Decem'r 1785, a case and controversy subsisting between Nicholas Easton of the City of Newport on one part and the said City on the other, respecting a certain Beach, Marsh and Pond adjacent, all lying in the City aforesaid.

"Report that we met the said parties, at the Court house in said City of Newport, on the 21st day of instant April, and on said day, the 22d, 24th, and 25th of said month, proceeding from day to day by adjournment, fully heard them, with their evidence and counsel, on said matters of submission, and viewed the premises.

"That it appears to us that the late Town, now City of Newport, under a purchase of the native right and a confirmation by the General Assembly of this State, became seized in fee of the disputed premises, together with an extensive tract of land adjacent. That no grant or disposition appears ever to have been made of said Premises, by said Town or City to any person or persons to hold in severalty; and from their nature and locality it was highly proper that they should be reserved for common use.

"That they appear to have been included in land which the owners of said Town of Newport in 1641 did sequester for a perpetual commonage.-That the inhabitants of said Town have ever as they had occasion, until the present controversy arose, participated in the use of them, taking fish in the Pond, and gravel, sand, kelp &c from the Beach-It also appears that the said Nicholas Easton and those whose right he hath, being all inhabitants of said Town, now city, have from time to time claimed an exclusive right in fee to the said premises, and have ever participated in the use of them; but have not had such exclusive and adverse possession as to disseize said Town or City, or gain a title.

"Whereupon we award and determine that the said disputed Premises, bounding South by the Sea, at low water, Easterly by the Westerly line of the Town of Middletown, from the Sea to the Northerly side of said Pond, and then round by said Pond Westerly and Southerly to the South Westerly corner of the same, from thence South 3 degrees East to the Sea (as the said last mentioned line is laid down in the plan taken by C. Harris, Surveyor taken by order of your Honors and herewith enclosed.) with all the privileges thereof ought to be and shall be and remain to the said City of Newport, for their common use forever-And we further award that the taxable Costs be paid equally by the parties.

"NEWPORT, April 26, 1786.

The citizens had gained their point, and it would seem that, having established their rights, they were willing to concede something to the plaintiff, as appears by the following document, signed by counsel on both sides:

"In the case, Nicholas Easton vs Giles Sanford, before referees, it is agreed by the parties that the determination of the referees be extended to the Beach only, any clause or clauses in the rule to the contrary notwithstanding: and that any right or claim on either side to the Marsh and Pond be not affected hereafter by this agreement.

"NEWPORT, 22d Apl 1786.

"H. MARCHANT

"WM CHANNING S for the defendants.

"J. M. VARNUM1

"II. GOODWIN } for Easton.

The

At this point there is some discrepancy in the dates. above agreement refers to the rule of the referees, but it antedates that instrument four days -a discrepancy that cannot now be explained.

Nicholas Easton did not sit down quietly by the rule of the referees, and after a time he picked a flaw in the rule, having discovered that the word "Bounds" appeared where it should read "Pond." H. Marchant accordingly addressed a lettter on the subject to one of the referees, and received the following reply:

"SIR.

NEW LONDON, Dec. 18, 1786.

Yours of the 30th Ultmo. pr. last Post, came not to Hand until yesterday, upon my Return home from Hartford-our Roads have been almost impassible, but shall transmit it by the first opportunity, to Govr. Huntington and Mr. Elsworthhowever it is not probable they will be able to transmit you an answer by the time you mention-I well remember that there was that mistake of the word Bounds for Pond in the Rule produced. And that it was fully agreed by all the Parties concerned that it was a mere Clerical Mistake, and was agreed to be rectified as such-and by the mutual Consent of all the parties and their Counsel-And that the Beach the Marsh and the Pond-were the three objects that were agreed by all the concerned to be the Subjects of our Enquiery and adjudication—and we accordingly were led by the Parties to take a Par(1) Varnum took part in the suit, but was not engaged at the opening.

ticular View of each and adjudicated upon them accordingly. And am Sir with high Esteem and Respect

Your most Obedt. humble Servt.

HENRY MARCHANT, ESQ.,

Newport.

“RICHARD LAW.”

But the above did not suffice. Nicholas Easton had had a long and troublesome suit, and all that he had gained was the privilege of paying one-half the cost; this with his temperament, was more than he could bear, and he continued to assert his claim exactly as he had done before. A meeting of the Freemen was therefore called, as appars by the following warrant :

"At a Meeting of the Freemen Agreeable to Adjourment, and also by Warrant-October 8th, 11 a. m. o'Clock, 1787.

Christopher Ellery appointed Moderator.

Whereas by the Report of the Referees appointed in the Action of Nicholas Easton, against Gyles Sandford in which this Town was admitted to defend the right of the Town to the Beach, Marsh and Pond within said Town, was established, and a judgment was entered thereon accordingly: And Whereas the said Nicholas notwithstanding said Report, Continues his Claim thereunto: Wherefore it is

Unanimously Resolved, that Messieurs, Henry Bliss, George Champlin, George Sears, Daniel Mason, Peleg Clarke, George Gibbs, Edward Simmons, Samuel Vernon ye 2d and John Topham or the Major part of them be a committee to maintain the right of said Town, to said Beach, Marsh and pond, in such a manner as shall most conduce to the Interests thereof: And this Meeting, placing the fullest confidence in said Committee, do authorize them to take such measures as they shall think proper for the preservation of the Town's Right to said premAnd all such their proceedings shall be as binding on the Town as if done in Virtue of Special orders from a Town Meeting. It is further Resolved, that said Committee be impowered to Contract with Counsel, and make them Reasonable allowances for their former and future services.

ises.

Newport, ye June 22d 1788

the aforegoing is copied from the Book of Town Records, and Compared by

"PELEG BARKER, JUNR, Town Clk." The committee so appointed obtained the following certificate from the referees.

"These may Certify. That in the Case of Easton with the City of Newport, which was referred to us the Subscribers

according to our best recollection-when the Cause came on before us and the Files read it appeared that the word Bound was written in the Submission, instead of the word--Pond, which was then by all the Parties concerned agreed to be a meer clerical mistake-and we were desired and directed by them to consider it as such-and accordingly we heard the Parties, relative to the Medow, Beach and Pond-as the three Subjects of Controversy and were also directed by all the Parties to go and view the same and accordingly did so-and awarded relative to the same as being within our Instructions-by the express agreement and consent of all concerned therein-as witness our bands. Dated in Connecticut the 16 day of Feby. 1787.

Two days later the matter in suit was compromised as follows:

"Be it remembered that in the Case Nicholas Easton of Newport in the County of Newport Plt. vs. Giles Sanford of sd. Newport, Deft. Wherein the Town of Newport is admitted as Deft. It is agreed by the Parties that sd. Case be continued until the next term-and for the settling and compromising the same; and that the Parties may be at Peace and harmony-It is further agreed that the Town of Newport shall relinquish unto said Nicholas Easton his Heirs and Assigns forever all their right and title to all the Kelp, Coral, Rock weed and all other kinds of Sea Grass and weeds cast upon the shore, or any parts thereof, called Easton's beach, together with an exclusive right for the said Nicholas to carry the same off.

"That the said Nicholas Easton shall relinquish his right. to the Beach and Marsh Land, together with the Pond adjacent, to the sd. Town of Newport forever-saving to himself the free and uninterrupted right of the Shore of the Pond with the soil which shall be made thereto which do adjoin his Lands which are now uncontroverted-June 24h, 1788.

"The Committee for the Town of Newport do agree to the above and engage to use their influence in the Town aforesd. that the same shall be carried into Execution, that the dispute aforesd. may be finally settled.

"GEO. CHAMPLIN,
"G. SEARS,

"PELEG CLARKE,

"JONATHAN EASTON, JR.,

"SAML. J. POTTER,

"R. J. HELME,

"HENRY GOODWIN, Acts, for N. E."

Thus ended this long and vexatious suit as to the ownership of the Town on Easton's Beach. During the pending of the suit party feeling ran high, and it has been asserted that Easton's disappointment found vent in influencing the withdrawal of the Charter of the City of Newport and the return to a Town form of government.