner of New Hampshire and southeast corner of Vermont, marked by a copper bolt in the top of a block of granite set in a mass of concrete 6 feet square," at or near ordinary low-water line” on the west bank

" of the Connecticut River, the geographic position of which is latitude 42° 43' 37.21", longitude 72° 27' 32.08". A witness mark of polished

' granite, suitably inscribed, stands on the Massachusetts-Vermont line, 582 feet, N. 87° 48' W. from the corner.

From the State corner the line was run on a general course about 212° south of east (true bearing), measured distance of 57.84 miles to the boundary pine monument, so-called, standing between the towns of Pelham, New Hampshire, and Dracut, Massachusetts, in the pasture land owned by Zachariah Coburn, at a point where one George Mitchell, surveyor, marked a pitch pine tree, March 21, 1741, then supposed to be 3 miles due north of a place in the Merrimack River formerly called Pawtucket Falls, now Lowell.

This monument is also granite, and its geographic position is latitude 42° 41' 50.25", longitude 71° 19' 22.02".

From this point the boundary consists of a series of straight lines, approximately paralleling Merrimack River and 3 miles distant therefrom. The terminal mark is a granite monument 42 by 14 by 12 inches in s

S size, marked Mass. on its south face and N. H. on its north face, which 1890

1890 stands on Salisbury Beach about 80 feet from high-water line and 250 feet from low-water line of the Atlantic Ocean. Its geographic position is latitude 42° 52' 19.28”, longitude 70° 49' 02.94". From this point the boundary extends for “ three miles

to the limit of State jurisdiction ” on a course 86° 07' 30'' E.

This survey was approved by Massachusetts 11 and by New Hampshire.12 The acts of the State legislatures give the complete notes of the surveys. Copies of the notes and many geographic positions on

*

[ocr errors]

19 Documentary history of New York, vol. 4, p. 331, 1851. 11 Act of May 12, 1899, ch. 369. 12 Act of Mar. 22, 1901, ch. 115.

the lines are given in the town boundary atlases prepared by the harbor and land commission of Massachusetts.

The question concerning the western boundary of New Hampshire was submitted to the King, who in 1764 made the following decree: 13

INTERNATIONAL
BOUNDARY

SPO 5/9

VE RM O N T

"THE

[ocr errors]

River

NEW

45°

AMPSHIRE

بيبيا

V2

[ocr errors]

I MILE

AT THE COURT OF ST. JAMES,

The 20th day of July, 1764. Whereas there was, this day read at the board, a report made by the Right Honorable the Lords of the Committee of council for plantation affairs, dated the 17th of this instant, upon considering a representation from the Lords Commisioners for trade and plantations, relative to the disputes that have, some years subsisted between the provinces of New Hampshire and New-York, concerning the boundary line between those provinces—His Majesty, taking the same into consideration, was pleased with the advice of his privy council, to approve of what is therein proposed, and doth accordingly, hereby order and declare the western banks of the river Connecticut, from where it enters the Province of the Massachusetts Bay, as far north as the forty-fifth degree

of northern latitude, to be the boundary line

between the said two provinces of New NEW HAMPSHIRE

Hampshire and New York. Wherefore the

respective Governors and Commanders in GORE"

Chief of his Majesty's said Provinces of New-Hampshire and New-York, for the time being, and all others whom it may con

cern, are to take notice of His Majesty's FIGURE 7.—Map of the Gore, at the pleasure hereby signified and govern them

northeast corner of Vermont selves accordingly.

Notwithstanding this decree of the King controversy attended with violence was kept up for many years, but the line was finally accepted and now forms the boundary between the States of New Hampshire and Vermont. (See p. 87.)

The northern boundary of New Hampshire was fixed by the British treaty of 1842 (p. 18) and is described as follows:

Commencing at the “ Crown Monument," so called,at the intersection of the New Hampshire, Maine, and Province of Quebec boundaries, in latitude 45° 18' 20", longitude 71° 05' 04", thence by an irregular line along the divide to the head of Halls Stream and down the middle of that stream to a line established by Valentine and Collins previous to 1774 as the 45th parallel of latitude.

The end of this line in the middle of Halls Stream is in latitude 45° 00' 48.7", longitude 71° 30' 05.7''. The New Hampshire-Vermont line then runs east for about 134 miles to the west bank of the Connecticut River, the approximate position of which is latitude 45° 00'50”, longitude 71° 27' 57''. This small area east of Halls Stream, known locally as “ The Gore” (see fig. 7), is often incorrectly shown as a part of New Hampshire.

13 Slade, William, jr., op. cit., p. 19; Documentary history of New York, vol. 4, p. 355, 1851.

14 Now monument 475 of the International Boundary Commission.

A historical description of the boundaries of New Hampshire is given by Harriman.15

The title to the New Hampshire area in the vicinity of the Connecticut Lakes and north of the 45th parallel was for many years in dispute between New Hampshire and Canada. In 1829 the settlers in that locality organized an independent republic, which was called the Indian Stream Territory. Local government was in effect until after the Indian Stream War, in 1835, when New Hampshire took control.16

VERMONT

The grants from King Henry of France in 1603 and King James of England in 1606 both included the territory which forms the present State of Vermont. It was also included in the charter of New England of 1620.

In the grants to the Duke of York in 1664 and 1674 all the territory between the Connecticut and Delaware Rivers was included. New York therefore claimed jurisdiction of the territory now known as Vermont. (See fig. 8.) Massachusetts, however, had made claim at an early period to the tract west of the Connecticut River now forming a portion of that State and claimed also the greater part of the Vermont territory.

By the terms of the charter of Massachusetts Bay, of 1629, that colony was granted all the lands which lye, and be within the space of three English Myles to the Northward of the said River called Monomack alias Merrymack, or to the Northward of any and every Parte thereof."?

Under this clause Massachusetts Bay claimed that its jurisdiction extended to a line 3 miles north of the northernmost part of the Merrimack River, which would embrace a large portion of New Hampshire and Vermont. New Hampshire contested this claim and after several years' controversy was more than sustained by a decision of the King in 1740. (See p. 81.) New Hampshire in turn claimed the territory of Vermont on the ground that as Massachusetts and Connecticut had been allowed to extend their boundaries within 20 miles of the Hudson River its territory should go equally far, and contended that the King's decree of 1740 left that fairly to be inferred; also that the old charters of 1664 and 1674 were obsolete. By a decree of the King, however, the territory west of the Connecticut River, from the 45th parallel to the Massachusetts line, was declared to belong to the Province of New York. (See New Hamp

15 Harriman, Walter, The history of Warner, N. H., pp. 550-581, Concord, 1879.

16 See Bacon, E. M., The Connecticut River and the Valley of the Connecticut, pp. 369-370, New York, 1906; and Faris, J. T., The romance of the boundaries, pp. 33–43. New York, 1926. For a historical sketch of the area see 25th Cong., 3d sess., H. Rept. 176, Jan. 16, 1839.

17 Thorpe, F. N., op. cit., vol. 3, p. 1847.

« PrejšnjaNaprej »