More on the New York Border
992. From William Tryon, 15 June 1772
993. To Charles Ward Apthorp, 18 June 1772
994. To Thomas Pownall, 22 June 1772
995. From William Sanford Hutchinson, 22 June 1772
996. To William Tryon, 24 June 1772
997. To Lord Hillsborough, 25 June 1772
998. To Lord Hillsborough, 25 June 1772
In late winter, Hutchinson believed the longstanding controversy with New York over its eastern border with Massachusetts was, at last, near resolution; the remaining territory, about which the commissioners were unable to agree in 1767, was to be split down the middle. Soon after the General Court had authorized a new delegation to meet with their New York counterparts, rumors began to circulate in western Massachusetts that New York was reviving its ancient claim to a border along the Connecticut River, and Governor William Tryon, wary that the Massachusetts legislation did not specify the preliminary terms of the agreement, refused to meet.
Fort George New York 15th June 1772
Sir, Until I had your Letter of the first instant
His Majesty’s Council, before whom I have laid these papers, sincerely regret, as I do, the delay of the Answer of your Legislature, to the proposal I made in November last; for they are unanimously of opinion that it will be very inconvenient to reassemble the General Assembly at this season, and as his Majesty’s service requires my early presence in the northern parts of the Colony I cannot call them together in the course of this Summer.
At present I cannot suggest any expedient to prevent the loss of the year, unless I send Commissaries to meet yours under the authority of the Great Seal; as the powers given by Act of Assembly to our former Commissaries were joint and are dissolved by the death of Mr. Nicoll, who was one of the three.
I was aware of the objection that their compact will, in that case, not be binding without a Law for its confirmation but I think it can have no weight, unless there is a reason to apprehend that the Colonies will with hold their approbation. On the part of this Province, we shall not expect that your Commissaries are to come to the Convention with more ample powers than our own; and I do assure your Excellency that I have not the least doubts of the cheerful concurrence of all the branches of our Legislature for confirming the agreement, provided the Line they fix for the boundary, equally divides the Tract laying between the ultimate offers of the Commissaries at New Haven in 1767.
This is precisely the business I meant to invite them to execute in my first Letter to your Excellency upon this subject;
If your Province will consent to a meeting under Commission, our Commissaries shall be particularly interested to enter into a compact agreable to my offer, and to wave debates upon the merits of our claim to more easterly limits.
Whether this tedious dispute is to be adjusted either by virtue of Commissions, or Acts of the Provinces, there seems to be a necessity for my being informed of the approbation of your Legislature of my proposal, as the basis of Negotiations at the next Interview, and I wish it may be done by an additional Act in such an explicit and authentic manner as to prevent all future controversies. If your Commissaries are to aim at any other boundary than that one I have frankly recommended, and ours should be instructed to accede only to that, their meeting will be of no manner of use, and on the other hand if the Provinces can be brought to consent to a division of that inconsiderable Tract about which the former Commissaries could not agree, I can neither perceive any plausible objection against an immediate Congress under Commission, nor why the expences that will be incurred to our respective Governments by our personal attendance may not be dispensed with.
I flatter myself that you will concur with me in these sentiments and upon the first notice that the necessary steps are taken by your Province I will Commissionate proper Persons on our side to carry this business into execution; resting in a firm expectation that we shall very speedily see these unhappy differences settled in the way so earnestly and graciously recommended to both Provinces by the Crown. I am, with great respect & regard Your Excellency’s most obedient Servant,
W Tryon
SC (National Archives UK, CO 5/761, ff. 144–45); at foot of letter, “His Excellency Governor Hutchinson Copy.” SC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 4:320–23); at foot of letter, “His Excelly Govr. Hutchinson.” SC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 25:519); at foot of letter, “His Excellency Governor Hutchinson”; excerpt of the eight and ninth paragraphs only.
Boston 18th. June 1772
Sir, One of my Sons who is lately married has been informed by your brother Mr. Wm. Apthorp that he believed you would dispose of the house in which Mr. Burch lately lived and as my Son inclines to live in that part of the Town, he has desired me to write to you upon the Subject.
AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:345); at foot of letter, “Hon Charles Ward Apthorp Esqr.”; in EH’s hand.
Boston 22d June 1772
Dear Sir, I thank you for your last favour of 5 April.
This however & every Instruction that does not violate the Charter I shall most certainly adhere to as you justly observe I ought to do. Indeed I never had an Instruction but what appeared to me consonant with the Charter. I rather think we do not differ much in opinion as to the Affair of the Castle & that you have been misinformed as to facts.
You would know but few of the people who are now most active among us. There is nova progenies. I can not add the rest of the line.
The Union of the Colonies is pretty well broke. I hope I shall never see it renewed. Indeed our sons of liberty for their illiberal brutal treatment of all in authority as well as for their strutting in their late non importation project are hated & despised by their former brethren in NYork and Pensilvania & it must be something very extraordinary ever to reconcile them. I am with very great regard Sir Your faithful & most obedient Servant,
AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:346–47); at foot of letter, “Gov Pownall.” Contemporary printings: Boston Gazette, 26 June 1775; Massachusetts Spy, 5 July 1775; Essex Journal, 29 September 1775.
995. From William Sanford Hutchinson
London 22 June 1772
Honoured Sir, I suppose you will have an account of our arrival before you can receive this. I should have wrote by Jacobson had I known he was going so soon. We had an agreable passage of 28 Days & landed at Weymouth, 130 Miles from London, and passed through as fine a Country as any in England, which would have pleased me more had I been well, but the Cold which I had when I left Boston, lasted me the whole passage & has somewhat reduced me. I have not yet got rid of the Cough, but, hope I shall soon, as the Weather is very fine and has been so ever since our arrival in England. I was not at all Sea Sick.
I have delivered most of your Letters, & have seen Sir F Bernard who has nearly recovered his health,
You will excuse to my Brothers & Sisters & Aunt my not writing & assure them it wasnt through want of affection. I hope by the next Vessel to get a little more settled when I will write them all. Your dutiful Son,
Wm. Sanford Hutchinson
Please to Remember me to all Friends & Relations.
RC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 25:520–20a); endorsed, “London 22d June 1772 Son Billy.”
Boston 24th June 1772
Sir, I should have acknowledged the receipt of your Excellency’s Letter of the 15th by the return of the post if my absence from Town had not prevented. I have laid the Letter before my Assembly and it is now under consideration of a Committee.
I think it necessary to acquaint you that altho’ the powers given to the Commissaries were general, yet I have no reason to think they would have entered further into the controversy than to have taken it up where the former Commissaries left it and they were restrained by no Instructions whatsoever.
I do not know what would be the sentiments of the Council & House of Representatives but so far as respects the share I am to take I could have been satisfied with a Commission under the Seal of your Province in the King’s name with your Test without an Act of your Assembly, provided you had given to the Commissaries as full powers as we have given to our Commissaries.
If you expect that in the authority given to our Commissaries your proposal be made the basis is it not equally reasonable it should be so in the authority given to your Commissaries and if this be the case, what need of any Treaty? If this be agreed to be the line there seems to be nothing more necessary than to appoint Surveyors on each part to run or ascertain it.
The settlement may and must be delayed but I hope may finally be effected.
I am deprived of the pleasure I expected from a day or two spent in Governor Tryon’s Company. I am with very great esteem, Your Excellency’s most obedient Servant,
SC (National Archives UK, CO 5/761, ff. 146–47); at foot of letter, “His Excelly Governor Tryon.” AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:347); at foot of letter, “His Excelly Govr Tryon.”
Boston 25 June 1772
(No 29)
My Lord, I shall transmit under cover with this Letter a Report of a Committee accepted by the two Houses relative to the Line with New York together with the Letters which have passed between the Governors of the two Provinces on that subject.
There is a jealousy in the people of this Province that New York expect a more extensive Jurisdiction will be determined for them in England than what they have proposed themselves and that this expectation is the real cause of the long delay of an answer to my Letters to Governor Tryon, and of their declining to close immediately, with the proposal of this Province.
The two Houses have the new Proposals of New York under consideration. I do not believe that any settlement will be effected until New York Assembly meets and makes advances equal to those made by this Assembly or that the Governor will make them without the Assembly. I have no doubt that if the Governors & Commissaries had met agreeable to the Act of this Province such a line might have been settled as that His Majesty would have approved of it; and the same disposition continues still on the part of this Province.
I may therefore, I conceive, be allowed humbly to pray that no determination be made by His Majesty in Council disadvantageous to this Province and that no Act of the General Assembly of the Province of New York which extends the Jurisdiction of that Province beyond the Line reported by the Lords of Trade & Plantations may be allowed by His Majesty, especially as that Line was proposed by the Commissaries from this Province at New Haven in 1767 and refused without sufficient reason, as I apprehend, by the Commissaries from New York. I have the honour to be My Lord Your Lordship’s most humble & most obedient Servant,
RC (National Archives UK, CO 5/761, ff. 136–37); at foot of letter, “Rt. Honble. the Earl of Hillsborough”; docketed, “Boston 25th. June 1772. Governor Hutchinson. (No. 29) Rx 5th. August.” DupRC (National Archives UK, CO 5/894, ff. 212–13); docketed, “Massachusets. Duplicate of a Letter No. 29 from Govr. Hutchinson to the Earl of Hillsborough, dated June 25. 1772, relative to the establishing of a Line between the provinces of Massachusets Bay & New York. O.o. 50. Reced Read Decr: 10. 1772.” AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:348); at foot of letter, “Ld Hillsborough.” SC (National Archives UK, CO 5/768, ff. 247–48); docketed, “Govr. Hutchinson. Boston, 25th. June, 1772. (No. 29.) Rx 5th. Augst.”; at foot of letter, “Inclosures. 1. Report of the Committee of Council & Assembly of Mass. Bay, concerning the Boundary with New York. 2. Letter from Govr. Tryon to Govr. Hutchinson of 6th. Novr. 1771. 3. Do. from Govr. Hutchinson to Govr. Tryon of 26 April, 1772. 4. Do. from Govr. Tryon to Govr. Hutchinson of 15 June, 1772. 5. Do. from Govr. Hutchinson to G. Tryon of 24 June, 1772. 6. Boston Newspaper of 2d. July, 1772.” Enclosures to RC: Report of the Committee of the General Court Concerning the New York Line, 24 June 1772 (National Archives UK, CO 5/761, ff. 138–39); William Tryon to TH, 6 November 1771 (ff. 140–41); TH to Tryon, 26 April 1772 (ff. 142–43); Tryon to TH, 15 June 1772 (ff. 144–45); TH to Tryon, 24 June 1772 (ff. 146–47); Massachusetts Gazette and Boston Weekly News-Letter, 2 July 1772 (ff. 148–49).
Boston 25 June 1772
My Lord, I have the honour of a private letter from your Lordship from Mr. Story. Your Lordships recommendations will always command every thing that is in my power to grant.
There are very few places in this Government except such as are elective worth accepting and it is to be lamented that those few have been too often filled with persons who, while seeking them, have professed to be well affected to Government but, having obtained them, join with the Opposers of it and boast that it is not in the power of the Governor without the voice of the Council to remove them.
Mr. Story seems not to despair of an appointment in the Revenue. Newbury Port, a Town of considerable trade in this Province, is now part of the Port of New Hampshire. He thinks it will be made a distinct Port. I have talked with the Commissioners of the Customs who judge it to be proper but say the Collector of New Hampshire, if the Port be divided, ought to have his choice and they think he would chuse Newbury Port. Is not there one Objection, My Lord, against Newbury Port & New Hampshire continuing one Port. All Vessels, built in or belonging to Newbury Port, are now registered by the Governor of New Hampshire. The fees are not an Object, perhaps not Twenty pounds sterling a year, but it has been made a doubt whether a Governor has authority to grant registers for Vessels unless they belong to his own Province; or are within it at the time when they are registred?
The Assembly make a long Session being employed in a new valuation of the Estates of the Inhabitants in order to a more equal rule for taxing them.
There is more danger of bad consequences from the present Temper of the Rhode Islanders. A Gentleman yesterday from Providence informs me that the Perpetrators of the late atrocious crime are well known but that it would be as much as a man’s life is worth to bring forward a prosecution.
I furnished Adm. Montagu with the relation of another Gentleman a Merchant of this Town of fair character who was at N London in Connecticut Sunday the 21st Instant on which day a Sloop rowed out of the harbour fitted with several Guns & three times the usual Compliment of men which it was understood was designed to protect from seizure some Vessels [expected at] N haven. I hope if any Offenders are taken in any such Acts of Rebellion upon the High Seas [tear in MS] Engd where the Law must take its course.
I have in a publick letter represented to your Lordship the state of our Controversy with New York.
AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:349–52); at foot of letter, “Rt Honble. the Earl of Hillsborough.”
Boston 27 June 1772
Dear Sir, I inquire after you from every New Engd man who comes from London. Story tells me he never saw you. Mr Murray says he had not seen you for many weeks before he left London but they both say you was recovering your health at Bath.
Dalrymple is upon motion with his Regiment the destination not yet publick it is generally tho’t to be the Southern part of the continent which must not be very agreeable to him.
AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:353–54); at foot of letter, “Sir F Bernard.”
Boston 30th. June 1772
Dear Sir, Allow me now & then to enquire after you & Mrs. Gambier and the little Folks. You are in the midst of the great and important affairs of Britain and consequently of all the known parts of the Globe with which in a greater or lesser degree it is now connected. We are an insignificant province where there is little or nothing that is interesting to any but ourselves. You can expect nothing from me therefore of any moment, except we should get into the way of pulling down the houses of the Kings Servants, again, attacking his Troops, burning his Ships or such like exploits. The Province house they design shall fall down. Some of our Heroes talked of selling it but finding my consent was necessary to every valid act they laid aside their design. Our last Ships carried you the news of the burning the Gachepe Scooner at Providence. I hope if there should be another like attempt some concerned in it may be taken prisoners and carried directly to England. A few punished at Execution Dock would be the only effectual preventive of any further attempts. In every Colony they are sure of escaping with impunity. Dalrymple is preparing for an Expedition, it is thought, to the Southern part of the Continent. I pity him. He seems distressed in spight of all his endeavours to put on another face. One of the Regiments at Halifax or some other is to accompany him, the other the 64th. to take his place here. I have by degrees brought the Assembly to such a state that although there are a small majority sour enough yet when they seek matter for protests Remonstrances &c they are puzzled where to charge their Grievances which they look for in the first place and then consider whether the things they complain of are Grievances or not. Under such circumstances and the advantage of having them in the Town of Boston where I can see a Company of them every day, which by the way you would think to be dearly earning your Salary I hope to pass thro’ a Session without much trouble.
AC (Massachusetts Archives, SC1/series 45X, 27:354–55); in EH’s hand. Contemporary printings: Boston Gazette, 26 June 1775; Massachusetts Spy, 5 July 1775; Essex Journal, 29 September 1775.