264 Nx^TURAL AND CIVIL 



and criielu- in this kind of oppression, to which 

 they ought not to have submitted, so long as it 

 was in their power to prevent it. Instead of 

 being softened, the iniquity of this oppression 

 v/as increased, by its being committed under the 

 ostentatious authority of the king, the law, and 

 the government of New York. The settlers cer- 

 tainly did right in opposing such pretentions, 

 and proceedings. They felt with an irresistable 

 evidence, that the natural rights of men, were of 

 an higher original, and of a more sacred author- 

 ity, than the variable decisions of a British king 

 or the rapacious views of a provincial governor, 

 and council 3 Such opposition to these pro- 

 ceedinp's, as Vv^as nccessarv in order to be effec- 

 tual, was undoubtedly justifiable by the law of 

 nature and nations. But Vermont was not 

 without error, in suffering the sixteen towns 

 from New Hampshire, to join with her. This 

 was opening the door to irregularity, and con- 

 fusion ; and in the event, was of more disad- 

 vantage, than benefit ; and ought in the first in- 

 stance, to have been prevented. But when New 

 Hampshire and New York were aiming to di- 

 vide the whole territory of Vermont between 

 them, Vermont was not blamable for de- 

 fending herself by the same policy, and recei- 

 ving their towns and settlements into her confed- 

 eration. 



New York had a proper right to claim the 

 juriadiction of tlie whole territory, which the 

 royal decision had assigned to her, in 1764 ; 

 And had she been content with this, there nev- 

 er would have been any controversy about the 

 jaatt&r* . Ha: great error was in regranting the 



