I believe there are Seventeen or Eighteen Acres under Actual improvements of the Land Discribed in said Plan; which Land is. claim'd by one m' Caleb Jones-I have extracted from certain Deeds said Jones has as follows viz by a Deed Signed by the late Col° Joseph Blanchard dated 1757 mentioning a tract of Land Bounded as follows viz begining at a heap of Stones the Northwest Corner of Charlstown School Farm and the Northwest Corner of the Antient Town of Dunstable, by Souhegan river and runing from thence South by the Needle in Dunstable old line one hundred rods, then turns and runs West by the Needle twenty four rods from thence North by the Needle about one hundred rods to said river, then Easterly by said river to the first bounds mentioned In and by a Deed Signed by mrs Blanchard (Widow of the deceased) Express'd as follows that is to Say all the property and Demand which Joseph Blanchard late of Dunstable Esq Deceased had at the time of his decease to that part of the mile Slip (so call'd) lying at the head of Charlstown School Farm (so called) Reserved and not Granted by the Lord Proprietors the said deceaseds Interest in said tract of Land being about forty acres more or less, in Com'on and undivided-one Signed by Jonatha Blanchard Esquire, thus all my Title and Demand of in and unto the tract of Land called the mile Slip aforesaid which I bought of Joseph Green of Boston Esq' Containing by Estimation twenty acres more or less lying in Com'on and undivided with Theodore Atkinson Esq and others purchasers of the Right of John Tufton Mason Esq By this Method I think I have given a clear Idea relative to the affair You wrote me about, & apprehend it will appear so to you, and the other Respectable Gentlemen concern'd Know all men That I Daniel Peirce of Portsm° in ye County of Rockingham in the Prove of New Hampsh' Esq' Have constituted & in my stead & Place put The Hon' Theod' Atkinson of Portsm afores Esq to be my sufficient & lawful Attorney for me & my Name & Stead & on my Behalf to appear at ye present meeting of ye Props of Mason's Patent & on my Behalf to vote in any Matters to be transacted at Said Meeting as to him my s Attorney shall seem meet & proper for my Interest-In Witness whereof I have hereunto my Hand & Seal this thirtyeth Day of Sep 1773Rich Lr Nelson D Peirce [seal] Wm Whipple [Directions for Surveyor.] [Masonian Papers, Vol. 2, p. 40.] DIRECTIONS for Laying out all that Tract of Land lying between the following Towns, and encompassing Kyasarge Mountain -Viz Parry's Town, Alexandria addition, Alexandria, New Chester, New Brittain, Salisbury, Boscawen and New Almsbury. To begin on the Easterly side of Parry's Town where Almsbury corners upon it, thence running to the North Easterly corner thereof, then on the North Westerly side line of said Town till it meets the corner of Alexandria Addition, then on the Easterly side line of that Tract to the corner of Alexandria, or untill you Meet y Corner of New Chester then on the Easterly side of Alexandria to the corner of New Chester, then on the Southerly side line or end line of New Chester to the corner of New Brittain then on the Southerly end line & South Easterly side line of New Brittain to the corner of Salisbury, then on the South Westerly Southerly & Easterly lines of Salisbury to the corner of Boscawen, then on the lines of Boscawen to New Almsbury and then on the line of Almsbury to the place set out from, on the line of Parry's Town NB To make the best observations on th Quality of the land and the extent of the Mountain; also the distance of it from the lines of the several Towns. That we thereby may determine the best way of Laying it out, in order for a division wrote to Jn Sheppard Esq' March 14th 1775-to request his making y Survey of ye above land [Jonas Minot to George Jaffrey, May 3, 1780.] [Masonian Papers, Vol. 2, p. 44.] Sir. I Recd yours of March 28 observed y Contents. have Advertised Meril Ardeway & Day who mean to Comply with the Terms & will Send Down Soon: I find People are about Going on the Best Land in that Goar: & will Soon Take it all up unless Prevented-as I have an Interest in that Land. would Submit it to the Better Judgment of the Proprietors, wheather Capt Atkinson will Not Make Terms: Respecting Said Goar-which will be to our advantage I think the Sooner the Survey of that Land is Compleeted the Better thes from Sir your Most humble Sevt To the Honble George Jeffrey Jonas Minot [Defence against Allen Title, April 12, 1785.] april 12 1785 [Masonian Papers, Vol. 2, p. 45.] A Committee of the Proprietors of the lands purchased of John Tufton Mason Esq' in New Hampshire, in April last, published in the New Hampshire Gazette, a Caution to any Person against purchasing or entering upon the lands of said Proprietors within their Claim, by pretence of the State Claim of the Heirs of Samuel Allen Esq notwithstanding that Caution there are reports that Some Heirs of Allen, or their Agents have given or Sold Sundry parcels of land of Said Proprietors, under the pretended Title of Allens Claim, and that Some persons have accepted their Grants, and others inveigled to make purchases of the land, at very low Rates to prevent the Deception increasing, and of unwary Persons from purchasing and entering upon the lands of Said Proprietors, & for Quieting the minds of those Persons who hold their possessions by grants of the Proprietors a brief State of the Right and Titles of the Claimers of the Heirs of Samuel Allen Esq' to lands in New Hampshire and that of the Purchasers of John Tufton Mason Esq' is presented-In` respect to the Title claimed by Allen's Heirs, it is declared-That John Mason of London Esq', the orignal Grantee of the Lands in New Hampshire, from the Council at Plymouth, in the County of Devon in great Britain; by his Will devised said lands in New Hampshire, to his grand Child John Tufton and to the Heirs of his body lawfully begotten; and for want of Such issue, to Robert Tufton his grand Child, and to the Heirs of his body lawfully begotten; and required, that they should alter their Sirname and take the Sirname of Mason, which they accordingly did: In the year 1690 John and Robert Tufton Mason Sue a common Recovery in the County of Kent in great Britain, to dock the Entail of the lands in New Hampshire, devised in the Will of their Grandfather John Mason Esq In the next year, 1691-John and Robert by one deed, Sell to Samuel Allen Esq' those Lands in New Hampshire-a few years after, John the elder Brother died without issue-Samuel Allen Esq' was com'isonated Governour of New Hampshire, and came to his Government about the year 1700-and in a few years he died in NewHampshire, leaving one Son, Thomas, and four Daughters-in 1706 Thomas Allen Sold to St Charles Hobby one fourth part of the lands in New-Hampshire which his father purchased of John and Robert Tufton Mason. About twenty five years past, a Gentleman arrived here as Attorney to the Heirs of Sir Charles Hobby, to take Care of their Interest in the Lands Sir Charles purchased of Thomas Allen; upon enquiry and examining Allens Title, and the Title of the Purchasers of John Tufton Mason Esq', he ackno'leged that Title under Allen could not be Supported, relinquished his pursuit & went off— Governour Allen and his Son Thomas had conveyed the greater part if not the whole of the land he claimed in New Hampshire; However it does not appear that any part of the land which Allen purchased of John & Robert Tufton Mason in New Hampshire is held or possessed by any person in ye Right or Title of Allen or his Heirs or of those to whom Allen or his Heirs had made a Conveyance of their Right nor could be held against the Heirs in tail of John Mason Esq' after the decease of John and Robert his Grandsons, as the fine & Recovery Sued in the County of Kent in great Britain could not bar the entail of lands in New Hampshire in New England and more especialy when the Court in New Hampshire Subsisting before the year 1690-where it must be Sued with Effect to dock the entail of those Lands in New Hampshire-the mention of one reason is Sufficient to shew the Absurdity of the docking of ye entail to be effectual as it is necessary that the Sheriff of the County, where the common recovery is Sued should put the Party recovering into possession of the Premises, which the Sheriff of y County of Kent in great Britain had no Authority to put any one into possession of Lands in New Hampshire in New England being out of his Bailiwick-In Respect to the Right and Title of John Tufton Mason Esq' to the |