convey to the Duke all the lands claimed by the Dutch, the first occupants of this colony. Secondly, from the submission and subjection of the Five Nations of Indians to the Crown of England;" and he describes the boundary as "extending westward nearly to the head of the Mohawk branch of Hudson's river, and southward of that branch to within a few miles of the north boundary of Pennsylvania," and says this is the only construction that will satisfy the treaty of Fort Stanwix.

Governor Tryon's observations on the Indian title are of such historical importance that they deserve to be quoted here in full. He says:

"The Second Source of the Title of this Government is grounded on the Claim of the Five Nations who are in the Treaty of Utrecht [1713] acknowledged by France to be subject to Great Britain. Soon after the English conquered this Country from the Dutch, pursuing their system of Policy, they entered into a strict Alliance with the Natives, who by Treaties with this Colony subjected themselves to the Crown of England, and their lands to its protection, and from this period were always treated as Subjects, and their Country consider'd by this Government as part of the Province of New York, which probably gave rise to the extended jurisdiction of the Colony beyond the Duke's Grants, signified by the Words 'the teretories depending thereon' which are found in all the Commissions of the Crown to its Governors. Nor has the Crown except by the Confirmation of the Agreement fixing the Boundary of Connecticut at about Twenty miles east of Hudson's River at any time contracted the jurisdiction of the Colony Westward of Connecticut River and Southward of the Latitude 45 the Proclamation of His Present Majesty of the 7th of October, 1763, leaving the jurisdiction Southward of that Latitude as it stood before, tho' it prohibits for the present the farther

extension of the Grants and Settlements into the Country thereby reserved to the Indians, to avoid giving Umbrage to that people who complained they were too much straitned in their hunting grounds. It is uncertain at this Day to what Extent the Five Nations carried their claim to the Westward and Northward but there is no doubt it went to the North beyond the 45 Degree of Latitude and Westward to Lake Huron, their Beaver Hunting Country being bounded to the West by that Lake, which Country the Five Nations by Treaty with the Governor of this Province at Albany in 1701, surrender'd to the Crown to be protected and defended for themMitchel in his Map extends their Claim much further Westward, and he is supported in this opinion by Maps east corner of Pensylvania or the Beginning of the Lati"The Boundaries of the Province of New York are as follows: On the South, the Atlantic Ocean, including Long Island, Staten Island and others of less note. On the west, the Banks of Hudson's River from Sandy Hook, on the Ocean, to the 41 Degree of Latitude, thence the line established between New York and New Jersey to Delaware River thence the River Delaware to the Northand other Authorities very Ancient aud Respectable." tude 43, which in Mitchel's Map is by mistake carried thro' the whole of that degree. Thence the North Boundary Line of Pennsylvania to the Northwest corner of that Province, and continuing the same line to a point in Lake Erie which bears due south from the East Bank of the Streight of D'Etroit and of Lake Huron to the Forty Fifth Degree of Northern Latitude. On the North, a line from a point on the East Bank of Lake Huron in the Latitude of forty five East to the River St. Lawrence, or the South Boundary Line of Quebec; Thence along the South Boundary Line of that Province across the River St. Lawrence to the Monument on the VOL. IV. CONST. HIST.-II.

East Bank of Lake Champlain, fixed there in the 45 degree of Northern Latitude; Thence East along the Line already run and marked to the Monument or Station fixed on the West Bank of the River Connecticut in the same Latitude. On the East, the Western Banks of the River Connecticut from the last mentioned Station to the Southwest Corner of the Province of New Hampshire, in the North boundary Line of the Massachusetts Bay, and from thence along that Line, (if continued) and the Western limits of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, and the Colony of Connecticut."

The Governor, in reply to another question, says that, assuming Lake Huron to be the western boundary, as inferred from the treaty of 1701, the general extent of the colony east and west was about 456 miles, and of the northern part, including Vermont, about 500 miles; and he also estimates the number of square miles, exclusive of lakes, at 82,112, or 52,551,680 acres. But the geography of the province was materially altered by events which were rapidly hastening to a culmination when Governor Tryon made his report, and in less than a year afterwards the colonies, beginning at Lexington, became involved in a war with the government which had requested this information concerning the province. If the boundaries indicated in this report could have been maintained for the new state, its rank as the Empire State in the Union would have been even more distinctively established. Its area would have been almost equal to the combined area of England and Ireland.

Treaty of Paris, 1783.—In the chapter on the first Constitution I have noted in the Convention proceedings a proposition to include in the Constitution the boundaries of the state; but such boundaries were not inserted, and apparently no attempt was made by the Convention to

We may

define the territorial extent of the new state. assume that the statesmen of that period were familiar with the Tryon report, or at least with the facts relating to the various Indian treaties, and doubtless appreciated the geographical uncertainties indicated by Governor Tryon. Besides, the results of the war might, as they did, modify the supposed boundaries of the state, and a description in the Constitution would have become incongruous and of course inaccurate in the light of the provisions of the treaty of peace, which materially reduced its area.

The ambitious designs of the colonists to seize and hold Canada for the new nation could not be realized, and the treaty of peace, by which the independence of the new nation was formally acknowledged, definitively prescribed the northern boundary, which excluded from the province of New York some 35,000 square miles of territory embraced in Governor Tryon's estimate of its area. By the treaty of peace signed at Paris September 3, 1783, and ratified by Congress early in January, 1784, the northern boundary of the United States, so far as it affected New York, was fixed at the 45th parallel of latitude, beginning at the Connecticut river, "from thence by a line due west on said latitude until it strikes the river Iroquois or Cataraquy (St. Lawrence); thence along the middle of said river into Lake Ontario; through the middle of said lake until it strikes the communication by water between that lake and Lake Erie; thence along the middle of said communication into Lake Erie and through the middle of said lake."

State policy. The foregoing sketch, omitting many interesting details, shows substantially the development of the colonial policy in regard to the acquisition of Indian land, and presents the situation at the close of the Revolutionary War, when, by the treaty of peace, the

thirteen colonies were acknowledged to be free and independent states, and the English Crown surrendered and relinquished all sovereignty over any part of the boundaries included in the treaty. While the state of New York thus acquired jurisdiction over the territory embraced in its boundaries, the Indians were still in possession and acknowledged to be the owners of nearly all the western part of the state. The colonial policy regarding these lands was continued; several statutes were passed in the early years of the state appointing commissioners to negotiate with the Indians in relation to their land and for other purposes relating to Indian affairs, and by an act passed April 11, 1785, commissioners were expressly directed "to obtain a cession or grant, to the use of the people of this state, of such lands within this state now holden or claimed by the native Indians as such Indians shall be willing to dispose of on reasonable terms." It will not be profitable to follow in detail the acquisition of Indian land. The proceedings of the commissioners of Indian affairs have not been published, but there are two manuscript volumes of their transactions in the state library which are readily accessible to the student who may wish to pursue this subject further. Various treaties between the United States and the Indian nations also deal with this question and have an important bearing on our relations with the Indians. Space will not permit a consideration of this subject from the Federal point of view, but our state courts have, on several occasions, determined questions relating to Indian titles and the proper construction of the constitutional provision in relation to Indian contracts.

Chancellor Kent's views.-Chancellor Kent considered this subject on several occasions. In Jackson ex dem. Klock v. Hudson (1808) 3 Johns. 375, 3 Am. Dec. 500, being then chief justice, he said, in delivering the judg