530 INDIAN LAND CESSIONS IN THE UNITED STATES [eth.ann. 18 



Great part of New Ens^land was granted by this company, which at length 

 divided their remaininu; lands among themselves; and, in 1635, surreudei'ed their 

 charter to the crown. A patent was granted to Gorges for Maine, which was allotted 

 to liini in the division of property. 



All the grants made Ijy the Plymouth Company, so far as we can learn, have been 

 respected. In pursuance of the same principle, the King, in 1664, granted to the 

 Duke of York the conntiy of New England as far south as the Delaware bay. His 

 Royal Highness transferreil New .lersey to Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret. 



In 166:!, the Crown granted to Lord Clarendon and otliers, the country lying 

 between the thirty-sixth degree of north latitude anil the river St Mathes; and, in 

 1666, the proprietors obtained from the crown a new charter, granting to them that 

 province in the King's dominions in North America which lies from thirty-sixth 

 degrees tliirty ndnntes north latitude to the twenty-ninth degree, and from the 

 Atlantic Ocean to the South sea. 



Thus has our whole country been granted by the crown while in the occupation 

 of the In<lians. These grants purport to convey the soil as well as the right of 

 dominion to the grantees. In those governments whicli wei'e denominated royal, 

 where the right to the soil was not vested in individuals, but remained in the Crown, 

 or was vested in the colonial government, the king claimed and exercised the right 

 of granting lands ami of dismembering the government at his will. The grants 

 made out of the two original colonies, aftin- tlie resumption of their charters .by the 

 crown, are examples of this. The governments of New England, New York, New 

 Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and a part of Carolina, were thus created. In all 

 of them, the soil, at the time the grants were made, was occupied by the Indians, 

 Y'et almost every title within those governments is dependent on these grants. In 

 some instances, the soil was conveyed by the crown unaccompanied by the powers 

 of government, as in the case of the northern neck of Virginia. It has never been 

 objected to this, or to any other similar grant, that the title as well as possession was 

 in the Indians when it was made, and that it passed nothing on that account. 



These various patents can not be considered as nullities; nor can they be limited 

 to a mere grant of the ])Owers of government. A charter intended to convey politi- 

 cal power only, would never contain words expressly granting the land, the soil and 

 the waters. Some of them purport to convey the soil alone; and in those cases in 

 which the powers of government, as well as the soil, are conveyed to individuals, the 

 crown has always acknowledged itself to be bound by the grant. Though the jiower 

 to dismember regal governments was asserted and exercised, the power to dismem- 

 ber projirietary governments was not claimed ; and, in some instances, even after the 

 powers of government were revested in the crown, the title of the jirojirietors to 

 the soil was respected. 



Charles II. was extremel.v anxious to acquire the property of Maine, but the 

 grantees sold it to Massachusetts, and he did not venture to contest the right of that 

 colony to the soil. The Carolinas were originally jiroprietary goveruuunts. In 1721 

 a revolution was etfected by the people, who shook otf their obedience to the pro- 

 prietors, and declared their dependence immediately on the crown. The king, how- 

 ever, purchased the title of those who were disposed to sell. One of them, Lord 

 Carteret, surrendered his interest in the government, but retained his title to the 

 soil. That title was respected till the revolution, when it was forfeited by the l.-^ws 

 of war. 



Further proofs of the extent to which this ))riniiplc has been recognized, will be 

 found in the history of the wars, negotiations and treaties which the difierent nations, 

 claiming territory in America, have carried on and held with each other. . . . 



Thus, all the nations of Eurojie, who have acquired territory on this continent, have 

 asserted in themselves, and have recognized in others, the exclusive right of the dis- 

 coverer to appropriate the lands occupied by the Indians. Have the American States 

 rejected or adopted this principle? 



By the treaty which concluded the war of our Kevolution, (iieat Britain rolin- 



