Virginia's Brief In Support of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
msa_sc_5330_15_2
, Image No.: 25
   Enlarge and print image (34K)          << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space


 

Virginia's Brief In Support of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
msa_sc_5330_15_2
, Image No.: 25
   Enlarge and print image (34K)          << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
1 .ishington expressed skepticism that Johnson's plan could work without the active support of the legislatures of Virginia and Maryland.17 In 1772, Virginia granted a charter for a company to improve navigation as far west as Cumberland, Maryland." Washington and Mason were both elected trustees of the new company, along with Johnson." Like Washington, Mason was greatly interested in the Potomac route to the West and the exploration of the Ohio valley and had been an early participant in the Ohio Company of Virginia." Washington and Mason worked closely with Johnson to draft a bill for the Maryland legislature to provide for its support of the project.°' But political opposition in Maryland delayed progress. Johnson wrote to Washington that the Maryland Governor apparently believed that supporting the project would weaken Maryland's claim to jurisdiction 3' Delaplaine, supra note 30, at 69-70. 38 1772 Va. Acts c. XXXI, reprinted in 8 Hening's Statutes at Large 570 (1821). The legislation permitted the use of a lottery to raise funds. Among the managers appointed to oversee it were Benjamin Harrison and Patrick Henry. Id. Art. XII at 578. 39 Delaplaine, supra note 30, at 77; 1 Rutland, supra note 20, at 222; Maryland Gazette, Nov. 3, 1774 (announcement by John Balledine identifying Washington, Mason and Johnson as trustees). a° Mason had become a partner in the Ohio Company in 1749 and was elected its permanent treasurer in 1751. See generally 1 Rutland, supra note 20, at cxiv, 3-10. 4' Delaplaine, supra note 30, at 82-83; see also 1 Rutland, supra note 20, at 221. 14