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



consideration is one of the few lines forming tbe exceptions alluded 

 to, at least so far as appears from tbe published data. 



The theory ujiou which the policy and acts of tbe Plymouth colony 

 and several other settlements were based is sufficiently clear, but that 

 of Massachusetts Bay is not so well defined and is not given precisely 

 the same in all the histories in which allusion to it is made. Moreover, 

 the records are somewhat deficient in the data bearing on the question. 

 Further reference, however, will be made to the subject a little later. 



A side light may be thrown on tbe method of acquiring title from 

 the Indians usually followed in Massachusetts, and, in fact, in most of 

 New England, by reference to the following passage from Doyle:' 



Of the various rights of the New Euglaud towuship the most important perhaps 

 were the territorial. lu Virginia the Governor and his Council, as the representatives 

 of the Crown, made over a tract of land to an individual as a tenant for life, paying 

 a (juitrent. In Maryland or Carolina the same process took place, except that the 

 grant was made, not hy the Crown, but by the Proprietors. But in New England 

 the soil was gi-anted by the government of the colony not to an individual, but to 

 a corporation. It was from the corporation that each occupant derived his rights. 

 Nor was this corporate claim to the land a legal technicality, like the doctrine that 

 the soil of England belongs to the Crown, and that all estates in land are derived 

 thence. The New England township was a landholder, using its position for the 

 corporate good, and watching jealously over the origin and extension of individual 

 rights. At the same time the colonial government did not wholly abandon its rights 

 over the territory. For example, we find the General Court of Plymouth in part 

 revoking a grant of lands at Mattacheese, or, as it was afterwards called, Yarmouth, 

 on the ground that the territory in question had not been fully occujiied. It was 

 accordingly enacted that those settlers who hud actually taken up lands shovild 

 continue to enjoy them, but that the township should not be allowed to make any 

 further distribution. 



As we have already seen, the territorial system of the New England town took 

 almost spontaneously a form closely resembling the manor. Part of the land was 

 granted in lots, part was left in joint pasture, part was to be tilled in common. 

 Though this was cultivated on a uniform system, yet apparently it was cut up into 

 strips which were allotted, not in annual rotation, but in permanence, to the differ- 

 ent holders. 



It would follow, as a natural consequence of this custom, that pur- 

 chases of lands from Indians were usually by and on behalf of the 

 towns. 



Plymouth colony commenced its settlement under favorable circum- 

 stances, so far as the right of entry was concerned. Notwithstanding 

 what is stated hereafter in regard to xiurcbases, it appears that tbe 

 land they fixed upon as tbe site of then- town was without inhabitants 

 or claimants. The following, from the " Preface to the Plymouth 

 Laws," as given in Holmes' Annals, shows that this was the under- 

 standing ot tbe first settlers : 



The new Plymouth associates, by the favor of the Almighty, began the colony in 

 New England, at a place called by the natives, Apaum, alias Patuxet; all the lauds 

 being void of inhabitants, we the said John Carver, William Bradford, Edward 



* Puritan Colonies, vol. 11, pp. 12-13. 



