CHAPTER III
THE CIRCULAR BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN DELAWARE COUNTY AND THE STATE OF DELAWARE
That Lord Baltimore, long before the royal grant to Penn, during the Dutch ascendency on the Delaware, had made demand upon the Hollanders for all the land lying to the south of the fortieth degree north latitude is fully attested by the published records, but inasmuch as his representatives never, so far as we have knowledge, personally came to any locality in Pennsylvania, the story of that disputed territorial authority at that time is properly the subject-matter of the history of the State of Delaware, and does not come within the scope of this work.
The controversy respecting the proper adjustment of the boundary line between the territories of Lord Baltimore and William Penn was a long and bitter struggle, which, descending from father to son, covered nearly a century in tedious and expensive litigation before it was finally set at rest by the decree of Lord Chancellor Hardwick and the establishment of the noted Mason and Dixon line in conformity therewith. While the southern boundary of Delaware County presents a circular course extending the State of Delaware several miles at its northern limit beyond the straight line which elsewhere forms the southern boundary of Pennsylvania, that circle constitutes historically no part of the Mason and Dixon survey, which, during the Missouri Compromise debates in 1820, was made so familiar to the nation by John Randolph, who, in his remarks, constantly referred to it as the imaginary geographical line which marked the division between the free and slave States. Nearly four years previous to the grant of the territory to Penn, for the convenience of the then settlers on the Delaware, an amicable adjustment of the line dividing New Castle and Upland (afterward Chester County) was made. At a court held at Upland, Nov. 12, 1678, this proceeding is recorded as follows:
“The Limits and Division between this and New Castle county, were this day agreed upon and settled By this Court and Mr. John Moll president of New Castle Court To be as followeth, vizt.
“This County of Upland to begin from ye north syde of oele fransens Creeke, otherwise Called Steenkill Lying in the boght above ye verdrietige hoeck, and from the said Creek over to ye singletree point on the East syde of the River.”
This division, Edward Armstrong, in his valuable note to the “Record of Upland Court,” has made intelligible to the modern reader. The creek, he tells us, at the time when the boundary line between the two counties was adjusted, known as Oele Francens, was at a late date called Streen or Stoney Creek, and is now recognized as Quarryville Creek, crossing the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad three and three-quarter miles below the mouth of Naaman’s Creek, in Brandywine Hundred, New Castle Co., Del. “Verdrietige hoeck,” or corner of land, was also called Trinity Hook, lying between Shellpot (a corruption of “Skelldpadde,” the Swedish for “turtle”) and Stoney Creeks. “Verdrietigh” was a term derived from the Dutch “verdrietigh,” signifying “grievous” or “tedious,” owing to the character of the navigation in approaching that point, while “Singletree Point” is now “Old Man’s Point,” on the New Jersey shore, one mile below the mouth of “Old Man Creek.”
The charter or patent of Charles II. to William Penn, bearing date the 4th day of March, 1681, as also in the proclamation of the king, April 2d of the same year, in defining the territorial boundaries of Penn’s provinces, mentions the circular line as “on the South by a circle drawn at twelve miles distance from New Castle northwards and westwards into the beginning of the fortieth degree of northern latitude and then by a streight line westwards to the limits of longitude above mentioned.”
After Penn had acquired jurisdiction of the territory by virtue of the royal grant, he dispatched his cousin, Capt. William Markham, as his Deputy Governor, to represent him in the province. The latter, in a letter to Penn, dated New York, June 25, 1681, says, “This is to acquaint thee that about ten daies since here arrived Francis Richardson with thy Deputy,” and on the 3d day of August, 1681, Markham was in Upland, as stated in the preceding chapter.
In the latter part of August, 1681, Capt. William Markham, Deputy Governor of Pennsylvania, who had been intrusted by the king with a letter to Charles, Lord Baltimore, requesting the latter to “appoint with all convenient speed some person or persons who may in connection with the agent or agents of ye said William Penn make a true division & separation of ye said Province of Maryland and Pennsilvania according to the bounds and degree of northern latitude expressed in our letters patent, &c.,” went to Maryland in order to settle as quickly as might be the controversy respecting the boundary line between the two provinces. Markham also took with him a letter from William Penn to Lord Baltimore, urging the prompt adjustment of the vexatious dispute. The lord proprietary of Maryland received Penn’s representative with marked kindness; and as the latter was suffering from indisposition, induced by the intensely warm weather, Baltimore invited Markham to his house on the Patuxent River, where the latter became dangerously ill, and for nearly a month was incapable of being moved. On his recovery he determined to return to Pennsylvania, but before his departure Baltimore and he arranged to meet at Upland on the 16th of October following, where observations should then be taken to ascertain precisely where the fortieth degree of northern latitude was, and thus adjust the disputed point of territorial boundaries. Markham also promised to borrow from Col. Lewis Morris, of New York, the necessary instruments for making the astronomical observations. Unexpected, the passage of the vessel up Chesapeake Bay to its head was long and tedious, so that much of the time Markham had intended for his journey to New York was thereby consumed. Hence, from the head of the bay, he addressed a letter to Lord Baltimore, Sept. 25, 1681, requesting that the meeting should be deferred until the 26th of the same month. When the Deputy Governor reached Upland he was again taken ill, and thereupon he wrote to Lord Baltimore, this time informing him that his physical condition was such that it would be impossible for him to attend to the adjustment of the boundary line until the following spring. This letter was forwarded, but before it reached its destination Markham received a communication from Lord Baltimore, dated Oct. 10, 1681, in which the latter stated that he could not come to Upland that year “for fear of the frost,” which might intercept navigation, but inasmuch as the king’s wishes in this matter have not been complied with, his lordship would place on Markham the responsibility of not meeting that year. In the mean while both parties to the controversy maintained that his adversary was trespassing on his domain, and so convinced was William Penn that this was the case, that on Sept. 16, 1681, he addressed letters to six of the most extensive land-owners in Maryland, whose possessions were located within the debatable territory, stating that he had no doubts that their estates were within his provinces, under his grant from the crown, and notified them to pay no taxes or assessments in obedience to any order of the lord proprietary or laws of Maryland. This claim on the part of Penn caused many of the residents of the latter colony to resist the public levies, and so general was this sentiment in Baltimore and Cecil Counties that the military was ordered to assist the sheriffs in collecting the taxes. Lord Baltimore, in his account of the difficulty respecting the boundaries, states that one of Penn’s commissioners, William Haige, a Quaker, had taken astronomical observations at the head of the bay (Chesapeake), and that he was very much dissatisfied at the result he obtained. Haige afterward went to Patuxent, where, in an interview with Baltimore, the latter charged him with having “taken some observations at Elk river, for his private satisfaction,” which Haige acknowledged he had done, but said the instrument he had used was so small that nothing decisive could be arrived at.
The winter of 1681 passed without any definite action being had until May 14, 1682, when Lord Baltimore wrote to Markham, desiring to meet him at Augustine Herman’s plantation(4*) on June 10th, to adjust boundaries. Markham, who was compelled to meet the Indians, to make payment for lands he had purchased from them, could not meet the Maryland commissioners at the time Baltimore had designated, since the Indians had deferred their annual hunt, nor was he ready, inasmuch that he was unable to procure the use of Col. Morris’ instrument until he had personally visited New York and entered security for its safe return. For the latter purpose he went to New York on the 26th of May, 1682, and before he started he sent a message to Lord Baltimore, apprising him of his journey thither, and requested that the proposed meeting might be deferred until his return. Baltimore, however, dispatched commissioners to represent him at the time fixed by him, and by them sent a letter to Markham, stating that they were fully qualified to act in his behalf, and trusting that they would be met by parties similarly commissioned on the part of Penn. The Maryland commissioners, when they reached Herman’s plantation, feigned to be surprised at not meeting Markham’s representatives, and on the day designated by Baltimore (June 10, 1682) addressed a letter to Markham, which was delivered to the Deputy Governor, then in New York, by George Goforth. In the communication the writers requested Markham to send the instrument he had promised to borrow from Col. Morris, as also to dispatch duly qualified persons to meet with them. The Maryland commissioners tarried several days at Herman’s, ostensibly to await the coming of Markham’s representatives, but in the mean while employed themselves in making astronomical observations.(5*)
The letter from the commissioners to Markham, as before stated, was delivered to him in New York, and he immediately procured the instrument, which he sent in a sloop to New Castle, and made his way homeward by land to Burlington, where he took a boat for the remaining distance. Pending these movements on the part of the Deputy Governor of Pennsylvania, the Maryland commissioners had gone to New Castle, out of a curiosity to see ye Towne,” as they said, and when they got there they learned that the sloop having Col. Morris’ astronomical instrument was at the landing. They, aided by the entreaties of the Dutch inhabitants of the place, persuaded Capt. Criger, himself a Dutchman, to permit them to make use of the instrument. On Tuesday, June 27, 1682, it being a very clear day, the commissioners made several observations, and found that town was in thirty-nine degrees forty odd minutes north latitude. The next day Markham went to New Castle, where he learned that the Maryland commissioners had left the place the very night of the day they had used the instrument which the Governor of Pennsylvania had had so much trouble to procure. The following morning Markham sent William Haige to Herman’s plantation, trusting that the Marylanders had gone thither, but before he got there they had renewed their journey southward. Markham thereupon wrote to Baltimore explaining his absence, and received in reply an intimation that in September he (Baltimore) proposed to send his commissioners again to meet him, and perhaps he might personally accompany them. On September 12th, Lord Baltimore sailed from Patuxent, reaching the Elk River on the 19th of the same month. There was no accommodation for his suite at Herman’s, and after he had dispatched a message to Markham, who was then at Burlington, Lord Baltimore, with a number of persons, went to New Castle, from which place, on the evening of the 23d of September, he embarked in boats for Upland, reaching the latter hamlet that night. He lodged at the dwelling of Robert Wade, where Markham then dwelt. The following morning (Sunday) Markham (who had been informed that Baltimore was at New Castle, had hastened his return to meet him, and had reached home the same night that the Marylanders came to Upland) called on Lord Baltimore. The latter was accompanied by Col. Corsie, Maj. Seawell, Maj. Sawyer, four commissioners, and forty men “armed with carbines, pistols, and swords.” The lord proprietary of Maryland, although Markham stated that it was the Sabbath, and not a day for the transaction of business, requested that his own as well as Col. Morris’ instruments should be set up, so that it would be known how they agreed. Markham at length consented, it being understood that the degree of latitude should be ascertained the following day; but while the Pennsylvanians were absent one of Lord Baltimore’s attendants took an observation, and reported that he found the latitude of Upland was thirty-nine degrees forty-five minutes. Next morning Baltimore desired to go farther up the river, as far as the fortieth degree, and, that ascertained, to follow that line westward as the boundary of the province. Markham, however, declined this proposition, stating that he (Baltimore) could have no claim on the river twelve miles northward of New Castle, because the king’s grant to William Penn fully covered all the land on the Delaware above that point. Baltimore replied that he had nothing to do with the grant to Penn, but would be guided by the grant the king had made to him, many years before Penn’s charter. The dispute thereupon waxed warm, during which Baltimore declared that he did not propose to bring the matter before the king and his Council, but designed to take his own wherever he found it; that if, as Markham asserted, New Castle was the centre of the circle, and a sweep therefrom must be had before the beginning of the direct line westward was established, “his Majesty must have long compasses.” The interview terminated by Markham refusing to permit Lord Baltimore to ascend the river to make observations, and a demand from the latter that the Deputy Governor of Pennsylvania should furnish his reasons for his action in writing, a request which the latter immediately complied with.(6*) The two Governors, however, agreed to meet at New Castle the next day, so that the point of forty degrees might be determined at the head of Chesapeake Bay.
In the afternoon of the 20th of September Lord Baltimore left Upland for New Castle, but before he stepped into the boat at the landing he spoke in a loud voice to Markham, who was present, together with a number of the residents of the place. “You are sensible, Capt. Markham, that by an observation taken yesterday that this plantation is in thirty-nine degrees forty-seven minutes and some seconds, and must therefore be sensible that I am here about twelve miles to the southward of the degree of forty, which is my north bound as the same is Mr. Penn’s south bound. Therefore, afore you and all the rest here present, I lay claim to this place and as far further as the degree of forty will reach.” To this claim of Lord Baltimore, Markham made no response, but with courteous attention conducted the former to the boat, and thus they parted. Baltimore, as he descended the river, halted at Marcus Hook, where he landed, and, going to each of the dwellings at that place, prohibited the residents from paying any more quit-rents to Penn, as the land did not come within his territory, but was part of Maryland, and that he, Baltimore, would return suddenly and take possession of his own. This notification, particularly as the one who made it was attended with the pomp and circumstance of power, caused the utmost consternation among the settlers, who repaired to Upland the next day, just as Markham – the instrument being placed on board a boat – was about starting on horseback with his attendants for New Castle, and so great was the excitement consequent on Lord Baltimore’s unexpected claim that Markham called his Council immediately together, and they decided that the Deputy Governor must remain at Upland “to quiet the disturbed people.” Whereupon Markham wrote to Lord Baltimore that he could not meet him at New Castle under the circumstances.(7*)
Although the proprietaries of the two provinces could not adjust their dispute, for the expediency of the inhabitants the court at Chester, on March 14, 1683, declared that Naaman’s Creek should be the boundary line between the two counties; and so generally was this recognized, that Thomas Holme, surveyor-general under Penn, in his “map of the improved part of the Province of Pennsylvania in America,” observes this division.
Nevertheless there was some confusion still existing, hence ten years later, in 1693, a petition was presented by some of the inhabitants of Chester County to the Governor and Council, stating that they were seriously inconvenienced because of there being no authoritatively recognized line between that county and New Castle. The Council after discussing the topic, on the 9th of August, 1693,
“Resolved, That for the present convenience of the government, and not for an absolute and final proprietarie division, but that the inhabitants on the borders of both counties may Know to which of the two to pay their levies, taxes, etc., and perform their other countie services, the bounds of New Castle county shall extend northward to the mouth of Naaman’s creek and upwards along the southwest side of the Northmost branch (excluding the townships of Concord and Bethel), and not to extend backwards of the said northmost branch above the said two townships.”
For eight years the boundary thus established seemed to meet in a measure the demands of the sparsely-settled country immediately effected thereby, although the constantly- growing disposition on the part of the inhabitants of the three lower counties (now the State of Delaware) to separate from the territory comprising the commonwealth of Pennsylvania was often manifested during the interval, and at length culminated in a petition from the Assembly to Penn, 20th of Seventh month, 1701, in which they urge “that the division line between the counties of New Castle and Chester be ascertained allowing the boundary according to the proprietary’s letters patent from the King.” Penn, then in Philadelphia, in response to this petition, replied, “It is my own inclination, and I desire the representatives of New Castle and Chester Counties forthwith, or before they leave town, to attend me about the time and manner of doing it.” In conformity with the wish of Penn a conference was held, which resulted in a warrant being issued 28th of Eighth month, 1701, to Isaac Taylor, surveyor of Chester County, and Thomas Pierson, surveyor of New Castle County, requiring them to meet the magistrates of the two counties, or any three of them, and, “In their presence to ad measure and survey from the town of New Castle the distance of twelve miles in a right line up ye said river and from ye said distance according to ye King’s letters patent and deeds from the Duke and ye said circular line to be well-marked two-thirds parts of ye semi-circle.”
The surveyor designated made report that, on the 4th day of Tenth month (December), 1701, in the presence of Cornelius Empson, Richard Halliwell, and John Richardson, justices of New Castle County, and Caleb Pusey, Philip Roman, and Robert Pyle, justices of Chester County, they ran the division lines, beginning at the point of the radial line, which was selected by the magistrates “at the end of the horse dyke next to the town of New Castle.” Thence they measured due north twelve miles, the termination of that distance being “a white oak marked with twelve notches standing on the west side of Brandywine Creek, in the lands of Samuel Helm; thence, eastwardly, “circularly changing our course from the east southward one degree at the end of every sixty-seven perches, which is the chord of one degree to a twelve miles radius; and at the end of forty-three chords we came to the Delaware River, on the upper side of Nathaniel Lampley’s old house at Chichester.” The surveyors then returned to the marked white oak on Helm’s land and ran a westwardly course, changing, as before, “our course one degree from the west-southward at the end of every sixty-seven perches, . . until we had extended seventy-seven chords, which, being added to the forty-three chords, make two-thirds part of the semi-circle to a twelve-mile radius, all which said circular lines being well marked with three notches on each side of the trees to a marked hickory standing near the western branch of Christiana Creek.”
The cost of the survey to the county of Chester is exhibited in the annexed interesting report of the Grand Jury:
“CHESTER the 24 of the 12 month 1701 – 2.
“We of the Grand Jury for the county having duly considered and carefully adjusted an account of charges contracted by running a circular line dividing this county from the county of New Castle and settling the boundaries and having duly and deliberately debated every article of the said account, do allow of the sum of twenty-six pounds nine shillings due to be paid by the county for said work.
“JAMES COWPER, Foreman.”
Although there is a general impression that Mason and Dixon afterwards ran the circular line, that is a popular error; nor is it true, as stated in an excellent article published in a leading American periodical, that “in the difficulty of tracing this circle was the origin of the work of Mason and Dixon.”’ The survey of Isaac Taylor and Thomas Pierson, in 1701, before described, is the only one ever made of the circular boundary between Pennsylvania and Delaware. The act of May 28, 1715,(8*) providing “for corroborating the circular line between the counties of Chester and New Castle,” seems to have been a dead letter from its passage, and was repealed July 21, 1719.
It is an interesting fact, in view of the ease with which the justices, in 1701, arrived at the point in New Castle where the twelve-mile radius should begin, – “the end of the horse dyke next to the town of New Castle,” – to recall the manner in which the commissioners of Maryland, in 1750, attempted to reach a like starting-point. In the diary of John Watson,(9*) one of the surveyors on behalf of Pennsylvania on that occasion, he mentions that the map of the Maryland officials had a puncture in it at a designated place within the limits of the town of New Castle from which they contended the radius of twelve miles should be measured. Watson subsequently learned that this point had been ascertained in this wise: “The commissioners of Maryland had constructed an exact plan of the town of New Castle upon a piece of paper, and then carefully pared away the edges of the draught until no more than the draught was left, when, sticking a pin through it, they suspended it thereby in different places until they found a place whereby it might be suspended horizontally, which point or place they accepted as the centre of gravity,” hence the centre of the town.
As the notches made by Taylor and Pierson to mark the circular line in the lapse of time were obliterated, thereafter to be recalled only in vague and uncertain traditions, and as the story that on the reexamination, in 1768, by Mason and Dixon, of the line surveyed in 1751 by Emory, Jones, Parsons, Shankland, and Killen, that the “middle stone,” planted by the latter surveyors at the southwestern boundary of the State of Delaware, was found overthrown by money-diggers, who believed because of its armorial bearing that it had been set up by Capt. Kidd to mark the spot where part of his ill-gotten treasures were secreted, had shifted its location many times, the impression became general that the stone planted by Mason and Dixon to mark the intersection of the three States had also been removed. Hence, in 1849, the Legislature of Pennsylvania authorized the Governor to appoint a commissioner to act in conjunction with similar commissioners representing the States of Delaware and Maryland to determine the points of intersection, and to place a mark or monument thereon to indicate its location. On behalf of Pennsylvania, Joshua P. Eyre, of Delaware County, was appointed commissioner. George Read Riddle represented Delaware, and H.G.S. Key, Maryland. The commissioners made application to the Secretary of War to detail Lieut.-Col. James R. Graham, of the corps of Topographical Engineers, who had acquired considerable prominence in adjusting the boundary of the United States and Mexico, to make the necessary surveys. On Oct. 30, 1849, the commissioners assembled at Annapolis, Md., where they had access to the notes of Mason and Dixon, as well as the agreement dated May 10, 1732, between Charles, Lord Baltimore, and the heirs and successors of William Penn, as also the subsequent agreement between Frederick, Lord Baltimore, and Thomas and Richard Penn, surviving heirs of William Penn, dated July 4, 1760, and the decree of Lord Chancellor Hardwick, May 15, 1750, which was the basis of the final settlement of the long controversy.
The commissioners, we are told by the accomplished historians of Chester County,(11*) at the northeast corner of Maryland – the commencement of the Mason and Dixon east and west line – found that the stone planted in 1768 to designate the spot, in a deep ravine, on the margin of a small brook near its source, was missing. That several years before the commissioners visited the place it had fallen to the earth, and had been taken away and used as a chimney-piece by a resident in the neighborhood, who, with some slight propriety, had driven a stake into the ground to mark the spot where the stone once stood. The commissioners at that point erected a new stone with the letter P on the north and east sides, and M on the south and west sides. At the junction of the three States the commissioners set up a triangular prismatic post of cut granite, eighteen inches wide on each side and seven feet in length. It was inserted four and a half feet in the ground, and occupies the exact spot where the old unmarked stone placed there by Mason and Dixon was found by Col. Graham in 1849, who had the old boundary mark buried alongside of its more modern and pretentious fellow. This new stone is marked with the letters M, P, and D, on the sides facing respectively towards the States of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. On the north side, below the letter P, are the names of the commissioners in deep-cut letters, with the date 1849.
Col. Graham, in his report, says, –
“At the meridian or middle point of the arc, corresponding to the length of the chord as we actually found it, and at the distance of one hundred and eighteen and four-tenths feet perpendicular from the middle point of said chord, a post of cut granite six feet long was inserted in the ground four and a half feet of its length. This stone squares seventeen by fourteen inches. It is rounded on the west side to indicate that it is on the curve, and on the east side the date 1849 is cut in deep figures.
“The circular boundary between Pennsylvania and Delaware from the point of junction of the three States to river Delaware being yet unmarked, and a number of citizens residing near the common border being in doubt whether as to which State they belonged, the survey was conducted with such precision as to enable us to describe that boundary correctly, as will appear upon our map, for a distance of about three and three-quarter miles northwestward from junction. We have determined the distance by computation at which a due east line from northeast corner of Maryland will cut that circular boundary, and find it to be four thousand and thirty-six feet, or seven sixty-six of a mile. We have also computed the angle with the meridian at the said northeast corner made by a line drawn from thence to the spire of the court-house at New Castle, and find it to be 70 degrees, 20 minutes, and 45 seconds east of south. At the distance of 3786 feet, measured by the said line from the aforesaid northeast corner, this line will intersect the circular boundary.”(12*)
As stated before, no survey of the circular line between Delaware and Pennsylvania has ever been made since that run by Isaac Taylor and Thomas Pierson, in 1701, and it may be asserted without fear of contradiction that no person at this time knows exactly where the line dividing New Castle County, Del., and Delaware County, Pa., is, and where it enters the river.
* Duke of York’s Book of Laws, p. 471.
** Sept. 23, 1682, Markham lived there, for he says, “Lord Baltimore was at my lodging at Robert Wade’s.” – Penn. Mag. of Hist., vol. vi. P. 430.
*** Record of Upland Court, page 119.
(4*) A tract of four thousand acres, still known as Bohemia Manor, Cecil Co., Md., on the east bank of Elk River, which was patented June 19, 1662, by Lord Baltimore to Augustine Herman, in consideration of the latter having undertaken to prepare a map of Maryland. This chart was engraved and published by Faithorne, in London, in 1672, and is very accurate so far as it delineates the western shore of the Chesapeake and the peninsula lying between the Chesapeake and Delaware Bays. (Johnston’s “History of Cecil County, Md.,” page 37.)
(5*) Extract of a letter to the Ld Baltimore from the commissioners appointed by his lordship to settle the bounds between Maryland and Pennsylvania, June 17, 1682 (published in Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, vol. vi. p. 418, note):
“Wee have taken three severall observations & in all of them have not differed two minutes & wee find Mr. Augustin Herman’s house to lye in the latitude of 39d & 45m so that your Lordship has 15m. yet from hence due North which will go not farr short of Upland & this differs very little from their own observation lately taken as wee are credibly informed wee have used our endeavors in letting all here know of your Lordship’s Desire to have the bounds determined & all seem much satisfied with your Lordship’s proceedings much blaiming Mr. Markham that after so many flourishes he should bee thus backward; Wee question but ye Lines will fall to answer yor Lordship’s expectacons & our true endeavors shall not be wanting to give your Lordship satisfaction.”
(6*) This letter is published in 6 Penn. Mag. of History and Biography, p. 432:
“To His Excell’y My Lord Baltimore:
“Whereas your lordship hath been pleased to Desire a reason of me under my Hand why I concurr not with your lordshipp in Laying out the bounds of this province Pennsilvania upon Delaware river: My Lord This is my reason that as I received all yt part of The river Delaware beginning 12 Miles above New Castle Towne and so Upwards, from The Government of New York which is according to The Express words of his Majesty’s Letters Patent To our Proprietory Wm. Penn Esqr I most humbly Conceive That I am not to be accoumptable to any other person Than his Majesty or Royall Highness for any part of This Province laying upon Delaware River & soe bounded but if your Lordshipp be willing to lay out ye bounds betwixt This Province and your Lordshipp’s Laying towards Chesapeake Bay and The rivers on That side I am ready and willing to wayte upon your Lordship for yt end & purpose.
“Upland in Pennsylvania 7ber 29th 1682.
“I am my Lord your Lordshipps most Humble Servt
“WM. MARKHAM.”
(7*) For fuller particulars of the interview between Baltimore and Markham, see 6 Penn. Mag. of History and Biography, p. 412.
(8*) Harper’s Magazine, vol. liii. page 549.
(9*) Dallas Laws of Pennsylvania vol. i. page 105.
(10*) This diary in good preservation is owned by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, to whom it was presented by the late William D. Gilpin, of Philadelphia. Gilpin stated that he found it among some old papers which had been sent to his mill as waste.
(11*) Futhey and Cope‘s History of Chester County, Pa., page 160.
Source: Page(s) 15-20, History of Delaware County, Pennsylvania, by Henry Graham Ashmead, Philadelphia: L.H. Everts & Co. 1884
About Author
