Virginia. Clark's western campaign, 1778-79. Winsor's America, VI, 716; Carolina. Georgia. that the state of that name succeeded to the rights which the Iroquois had once possessed. Virginia, on her part, claimed nearly the same land, under the charter of 1609, which had been annulled in 1624 (pp. 63, 67). It was also contended on her behalf that her soldiers led General G. R. Clark by a Virginia officer, George Rogers Clark, and paid out of the Virginia treasury, had conquered this territory from the British (177879). Already colonists from Virginia had begun the occupation of the region now included in the state of Kentucky. The Carolinians claimed lands south of the Virginia line and north of the parallel of the Savannah River, under the charters of 1663 and 1665 as modified by the Georgia It is true that, in the 130), all but one of the grant of 1732 (pp. 128, 136). 1778] Validity of these Claims 243 a title to all the land south of her charter limits and north of the Floridas- according to the same proclamation - as far west as the Mississippi River! 171. Validity of these Claims. As none of these claims Value of ever came before a court for judicial determination, it is these claims. impossible to say anything definite as to their validity. It is probable that the claim of Connecticut and that of Massachusetts, as far as they rested upon the charter of 1691, would have been recognized as good in law. None of the other claims appears to have much weight; that of Virginia, by conquest, was the strongest. But the right of any one Position of the other states. Articles ratified by several states. Maryland refuses to ratify. Cessions by America, VII, app. i. state to claim lands conquered by her troops while engaged in the Revolutionary War certainly could not be defended on moral grounds, especially as Virginia had seldom fulfilled her military and financial obligations to the United States. The other states New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland — could advance no claims to western lands by grant from the king, by conquest from the British, or by cession from the Indians. They contended, however, that if this territory should come into the possession of the United States at the conclusion of peace with Great Britain, it should be used for the benefit of the people of all the United States, and not for the aggrandizement of the people of a few states. 172. The Land Cessions. - The Articles of Confederation were very favorable to the interests of the smaller states: Delaware, New Jersey, and Rhode Island might well conceive that they would gain more benefit under the Articles than they could hope for from any scheme of administration of western lands. Pennsylvania, also, was not much interested in the question, as she still held thousands of acres of undeveloped land within her borders. The case of Maryland, however, was very different: her soldiers bore a conspicuous part in the defense of the country, although British armies scarcely touched her soil; but she had no means, save taxation, to recompense them for their services. Virginia had already set on foot a scheme to remunerate her soldiers by grants of western lands, and Pennsylvania might easily do the same from the lands within her borders. Maryland had no such resource; she might well ask if she were being treated with justice. She refused to ratify the Articles until this great wrong were redressed, and thus brought the matter to public notice. Congress declined to enter into an examination of the relative merits of the several claims, and suggested that all the claimant states should cede the lands claimed by them to the United States, to be administered in the interests of 1784] The Land Cessions 245 the whole people. New York led the way in making the New York. cession as requested, and Virginia promised to do so on certain conditions. Confiding in the good will of the other claimant states, Maryland withdrew her opposition to the ratification of the Articles of Confederation (March, 1781), and they went into force not long afterwards. One after another the states followed the example set by New York and transferred their claims to western lands to the United States. Virginia (1784) in making her grant reserved the jurisdiction and title to lands in Kentucky; she also retained certain lands north of the Ohio, which had already been promised to her Daniel Boone Virginia. Massachusetts. Connecticut. one hundred and twenty miles in length lying directly west of Pennsylvania: this was called the Connecticut or Western Reserve, and the proceeds of the lands thus reserved were used for educational purposes in Connecticut; in 1800 she ceded her rights of jurisdiction in this tract to the United States. South Carolina (1787) aban- South doned her claim to a little strip twelve miles wide lying North just south of North Carolina. North Carolina (1790) ceded Carolina. Carolina. her claim to jurisdiction over what is now Tennessee, but she had already granted away most of the land. Finally, Georgia. in 1802, Georgia followed the other states, and ceded her claims to the vast tract between her present western boundary and the Mississippi River. Long before this, in 1783, Great Britain had abandoned her right to this whole western region, although she still retained a few posts in the northwest, contrary to the express words of the treaty of peace (pp. 230, 251). It remained to be seen what disposition should be made of this great domain, imperial in extent, and far exceeding in area the original thirteen Policy of to western lands. Schouler's United States, I, 108-113. states. 173. The Ordinance of 1787. — In suggesting that the states should transfer their claims to the United States, Congress (1780) had also proposed that the lands to be acquired in this manner should be "disposed of for the common benefit and be formed into distinct republican states, which shall become members of the federal union." It is difficult to determine how far this vote of the Continental Congress was binding on the Congress of the Confederation; it is even more difficult to find the constitutional authority under which the latter Congress acted in accepting the cessions; and it is absolutely impossible to discover the slightest constitutional sanction for its procedure in respect to the government of the territory when it had been acquired. It is possible that the territory might have been divided among the states in such a manner as to satisfy all; but it is difficult to see how such a division could have been made. Congress and the states seem to have been agreed to regard it as national property, to be used for national purposes, and its possession by the United States as a whole worked powerfully for the continuance of union. In the prerevolutionary days, the crown had the disposal of ungranted lands within the empire; Congress regarded itself as the successor to the crown, and accordingly undertook the management of the public domain of the United States. In 1785, after the New York, the Virginia, and the |