a letter to the judges of the land office, in which, after mentioning several surveys already made, and others then making, of these western lands, he desired and insisted, on the part of the proprietary, that no patents should be issued for them until his lordship's pleasure should be known:¾He represented that some of these surveys were located beyond the Allegany mountains, in contravention of the king's proclamation of the 7th October, 1763. In addition to the impolicy which he attributed to the whole proceeding, he censured it as unjust in reference to the back inhabitants, who had " stood the brunt of two Indian wars," and some of whom had obtained warrants, with a view of locating them on those lands, before the reserve was laid, and now, for want of notice, had not an equal chance with others for making advantageous locations. One of the judges, in answer to this letter, stated that the agent had received notice of the governor's intention to take off the reserve, and had been informed that the issuing of warrants must depend on him, as they could not be granted until he the agent had certified that the caution money was paid: that when this was done, the rest followed in course: the person bringing a titling must have a warrant, and he who returned a certificate must have a patent, supposing all requisites to be complied with. The agent rejoined by throwing the responsibility in regard to location on the judges of the land office, as he could not refuse warrant to any person that applied for it, but gave no direction that the surveys should be made westward of Fort Cumberland. The rest of the dispute turned upon the policy of the proprietary's enforcing his claim at that juncture to what they both agreed were his just limits, to wit, a meridian line drawn from the head of the south instead of the north branch of the Potomack. The board of revenue finally took up the contest, by a kind of manifesto, entered on their journal, in which, after reciting the correspondence just mentioned, they justified their proceedings by a variety of reasons, very warmly urged, and found great fault with the agent's interference.¾ This defence appears to have been transmitted to the new proprietary, or rather to his guardians, to whom Mr. Jenifer is also supposed to have made an appeal. The result of the contest was that, on the 6th of October, 1774, the judges of the land office received instructions to suspend all further proceedings upon the governor's order to them of the (a) 22d March preceding, and to prepare, for the use of proprietary's guardians, accurate lists and statements of all warrants issued,     (a)There is some disagreement concerning the date of this order; the proceedings of the board of revenue being on the 26th, but this is the date assumed by the state government in the measures which it took respecting the unfinished business arising out of this transaction. I i