Note by the Commissioner on the Sources of Land Titles in Maine

Screenshot 2024 03 15 064240

The development of that political jurisdiction and sovereignty, which at the end of more than two centuries ripened into State Independence in 1820, is so peculiar and interesting, and the sources of land titles in Maine are so obscure as to justify a reference to some of the more important links in the intricate historical chain.

In 1493, Alexander VI, Pope of Rome, issued a bull, granting the New World, which Columbus was discovered during the preceding year by the sovereigns of Spain and Portugal. Under this title, Spain laid claim to the entire North American Coast from Cape Florida to Cape Breton, as part of its territory of Bacalaos. It has even been claimed that between 1566 and 1588, Spain took the fortified possession of Maine as a part of its grant at Pemaquid, but such possession, if effected, was abandoned before the end of the sixteenth century.

Although in that age, a Papal bull was usually regarded by British nations as a sufficient title to heathen lands, both France and England protested against the exclusion of so many Christian Princes from this wholesale grant. England, becoming Protestant, did not hesitate to plead against the bull, its legal maxim “Prescriptio sine possessione haud valebat,” and in 1588, Drake decided the issue by his victory over the Danish Armada in the British Channel.

In 1495–6, three years after the discovery of the Western Hemisphere, Henry VII, King of England issued a commission to John Cabot and his sons “to seek out, discover, and find whatsoever Isles, Countries, Regions, or Provinces of the Heathens and infidels” hitherto unknown to all Christians; and, as vassals of the King, to hold same by his authority. (1) Under this commission, the rising Venetians discovered the Western continent more than a year before Columbus saw it, and the American coast, at least as far as Nova Scotia to Labrador. (2) (3)

In 1502, the same king commissioned Hugh Eliot and Thomas Ashurst to discover and take possession of the islands and continents in America; “and in his name and for his use, as his vassals, to enter upon, doss, conquer, govern, and hold any Mainland or Islands by them discovered.” (2)

In 1524, Francis I, King of France, said that he should like to see the clause in Adam’s will, which made the American continent the exclusive possession of his brothers of Spain and Portugal, is said to have sent out Verrazzano, a Florentine corsair, who, as has generally been believed, explored the entire coast from 30° to 50° North Latitude, and named the whole region New France. (1)

In 1534, King Francis commissioned Jacques Quartier [or Cartier] to discover and take possession of Canada; “his successive voyages, within the six years following, opened the whole region of St. Lawrence and laid the foundation of French dominion on this continent.” (1) (2)

In 1574, a petition had been presented to Elizabeth, Queen of England, to allow of the discovery of lands in America “fatally reserved to England and for the honor of Her Majesty,” and, in 1578, she gave a royal commission to Sir Humphrey Gilbert, “for planting our people in America,” authorizing himself, his heirs, and assigning them to discover’, occupy and possess such remote “heathen lands not actually possessed of any Christian prince or people, as should seem good to him or them,” and in 1584, after Gilbert’s death, she renewed the grant to Sir Walter Raleigh, his half-brother.

Under this commission, Raleigh made an unsuccessful attempt to plant an English colony in Virginia, a name afterwards extended to the whole North Coast of America in honor of the “Virgin” Queen. (3)

On November 8, 1603, Henry IV, King of France, granted Sieur de Monts, a Protestant gentleman of the King’s Bedchamber, a royal patent conferring the possession of and sovereignty of the country between latitudes 40° and 46° (from Philadelphia as far north as Katahdin and Montreal). Samuel Champlain, geographer to the King, accompanied De Monts on his voyage, landing at the site of Liverpool, N.S., a region already known as “Acadia,” May 6, 1604, but establishing their first colony of gentlemen, priests, ministers, vagabonds, and ruffians, “the best and the meanest of France,” at Neutral Island, in the St. Croix River, where they passed the winter of 1604-5. After carefully exploring the entire coast of Maine and giving names to Mt. Desert and the Isle au Haut, they abandoned its shores in 1606.(4)

“But the noble efforts of Raleigh had not passed out of thought.” (5) On the last day of March, 1605 (0. S.), Captain George Waymouth sailed from the
Downs in the Arc-angel, a ship which had been fitted out by Sir Ferdinando Gorges, Governor of Plymouth, in England (to whom Waymouth on his return gave the three Maine Indians whom he kidnapped), and the Earls of Southampton and Arundel, and anchored off the coast of Maine, May 17, probably under Monhegan Island, whence he visited the mainland and from the anchorage in “Pentecost Harbor” (probably George’s Island Harbor, possibly Boothbay) explored “that most excellent and beneficial River of Sagadahoc,” and afterwards, as some have supposed, the Penobscot, returning the same season to England. (6) (7)

Early the next spring, an association of English gentlemen, prominent among whom was Gorges, obtained from James I, King of Great Britain, a grant of all that part of North America between latitudes 34° and 45° (from South Carolina to New Brunswick) “extending from the sea on the east between those parallels of latitude west, one hundred English miles inland, and the Islands within one hundred miles of the shore, to be holden by them as a corporation, and to their success in the same, and to their assigns, in free and common socage, not in capite, nor by knights’ sevice; but after the form of the royal manor of East Greenwich, in the county of Kent, for the advancement of the Christian religion and the good of God; and to replenish the deserts with people, which would be led by laws and magistrates.” (1)

By the Royal Patent, which passed the seals on April 10, 1606, the grantees were, at their own desire, incorporated into two Companies under one Council of Government, wherein Richard Hakluyt, Somers and their associates, of London, formed the London Company, Dr. First Colony of Virginia; and Lord John Popham, Chief Justice of England, Raleigh Gilbert, George Popham, Sir Ferdinand D Gorges, and others of Plymouth, in the County of Devon, and their associates, formed the Plymouth Colony, or the Second Commonwealth of Virginia. The first colony was permitted to begin a plantation anywhere South of Latitude 41° and the Second Colony anywhere North of 38°, provided that the Colony last planted should not settle within one hundred miles of the other. The government was ordained as a general “Council of Virginia,” consisting of thirteen men appointed by the crown, residing in England, with paramount jurisdiction, to be exercised according to such arrangements as should be given them under the royal sign manual; and two subordinate councils, each of thirteen members, living in America, named in the same way. The first settlement was affected by the London Company of South Virginia at Jamestown, in Virginia, April 26, 1607. (2)

On the last day of the next month, two ships “The Gift of God,” commanded by George Popham, brother of the Lord Chief Justice, and “The Mary and John,” composed by Raleigh Gilbert, son of Sir Humphrey and nephew of Sir Walter Raleigh, sailed from Plymouth with the Plymouth Company of North Virginia, arriving at Monhegan Island, August 8, at Stage Island, August 11, and landing at the site of Fort Popham, at the mouth of the Kennebec, August 18, 1607, where, with Popham for their President and Gilbert for their Admiral, the Colony built a thirty-ton vessel “The Virginia of Sagadahoc” and passed the winter. But they experienced So many misfortunes and discourages in the death of their president, the loss of their fort, storehouse and magazine, and the hostility of the natives, that the settlement was abandoned in the spring, some of the company returning to England, while Some, as there is reason to believe, may have gone to Virginia, and others probable to Monhegan and Pemaquid. (3) (4)

During the next twelve years, settlements were attempted at various points on the coast of Maine, at Mt. Desert, in 1613, by Suassaye, agent of Madame de Guercheville, a French Roman Catholic lady who had procured of De Monts a Surender of his patent, and had obtained a Charter from the French King at Monhegan, in 1614, by Captain John Smith, ex-president of the Commonwealth Council of Virginia Who gave to New England the name which was confirmed by Charles I, when Prince of Wales, by Sir Richard Hawkins, President of the Plymouth Colony in October 1615, -at Saco, by Richard Vines and his companions, whom Gorges hired to remain during the winter of 1617, and others. (5)

The General Court of Massachusetts, by a resolution of July 6, 1787, granted to ”Monsieur and Madame de Gregsire, all such parts and parcels of the island of Mount Desert, and other islands, and tracts of land particularly described in the grant or patent of his late most Christian majesty, Lewis XIV, in April 1691, to Monsieur de la Motte Cadillac, grandfather of said Madame de Gregoire, which now remain the property of this commonwealth,” not so much on account of any legal claim, “the legal title to the lands having been by Iong lapse of possession lost to said heir at law,” but as an “act of the most liberal justice” and “through the liberality and generality of this Court, which are not hereafter to be drawn into precedent.” (6) Perhaps the inlet between Mt. Desert and Gouldsborough may thus have derived the name “Frenchman’s Bay.”

In September 1619, the Leyden Pilgrims who had been in Holland since 1608, obtained a patent from the London or South Virginia Company under which they founded the first permanent Colony in New England, at Plymouth, Massachusetts, Dec. 11, 1620. (0. S.)

While the Pilgrims were on their way under their South Virginia patent, King James, on petition of Sir Ferdinando Gorges, granted to the North Virginia Company a new separate patent dated Nov. 3, 1620, and known as the great Charter of New England, conferring in fee simple all the North American continent and islands between the parallels of 40° and 48°, “throughout the mainland from sea to sea” (from the Bay of Chaleur as far south as Philadelphia). The patentees were forty noblemen, knights, and gentlemen of England, chief of whom were the Duke of Lenox, Sir Ferdinando Gorges, Francis Popham, son’ of the late Chief Justice, and Raleigh Gilbert; they were styled “The council established at Plymouth in the County of Devon for planting, ruling, and governing New England in America.” (1)

Whatever may have been the original design of the Pilgrims when they embarked In the Mayflower at Plymouth, their captain landed them nearly a degree north of the extreme limit of the South Virginia patent under which they had sailed, so that the colony found itself from the start within the jurisdiction of the Great Charter of New England.

But Gorges, Chief Manager of the Council, courteously obtained the new colony a Charter issued June 1, 1621, and enlarged in 1630, on which all the legal titles of the “Old Colony” are based. (2)

On February 2, 1619, John Pierce, a London clothier, and his associates obtained a grant. “in the northern part of what was called New England.”

On Feb. 12, 1620, Thomas Weston was sent to the Pilgrims at Leyden, in Holland, to inform them of the fact and to induce them to go there, which, it is stated, they were inclined to do so for “the hope of present profit to be made by the fishing that was found in that country.”

It is recorded in the transactions of the directors of the Virginia Company that prior to June 1, 1621, John Pierce had a grant indorsed by Sir T. Gorges and had seated thereupon a company within the limits of the Northern Plantations. This colony settled in and about Muscongus, north of New Harbor of Pemaquid. This grant of 1619, located prior to February 1620 and settled before 1621, was the root of the Muscongus grant and ended in the Waldo Patent. (3)

But the authority of the Council for the affairs of New England was too remote to be referred to by the Pilgrims. Therefore, they came into a voluntary and solemn compact, dated Nov. 11, 1621, to obey the laws, which should be made by their own common consent, and for this purpose, they assumed the title of a body politic, and proceeded to a division of the land. Under this compact, or at least without other authority, John Billington, one of the original companies of the Mayflower, was executed at Plymlouth in 1630 for the murder of one Newcomin. (4) (5)

On August 10, 1622, the Council granted Gorges and Mason a patent conveying all the country between the Merrimac and Kennebec to the farthest head of said rivers, and many miles inland, with all the islands and islets within five leagues of the shore which “they intend to call the province of Maine,”

On March 19, 1627-8, the Plymouth Council, through the friendly instrumentality of Gorges and the Earl of Warwick, granted to Sir Henry Roswell, John Endicott, and others, the territory, afterwards called the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, in New England, “between the great River Merimeck and the Charles River, in the bottom of a certain bay, called Massachusetts Bay; and within three English miles to the Northward of the River Merimeck or to the Northward of any and every part thereof from the Atlantic and Western Sea and Ocean on the East Part, to the South Sea, on the West part.” (6)

To give full effect to this patent, a Royal Charter was obtained on March 4, 1628-9, by which it was erected into a colony, under the name of Massachusetts Bay, and Endicott and his associates were incorporated into a government, with the power to choose a governor, deputy governor, and assistants, annually and forever. (7)

Endicott’s colony of Puritans arrived at Salem in 1628, but the authority of the corporation was exercised under a form of government agreed upon in London on April 30 1629, whereby the sole power was delegated from time to time to thirteen of such residents on the plantation “as should be reputed the most wise, honest, expert, and discreet.” (1)

Gorges claimed that in the Royal Patent to the Massachusetts Bay Colony, it was expressly conditioned that the grant should contain nothing to prejudice his son Robert, who in 1622 had obtained, under the Great New England Charter, the patent of a tract extending ten miles along Massachusetts Bay. But the Massachusetts agents claimed that this grant was “void in law,”  and the colony was advised “to take possession of the chief part thereof,”  which was forthwith done. (2)

In January 1629, before the Puritan colony had been organized upon the shores of Massachusetts, the Pilgrims had received from the Plymouth Council of Gorges an advantageous grant on the Kennebec, since called the Kennebec or Plymouth Patent, comprising a territory of about 1,500,000 acres, fifteen miles in width on each side of the Kennebec River, between Woolwich and Cornville. This grant was sold by the Pilgrim Colony in 1661 for £400 sterling to four persons. In 1753, the lands passed to a company, and were thenceforward known as the Kennebec Purchase. (3)

As early as 1624, Gorges had been called to the bar of the House of Collons to defend the Plymouth Council against the charge of misuse of its charter, and was required to deliver the patent forthwith to the House.

This Gorges declined to do because he had no authority to deliver the patent without the consent of the Council and because it was not in fact in his custody. But the House, in its presentation of grievances to King James, put the Plymouth Patent at the head of the list. Nevertheless, the King refused to recall it.

The next year, James I died. His successor, Charles I, married the daughter of the French King, and stipulated in the marriage treaty to cede Acadia to France.

In 1635, D’Aulney, under Razillai, in behalf of France, took possession of Penobscot [Castine] and drove out the English who had a trading house there. (4)

The north-eastern portion of the Plymouth patent was claimed by the French King. as part of Acadia, and Gorges was again summoned to defend it—this time before the King and his Council.

As soon as the French claim had been disposed of, the Commons again moved the crown for a dissolution of the charter, which the King refused to grant. (5)

On June 7, 1635, the Plymouth Council surrendered to Charles I the Great Charter of New England, which had been granted by James I in 1620, having divided all the territory that had not been deeded by the Council into eight Royal Provinces, four of which were in Maine, and the others in New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York and New Jersey. Gorges obtained Western Maine, being all the territory between the Piscataqua and the Kennebec, more than one-sixth of the present area of the state.

The Council also petitioned King Charles to revoke the Massachusetts Bay Charter alleging that it had been obtained surreptitiously and was held wrongfully, that a portion of their territory rightfully belonged to Robert Gorges, son of Sir Ferdinando, who, when the governor took actual possession of it, and that the Massachusetts Bay the colonists claimed to be absolute masters of the continent from sea to sea, a distance of more than a thousand leagues. Judgement was given that the franchises of Massachusetts Bay should be seized into the King’s hands, but in the confusion of the times it was never carried into execution.

On April 28, 1634, the King had appointed eleven of his Privy Councillors, Lords Commissioners of all his American plantations, and soon afterwards he made Sir Ferdinando Gorges Governor General over the whole of New England. (6) The same year or the next, he sent over his nephew, William Gorges, as Governor of his lands in Western Maine, which he called “New Somersetshire.” Governor William Gorges
opened a court at Saco as the shire town on March 28, 1636, which was the first organized government established within the present state of Maine.

At this time, there were six permanent settlements within the province: at Agamentic (now York),  at the Piscataqua settlement from Kittery Point to Newichawannock and the Northern Isles of Shoals; at Black Point, in Scarboro; at the Lygonian Plantation, or Casco, now Portland and vicinity; and at the Pejepscot settlements, on the lower Androscoggin, besides the Kennebec patent, which was under the jurisdiction of the Pilgrims. (1)

It was not, however, until April 3, 1639, that Sir Ferdinando Gorges obtained from King Charles, in a Provincial Charter of his Territory, described “all that Parte, Purpart, and Porcon of the Mayne Lande of New England aforesaid, beginning at the entrance of Pascatway Harbor,” extending up that river and through Newichawannock and Salmon Fall rivers, “north-westward, one hundred and twenty miles, and then overland to the utmost northerly end of the line first mentioned, including the north half of the Isles of Shoals;”… “also all the islands and inlets within five leagues of the Mayne, along the coasts between the said rivers Pascatway and Sagadahock, all of which said Parte, Purpart, or Porcon of the Mayne Lande wee doe for us Our heirs and successors create and incorporate into our province or county. And wee doe name, ordeyne, and appoynt that the Porcon of the Mayne Lande and Premises aforesaid shall forever hereafter be called and named THE PROVINCE OR COUNTIE OF MAYNE.” (2)

By this memorable charter, Gorges was made Lord Palatine of a princely domain extending northerly to the mouth of the Dead River and northwesterly to Umbagog Lake, the only instance of a purely feudal possession on this continent: a charter containing more extensive powers than were ever granted by the English crown to any other subject.

Under this Charter, which made the Lord Palatine, his heirs, and assigns absolute Lords Proprietors of the Province, subject only to the supreme dominion, faith, and allegiance due to the crown and certain revenues payable thereto, with the power to erect Courts of justice, and in concurrence with a majority of the freeholders, assembled in legislation, to establish laws extending to life or members, the colony was organized March 10, 1640, by the appointment of Thomas Gorges, cousin to Sir Ferdinando, Deputy Governor, Richard Vines, five other councillors, and the first General Court for the preservation of justice throughout his province, was opened at Saco on June 25 1640. The province was divided by the Kennebunk River into two counties, “East and West,” the former gradually acquiring the name “York” with its shire to at Agamenticus, and the latter the name of “Somerset,” or ‘New Somerset,” with Saco for its shire. (3)

Prior to the surrender of its charter, the Plymouth Council in England had issued twelve land patents within the limits of Maine, in addition to the two already mentioned, viz:

In 1630.
To Lewis and Bonythan on the north side of the Saco River, four miles along the
coast and eight miles inland.
To Oldham and Vines, a similar tract in Biddeford, on the south side of the Saco.
The Muscongus Grant, a territory thirty miles square between the Muscongus and
Penobscot Rivers, aftenvards known as the Waldo patent.
The Lygonia Patent, ending from Kennebunk to Harpswell and forty miles
inland, including rights to soil and government.

In 1631.
The Black Point Patent in Scarboro’, to Cammock, 1,500 acres on the sea coast, on
the east side of the Black Point River;
The Pejypscot Patent on the North Side of the Androscoggin River, to Bradshaw;
The Agamenticus Patent, to Godfrey and others at York, 12,000 acres;
Richmond’s Island and 1,500 acres on the inainland at Spurwink, in Scarboro’, to
Bagnall;
Cape Porpoise (Kennebunk Port),  2,000 acres on the south side, to Stratton.

In 1632.
The Treiawney and Goodyear Patent “between Black Point and the River and Bay of Casco,” including the ancient town of Falmouth (Portland and vicinity), Cape Elizabeth and a part of Gorham.

The Pemaquid Patent at Bristol, between the Muscongus and Damariscotta Rivers, 12,000 acres along the seacoast and up the river, besides all three leagues of islands into the ocean, with powers of government. The Way and Purchas Patent on the lower Androscoggin, reaching Casco Bay,
The whole, embracing the entire seaboard from the New Hampshire line to the Penobscot (save the coast between Sagadahoc and Damariscotta, a tract of five leagues, including the Sheepscot plantation and the Islands, and the most even of those small strip was claimed under the Kennebec Patent. Some of these grants conflicted with each other. (1)

On April 10, 1641, Sir Ferdinando Gorge’s, by a special charter of incorporation, was erected Agamenticus into a “borough,” and by a second charter dated March I, 1642, incorporated it with a territory of twenty-one square miles into a city called Gorgeana, with a charter that allowed no appeal to England. Under this charter, in 1644, a woman was tried, convicted, and executed in Gorgeana for the murder of her husband. (2)

Encouraged by the success of Republicanism in England, Sir Alexander Rigby, a member of the Long Parliament, purchased the Lygonia Patent, taking an assignment of the charter on April 7, 1643, and claimed exclusive jurisdiction thereunder from Kennebunk to Harpswell, but agreed to submit his claim to the Magistrates of Massachusetts Bay, who, in June 1645, dismissed the case, advising the disputants to live in peace until a decision comes from the proper authority.

In March 1646, the Earl of Warwick, whom the House of Commons in 1642 had appointed Governor General and High Admiral of all the American Plantations, and sixteen Commissioners (of whom John Pym and Oliver Cromwell were two) decided that Rigby was “the lawful owner and proprietor, in fee-simple, of the Province of Lygonia, being a tract of land forty miles square, lies on the south side of the river. Sagadahock and adjoining the great ocean, or sea, called Mare del Nort,” and directed the Governor of Massachusetts Bay, in case of resistance, to afford Rigby’s officers all suitable assistance. This restricted Gorges to the Kennebunk River on the East: (3)

The next year, Sir Ferdinando Gorges died in England while in arms for King Charles I against the Parliamentary forces.

At the death of the Gorges, the present area of Maine embraced four great political
sections:
First,—the restricted Province of Gorges, extending from the New Hampshire Line
to the Kennebunk River, and one hundred and twenty miles into the interior.
Second,—Lygonia, extending forty miles east from the Kennebunk River, and forty
miles inland, including Harpswell and the Islands of Casco Bay.
Third,—the Sagadahoc Territory, extending from the Kennebec River to the Penobscot, including several detached settlements, the chief of which was the Pemaquid Patent; and
Foul’th,— The region between Penobscot Bay and the Passamaquoddy or St. Croix
River was, at the time, in substantial possession of the French and claimed by them as part of Acadia. (4)

Discouraged by the dismemberment of the province and the death of the Lord Palatine, followed in less than two years by the execution of the King, the people of Wells, Gorgeana and Kittery held a consultation at Gorgeana in July, 1649, where they formed themselves into this “Social Compact:” — “We, with our free and consent, do bind ourselves in a body political and combination, to see these parts of the Country and province regulated, according to such laws as have formerly been exercised, and such others as shall be thought meet, but not repugnant to the fundamental laws of our native country.” (5)

Two years later, the General Court of Massachusetts Bay put forth a new claim. King Charles’ Charter of 1622–9 embraced “all the lands within the space of three English miles, to the northward of the River Merrimeck, or to the northward of any and every part thereof,” meaning, as had always been supposed, three miles beyond the river, but the colonial government now contended that their charter conveyed all the territory south of the line drawn due east across the country from point three miles north of the shore of the Merrimac to the same latitude on the Maine coast.

At the May session, 1652, the claim was embodied in a Legislative Resolve, and commissioners were appointed to procure “suitable artists (1) and assistants” to take a true observation of the latitude and to make the Survey, which they accomplished in August. 1, 1652, fixing the source of the Merrimac at Lat. 43° 40′ 12″, and at the October session their report was accepted, and the jurisdiction of Massachusetts was declared to extend as far north and east as a line drawn due east from a point three miles north of the head waters of the Merrimac in Lat. 43° 43′ 12″, “touching the southernmost bend of the River Presumpscot, and touching the coast at Goose Rock” (on the line which still divides the towns of Falmouth and Cumberland) “and terminating at Split Rock, on the northern point of Upper Clapboard” (Sturdivant’s) “Island, in Casco Bay, about three miles eastward of the Casco Peninsula” (Stover’s Point). (2)

The authorities of Massachusetts Bay at once proceeded to enforce their claim as fast as practicable upon the inhabitants of the Province of Maine and of Lygonia, South of 43° 43′ 12″, Luckidly for them, Edward Rigby, son and heir of Sir Alexander who had died in 1650, was pleased, at this juncture, to address the leaders of Lygonia a letter, dated London, July 19, 1652, notifying them that he conceived that all political power derived from his father expired at his death and commanding them to desist and abstain from the full exercise thereof, thus extinguishing the Lygonia government of which Saco had made the shire. (3)

In November 1652, a commission was appointed by the General Council of Massachusetts Bay was opened at Kittery, which had been incorporated into a town under the Government of Gorges five years before. and the inhabitants were persuaded to acknowledge their subjection to the government of Massachusetts Bay in New England.

Proceeding to Gorgeana, which had been erected into a borough by Sir Ferdinando Gorges in 1641, and chartered by him as a city in March 1642, abolished its charter and named it York, being the second town incorporated into the state. The next year, Wells, Saco, and Cape Porpoise (now Kennebunkport) were incorporated as towns by the Massachusetts Bay Commissioners. In July. 1658, Scarboro’ and Falmouth were incorporated out of the Lygonia territory and declared to be a part of Yorkshire. On October 27, 1658, the towns of York, Kittery, Wells, Saco, and Cape Porpoise were presented their memorial to “Lord Cromwell,” expressive of their satisfaction in the new government as administered by Massachusetts Bay, with a request for its uninterrupted continuance. (4)

At the restoration, in 1660, Ferdinando Gorges, grandson of the Lord Palatine, made claim to the Province of Maine, appealing to King Charles II in Council and to Parliament. (5)

Although the Committee of Parliament reported in favor of Gorges, it was not until January 11, 1664, that he obtained from the King an order to the Governor and Council of Massachusetts Bay forthwith to restore to him his province, or without delay assign their reasons for withholding it, and on June 11, 1664, the King addressed them a letter communicating his decision. But, notwithstanding, neither the King nor the Parliament of Charles II had any sympathy with the Massachusetts authorities, and In spite of the defects in that colony’s title, the General Council didn’t succeed in delaying final judgment for twenty years. (6)

But as early as March 12, 1664, the King granted to his brother James, Duke of York and Albany (afterwards King James II), all the Dutch territory on the Hudson River, including Long Island, together with the whole region between the St. Croix and Pemaquid, “thence to the Kennebeck and so upwards, to the ruler of Canada Northward.”

This grant was known as “The Duke of York’s Property,” “The Territory of Sagadahock, New Castle, and “The County of Cornwall.”! It was an encroachment upon the Kennebec Patent, the Pemaquid Patent, the Muscongus Patent, and others. Col. Nichols assumed the government of the ducal province as Deputy Governor under his Royal Highness, on Sept. 5, 1665, possession was taken of the Sheepscot plantation as the shire of the New County of Cornwall, the plantation being named Dartmouth or New Dartmouth . (1)

By 1670, the “Province of Maine” had been substantially reduced to the subjection of Massachusetts Bay; the interior regulations of Yorkshire had been perfected by the establishment of courts and the appointment of magistrates, commissioners, and judges, chief of whom was Thomas Danforth.

But the French, who were in full possession of Nova Scotia (including New Brunswick) and the territory west as far as the Penobscot River, boldly claimed jurisdiction over the rest of the Duke of York’s Patent, even to the Kennebec. In this aspect of affairs, both Massachusetts Bay and Duke’s colonists had reason to apprehend the sale or resignation of his entire Eastern patent to the French.

“To contravene a measure so much apprehended, the General Council in May, 1671, suspecting the accuracy of the survey of 1651,” determined to have a revision of their Northern line, which was accordingly made by Mountjoy of Falmouth in 1672, who found it six minutes further north, at 43° 49′ 12″, crossing the Kennebec near Bath, and terminating at White Head Island in Penobscot Bay. This new line, “run more suitable to the exigency,” added to the Massachusetts Bay Charter an extensive seaboard, also Arrowsic, Parker’s, and George’s Islands, with Monhegan, Matinicus, Damariscove and, in fact, all the other islands along the coast, and even the principal settlement at Pemaquid, “but happily, not embracing Dartmouth, the seat of the Duke’s Government.”

Encouraged by the recapture of the fort at New York by the Dutch armor On June 30, 1673, the General Court of Massachusetts Bay sanctioned Mountjoy’s Survey and in October 1673, proceeded to erect the easternmost section of the readjusted patent beyond Sagadahoc into a new county. In May 1674, a court was opened at Pemaquid, which was made the shire of the “County of Devonshire,” extending from Sagadahoc to Georges’ River.

But by a treaty of peace signed on February 9, 1674, Holland had already restored the Province of New York to the English, and on June 22, 1674, King Charles granted to the Duke of York a new patent comprising all the territories embraced in that of 1664. The Duke thereupon commissioned Sir Edmund Andros, Governor of both provinces, New York and Sagadahock, and Andros assumed the government in October. (2)

In 1676, Gorges and Mason, in their complaint against Massachusetts Bay, they had instituted in 1659, succeeded in persuading the King to serve legal notice of the charges against the Massachusetts Bay authorities and to require the appearance of its agents in defense.

Toward the end of the year, the Massachusetts agents appeared before a committee of the Privy Council, who gave a decision substantially extinguishing the claims of Massachusetts Bay to Maine, but leaving the rightful ownership of the province undetermined.

In consequence of this decision, the authorities of Massachusetts Bay employed John Usher, a Boston trader then in England, in behalf of the Colony, purchased all his interest in the Province. May 6, 1677, Ferdinando Gorges gave Usher an assignment of THE PROVINCE OF MAYNE for £1,250 sterling, with all “royalties, jurisdictions, ecclesiastical, civil, admiral, and military;— the privileges, governments, and liberties” that had been granted to Sir Ferdinando Gorges by charter of King Charles I, April 3, 1639, covenanting that “Usher should stand seized of an absolute, perfect, and independent estate of and in the said County Palatine,” excepting the grants made by the original proprietor or his agents. (3)

The purchase of Maine by the colony of Massachusetts Bay displeased Charles II who was himself, at the time, in a treaty with Gorges for its purchase for his natural son, the Duke of Monmouth (afterwards executed by Charles’ brother James), and he remonstrated with the colonial government on their conduct, and Even required the colony’s agents to assist it to the crown upon payment of the purchase money; to this demand, little attention was paid, and at the October session, the General Court resolved to keep the province. Accordingly, in February 1680, it was determined to assume the Royal Charter granted to Sir Ferdinando Gorges and to frame a civil administration over the province in conformity with its provisions,” consisting of a standing Council of eight members appointed by the Massachusetts Bay Board of Colony Assistants and a House of Deputies chosen by the towns in the province, with a President chosen by the Board of Assistants: (1)

Thomas Danforth of Cambridge, Deputy Governor of Massachusetts Bay, was chosen President of Maine and at once entered upon his duties, proclaiming his authority at York in March, and at Fort Loyal at Casco Neck in Falmouth (now Portland) on September 2, 1680, where President Danforth and his two assistants gave the name of North Yarmouth to a new plantation adjoining Falmouth on the east, eighth town incorporated in Maine. (2)

But the charter of Massachusetts Bay was now so violently assailed that in 1683, the The General Court directed its agents in England to resign to the crown the title deeds of Maine provided that the colonial conflict could be saved. Their proposition was not acceptable, for a writ of quo warranto has already been brought before the court of King’s Bench on July 20, and was served on the Governor of Massachusetts Bay in October, 1683. This not proving sufficient, a writ of scire facias was sued out of the Chancery Court at Whiteball in June 1684, under which the Royal Charter was granted to the Colony of Massachusetts Bay by Charles I in 1628 was promptly adjudged to be forfeited, and the liberties of the colonies were seized by the crown. (3)

The infamous Col. Kirke was immediately appointed by Charles II, Governor of Massachusetts Bay, Plymouth, New Hampshire, and Maine, but before his embarkation from England, the Duke of York succeeded to the throne as James II, Feb. 16. 1685, and was publicly proclaimed in York in April. He was not inclined to renew the appointment of Kirke, but commissioned Joseph Dudley, a native of Massachusetts, as President of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, and Rhode Island, with fifteen mandamus councillors appointed by the Crown to assist him.

The last General Court under the Massachusetts Bay Court of Charles I organized May 12, 1686, but was dissolved by President Dudley on May 20. (4)

Within five months, he was superseded by Sir Edmund Andros, who arrived in Boston on December 20, 1686, and on the same day published his commission. He has been for eight years the Ducal Governor of New York and Sagadabock, and was now made captain-general and governor-in-chief of all of New England. (5)

On April 18, 1689, a revolution took place in Boston, and the populace seized and imprisoned Governor Andros and a bunch of his partisans, and Andros was finally induced to surrender the keys of government and the command of the fortifications.

A general convention of the people was assembled on April 20, and a meeting of the General Court was called in Boston on May 22, which determined to resume the government according to charter rights, a resolution was called into effect on May 24, 1689.

Two days later, news arrived from England that James II had abdicated the British throne December 12, 1688, and that William and Mary had been proclaimed King and Queen, February 16, 1689. Danforth was re-elected President of Maine and continued to govern the province of Maine under the provisions of the Charter to Gorges until May 6, 1692.

Finally, the Province of Massachusetts Bay, the Pilgrim Colony of Plymouth, the Province of Maine, together with Sagadabock and Acadia (or Nova Scotia, including New Brunswick) were all incorporated into the Royal Province of Massachusetts Bay by the charter of William and Mary, which received royal sanction on October 7 1691, and took effect May 6, 1692. But Nova Scotia (with New Brunswick) was soon after being relinquished by Massachusetts to the entire exclusive dominion of the British crown.

The present state of Maine, at the time of this consolidation, consisted of three principal divisions:


I— The original ”Province of Maine” granted by Charles I to Sir Ferdinando Gorges in 1639, extending from the New Hampshire line to the Sagadahock’ or Kennebeck and one hundred and twenty miles into the interior, which his grandson Ferdinando Gorges was sold to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1677.
II.—The Province of Sagadabock, between the Kennebeck River and Nova Scotia, and extending “Northward to the River of Canada,” or latitude 48°, embracing not only the second principle in the eight great divisions of 1635, lying between the Kennebeck River and Pernaquid, but the ducal province of James II (as Duke of York) includes the rest of the whole territory between Pemaquid and St. Croix which had reverted to the crown on his abdication in 1688.
III.— The territory north of the original grant to Gorges, between the Northern limit of his patent and the Canada Line. (1)

As the Palatine Province of Maine was limited to one hundred and twenty miles from the sea, it may be asked how the Colony of Massachusetts Bay could, either by its purchase from Gorges or, under the charter of William and Mary, acquire title to that feasible territory in the north-western corner of the present State of Maine, between the northerly line of Gorges’ Province and the Canadian boundary, as conceded by the treaty of independence. Perhaps no better answer can be readily given than that of the learned attorney General of Massachusetts; in the first year of this century; the question “is not of much consequence.” (2)

The Provincial Charter of Massachusetts Bay continued to be the foundation and ordinance of civil government in Massachusetts and Maine for eighty-eight years, until the adoption of a Republican Constitution by the parent nation on October 25, 1780 (N.S.)

With the consolidation of 1692, the ephemeral counties of Somerset, Cornwall and Devonshire, and for seventy-eight years thereafter, the County of York, which was created by Sir Ferdinando Gorges, Lord Palatine of the Province of Maine in 1610, and the first volume of whose records begins with the court opened at Saco, June 25, under the charter of Charles I, embraced the whole of Maine until November 2, 1760, when the counties of Cumberland and Lincoln were created by an act of the Provincial Legislature.

The formation of a Republican Constitution by the people of Massachusetts Bay and the recognition of that Commonwealth as an independent state within three years afterward seem to have inspired in the inhabitants of Maine a desire for separation. Indeed, as early as 1778, the Continental Congress had divided the United States into three districts, the Southern, Middle, and Northern, the last embracing the three Eastern counties of York, Cumberland, and Lincoln, which thus acquired a distinctive name, “THE DISTRICT OF MAlNE,” which it retained until the separation. Twelve years later, the First Federal Congress re-established the same division under the National Constitution.

Very soon after the acknowledgment of independence, separation began to be generally agitated throughout the district, and in September 1785, a notice appeared in The Falmouth Gazette, a paper that had made its appearance on New Year’s Day, calling a conference at Messrs. Smith and Dean’s Meeting House in Falmouth on October 5th to consider the proposal to erect the three eastern counties into a separate Government. Accordingly, thirty-five delegates appeared from twenty of the principal towns of each of the counties and organized a convention where William Gorham, of Gorham, was chosen President and Stephen Longfellow, Jr., of Gorham, Secretary. The convention voted to call another convention at the same place. on January 4, 1786, to consider the expediency and means of forming a separate state.


Governor Bowdoin, in his speech to the General Court, October 20, 1785, of his Council, deprecated the movement, and the General Council, in their reply, concurred in his views. The Convention, however, assembled and appointed a committee of nine whose report, stating the grievances and inconveniences under which the district labored, was signed by the President and sent to every town and settlement in Maine, and the Convention appointed another Convention to be held at the same place on September 6 1786; it was also voted to request the towns and plantations at their next March meetings to choose delegates and to certify the number of votes for and against the choice.

A convention, consisting of thirty-one members, was accordingly assembled and a committee to petition the General Court that the District of Maine be erected into a separate state and adjourned to January 3, 1787. On its re-assembling, the Convention found that of the ninety-three towns and plantations in Maine, only forty had been represented in any Convention, and of those only thirty-two had returned their votes; that was the whole number of votes returned was only 994, of which 645 were in favor of separation and 349 were opposed. Finally, the Convention, by a majority of two, directed the Committee to present or retain the petition, at their discretion, and adjourned from time to time until September, 1788, when it ejected the non-attendance of its members. The Committee finally decided to present the petition in 1788, and it was only referred to a committee of the General Court, which was the end of the agitation for nearly thirty years.

At the close of the war of 1812–15, the subject was revived, and at the January session of General Court in 1816, petitions were presented from forty-nine Maine towns in their corporate capacity, and individuals in many others, in favor of separation, wherein the Legislature directed town and plantation meetings to be held on the question throughout the district on May 20.

At the June session, it was found that out of the total number of 37,828 legal voters Only 16,891 had voted, of whom 10,393 favored separation and 6,501 opposed it. Thereupon, the Legislature of Massachusetts called for a second vote from the district in September and authorized each town to choose delegates to a convention to be held at Brunswick on the last Monday in September, which should count the votes, and if five-ninths of the votes returned were in favor of separation, they should also form a Constitution, but not otherwise.

A Convention of 185 delegates assembled and elected William King, of Bath, President, but of the 23,316 votes cast, only 11,969, a majority of less than five ninths, were for separation. Nevertheless, the Convention appointed a committee to frame a constitution and another to apply to Congress for admission into the Union and then adjourned to December.

But the General Court, convening in the meantime, dissolved the Convention. Still, the agitation continued, and at the May session of 1819, petitions for separation were presented from about seventy towns. By an act passed June 19, the General Court directed the voters of Maine to vote on the question July 24, and if the majority in favor of separation should exceed 1,500, the governor was authorized to proclaim the result and to direct the towns at the September election to choose delegates to a constitutional convention.

On August 24, Governor Brooks made the proclamation that separation had been carried out by the requisite majority of 9,959 to 7,132, and issued his call for a convention. The delegates chosen for the next month assembled at the convention in Portland on October 11 and organized by electing William King, President, and Robert C. Vose, Secretary.

The Convention completed the proposed Constitution on October 29 and adjourned to January 5, 1820, after submitting it to the people in town meetings to be held in December 6,1819.

On re-assembling, the Convention found that the Constitution had been adopted by
a large majority and announced the result to the people of Maine, as did Governor Brooks in his message to the General Court of Massachusetts. The Convention also applied to Congress for admission, which was granted by the Act of March 3, 1820, and Maine became an independent state of the Union on March 15, 1820.

During its connection with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, six new counties were included within the District of Maine, viz.—

Hancock and Washington, May 2, 1790, by act of June 25, 1789;
Kennebec, April 1, 1799; —February 21, 1799;
Oxford, —March 4, 1805;
Somerset, June 1, 1809;— March 1, 1809;
Penobscot, April 1, 1816;— February 15, 1816.

Since its independent existence, seven other counties have been organized in Maine. viz:-
Waldo, July 4, 1827, by act of February 7, 1827;
Franklin, May 9, 1838;  “March 20, 1838;
Piscataquis, May 1, 1838; March 23, 1838;
Aroostook, May 2, 1839; “”March 16, 1839;
Androscoggin, “.. March 18, 1854; March 31, 1854.”
Sagadahoc, April 5, 1854.” “April 4, 1854;
Knox, April 1, 1860,”… March 5, 1860;
being in all sixteen counties.

In conclusion, it may be said that private land titles in Maine are derived from six principal sources.

I— Possession.
II— Indian deeds.
III— The patent of the French King Louis XIV, in 1603, to Monsieur de la Motte Cadillac; substantially confirmed by a resolution of the General Court of Massachusetts Bay passed on July 6, 1787. 
IV— The Great Charter of New England, granted by James I, King of Great Britain, to the North Virginia or Plymouth Colony, issued November 3, 1620; through divers grants made by the Plymouth Council before the signing of its Charter in 1635, viz: between 1622 and 1632.
V— The Provincial Charter granted by Charles T., King of Great Britain, to Sir Ferdinando Gorges, April 3, 1639; through various grants from Gorges prior to the sale of his charter by his grandson Ferdinando Gorges to the Massachusetts Bay Colony, in 1677, and through grants directly from the Colony of Massachusetts ‘Bay and the Province and State of Massachusetts after said sale.
VI— The Royal Charter issued by Charles I to the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, March 4, 1628; through grants directly from the colony after its assertion of a claim, thereunder to Latitude 43° 43′ 12″ and to 43° 49′ 12″ in 1652 and 1673.

The political sovereignty and authority of government in Maine is derived of course, directly from the act of Congress admitting Maine into the Union, passed March 3, 1820, and the consent of Massachusetts expressed in the act of its General Court passed June 19, 1819. The independence of Massachusetts itself rests on the Declaration of the Continental Congress, adopted on July 4, 1776. The Province of Massachusetts Bay, which sent its delegates to the Congress was chartered by William and Mary on October 7, 1691, which charter is, roughly speaking, the basis of the government of the States of Massachusetts and Maine.
Yet the germs of the State of Maine are to be found in the. grant of James I to the North Virginia or Plymonth Colony, issued November 3, 1620, and to the Pilgrim Colony of Massachusetts, dated June 1, 1621, and what is known as the Warwick Patent to the Pilgrim’s issued in 1629–30; in the two grants of his son Charles T, one to Sir Ferdinando Gorges, dated April 3, 1639, and purchased by Massachusetts Bay in 1677; the other to the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, March 4, 1628–9; in the extinction conquest of the claim maintained by France to the eastern part of Maine until the capture of Canada by the British government in 1759, and in terms of the Treaty of Independence of September 3, 1783, by which Great Britain conceded to the United States a boundary that includes within the limits of the District of Illinois a portion of territory in the Northwest extending beyond the terms of any prior grant from the British Crown, but which was curtailed on the Northeast by releasing to Great Britain its territory northerly of the river St. John, in the settlement of the Northeastern boundary in 1842. 

Legislature of the State of Maine. “The Revised Statutes of the State of Maine, Passed August 29, 1883, and Taking Effect January 1,1884.”, Portland, Loring, Short & Harmon and William M. Marks. 1884. https://lldc.mainelegislature.org/Open/RS/RS1883/RS1883_f0005-0017_Land_Titles.pdf

“A chart of the coast of America from New found Land to Cape Cod”

“Sesembre” or Sambro, which is at the mouth of Halifax Harbor. I’m not sure if “Baye Senne” then is meant to represent it or another subsequent indentation in a coast that is nothing but indentations and harbors, but it does serve as a reference point that’s noted on other maps, much like the Bay of Many Islands (Toutes Isles).

“New Scot Land” and “Accadia”

“A chart of the coast of America from New found Land to Cape Cod”, Seller, John. London. 1675. https://collections.leventhalmap.org/search/commonwealth:3f462s922

The history of the colony of Massachusetts Bay, from the first settlement thereof in 1628, until its incorporation…in 1691

Not just any old moldering title, but that of the second last royalist governor of Massachusetts, Thomas Hutchinson. Written in 1765, at a time when all of the colonies were kindred, just previous to the implementation of the Stamp Act. Although specifically written on the history of Massachusetts, that Nova Scotia was once affixed ensures the inclusion of numerous details.


It is observable that all the colonies, before the reign of King Charles the second, Maryland excepted, settled a model of government for themselves. Virginia had been many years distracted under the government of presidents and governors, with councils in whose nomination or removal the people had no voice, until in the year 1620 a house of burgesses broke out in the colony; the King nor the grand council at home not having given any powers or directions for it.

— The governor and assistants of the Massachusetts at first intended to rule the people, and, as we have observed, obtained their consent for it, but this lasted two or three years only; and although there is no colour for it in the charter, yet a house of deputies appeared suddenly, in 1634, to the surprize of the magistrates and the disappointment of their schemes for power. — Connecticut soon after followed the plan of the Massachusetts. — New-Haven, altho’ the people had the highest reverence for their leaders and for near 30 years in judicial proceeding submitted to the magistracy (it must however be remembered that it was annually elected) without a jury, yet in matters of legislation the people, from the beginning, would have their share by their representatives. — New Hampshire combined together under the same form with Massachusetts, — Lord Say tempts the principal men of the Massachusetts, to make them and their heirs nobles and absolute governors of a new colony; but, under this plan, they could find no people to follow them. — Barbadoes and the leeward islands, began in 1625, struggled under governors and councils and contending proprietors for about 20 years. Numbers suffered death by the arbitrary sentences of courts martial, or other acts of violence, as one side or the other happened to prevail. At length, in 1645, the assembly was called, and no reason given but this, viz. That, by the grant to the Earl of Carlisle, the inhabitants were to enjoy all the liberties, privileges and franchises of English subjects, and therefore, as it is also expressly mentioned in the grant, could not legally be bound or charged by any a without their own consent. This grant, in 1627, was made by Charles the first, a Prince not the most tender of the subjects liberties. After the restoration there is no instance of a colony settled without a representative of the people, nor any attempt to deprive the colonies of this privilege, except in the arbitrary reign of King James the second. The colonies, which are to be settled in the new acquired countries, have the fullest assurance, by his Majesty’s proclamation, that the same form of government shall be established there. Perhaps the same establishment in Canada, and the full privileges of British subjects conferred upon the French inhabitants there, might be the means of firmly attaching them to the British interest; and civil liberty tend also to deliver them by degrees from their religious slavery.

The inhabitants of Acadie or Nova-Scotia lived, above forty years after the reduction of Port Royal under the government of their priests. No form of civil government was established, and they had no more affection for England than for Russia. The military authority served as a watch to prevent confederacies or combinations. The people indeed chose more or less deputies from each canton or division, but their only business seems to have been to receive orders from the governor, and to present petitions to him from the people. Temporal offences, unless enormous, and all civil controversies were ordinarily adjudged and determined by their spiritual fathers. I asked some of the most sensible of the Acadians, what punishment’s the priests could inflict to answer the ends of government. They answered me by another question. What can be a greater punishment than the forfeiture of our salvation? In no part of the Romish church the blind persuasion, of the power of the priest to save or damn, was ever more firmly riveted; and although these Acadians have, for eight years past, been scattered through the English colonies, yet I never could hear of one apostate or so much as a wavering person among them all: and if the Canadians are treated in the same manner, they will probably remain under the same infatuation.”


About this time [1644], much division and disturbance in the colony was occasioned by the French of Acadie and Nova-Scotia. It is necessary to look back upon the state of those countries. After Argall dispossessed the French in 1613, they seem to have been neglected both by English and French, until the grant to Sir William Alexander in 1621. That he made attempts and began settlements in Nova-Scotia has always been allowed, the particular voyages we have no account of. It appears from Champlain, that many French had joined with the English or Scotch, and adhered to their interest. Among the rest, La Tour was at Port Royal in 1630, where out of seventy Scots, thirty had died the winter before from their bad accommodations. La Tour, willing to be safe, let the title be in which it would, English or French, procured from the French King a grant of the river St. John, and five leagues above and five below, and ten leagues into the country; this was in 1627.

This appears from a list of the several grants made to La Tour, communicated to governor Pownall by Monsieur D’Entremont a very ancient French inhabitant of Acadie descended from La Tour, and who was removed to Boston in 1756 and died in a few years after. At the same time he was connected with the Scotch, and first obtained leave to improve lands and build within the territory, and then, about the year 1630, purchased Sir William Alexander’s title. La Tour’s title is said to have been confirmed to him under the great seal of Scotland, and that he obtained also a grant of a baronettage of Nova-Scotia. It is probable the case was not just as represented. King Charles in 1625 confirmed Alexander’s grant, under whom La Tour settled Penobscot, and all the country westward and southward, was at this time in the possession of the English. In 1632, La Tour obtained from the French King a grant of the river and bay of St. Croix and islands and lands adjacent, twelve leagues upon the sea and twenty leagues into the land. The French commissaries speak of this grant as made to Razilly.

By the treaty of St. Germains, the same year, Acadie was relinquished by the English, and La Tour became dependent upon the French alone. In 1634, he obtained a grant of the isle of Sables ; another of ten leagues upon the sea and ten into the land at La Have; another of Port Royal the fame extent; and the like at Menis, with all adjacent islands included in each grant. Razilly had the general command, who appointed Monsieur D’Aulney de Charnify his Lieutenant of that part of Acadie west of St. Croix, and La Tour of that east. In consequence of this division, D’Aulney came, as has been related, and dispossessed the English at Penobscot in the year 1635. Razilly died soon after, and D’Aulney and La Tour both claimed a general command of Acadie and made war upon one another. D’Aulney, by the French King’s letter to him in 1638, was ordered to confine himself to the coast of the Etechemins, which in all his writings he makes to be a part of Acadie. La Tour’s principal fort was at St. John’s. As their chief views were the trade with the natives, being so near together, there was a constant clashing of interest. In November 1641, La Tour sent Rochet, a protestant of Rochel, to Boston from St. John’s, with proposals for a free trade between the two colonies, and desiring assistance against D’Aulney; but not having sufficient credentials, the governor and council declined any treaty, and he returned. The next year, October 6, there came to Boston a shallop from La Tour, with his Lieutenant and 14 men, with letters full of compliment, desiring aid to remove D’Aulney from Penobscot, and renewing the proposal of a free trade. They returned without any assurance of what was principally desired, but some merchants of Boston sent a pinnace after them to trade with La Tour at the river St. John. They met with good encouragement, and brought letters to the governor, containing a large state of the controversy between D’Aulney and La Tour, but stopping at Pemaquid in their way home, they found D’Aulney upon a visit there, who wrote to the governor and sent him a printed copy of an arrêt he had obtained from France against La Tour, and threatened, that if any vessels came to La Tour he would make prize of them. The next summer (June 12) La Tour himself came to Boston, in a ship with 140 persons aboard, the matter and crew being protestants of Rochel. They took a pilot out of a Boston vessel at sea, and coming into the harbour saw a boat with Mr. Gibbon’s lady and family, who were going to his farm. One of the Frenchmen, who had been entertained at the house, knew her, and a boat being manned to invite her aboard, she fled to Governor’s island and the Frenchmen after her, where they found the governor and his family, who were all greatly surprized, as was the whole colony when they heard the news.

The town was so surprized, that they were all immediately in arms, and three shallops filled with armed men were lent to guard the governor home. Had it been an enemy, he might not only have secured the governor’s person, but taken possession of the castle opposite to the island, there not being a single man at that time to defend the place . This occasioned new regulations for the better security of the place. The castle was rebuilt in 1644, at the charge of the six neighbouring towns.

La Tour acquainted the governor, that this ship coming from France, with supplies for his fort, found it blocked up by D’Aulney his old enemy, and he was now come to Boston to pray aid to remove him. La Tour had cleared up his conduct, so as to obtain a permission under the hands of the Vice Admiral and Grand Prior, &c. for this ship to bring supplies to him, and in the permission he was stiled the King’s Lieutenant General in Acadie. He produced also letters from the agent of the company in France, advising him to look to himself and to guard against the designs of D’ Aulney. The governor called together such of the magistrates and deputies as were near the town, and laid before them La Tour’s request. They could not, consistent with the articles they had just agreed to with the other governments, grant aid without their advice; but they did not think it necessary to hinder any, who were willing to be hired, from aiding him, which he took very thankfully ; but some being displeased with these concessions, the governor called a second meeting, where, upon a more full debate, the first opinion was adhered to.

Some of the magistrates, deputies and elders, were much grieved at this proceeding. A remonstrance to the governor was drawn up and signed by Mr. Saltonstall, Mr. Bradstreet, and Mr. Symonds of the magistrates, and Mr. Nath. Ward, Ezekiel Rogers, Nathanael Rogers and John Norton of the elders ; wherein they condemn the proceeding, as impolitic and unjust, and set forth “that they should expose their trade to the ravages of D’AuIney, and perhaps the whole colony to the resentment of the French King, who would not be imposed upon by the distinction of permitting and commanding force to assist La Tour ; that they had no sufficient evidence of the justice of his cause, and in causa dubia bellum non est suscipiendum ; that La Tour was a papist attended by priests, friars. Sec. and that they were in the case of Jehoshaphat who joined with Ahab an idolater, which act was expressly condemned in scripture.

La Tour hired four ships of force, and took 70 or 80 volunteers into his pay, with which assistance he was safely landed at his fort, and D’Aulney fled to Penobscot, where he ran his vessels ashore; and although the commander of the ships refused to attack him, yet some of the soldiers joined with La Tour’s men in an assault upon some of D’Aulney’s men, who had intrenched themselves; but were obliged to betake themselves to flight, having three of their number slain. The ships returned in about two months, without any loss. The governor excused the proceeding to D’Aulney, as not having interested himself in the quarrel between them, but only permitted La Tour, in his distress, as the laws of Christianity and humanity required, to hire ships and men for his money, without any commission or authority derived from the government of the colony. D’Aulney went to France, and, being expected to return the next summer 1644, with a great force, La Tour came again to Boston, and went from thence to Mr. Endicot, who was then governor and lived at Salem, and who appointed a meeting of magistrates and ministers to consider his request. Most of the magistrates were of opinion that he ought to be relieved as a distressed neighbour, and in point of prudence, to prevent so dangerous an enemy as D’Aulney from strengthening himself in their neighbourhood; but it was finally agreed, that a letter should be wrote to D’Aulney, to enquire the reason of his having granted commissions to take their people, and to demand satisfaction for the wrong he had done to them and their confederates, in taking Penobscot, and in making prize of their men and goods at the Isle of Sables; at the same time intimating, that although these people who went the last year with La Tour, had no commission, yet if D’Aulney could make it appear they had done him any wrong (which they knew nothing of) satisfaction should be made ; and they expected he should call in all his commissions, and required his answer by the bearer. They likewise acquainted him, that their merchants had entered into a trade with La Tour, which they were resolved to support them in. La Tour being able to obtain nothing further, returned to his fort. Some of the province of Maine going this summer (1644) from Saco to trade with La Tour, or to get in their debts, put in at Penobscot in their way, and were detained prisoners a few days ; but for the fake of Mr. Shurt of Pemaquid, one of the company, who was well known to D’Aulney, they were released. La Tour afterwards prevailed upon Mr. Wanneston, another of the company, to attempt, with about twenty of La Tour’s men, to take Penobscot, for they heard the fort was weakly manned and in want of victuals. They went first to a farm house of D’Aulney ’s about six miles from the fort. They burned the the house and killed the cattle, but Wanneston being killed at the door, the rest of them came to Boston. In September, letters were received from D’Aulney informing that his master the King of France understanding that the aid allowed to La Tour, the last year, by the Massachusetts, was procured by means of a commission which he shewed from the Vice-Admiral of France, had given in charge that they should not be molested, but good correspondence should be kept with them and all the English, and that, as soon as he had settled some affairs, he intended to let them know what further com-mission he had, &c. Soon after, he lent a commissioner, supposed to be a friar, but dressed in lay habit, with ten men to attend him, with credentials and a commission under the great seal of France, and copy of some late proceedings again! La Tour, who was proscribed as a rebel and traitor, having fled out of France again against special order. The governor and magistrates urged much a reconciliation with La Tour, but to no purpose. La Tour pretended to be a Huguenot, or at least to think favourably of that religion, and this gave him a preference in the esteem of the colony to D’Aulney; but as D’Aulney seemed to be established in his authority, upon proposals being made by him of peace and friendship, the following articles were concluded upon, viz,. The agreement between John Endicott, Esq; governor of New-England, and the rest of the magistrates there, and Monsieur Marie commissioner of Monsieur D’Aulney, Knt. governor and lieut. general for his Majesty the King of France in Acadie, a province of New France, made and ratified at Boston in the Massachusetts aforesaid, October 8, 1644.

“The Governor and all the rest of the magistrates do promise to Mr. Marie, that they, and all the rest of the English within the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts, shall observe and keep firm peace with Monsieur D’Aulney, &C. and all the French under his command in Acadie. And likewise, the said M. Marie doth promise in the behalf of Monk D’Aulney, that he and all his people shall also keep firm peace with the governor and magistrates aforesaid, and with all the inhabitants of the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts aforesaid; and that it shall be lawful for all men, both the French and English to trade with each other , so that if any occasion of offence should happen, neither part shall attempt any thing against the other in any hostile manner, until the wrong be first declared and complained of, and due satisfaction not given. Provided always, the governor and magistrates aforesaid be not bound to restrain their merchants from trading with their ships with any persons, whether French or others, wheresoever they dwell. Provided also, that the full ratification and conclusion of this agreement be referred to the next meeting of the commissioners of the united colonies of New-England, for the continuation or abrogation, and in the mean time to remain firm and inviolable. This agreement freed the people from the fears they were under of ravages upon their small vassals and out plantations. La Tour was suffered to hire a vessel to carry a supply of provisions to his fort ; which vessel he took under his convoy and returned home.

The agreement made with D’Aulney was afterwards ratified by the commissioners of the united colonies, but he proved a very troublesome neighbor notwithstanding. In 1645 he made prize of a vessel, belonging to the merchants of Boston going to La Tour with provisions, and sent the men home (after he had stripped them of their cloaths and kept them ten days upon an island) in a small old boat, without either compass to steer by or gun to defend themselves. The governor and council dispatched away a vessel with letters to expostulate with him upon this action, complaining of it as a breach of the articles, and requiring satisfaction; but he wrote back in very high and lofty language, and threatened them with the effects of his master’s displeasure. They replied to D’Aulney, that they were not afraid of any thing he could do to them ; and as for his master, they knew he was a mighty prince, but they hoped he was just as well as mighty, and that he would not fall upon them without hearing their cause, and if he should do it, they had a God in whom to trust when all other help failed. With this ship D’Aulney made an attempt the same year upon La Tour’s fort while he was absent, having left only 50 men-in it; his lady bravely defended it, and D’Aulney returned disappointed and charged the Massachusetts with breach of covenant in entertaining, La Tour and sending home his lady. They excused themselves in a letter, by replying, that La Tour had hired three London ships which lay in the harbour. To this letter D’AuIney refused at first to return any answer, and refused to suffer the messenger, Capt. Allen, to come within his fort; but, at length, wrote in a high strain demanding satisfaction for his mill which had been burnt and threatening revenge. When the commissioners met in September, they agreed to send capt. Bridges to him, with the articles of peace ratified by them, and demanding a ratification from him under his own hand. D’Aulney entertained their messenger with courtesy and all the state he could, but refused to sign the articles, until the differences between them were composed ; and wrote back, that he perceived their drift was to gain time, whereas if their messengers had been furnished with power to have treated with him and concluded about their differences, he doubted not all might have been composed, for he stood more upon his honour than his interest, and he would sit still until the spring expecting their answer.

The general court, upon considering this answer, resolved to send the deputy governor Mr. Dudley, Major Demson and Capt. Hawthorn, with full powers to treat and determine, and wrote to D’AuIney, acquainting him with their resolution, and that they had agreed to the place he desired, viz. Penobscot or Pentagoet, and referred the time to him, provided it should be the month of September. This was opposed by some, as too great a condescension, and they would have had him come to the English settlement at Pemaquid; but his commission of lieutenant-general for the King or France was thought by others to carry so much dignity with it, that it would be no dishonour to the colony to go to his own home ; but it seems he was too good a husband to put himself to the expense of entertaining the messengers, and wrote in answer that he perceived they were now in earnest and desired peace, as he did also for his part, and he thought himself highly honored by their vote to send so many of their principal men to him; but desired he might spare them the labour, and he would fend two or three of his to Boston, in August following (1646) to hear and determine, &c. On the 20th of September, Messrs. Marie, Lewis, and D’Aulney’s secretary, arrived at Boston in a small pinnace, and it being Lord’s day, two officers were sent to receive them at the water side and to conduct them to their lodgings without any noise, and after the public worship was over, the governor sent Major Gibbons, with other gentlemen and a guard of musketeers to attend them to his house, where they were entertained. The next morning they began upon business, and every day dined in public, and were conduced morning and evening to and from the place of treaty with great ceremony. Great injuries were alleged on both sides, and after several days spent, an amnesty was agreed upon.

One Capt. Cromwell had taken in the West Indies a rich sedan made for the Vice Roy of Mexico, which he gave to Mr. Winthrop : This was sent as a present to D’Aulney, and well accepted by his commissioners, the treaty renewed, and all matters amicably settled. In the mean time, D’Aulney effectually answered his main purpose, for by his high language he kept the colony from assisting La Tour, took his fort from him, with ten thousand pounds sterling in furs and other merchandise, ordnance stores, plate, jewels, &c. to the great loss of the Massachusetts merchants, to one only of whom (Major Gibbons) La Tour was indebted 2500l. which was wholly lost. La Tour went to Newfoundland, where he hoped to be aided by Sir David Kirk, but was disappointed, and came from thence to Boston, where he prevailed upon some merchants to send him with four or five hundred pounds sterling in goods to trade with the Indians in the bay of Fundy. He dismissed the English, who were sent in the vessel, and never thought proper to return himself or render any account of his consignments. D’Aulney died before the year 1652, and La Tour married his widow, and repossessed himself, in whole or in part, of his former estate in Nova Scotia ; and in 1691, a daughter of D’Aulney and a canoness at St. Omers dying, made her brothers and fillers La Tours her general legatees. Under them, and by force of divers confirmations of former grants made by Lewis the 14th, between the peace of Ryswick and that of Utrecht, D’Entremant aforementioned claimed a great part of the province of Nova Scotia and of the country of Acadie. Of part of those in Nova Scotia he was possessed, when all the French inhabitants were removed by order of admiral Boscawen and general Lawrence.

Sir Thomas Temple came first to New-England in 1657, having, with others, obtained from Oliver a grant of lands in Acadie or Nova Scotia, of which he was made Governor. He was recommended by Nathaniel Fiennes, son to Lord Say. Mr. Fiennes calls him his near kinsman. The King having recommended, by a letter Feb. 22d 1665, to the governor and council, an expedition against Canada, the court in their answer to Lord Arlington, July 17th 1666, say that “having consulted with Sir Thomas Temple, governor of Nova Scotia, and with the governor of Connecticut (Mr. Winthrop, who had lately been in England) they concluded it was not feazable at present, as well in respect of the difficulty, if not impossibility of a land march over the rocky mountains, and howling deserts, about four hundred miles, as the strength of the French there, according to reports.

From 1666 to 1670 Mr. Bellingham was annually chosen governor, and Mr. Willoughby deputy governor. Nova-Scotia and the rest of Acadie, which had been rescued from the French by Cromwell, were restored by the treaty of Breda. The French made little progress in settling this country. The only inconvenience the Massachusetts complained of, until after the revolution, was the encouragement given to the Indians to make their inroads upon the frontiers. Sir Thomas Temple who, with others had a grant of the country first from Cromwell, and afterwards from King Charles, thought he had reason to complain, and the King’s order was repeated to him, to give up his forts to the French, some pretense being made for not complying with the first order.

Hutchinson, Thomas. The History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay. 1765. https://archive.org/details/historyofcolonyo00hutc/page/94/mode/2up

America and West Indies Colonial Papers: October 1733, 16-31

The document is a summary of discussions and recommendations regarding the land rights and defense considerations in Nova Scotia and other British colonies in America. It begins with a representation on Mrs. Campbell’s petition regarding land rights in Nova Scotia, tracing back to the original grants by French kings and subsequent confirmations. Despite missing documents, evidence suggests Mrs. Campbell’s rightful claim to lands and quit rents. It proposes compensating her for quit rents and reinstating her possession.

Moving on, it addresses security concerns in British colonies, particularly vulnerability to French attacks. It discusses potential threats to various islands, including the Leeward Islands, Barbados, and Jamaica, highlighting weaknesses in defenses and suggesting reinforcements. It stresses the importance of Jamaica, urging efforts to increase its population and fortify defenses.

The document also discusses defense strategies for the Bahama Islands and the potential threat posed by French settlements surrounding Nova Scotia. It suggests recruiting settlers from Newfoundland and other areas to populate Nova Scotia and strengthen its defense.


Council of Trade and Plantations to Committee of Privy Council. Representation upon petition of Mrs. Campbell. Continue : We have discoursed hereupon with Coll. Philips, H.M. Governour of Nova Scotia, and likewise with Mrs. Campbell the petitioner, who hath laid before us several papers and affidavits relating to her title to the aforesaid lands and quit rents in Nova Scotia, from whence it appears, That in 1631 the Most Christian King Lewis XIII gave the Government of Nova Scotia or Accadie to Monsieur Charles de St. Estienne, Sieur de la Tour, grandfather to the petitioner, who had Letters Patents granted to him thereupon.

What the particulars contained in the said Letters Patent were, does not appear, because no copies of them have been produced to us, but upon the death of Lewis XIII, his son Lewis XIV etc. having been informed of the progress and improvements made in Accadie by the said Sieur de la Tour was pleased by new Letters Patents bearing date February 25th, 1651, to confirm him in the post of Governour and Lieutenant General of Accadie or New France and likewise in the full and free possession of all the lands which had been before granted to him in that Province with full power to dispose of them to whom and in such proportions as he should think proper ; as appears by a printed copy of the said Patent which refers to the former of 1631, and for want of that former Patent it cannot be ascertained whether the whole Province or what part thereof was granted to the said de la Tour.

It would seem that the second Patent of 1651 was issued by way of confirmation of La Tour’s title just after he had been acquitted of certain charges alledged against him ; for the petitioner hath produced to us a decree made for that purpose by the Masters of Requests in the French King’s Court and Chancery bearing date the ninth day of February of the same year 1651, and in this decree mention is likewise made of a former Commission granted to the Sieur de la Tour dated Feb. 8th, 1631, constituting him Lieutenant General for the French King in the said Province of Accadie, Fort St. John, Port de la Tour, and the places dependant upon them.

This decree was confirmed by the French King’s Order in Council dated the 26th of the same month, and the said Sieur de Tour was thereby absolved from all accusations which had been preferred against him for treason or maladministration in his government of Accadie and reinstated and maintained in the full possession and enjoyment of all the lands which had been acquired by him or in his name in the said territory of Accadie or New France. Under the authority of these Letters Patents and of the decree of the Masters of Requests and Chancery confirmed by the French King’s Order in Council Mrs. Campbell alledges that the said De la Tour, her grandfather, for the good of the State and for the encouragement of those who desired to settle in this new colony, as well as in conformity to the intention of the King his master, distributed part of the lands he had acquired in the Province under his government at a very low rate to the new inhabitants, upon certain conditions or Articles made with them in his own name or in the names of his attornies or agents, which contracts were either plundered and taken away from the Petitioner, or burned in the last descent and invasion of the [Mi’kmaq] in Nova Scotia, in which the Petitioner’s first husband was killed.

She supposes however that copies of these contracts might be found in some of the publick offices in Nova Scotia, and that altho’ they should be entirely lost, yet her long possession with the successive and uncontested payments of rents to her, down to the years 1729 and 1730, would be sufficient proofs for the support of her present claim. The aforesaid Charles de St. Estienne de la Tour being dead, the petitioner alledges, that his only son the petitioner’s father succeeded him in all his estates, titles, possessions, honours and privileges, which he continued to enjoy peaceably to the time of his death in the year 1704, leaving several children his heirs who enjoyed his inheritance under the guardianship of their mother until the year 1713, when the Province of Nova Scotia was yielded to Great Britain by the 12th Article of the Treaty of Utrecht.

By the 14th Article of that Treaty, it was expressly provided that the subjects of the King of France in Nova Scotia should have liberty to remove themselves within the term of one year to any other place if they should think fit, with all their moveable effects, but that such as should be willing to remain there and be subject to the Kingdom of Great Britain, should enjoy the free exercise of their religion, according to the usage of the Church of Rome, as far as the laws of Great Britain do allow the same. But her late Majesty Queen Anne was pleased by her letter to General Nicholson bearing date the 23rd day of June, 1713, in consideration of the French King’s having at her request released some of his Protestant subjects from the galleys to allow the French inhabitants in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland to hold their lands or dispose of them if they thought fit etc. Letter from Queen to Governor Nicholson quoted. (v. C.S.P. 23rd June, 1713).

Continues: Hereupon soon after the publication of the foregoing letter in Nova Scotia, the several brothers and sisters of the Petitioner’s coheirs of the land and premises in question retired into the neighbouring Provinces under the domination of France, and left the Petitioner who would not abandon her country, sole proprietor in possession of all their lands and rents, under certain conditions agreed upon amongst themselves. The conveyances which were made to the Petitioner upon this occasion have been produced to us and bear date November 9th, 1714. The Petitioner sets forth that notwithstanding the refusal made by the inhabitants of Minis to pay her the rents to which they were engaged by their articles because she durst not go thither to compel them for fear of the [Mi’kmaq] , by whom she was seized about seven years ago, and run a very great hazard of being massacred, the revenue ariseing to her from thence amounted to 80 or 90 pounds sterling p. annum which she offers to confirm by oath, not being able at present to give better evidence of the value of the income arising from the said rents ; and she likewise further avers that her lands are now set for a 20th part of their real value.

To prove her possession and enjoyment of the lands and premises in question, the petitioner produces two orders under the hand of the aforesaid Governor Philipps dated July 5th, 1721, and Sept. 19th, 1722, by which all the inhabitants and landholders are ordered to pay her the rents stipulated in their contracts. She likewise produces a certificate subscribed and sworn to by the Reverend Mr. Robert Cuthbert, sometime minister of Annapolis Royal where the Petitioner resided, as Chaplain to Colonel Philipp’s regiment, who deposes that during his residence at Annapolis he was well acquainted with the Petitioner etc. who was seized and possessed of a large estate of inheritance lying in and about Annapolis Royal in Nova Scotia and was reputed and esteemed both by English and French and other the inhabitants thereabouts to be Lady of the Mannor lands and premises situated as aforesaid and to be legally intitled thereto, and as such received the rents and profits thereof during this deponent’s stay there ; and this deponent saith that he hath been present and several times seen the rents and profits of the premises aforesaid paid to her from the French, and believes that in her own name she gave proper and legal receipts and discharges for the same, and that the said Agatha Campbell held and enjoyed the aforesaid lands and premises without any interruption or molestation and free from any claim or demand whatsoever during this deponent’s residence there.

The Petitioner hath likewise produced to us three affidavits of Mary Barton, John Welch and William Tipton, who severally depose that they have lived many years at Annapolis Royal during which time they were well acquainted with the Petitioner etc. and that during their abode in Nova Scotia she was acknowledged sole Lady of the Manour, lands and premises of all the inhabited parts of that Province and that in her own right she received the rents and acknowledgements thereof from the inhabitants enjoying the same without molestation, and that she was a Protestant of the Church of England and greatly beloved by the inhabitants her tenants, as will appear more largely by the said affidavits etc. annexed. Having heard what the petitioner had to alledge in support of her claim, we thought it proper upon this occasion to discourse with Governor Philipps etc., by whom most of the facts alledged by the Petitioner in support of her right have been confirmed, particularly as to the value of the quit rents, and her receipt of them, as the rightful proprietor thereof, and that she would have continued to do so to this day but that a stop was put thereto in 1730 in consequence of H.M. orders upon a representation from the said Colonel Philipps till Mrs. Campbell’s title should be further enquired into and H.M. pleasure be known thereupon.

We have also examined the Histories of this Country and searched the books of our office with respect to the facts alledged by the Petitioner, from whence it appears amongst other things, that in the year 1621 the country of Nova Scotia was granted by King James 1st to Sir William Alexander, afterwards Earl of Sterling, who took possession thereof, drove out the French who had encroached upon it, and planted a colony there. That in the year 1630 the said Sir William Alexander sold his right to Nova Scotia to Monsieur Claude de la Tour, a French Protestant, to be held by him and his successors under the Crown of Scotland. That about the year 1631 King Charles 1st made some sort of concession of the said country to the Crown of France, reserving nevertheless the right of the Proprietor who had before enjoyed it.

That in 1633 notwithstanding this last mentioned concession the said King Charles 1st by Letters Patents bearing date the 11th of May in the same year granted to Sir Lewis Kirk and others full privilege not only of trade and commerce even in the River of Canada, which is to the northward of Nova Scotia, and places on either side adjacent, but also of planting colonies and building forts and bulwarks where they should think fit, but the said Sir Lewis Kirk and partners were molested by the French in the enjoyment and exercise of their privileges. That several years afterwards in the year 1654 Cromwel having then a fleet at New England caused the country of Nova Scotia to be seized, as being antiently a part of the English Dominions to which the French had no just title, and the proprietor of the said country Sir Charles de St. Estienne, son and heir to the fore-mentioned Monsieur de la Tour, coming thereupon into England and making out his title under the aforesaid Earl of Sterling and the Crown of Scotland, his right was allowed of by Cromwell ; whereupon the said St. Estienne, by his deed bearing date the 20th of November 1656 made over all his right and title to Nova Scotia to Sir Thomas Temple and Mr. William Crown ; one or both of them who did accordingly continue to possess and enjoy the same with the profits thence arising until the year 1667 when Nova Scotia was yielded to the French by the Treaty of Breda, and was accordingly delivered to them in 1670 by virtue of an order from King Charles the Second to Sir Thomas Temple, who then resided as Governor upon the place.

From this time to the Treaty of Utrecht, when N. Scotia was again surrendered by France to the Crown of Great Britain, our books make no mention of the descendants of the abovementioned Monsieur de la Tour ; but as the Petitioner with her brothers and sisters were found in possession of the lands and quit rents abovementioned, we think it highly reasonable to believe that after the surrender of Nova Scotia to France in 1670, the French King did thereupon restore Monsieur de la Tour, the Petitioner’s father, to the enjoyment of his estate, and it appears to us upon the whole that the Petitioner Mrs. Agatha Campbell is daughter to the last mentioned Monsieur de la Tour and grand-daughter to Monsieur Charles Saint Estienne, Sieur de la Tour, whose right to Nova Scotia was allowed by Cromwell, and that partly by right of inheritance and partly by cession from her relations, she is justly entitled to all the possessions and rents belonging to her said father and grandfather not disposed of by them during their respective lives ; but what those rents and possessions were does not appear to us for want of the first Letters Patent to the Sieur de la Tour in 1631, excepting the quit rents abovementioned of eighty or ninety pounds pr. annum. Whereupon we would take leave to propose that H.M. should be graciously pleased to order a valuable consideration to be paid to the Petitioner for her said quit rents, and also for the extinguishment of her claim to any other part of Nova Scotia ; and in the meantime to issue his Royal Orders to Coll. Philipps, the present Governor of Nova Scotia or to the Commander in Chief there for the time being to give the necessary directions in that Province, that all arrears of rents or quit rents due to the Petitioner from the inhabitants of Nimos or others since the year 1730 or from the time of her receiving the last payments be paid to her the said Agatha Campbell without delay ; and that she be re-instated in the possession of such lands and quit rents as she was possessed of before the late orders for stopping the payment of her rents, and to enjoy them without any let or molestation, until the aforesaid consideration shall be paid. [C.O. 218, 2. pp. 273-292]

Some considerations relating to the security of the British Colonies in America. If a war should break out between England and France, it is natural to expect they will attack us where we are weakest, and that is in America. The Leeward Islands may be overrun in a very few days from Guardaloupe or Martinique, etc. Barbados would make but a very poor resistance, having no forces but their own militia, and their fortifications in a very bad condition. Jamaica might possibly be defended by a powerfull sea force against a descent from Hispaniola, but ye French have near 20,000 people in their part of that island, settl’d within ye space of a few years, whereas Jamaica tho’ planted in Oliver Cromwell’s time, and capable of maintaining 200,000 inhabitants by ye last returns from thence had no more than 7,648 white people, including men, women, and children. And is under daily alarms from her runaway black people].

Gives details of numbers of inhabitants : 74,525 slaves etc. Argues that the Leeward Islands being so small are not capable of supporting a sufficient number of inhabitants to defend them against the superior forces of the French in their neighbouring Colonies. There may be between 3 or 4000 in the four islands, but they are dispers’d, and can never be brought together for their common defence : and therefore the Crown has constantly been at the expence of maintaining a regiment of foot there, which has been an expence thrown away to no manner of purpose etc. This Regiment has been so manag’d that ye inhabitants could have expected but very little protection from it, being always vastly deficient in its numbers, and ye few soldiers that were effective, except tradesmen who could earn their own bread, have been almost starv’d for want of subsistance, consequently much fitter for hospital than for service.

Proposes that the Colonel should be immediately ordered to his post and to make, in conjunction with the Governor, a return of the strength of the Regiment : that it be forthwith recruited ; and as it is impossible for the common soldiers to subsist there upon their own pay, that the Governor be instructed to recommend to the people to make the same additional provision for them at least, which the Assembly of Jamaica give to their 2 Independent Companies. But this Regiment compleated to its full establishment will be but of little use without a Naval force etc. The loss of these islands, or even the destruction of their sugar works, would be a great detriment to England, and an irreparable damage to the inhabitants, who have not to this day recovered the losses of the last war etc. The Admiralty have a very good harbour at Antegoa, and we should upon the first apprehension of danger, have two ships of war at the least upon this station.

The property of the King’s subjects in these islands, including their slaves, stock, coffers and buildings is computed at near three millions sterl. Barbados has of late years given so much money to their Governors that they have not been able to lay out any upon their fortifications, but their charge upon that head is at present considerably diminished and therefore their Governor should be instructed to recommend to them to take care of the necessary repairs for their fortifications and supply of their magazine. For I fear the number of their inhabitants is much lessen’d of late. Upon the least umbrage of a war they should have the same number of ships for their defence which were employ’d on that station during the last war. This will be the more necessary at present, because of the French encroachments at Santa Lucia which lies within sight of Barbados, and of the encrease of the French inhabitants in their neighbourhood.

Jamaica has always been deservedly our chief concern, as well upon acct. of its scituation, as of its real value, and if the inhabitants had understood their own interest or had half so much concern for themselves as we have had for them, they would not have been in so bad a condition as they now are. Instead of being a great burthen to us, they might, with good conduct, by this time have been able to stand alone, and have been the terror of the West Indies. But it is too late to look backwards, and some way must be found out effectualy to people this island, or we shall certainly lose it. Our Fleets indeed may do a great deal for the defence of Jamaica ; but it is to be consider’d that the same winds which may bring a force from Hispaniola, may confine our ships in port ; and an Iland upon which we have long valu’d ourselves, be lost, notwithstanding our naval force, in a very few days. It will therefore be highly necessary to send some person of spirit, integrity, and capacity to command this Iand. He should be instructed to send home a full and true state of their condition.

How it comes to pass that they are not better peopled? What impediments there are to the settling of the country? and how they may be removed, either by the Legislature of the Iland, or that of Great Britain? for this is too valuable a jewel in the Crown of England, to be lost by the petulance of the inhabitants, or the exorbitant avarice of a few leading men, who have eat up all their poor neighbours and expelled them the Iland. Something in the nature of an Agrarian law must be made for Jamaica if we intend to keep it. No man should be allow’d to hold more land than he can cultivate, and great encouragment should be given to draw inhabitants thither, for England could not lay out money to a better purpose. In the mean while we should allow them as many ships for their defence in case of danger, as they had any time the last war. And we must not wait till we hear the French are going to send ships into the West Indies ; for we may be undone by the land force they have there already etc. Suggests sending, upon the first apprehension of a rupture a strong land force also into the iland, under the command of some experienced officer. The Bahama Ilands in case of a war would lye greatly expos’d to an invasion from the Spanish Colonies at Porto Rico, Hispaniola or Cuba, but especially from the last. The temptation of attacking them will not arise from the plunder, the inhabitants being hitherto very poor, but their scituation is of very great importance, and therefore they will merit a farther land force for their defence, having only one Company there at present.

And as they have a good harbour at Providence for 20 gun cruisers, two ships of that size may be station’d here to good purpose, to watch the Spanish plate fleets, and be a cheque upon the navigation of the Gulph of Florida. It were to be wished that these were the only British Dominions in America expos’d to danger ; but it is certain that the French may make themselves masters of Nova Scotia whenever they please. It is easie to perceive from one cast of the eyes upon the map, that this Province is surrounded almost on every side by the French settlements of Cape Briton, L’isle Madam, Anticosta, the river of St. Laurence, and Canada, in all which places, the French are very strong and numerous, especialy at Cape Briton and L’isle Madam etc., but we have hardly one civil inhabitant in the whole province of Nova Scotia, and what is still worse, we have upwards of 3000 French Papists settled in the heart of the countrey, who have remained there ever since the Peace ; and tho’ they have with great difficulty been prevail’d on not long since to take the oaths of allegiance to the King ; there is no doubt that they would readily joyn with their countreymen to recover this Province for the Crown of France etc. Something should be done without loss of time. It may not perhaps be adviseable to ask the assistance of Parlt. yet nothing can be done without expence.

Palatines or Saltburgers might certainly be had in Holland, and in my humble opinion they ought to be had. But there is one other way which has formerly been recommended as advantageous to the publick in every respect, and that is to engage the straglers, now settled in Newfoundland, where they do a great deal of harm, to transport themselves to Nova Scotia, where they may be of some use to their Mother Countrey. And as these people are already inur’d to the hardships of these cold climates they would be of more service there than a much larger number from any other place. All reasonable encouragements should therefore be given to them, and indeed to any other people that are dispos’d to settle in Nova Scotia, till that Province shall have acquir’d a reasonable defence. It may likewise be for the King’s service, that Col. Philips should be order’d forthwith to recruit his Regt. to the full establishment, and if the men were allow’d to carry wives with them they might in time do something towards peopling the countrey. But this is only one of those gradual expedients to which many more might be added, but which would not save the present emergency etc. The preservation of this Province, and of the Fishery upon its coast, which is preferable to that of Newfoundland, would always deserve a station ship, and more in time of war, with another regiment. Without date or signature. Endorsed, Oct. 28th, 1733. 5 pp. [C.O. 5, 5. No. 2.]

“America and West Indies: October 1733, 16-31.” Calendar of State Papers Colonial, America and West Indies: Volume 40, 1733. Eds. Cecil Headlam, and Arthur Percival Newton. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1939. 216-232. British History Online. Web. 2 April 2020. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/colonial/america-west-indies/vol40/pp216-232.

Council of Trade and Plantations to Committee of Privy Council, Representation upon petition of Mrs. Campbell; considerations relating to the security of the British Colonies in America

367. Council of Trade and Plantations to Committee of Privy Council.

Representation upon petition of Mrs. Campbell. Continue:

We have discoursed hereupon with Coll. Philips, H.M. Governour of Nova Scotia, and likewise with Mrs. Campbell the petitioner, who hath laid before us several papers and affidavits relating to her title to the aforesaid lands and quit rents in Nova Scotia, from whence it appears, That in 1631 the Most Christian King Lewis XIII gave the Government of Nova Scotia or Accadie to Monsieur Charles de St. Estienne, Sieur de la Tour, grandfather to the petitioner, who had Letters Patents granted to him thereupon. What the particulars contained in the said Letters Patent were, does not appear, because no copies of them have been produced to us, but upon the death of Lewis XIII, his son Lewis XIV etc. having been informed of the progress and improvements made in Accadie by the said Sieur de la Tour was pleased by new Letters Patents bearing date February 25th, 1651, to confirm him in the post of Governour and Lieutenant General of Accadie or New France and likewise in the full and free possession of all the lands which had been before granted to him in that Province with full power to dispose of them to whom and in such proportions as he should think proper ; as appears by a printed copy of the said Patent which refers to the former of 1631, and for want of that former Patent it cannot be ascertained whether the whole Province or what part thereof was granted to the said de la Tour. It would seem that the second Patent of 1651 was issued by way of confirmation of La Tour’s title just after he had been acquitted of certain charges alledged against him ; for the petitioner hath produced to us a decree made for that purpose by the Masters of Requests in the French King’s Court and Chancery bearing date the ninth day of February of the same year 1651, and in this decree mention is likewise made of a former Commission granted to the Sieur de la Tour dated Feb. 8th, 1631, constituting him Lieutenant General for the French King in the said Province of Accadie, Fort St. John, Port de la Tour, and the places dependant upon them. This decree was confirmed by the French King’s Order in Council dated the 26th of the same month, and the said Sieur de Tour was thereby absolved from all accusations which had been preferred against him for treason or maladministration in his government of Accadie and reinstated and maintained in the full possession and enjoyment of all the lands which had been acquired by him or in his name in the said territory of Accadie or New France. Under the authority of these Letters Patents and of the decree of the Masters of Requests and Chancery confirmed by the French King’s Order in Council Mrs. Campbell alledges that the said De la Tour, her grandfather, for the good of the State and for the encouragement of those who desired to settle in this new colony, as well as in conformity to the intention of the King his master, distributed part of the lands he had acquired in the Province under his government at a very low rate to the new inhabitants, upon certain conditions or Articles made with them in his own name or in the names of his attornies or agents, which contracts were either plundered and taken away from the Petitioner, or burned in the last descent and invasion of the Indians in Nova Scotia, in which the Petitioner’s first husband was killed. She supposes however that copies of these contracts might be found in some of the publick offices in Nova Scotia, and that altho’ they should be entirely lost, yet her long possession with the successive and uncontested payments of rents to her, down to the years 1729 and 1730, would be sufficient proofs for the support of her present claim. The aforesaid Charles de St. Estienne de la Tour being dead, the petitioner alledges, that his only son the petitioner’s father succeeded him in all his estates, titles, possessions, honours and privileges, which he continued to enjoy peaceably to the time of his death in the year 1704, leaving several children his heirs who enjoyed his inheritance under the guardianship of their mother until the year 1713, when the Province of Nova Scotia was yielded to Great Britain by the 12th Article of the Treaty of Utrecht. By the 14th Article of that Treaty, it was expressly provided that the subjects of the King of France in Nova Scotia should have liberty to remove themselves within the term of one year to any other place if they should think fit, with all their moveable effects, but that such as should be willing to remain there and be subject to the Kingdom of Great Britain, should enjoy the free exercise of their religion, according to the usage of the Church of Rome, as far as the laws of Great Britain do allow the same. But her late Majesty Queen Anne was pleased by her letter to General Nicholson bearing date the 23rd day of June, 1713, in consideration of the French King’s having at her request released some of his Protestant subjects from the galleys to allow the French inhabitants in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland to hold their lands or dispose of them if they thought fit etc. Letter from Queen to Governor Nicholson quoted. (v. C.S.P. 23rd June, 1713).

Continues :Hereupon soon after the publication of the foregoing letter in Nova Scotia, the several brothers and sisters of the Petitioner’s coheirs of the land and premises in question retired into the neighbouring Provinces under the domination of France, and left the Petitioner who would not abandon her country, sole proprietor in possession of all their lands and rents, under certain conditions agreed upon amongst themselves. The conveyances which were made to the Petitioner upon this occasion have been produced to us and bear date November 9th, 1714. The Petitioner sets forth that notwithstanding the refusal made by the inhabitants of Minis to pay her the rents to which they were engaged by their articles because she durst not go thither to compel them for fear of the Indian savages, by whom she was seized about seven years ago, and run a very great hazard of being massacred, the revenue ariseing to her from thence amounted to 80 or 90 pounds sterling p. annum which she offers to confirm by oath, not being able at present to give better evidence of the value of the income arising from the said rents ; and she likewise further avers that her lands are now set for a 20th part of their real value. To prove her possession and enjoyment of the lands and premises in question, the petitioner produces two orders under the hand of the aforesaid Governor Philipps dated July 5th, 1721, and Sept. 19th, 1722, by which all the inhabitants and landholders are ordered to pay her the rents stipulated in their contracts. She likewise produces a certificate subscribed and sworn to by the Reverend Mr. Robert Cuthbert, sometime minister of Annapolis Royal where the Petitioner resided, as Chaplain to Colonel Philipp’s regiment, who deposes that during his residence at Annapolis he was well acquainted with the Petitioner etc. who was seized and possessed of a large estate of inheritance lying in and about Annapolis Royal in Nova Scotia and was reputed and esteemed both by English and French and other the inhabitants thereabouts to be Lady of the Mannor lands and premises situated as aforesaid and to be legally intitled thereto, and as such received the rents and profits thereof during this deponent’s stay there ; and this deponent saith that he hath been present and several times seen the rents and profits of the premises aforesaid paid to her from the French, and believes that in her own name she gave proper and legal receipts and discharges for the same, and that the said Agatha Campbell held and enjoyed the aforesaid lands and premises without any interruption or molestation and free from any claim or demand whatsoever during this deponent’s residence there. The Petitioner hath likewise produced to us three affidavits of Mary Barton, John Welch and William Tipton, who severally depose that they have lived many years at Annapolis Royal during which time they were well acquainted with the Petitioner etc. and that during their abode in Nova Scotia she was acknowledged sole Lady of the Manour, lands and premises of all the inhabited parts of that Province and that in her own right she received the rents and acknowledgements thereof from the inhabitants enjoying the same without molestation, and that she was a Protestant of the Church of England and greatly beloved by the inhabitants her tenants, as will appear more largely by the said affidavits etc. annexed. Having heard what the petitioner had to alledge in support of her claim, we thought it proper upon this occasion to discourse with Governor Philipps etc., by whom most of the facts alledged by the Petitioner in support of her right have been confirmed, particularly as to the value of the quit rents, and her receipt of them, as the rightful proprietor thereof, and that she would have continued to do so to this day but that a stop was put thereto in 1730 in consequence of H.M. orders upon a representation from the said Colonel Philipps till Mrs. Campbell’s title should be further enquired into and H.M. pleasure be known thereupon.

We have also examined the Histories of this Country and searched the books of our office with respect to the facts alledged by the Petitioner, from whence it appears amongst other things, that in the year 1621 the country of Nova Scotia was granted by King James 1st to Sir William Alexander, afterwards Earl of Sterling, who took possession thereof, drove out the French who had encroached upon it, and planted a colony there. That in the year 1630 the said Sir William Alexander sold his right to Nova Scotia to Monsieur Claude de la Tour, a French Protestant, to be held by him and his successors under the Crown of Scotland. That about the year 1631 King Charles 1st made some sort of concession of the said country to the Crown of France, reserving nevertheless the right of the Proprietor who had before enjoyed it. That in 1633 notwithstanding this lastmentioned concession the said King Charles 1st by Letters Patents bearing date the 11th of May in the same year granted to Sir Lewis Kirk and others full privilege not only of trade and commerce even in the River of Canada, which is to the northward of Nova Scotia, and places on either side adjacent, but also of planting colonies and building forts and bulwarks where they should think fit, but the said Sir Lewis Kirk and partners were molested by the French in the enjoyment and exercise of their privileges. That several years afterwards in the year 1654 Cromwel having then a fleet at New England caused the country of Nova Scotia to be seized, as being antiently a part of the English Dominions to which the French had no just title, and the proprietor of the said country Sir Charles de St. Estienne, son and heir to the fore-mentioned Monsieur de la Tour, coming thereupon into England and making out his title under the aforesaid Earl of Sterling and the Crown of Scotland, his right was allowed of by Cromwell ; whereupon the said St. Estienne, by his deed bearing date the 20th of November 1656 made over all his right and title to Nova Scotia to Sir Thomas Temple and Mr. William Crown ; one or both of them who did accordingly continue to possess and enjoy the same with the profits thence arising until the year 1667 when Nova Scotia was yielded to the French by the Treaty of Breda, and was accordingly delivered to them in 1670 by virtue of an order from King Charles the Second to Sir Thomas Temple, who then resided as Governor upon the place. From this time to the Treaty of Utrecht, when N. Scotia was again surrendered by France to the Crown of Great Britain, our books make no mention of the descendants of the abovementioned Monsieur de la Tour ; but as the Petitioner with her brothers and sisters were found in possession of the lands and quit rents abovementioned, we think it highly reasonable to believe that after the surrender of Nova Scotia to France in 1670, the French King did thereupon restore Monsieur de la Tour, the Petitioner’s father, to the enjoyment of his estate, and it appears to us upon the whole that the Petitioner Mrs. Agatha Campbell is daughter to the last mentioned Monsieur de la Tour and grand-daughter to Monsieur Charles Saint Estienne, Sieur de la Tour, whose right to Nova Scotia was allowed by Cromwell, and that partly by right of inheritance and partly by cession from her relations, she is justly entitled to all the possessions and rents belonging to her said father and grandfather not disposed of by them during their respective lives ; but what those rents and possessions were does not appear to us for want of the first Letters Patent to the Sieur de la Tour in 1631, excepting the quit rents abovementioned of eighty or ninety pounds pr. annum. Whereupon we would take leave to propose that H.M. should be graciously pleased to order a valuable consideration to be paid to the Petitioner for her said quit rents, and also for the extinguishment of her claim to any other part of Nova Scotia ; and in the meantime to issue his Royal Orders to Coll. Philipps, the present Governor of Nova Scotia or to the Commander in Chief there for the time being to give the necessary directions in that Province, that all arrears of rents or quit rents due to the Petitioner from the inhabitants of Nimos or others since the year 1730 or from the time of her receiving the last payments be paid to her the said Agatha Campbell without delay ; and that she be re-instated in the possession of such lands and quit rents as she was possessed of before the late orders for stopping the payment of her rents, and to enjoy them without any let or molestation, until the aforesaid consideration shall be paid. [C.O. 218, 2. pp. 273-292]

370. Some considerations relating to the security of the British Colonies in America. If a war should break out between England and France, it is natural to expect they will attack us where we are weakest, and that is in America. The Leeward Islands may be overrun in a very few days from Guardaloupe or Martinique, etc. Barbados would make but a very poor resistance, having no forces but their own militia, and their fortifications in a very bad condition. Jamaica might possibly be defended by a powerfull sea force against a descent from Hispaniola, but ye French have near 20,000 people in their part of that island, settl’d within ye space of a few years, whereas Jamaica tho’ planted in Oliver Cromwell’s time, and capable of maintaining 200,000 inhabitants by ye last returns from thence had no more than 7,648 white people, including men, women, and children. And is under daily alarms from her runaway negroes. Gives details of numbers of inhabitants : 74,525 slaves etc. Argues that the Leeward Islands being so small are not capable of supporting a sufficient number of inhabitants to defend them against the superior forces of the French in their neighbouring Colonies. There may be between 3 or 4000 in the four islands, but they are dispers’d, and can never be brought together for their common defence : and therefore the Crown has constantly been at the expence of maintaining a regiment of foot there, which has been an expence thrown away to no manner of purpose etc. This Regiment has been so manag’d that ye inhabitants could have expected but very little protection from it, being always vastly deficient in its numbers, and ye few soldiers that were effective, except tradesmen who could earn their own bread, have been almost starv’d for want of subsistance, consequently much fitter for hospital than for service. Proposes that the Colonel should be immediately ordered to his post and to make, in conjunction with the Governor, a return of the strength of the Regiment : that it be forthwith recruited ; and as it is impossible for the common soldiers to subsist there upon their own pay, that the Governor be instructed to recommend to the people to make the same additional provision for them at least, which the Assembly of Jamaica give to their 2 Independent Companies. But this Regiment compleated to its full establishment will be but of little use without a Naval force etc. The loss of these islands, or even the destruction of their sugar works, would be a great detriment to England, and an irreparable damage to the inhabitants, who have not to this day recovered the losses of the last war etc. The Admiralty have a very good harbour at Antegoa, and we should upon the first apprehension of danger, have two ships of war at the least upon this station. The property of the King’s subjects in these islands, including their slaves, stock, coffers and buildings is computed at near three millions sterl. Barbados has of late years given so much money to their Governors that they have not been able to lay out any upon their fortifications, but their charge upon that head is at present considerably diminished and therefore their Governor should be instructed to recommend to them to take care of the necessary repairs for their fortifications and supply of their magazine. For I fear the number of their inhabitants is much lessen’d of late. Upon the least umbrage of a war they should have the same number of ships for their defence which were employ’d on that station during the last war. This will be the more necessary at present, because of the French encroachments at Santa Lucia which lies within sight of Barbados, and of the encrease of the French inhabitants in their neighbourhood. Jamaica has always been deservedly our chief concern, as well upon acct. of its scituation, as of its real value, and if the inhabitants had understood their own interest or had half so much concern for themselves as we have had for them, they would not have been in so bad a condition as they now are. Instead of being a great burthen to us, they might, with good conduct, by this time have been able to stand alone, and have been the terror of the West Indies. But it is too late to look backwards, and some way must be found out effectualy to people this island, or we shall certainly lose it. Our Fleets indeed may do a great deal for the defence of Jamaica ; but it is to be consider’d that the same winds which may bring a force from Hispaniola, may confine our ships in port ; and an Iland upon which we have long valu’d ourselves, be lost, notwithstanding our naval force, in a very few days. It will therefore be highly necessary to send some person of spirit, integrity, and capacity to command this Iland. He should be instructed to send home a full and true state of their condition. How it comes to pass that they are not better peopled? What impediments there are to the settling of the country? and how they may be removed, either by the Legislature of the Iland, or that of Great Britain? for this is too valuable a jewel in the Crown of England, to be lost by the petulance of the inhabitants, or the exorbitant avarice of a few leading men, who have eat up all their poor neighbours and expelled them the Iland. Something in the nature of an Agrarian law must be made for Jamaica if we intend to keep it. No man should be allow’d to hold more land than he can cultivate, and great encouragment should be given to draw inhabitants thither, for England could not lay out money to a better purpose. In the mean while we should allow them as many ships for their defence in case of danger, as they had any time the last war. And we must not wait till we hear the French are going to send ships into the West Indies ; for we may be undone by the land force they have there already etc. Suggests sending, upon the first apprehension of a rupture a strong land force also into the iland, under the command of some experienced officer. The Bahama Ilands in case of a war would lye greatly expos’d to an invasion from the Spanish Colonies at Porto Rico, Hispaniola or Cuba, but especially from the last. The temptation of attacking them will not arise from the plunder, the inhabitants being hitherto very poor, but their scituation is of very great importance, and therefore they will merit a farther land force for their defence, having only one Company there at present. And as they have a good harbour at Providence for 20 gun cruisers, two ships of that size may be station’d here to good purpose, to watch the Spanish plate fleets, and be a cheque upon the navigation of the Gulph of Florida. It were to be wished that these were the only British Dominions in America expos’d to danger ; but it is certain that the French may make themselves masters of Nova Scotia whenever they please. It is easie to perceive from one cast of the eyes upon the map, that this Province is surrounded almost on every side by the French settlements of Cape Briton, L’isle Madam, Anticosta, the river of St. Laurence, and Canada, in all which places, the French are very strong and numerous, especialy at Cape Briton and L’isle Madam etc., but we have hardly one civil inhabitant in the whole province of Nova Scotia, and what is still worse, we have upwards of 3000 French Papists settled in the heart of the countrey, who have remained there ever since the Peace ; and tho’ they have with great difficulty been prevail’d on not long since to take the oaths of allegiance to the King ; there is no doubt that they would readily joyn with their countreymen to recover this Province for the Crown of France etc. Something should be done without loss of time. It may not perhaps be adviseable to ask the assistance of Parlt. yet nothing can be done without expence. Palatines or Saltburgers might certainly be had in Holland, and in my humble opinion they ought to be had. But there is one other way which has formerly been recommended as advantageous to the publick in every respect, and that is to engage the straglers, now settled in Newfoundland, where they do a great deal of harm, to transport themselves to Nova Scotia, where they may be of some use to their Mother Countrey. And as these people are already inur’d to the hardships of these cold climates they would be of more service there than a much larger number from any other place. All reasonable encouragements should therefore be given to them, and indeed to any other people that are dispos’d to settle in Nova Scotia, till that Province shall have acquir’d a reasonable defence. It may likewise be for the King’s service, that Col. Philips should be order’d forthwith to recruit his Regt. to the full establishment, and if the men were allow’d to carry wives with them they might in time do something towards peopling the countrey. But this is only one of those gradual expedients to which many more might be added, but which would not save the present emergency etc. The preservation of this Province, and of the Fishery upon its coast, which is preferable to that of Newfoundland, would always deserve a station ship, and more in time of war, with another regiment. Without date or signature. Endorsed, Oct. 28th, 1733. 5 pp. [C.O. 5, 5. No. 2.]

“America and West Indies: October 1733, 16-31.” Calendar of State Papers Colonial, America and West Indies: Volume 40, 1733. Eds. Cecil Headlam, and Arthur Percival Newton. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1939. 216-232. British History Online. Web. 2 April 2020. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/colonial/america-west-indies/vol40/pp216-232.

Letters from Sir Thomas Temple to Secretary Lord Arlington, Charles II

“Sir Thomas Temple, in letters to Secretary Lord Arlington describes in detail his purchase of Nova Scotia for the sum of 16,260 l., of which he was for some years the resident Governor, but was, in August 1669, commanded by Charles II. forthwith to restore to the French King, in pursuance of the Treaty of Breda, and he hopes God may inspire his Lordship’s heart to do a charitable deed to a friendless person in distress, “a rare thing, I confess, at Court.”

In a letter to the King, written 18 months later, he recounts “the whole truth of his heart” and his own sad condition consequent upon the King’s commands to surrender his country to the French, which he says is annexed to the Crown of Scotland, as the records in Edinburgh Castle show, and is of infinite more value than St. Christopher’s. He beseeches the King to take his 12 years’ faithful services into consideration, and points out his reason for first coming to Nova Scotia, which he says George Kirke, the Master of the King’s House, can testify.

Sir Thomas Temple describes his design more fully in his letter to Secretary Lord Arlington, written two years before his said letter to the King, wherein he says that the true reason of his coming into those parts was to fly Cromwell’s fury for having laid a design for his late Majesty’s escape when he was at his trial, which Mr. Kirke, if he be alive, will inform his Lordship, Sir Thomas, had very nearly effected, having made a brother of his, Colonel Edmund Temple, for one night, Captain of the guard of the King’s person.

This coming to Cromwell’s ears, Sir Thomas was privately advised by his kinsman, the then Lord Fienes (in great favour with Cromwell), to absent himself till the times might be more propitious, and his good friend and uncle, old Lord Say, then advised and assisted him to purchase Nova Scotia. This “design” for the escape of Charles 1st, which it will be remembered is graphically depicted in a popular novel of the present day, is undoubtedly an historical fact, otherwise it is scarcely probable that Sir Thomas Temple would relate the circumstance to Charles II. and to his Secretary of State.”

“America and West Indies: Preface.” Calendar of State Papers Colonial, America and West Indies: Volume 7, 1669-1674. Ed. W Noel Sainsbury. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1889. vii-xl. British History Online. Web. 2 April 2020. https://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/colonial/america-west-indies/vol7/vii-xl#p15