Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 7.djvu/14

4 INDIAN TREATIES. south as the Delaware bay. His royal highness transferred New Jersey to lord Berkeley and sir Geortge Carteret. In 1663, the crown grante to lord Clarendon and others, the country lying between the thirty-sixth degree of north latitude and the river St. Mathes; and, in 1666, the proprretorslobtamed from the crown a new charter, granting to them that province m the krng’s ldommions m North America which lies from thirt -six degrees thirty minutes 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 Indians. These grants purport to convey the soil as well as the right of dominion to the grantees. In those governments which were denominated ro al, 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, and of dismembering the gevemrnent at his will. The grants made out of the two original colonies, after the 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 b the Indians. Yet 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 cannot be considered as nullities; nor can they be limited to a mere grant of the powers of government. A charter intended to convey political 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 power to dismember regal governments was asserted and exercised, the power to dismember proprietary governments was not claimed; and, in some instances, even after the powers of government were revested in the crovnm, the title of the proprietors to the soil was respected. Charles II. was extremely 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 proprietary governments. In 1721 a revolution was effected by the people, who shook off their obedience to the proprietors, and declared their dependence immediately on the crown. The king, however, 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 iorhh 'lgiat tutle was respected till the revolution, when it was forfeited yt e ws 0 war. _Further proofs of the extent to which this principle has been recognised, will be found in the history of the wars, negotiations and treaties, which the different nations, claiming territory in America, have carried on, and held with each other. The contests between the cabinets of Versailles and Madrid, respeetin the territory on the northern coast of the gulf of Mexico, were fierce and bloody: and lcontmned, until the establishment of a Bourbon on the throne of Spam produced such amicable dispositions in the two crowns, as to suspend or termmate them. Between France and Great Britain, whose discoveries as well as settlements were nearly contemporaneous, contests for the country actually covered by the Indians, began as soon as their settlements approached