' to continue to exercise jurisdiction in their respective
functions, as far as to the banks of Connecticut River,'' and enjoin-
ing the sheriff of Albany to rctur n to him " tbe names of all and
every person or persons, who under the grants of New Hampshire,
<lo or shall hold possession of any lands westward of Connecticut
River, that they may be proceeded against according to law."
On the 19th of March, 1764, the governor of New Hampshire,
issued a counter proclamation, in which he contends, '• that the
patent to the Duke of York is obsolete, and cannot convey an^'- cer-
tain boundaiy to New York, that can be claimed as a boundarj'-, as
plainly appears by the several boundary lines of the Jerseys on the
west, and the colony of Connecticut on the east," andencourages
the grantees under New Hampshire, '• to be industrious in clearing
and cultivating their lands," and commands " all civil officers to
continue and be diligent in exercising jurisdiction in their respective
offices, as far westward as grants of land have been made by this
government, and to deal Aviih any person or persons that may pre-
sume to interrupt the inhabitants or settlers on said lands, as to law
and justice doth appertain."
At an carlv ivoriod of the controversy, and soon after the first
HISTORY 01^ ADDISON COUXTY. OO
grant was made by New Hampshire, it was agreed bj the gover-
nors of the two provinces, to refer the question in dispute to the
king; but no decision had yet been made. The king had, on the 7th
of October 1763, issued a prochimation in behalf of the