lxxx Introduction.

Indians should desert it, it not appearing to your committee that any compen-
sation had ever been paid to Colonel John Rider for the land. It also appeared
that a certain George Kirkman and the heirs of Colonel William Ennalls also
claimed lands in the Nanticoke River reservation, but that these later claims
did not seem to be valid as the lands were granted to them subsequent to the
passage of the act of 1704; nor does it appear to the committee that there
are any Indian claimants to these Nanticoke River tracts granted in 1704,
or to the tracts on Broad Creek granted in 1711, other than the three who signed
the petition to the Assembly, namely, one Indian woman and two Indian boys
on the Nanticoke River tract; and that there are none on the Broad Creek tract
which lies partly in Maryland and partly in Delaware. The committee con-
cluded by saying that none of the Maryland Indians, except these three Nanti-
coke petitioners are anxious to remove out of Maryland, the Choptank River
Indians choosing to live in Maryland and to enjoy the provisions made for
them (pp. 335-337). The house thereupon voted to reject the petition of the
Nanticoke Indians, and the committee was ordered to prepare an address to
the Governor, giving the reasons for this action. In this address of the Lower
House it is stated that the Nanticoke River tract belonged to several owners;
that the lands of which the Rider heirs claimed the reversion had been taken
up many years before the act of 1704 was passed; that the Lower House felt that
the intention of these acts was to provide a dwelling place and a comfortable
subsistence for the Indians living on the Nanticoke and Choptank rivers so
long as they remained in Maryland, and that to permit the very few that are
now left to sell these lands would neither be for the interests of the Indians
themselves nor consistent with justice to the public and the individuals con-
cerned (pp. 338-339). Perhaps the Lower House felt a settlement with the few
Nanticoke Indians on the basis of anything like the then market value of their
lands involved larger payments than were felt justifiable, and that the claim
of their agent, Ogden, was in the nature of a hold-up; and also apparently
because the original petition did not state that practically the entire tribe already
had moved north.

Notwithstanding the emphatic rejection by the Lower House of the Nanti-
coke petition, just ten days later, on June 7th, the Governor sent another message
to the Lower House, transmitting with it a revised petition by Amos Ogden,
the Nanticokes' agent, which recommended a settlement with the Indians on the
basis of a small payment and the passage of an empowering act. The Governor,
in his message to the Lower House, said that Mr. Ogden's revised petition,
restated the entire matter in a way of which he had not been before apprised,
and that this might also induce the house to come to a different resolution. He
said that Ogden regretted that he did not have the opportunity to present the
matter personally to the Assembly. He explained that Ogden represented
the entire Nanticoke tribe, who, with the exception of the old woman and the
two children remaining in Maryland, had already actually incorported them-
selves with the Six Nations, and that they were, therefore, "willing to accept
a very small compensation in proportion to the actual value of the lands in lieu
of any claim they or their heirs may have—by virtue of the acts of the As-