OCR Text |
Show 49 ii»fl»" INDIAN LAND CESSIONS IN THE UNITED STATES [ETH.ANN.18 consideration is one of the few lines forming the exceptions alluded to, at least so far as appears from the published data. i h e theory upon which the policy and acts of the Plymouth colony and several other settlements were based is sufficiently clear, but that of Massachusetts Bay is not so well defined and is not given precisely the same in all the histories in which allusion to it is made. Moreover, the records arc somewhat deficient in the data bearing on the question Further reference, however, will be made to the subject a little later. A side light may be thrown on the method of acquiring title from the Indians usually followed in Massachusetts, and, in fact, in most of .New England, by reference to the following passage from Doyle: Of the various rights of the New Eugland township the most important perhaps were the territorial. In Virginia the Governor and his Council, as the representatives of the Crown, made over a tract of land to an individual as a tenant for life, paying a (imtrent. In Maryland or Carolina the same process took place, except that the grant was made, not by the Crown, but by the Proprietors. But in New England the soil was granted by the government of the colony not to an individual, but to a corporation. It was from the corporation that each occupant derived his rights. Nor was this corporate claim to the land a legal technicality, like the doctrine that the soil of England belongs to the Crown, and that all estates in land are derived thence. The New England township was a landholder, using its position for the corporate good, and watching jealously over the origin and extension of individual rights. At the same time the colonial government did not wholly abandon its rights over the territory. For example, we find the General Court of Plymouth in part revoking a grant of lands at Mattacheese, or, as it was afterwards called, Yarmouth, on the ground that the territory in question had not been fully occupied. It was accordingly enacted that those settlers who had actually taken up lands should continue to enjoy them, but that the township should not be allowed to make any further distribution. As we have already seen, the territorial system of the New England town took almost spontaneously a form closely resembling the manor. Part of the land was granted in lots, part was left in joint pasture, part was to be tilled in common. Though this was cultivated on a uniform system, yet apparently it was cut up into strips which were allotted, not in annual rotation, but in permanence, to the different holders. It would follow, as a natural consequence of this custom, that purchases of lands from Indians were usually by and on behalf of the towns. Plymouth colony commenced its settlement under favorable circumstances, so far as the right of entry was concerned. Notwithstanding what is stated hereafter in regard to purchases, it appears that the land they fixed upon as the site of their town was without inhabitants or claimants. The following, from the "Preface to the Plymouth Laws," as given in Holmes' Annals, shows that this was the understanding ot the first settlers: The new Plymouth associates, by the favor of the Almighty, began the colony in New England, at a place called by the natives, Apaum, alias Patuxet; all the lands being void of inhabitants, we the said John Carver, William Bradford, Edward 1 Puritan Colonies, vol. n, pp. 12-13. |