SECTION IX. PROPOSAL TO UNITE ALL THE NEW HAMPSHIRE GRANTS WITH THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. Petition of Facob Bailey and Davenport Phelps, relating to a connection of all the New Hampshire Grants with the State of New Hampshire. [Copied from Slade's State Papers, pp. 104-105.] To the Honorable the President in Council, and the Representatives of the State of New Hampshire, in General Assembly convened: The subscribers hereto, beg leave to represent: That a large number of Charters of Incorporation of certain tracts of land, were formerly issued from their Excellencies Benning Wentworth and John Wentworth, Esqr, in the name of the King of Great Britain, lying and being west of the Mason Grant, and east of a north line drawn from the north-west corner of the now State of the Massachusetts Bay to Lake Champlain, and from thence to the latitude of forty-five degrees: That in the year 1764, the aforesaid King of Great Britain, in violation of his contract with the grantees, and in an arbitrary manner, passed a decree, that there should be a division of the aforesaid Grants between the then Province of New York and New Hampshire; to which decree the inhabitants of said grants were then, and have ever since been averse; as they were, thereby deprived of privileges, which they of right claimed, and, in their settlement, reasonably expected, within the jurisdiction of New Hampshire;-That the inhabitants aforesaid, since the declaration of independence, view themselves at liberty to connect in one body politic, or unite with any other State; That they are now, in general, desirous of an union with the State of New Hampshire;-That the representatives of the people in Assembly, on the 20th of October last, Voted, that a defence of the rights of the people be stated by a Committee appointed for that purpose, and that answers to some letters &c. be drafted by said Committee. Also, that offers be made to the State of New Hampshire either to settle a boundary line between said New Hampshire and the Grants, by a Committee mutually chosen, or in such way as Congress may point out; or to make an offer of the whole of said Grants to New Hampshire: That on the 9th day of December last, by a Convention of Committees delegated by the inhabitants of said grants,* it was voted, that proposals of an union with said New Hampshire be made to the Assembly of said State. In consequence whereof, we, the subscribers, being duly authorized for that purpose, do now propose to this honorable Court, that the whole of said grants be connected and confederated with said State of New Hampshire, receiving and enjoying equal privileges and immunities with the good people of said State. Dated at Newbury, this 17th day of March, 1779, JACOB BAILEY† Proceedings of the Legislature of New Hampshire, on the foregoing Petition : STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. In the House of Representatives, April 24, 1779. The Committee on the petition of Gen. Bailey and Mr. Phelps, relating to the New Hampshire Grants, so called, reported, That this State should lay claim to the jurisdiction of the whole of the New Hampshire Grants, so called, lying to the westward of Connecticut River, setting forth the right this State has to the same: Allowing and conceding, nevertheless, that if the honourable Continental Congress shall allow the said Grants to the westward of Connecticut river, to be a separate State, as now claimed by some of the inhabitants thereof, by the name of Vermont, that in such case, the State of New Hampshire will acquiesce therein :-And that this State shall exercise jurisdiction Only eight towns in Vermont were represented in this convention. -Williams. In Slade's Papers the name is erroneously spelled Balley. as far as the western bank of Connecticut river, and no further, until the dispute is settled by Congress. By order of the major part of the Committee, (Signed) JOSIAH BARTLETT, Ch. Which report being read and considered-Voted, That it lie for further consideration, until the next session of the General Assembly of this State. Sent up for concurrence, JOHN LANGDON, Speaker. In Council the same day, read, and concurred. E. THOMPSON, Sec'ry. STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. In the House of Representatives, June 24th, 1779. The House, by vote, took under consideration the report of the Committee of the second day of April last, which was, at that session, Voted to lie for consideration until this session, relative to the New Hampshire grants &c. And the question being put, whether the report of the said Committee be received and accepted or not? It passed in the affirmative. Sent up for concurrence, JOHN LANGDON, Speaker. In Council, the 25th of June, 1779, read and concurred. E. THOMPSON, Sec'ry. Proposal of sundry matters to the town of Newbury, by order of a Committee signed Joseph Marsh, chairman, dated Dresden, April 23a, 1779. [P. 131.] TO THE INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF Newbury, on the New Hampshire Grants: The Committee appointed by the Convention held at Cornish in December last having laid before the Assembly of New Hampshire the Proposals contained in a printed Pamphlet entitled a "Public Defence," the said Assembly have it in contemplation to extend their claim over the whole of the New Hampshire grants, submitting to Congress whether a new State shall be established on the Grants; but have deferred a Determination of the Matter till their June Sessions, that they may more fully know the Sentiments of the Inhabitants respecting such a measure. In order therefore that the real Sentiments of the Inhabitants on the Grants may be collected, and the Matter which has been long held in Suspence be brought to an Issue, the Committee request that a Return be made some time in the month of May next to General Bayley, of the following Matters, that they may be communicated to the General Assembly of New Hampshire, at their next Sessions. 1. The Number of legal Voters in Town Meetings, as nearly as they can be conveniently ascertained. 2. The Number who attend the Town Meeting when the following Question shall be put. 3. The Yeas and Nays on the following Question, viz: Whether this Town is willing that the Assembly of New Hampshire extend their claim and jurisdiction over the Whole of the Grants;-New Hampshire at the same time submitting to Congress, whether a new State shall be established on the Grants? Dresden, April 23d, 1779. Per order of the Committee J. MARSH, Chairman. Agreeable to the above Request the Town of Newbury met, according to a warning for that purpose, and the Question above put: (Yeas 20) 60 soles in så town owning freeholds. JACOB KENT, Town-Clerk. Return from Hartford. [NOTE. Precisely the same matters and question were referred to the inhabitants of the town of Hartford (return to be made to J. Marsh), [P. 133.] and probably to other towns on the said Grants. The return from Hartford was as follows, viz. :—ED.] "In the affirmative 19 ("Reserving to ourselves the Right negative 4 we have had or could have had to be a New State Notwithstanding. Attest, AMOS ROBINSON, Town Clerk." Return from Moretown. [P. 135.] Att a Leagel Town Meeting Held in Moretown on the New Hampshire Grants, the 25th Day of May 1779, The Number of Voters to act in Town Meetings is forty; fifteen attended said meeting and voted the following vote: Its our desire to be a New State but are willing to submit the matter to Congress whether we shall be a New State, and if that cannot be obtained, we Desire to be annex'd to the State of New Hampshire. And we find by information it is the opinion of the Town in general that New Hampshire extend there jurisdiction over the whole of the Grants. The Town of Peacham having Received warning from J. Marsh, Chairman, to take the Yeas & Nays on the following Question, viz. Wheather this Town is willing that the Assembly of New Hampshire, extend their claim and Jurisdiction over the whole of the Grants;-New Hampshire at the same time submitting to Congress Wheather a New State shall be Established on the Grants. The Town having been duly warned met accordingly, the Twenty-fifth day of May A. D: 1779, and proceeded as follows, viz. Isly Chose James Bayley, Moderator & Jonathan Elkins Clerk of said meeting. 2dly Proceeded to know the number of Legal Voters in said Town and find Eleven. 3dly The Number of Legal Voters who attended the meeting when the above Questions ware Put, and find seven, viz. |