That upon Complaints of Encroachments made by people of the Massachusetts Bay On Lands long since granted under the great seal of this province a Committee of the Councill of the said province did in their report of the Twenty Eighth of ffebruary Last set in a clear light his Majestys right To the Jurisdiction and soil of the Lands westward of Connecticut river and northward of the Colony of Connecticut as part of this his Majesty's province of New York and then pointed out and Considered all the Grants within their Knowledge, by which the Colony of the Massachusetts Bay have pretended To claim, and showed that they could not under any of them rightfully claim any soil or Jurisdiction west of Connecticut river and proposed that the Generall Court of the Massachusetts Bay should Inform this Government "By what Warrant they Claim or Exercise any right To soil or Jurisdiction west of Connecticut river" To which the Generall Court of the Massachusetts Bay after Considering the said report made no answer. But Instead thereof proposed the appointment of Commissioners by Both provinces for settling the Bounds between the said Colonies.

That the Councill of this province on the first of May Last Exhibited Sufficient reasons why Commissioners ought not To be appointed on the part of this province for that purpose. But that the Colony of the Massachusetts Bay ought to answer the former plain request made Concerning their Warrant, to Claim Westward of Connecticut River.

That on the Twelfth of June Last the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay gave a Generall But no particular answer To the said Question Twice proposed to them But Instead thereof resolve to proceed in the matters first Complained of by this Government.

That the Councill of this province on the 19th of July Last. particularly pointed out the defects and Insufficiencys of the answer of the Massachsetts Bay to said Question. AND the injustice of their Resolution to proceed and take upon themselves To be the judges, in Contempt of his Majestys Sole right to Judge in this matter. and that the said Councill propose the sending them a Coppy of the act of this province for appointing Commissioners to Examine into the Eastern Bounds of this Colony, and also propose the stay of Exercising the Jurisdiction of this province on any lands Eastward of our antient grants till the final Settlement of this Controversy or his Majestys pleasure should be known, if the Massachusetts Bay would make no other Encroachments on the said antient Grants, But that should they Continue their Encroachments it would then be the Indispensable duty of this Government to protect his Majestys Subjects thereof.

That some person or persons pretending To Be Officers of the Massachusetts Bay came into the mannor of Livingston in this province (which manor has been in the quiet possession of Robert Livingston

Jun' and his Ancestors about Sixty Years under grants of this province) and on or about the nineteenth day of July last with the aid and assistance of a great number of persons in a Riotous manner Entred the house of Robert Vanduesen in the said Mannor of Livingston, and by force took Bound and Carryed away the said Robert Vanduersen and his son Johannes out of the said Mannor of Livingston in Order to Confine them In some Goal of the Government of the Massachusetts Bay pretending they acted under a Warrant or Authority from that Government.

That on the Twenty Eighth day of July Last a proclamation was Issued by the Late Governour Clinton to apprehend the said Rioters and all who should for the future enter upon any Lands granted under the great seal of this province By Colour of any Authority from the Massachusetts Bay or New Hampshire and to Committ them to Goal to remain till delivered by due Course of Law. And That Michael Hallenbeck one of the said Rioters was by Vertue of the said proclamation, apprehended and Committed to the Goal of Dutchess County.

These things premised we shall beg leave to report our opinion on the Papers referred to us and first as to Michael Hallenbeck's confinement in Goal in this province we have seen a Coppy of a Letter from Governour Clinton to Governour Shirley of the first of October Last, acquainting him with Hallenbeck's Escape out of Goal and the mistakes of their Information Concerning him which renders any other answer in Our opinion needless Save that it has been proved to us that the Land on which the said Hallenbeck was settled at the time of the said Riot, has been held by him and Others before him under the said Robert Livingston and his ancestors as part of the Mannor of Livingston above Sixty Years upon annual rents.

We Conceive that the Massachusets Bay could not with any propriety, Interfere in the matter of his Imprisonment even had his Bail been refused after proper application which however was not done.

As to the said Representation of the 11th of September

The two Houses of the Massachusetts Bay declare therein that "they proposed the mutual appointment of Commissioners for Settling the Boundary Line [which] this New York Government did not agree to. But on the advice of the Councill there in a very Magisterial manner It was demanded of this Government what right they had to soil or Jurisdiction west of Connecticut river.”

Upon which we Beg Leave to remark that when they made the proposal to appoint Commissioners which was on the 12th of Aprill they had the report, of the Councill of this province of the 28th of february under their Consideration In which the Question which they are pleased to term Magisterial was Contained and that it was a proper and the

only Rational Question that Could be put will appear upon Considering that report and in part from the purport of it herein Before set forth. "Tis a question to which this Government had Intitled it self To a fair answer by the rule of Equality of doing To us as we had done to them by our haveing given a fair answer, in such manner as if the Like question had been put by the Massachusets Bay to this Government, and 'Tis a question We suppose they would have answered, & thereby have set forth their right if any other they had than what by that report is pointed out and shown to be void.

We would further remark that they Omitt the reason given by the Council here on the first of May Last why it was improper to appoint Commissioners for the purpose Requested and are pleased to Introduce this which they call Magisterial as if it had Been the answer of this province to their request But why this representation of the matter is made by them, they can best account.

To the next paragraph wherein they Question What the Councill here had declared in their Report of the 1" of May Concerning their knowledge of this affair, We say the Council here are on their Oaths in all their Transactions as Councillors and it seems to stand in need of some Apology to call in question what they had so declared.

They are then pleased to Express themselves thus "As diverse of our ancient and best Towns had been settled West of this river about an hundred years and the Shire Town of Springfield near an hundred and Twenty years" with respect to Those things they might have been so and yet not have Come to the Knowledge of the Councill here, and if they are so (which we know not) Yet we do not apprehend that they will make a Title to any Lands against his Majesty.

On the first reading of the above paragraph few of us doubted but that the Shire Town of Springfield had been situated on the west side of Connecticut river Till we were informed that it is on the East side of the river & that Mr Poplis Large map Represents it so which Information some of us doubted and still doubts the Truth of, Because of the Difficulty of Reconciling it with what was Conceived the Obvious sense of the above paragraph.

We believe that their Committee did Last May Enter into the Manor of Livingston (quietly possessed under a grant of this province about Sixty years without any pretence of the Massachusetts Bay) and are Informed that notwithstanding the said Robert Livingston had then offered to shew them his Title and had actually shewn them a Coppy of the said report of the 28th february and also the report of their Generall Court of the 12th of Aprill proposing To appoint Commissioners for the Settlement of the Boundarys in question and had represented to them the injustice of their proceedings and the undue means taken to

Corrupt his Tenants and to induce them to disown his title and pay him. no more Rents and even after the said Committee of the Generall Court had appeared Satisfied of the Injustice which had been done to him and had in his presence recommended to his Tenants To pay their rents and agree with him as well as they Could till the line was settled Yet Several persons did about ten days after proceed by order of the said Comme as we are Informed to the Surveying and running a line within the said mannor and we believe that Instead of the said Committees agreeing with him "that all proceedings should be stop't till further Orders were taken by the Two Governments" They did Only recommend to his Tenants the Conduct above set forth. But that he agreed to give up his mannor or any part of it To them or to any of his Corrupted Tenants or to lay aside the Exerciseing his just right within his mannor as is in part Insinuated we think is against reason to Believe.

No authority in the County of Hampshire had any Right To take Cognizance of any offence (if that was one) done in the manor of Livingston within this province and it was highly Criminal in any of their Officers to Execute any warrants there, and the demand of the Delivery up of those officers to be sent here for their Tryalls we do not apprehend was extraordinary or unprecedented but Rational and Just for suppose officers of this Province, by a Warrant from him, went to Boston, and Broke Open a house there, and brought away the people, and Committed them to Goal here, for an offence done in Boston, would it be very Extraordinary or unprecedented, to demand those officers from this Government for their tryalls in Boston, for that high Crime Committed there by them? But the Cases are alike for the Manor of Livingston we Conceive to be as clearly part of this province as Boston is part of Massachusetts-Bay, and while the said Report of the 28th of ffebruary Last, and what they call the Magisterial Question therein, stands unanswered, we Believe it will appear so to every Impartial man who reads it.

The Massachusets Government have been pleased to appoint a time and place for the meeting of their Commissioners with those of this province: If they would have been pleased to have Recollected that the Government of this province is his Majesty's Immediate Government, which theirs is not, it would have been something more Decent to haue referred the nameing of those things to this Government.

And as his Majesty is Concerned in the Controversy, and no Settlement which can be made by any authority Derived from Both Governments without the Royal Direction participation and Concurrence, can be Binding on the Crown, we Conceive that the appointment of Commissioners for that purpose would not only be fruitless and Ineffectual to

the Determination of the Controversy but also Derogatory To the rights of the Crown and disrespecfull to his most Sacred Majesty.

Had the Government of the Massachusets Bay giuen a full and perfect Answer to the Report of the 28th of ffebruary last and shown a Colour of Title they had by Grants of the Crown to Soil or Jurisdiction West of Connecticut River. And shown any reasonable Cause to doubt whether the Connecticut River was the Eastern Boundary of this province. It's possibly there might from thence have arisen some Cause for the meeting of Commissioners of Both sides to Come to a right understanding on the Doubtfull matters thereby arisen But while the Title of this Province to be Bounded by Connecticut River, does stand Clear in that Report and no Title appears For the Massachusetts Bay to any soil or Jurisdiction west of that River We cannot apprehend any use even for the meeting of Commissioners, nor that its in the power of this Government to give their Commissioners any other Instructions than to receive the answer of the Massachusetts Bay to the matters in the said report, To deliver which we see no need of the Charge of the meeting of Commissioners on either side, when it may be done by a Letter by the post.

There are some other facts set forth in the said Representation which we think are of very little or no Consequence to the matter in question, whether they be as set forth or not, for which reason we have declined Examining into them and takeing any other than this notice of them.

As To his Excellency Governour Shirley's said Letter we agree in opinion with him, that there ought to be Mutual Condescentions on both sides, and that there can be But Little prospect of any Accomodation of those differences without them, and whatever Condescention is reasonable to be granted by this Government, we doubt not will Be Complyed with when requested, and as M' Livingston has already been at very considerable charge concerning the apprehending of Vanduersent & his son and procuring Bail for them we beg Leave to recommend it to your honour to desire of Governour Shirley that the said Vanduersens and their Bail be discharged to save further Expence in that matter.

And lastly As this Controversy hath already subsisted a Long time and in the present Method of carrying it on is likely to be protracted to a very unreasonable length without the least Appearance of its determination We pray your Honour will be pleased to lay this Report before the Governm' of the Massachusets Bay to be communicated to the next General Court hopeing that they will come to a Resolution to signify to this Government on what their Claim to Soil or Jurisdiction Westward of Connecticut River is founded, and how far the same extends that this Government may Consider of the same, and do