sent of Mason or his descendants. 34 Ten years later the colony entered into a 
league with the Mohegans whereby Uncas resigned the tribal lands to the 
disposition of the General Court and covenanted to refrain from grants without 
the colony's consent. The colony alleged that this league was intended to 
preserve friendly relations, 35 while the Indians argued that the league only 
granted pre-emptive rights to the colony. 38 In March, 1683/4, Oweneco 
(Owaneco), son of Uncas, conveyed all his rights in the "sequestered lands" to 
the Mohegan tribe. 37 The first of the grants infringing upon any of the three 
tracts claimed by the Mohegans—the "sequestered lands," a parcel north of 
Lyme, and the Mohegan "hunting grounds"—was made by the colony government 
in 1687 to the town of Lyme. 38 In 1698 grants were made by the 
colony to Governor John Winthrop, Gurdon Saltonstall, and others of acreage 
within the "sequestered lands." In the next year a great part of the Mohegan 
"hunting grounds" was included within a grant to the new township of Colchester. 
The bounds of this grant were increased in 1703, and in the same year 
all the "sequestered lands" were included within a grant to the township of 
New London. 30 Several additional transactions afforded variant interpretations. 
In 1692 the Governor and Company ordered upon petition of Oweneco 
that his father's lands might be confirmed to petitioner and that they might 
not be alienated without consent of Samuel Mason. But the colony insisted 
that this action did not subject Oweneco to the absolute will of Mason but 
left that guardian still subject to the colony's control. 40 A 1699 grant from 
Oweneco to Colchester of all the Mohegan "hunting grounds" was assailed as 
obtained for insufficient consideration, without Mason's consent, while the 
grantor was intoxicated. 41 
There are different versions of the genesis of the Mohegan application to 
the English authorities for relief from the actions of the colony. It was asserted 
by the tribe that they had been reduced to distress by gradual disseisin 
and that frequent applications to the Governor and General Assembly for 
relief were fruitless. 42 The colony maintained that the groundless complaint 
originated in attempts of Nicholas Hallam, Joseph Dudley, and other foes to 
discredit the colony in the eyes of the imperial authorities. 43 At any rate, in 
34 Case of Respondents (Governor and Company), 
5; Case of Appellants, 3. Cf. MS Conn. 
Archives, 2 Indians, $277 h. 
35 Case of Respondents (Governor and Company), 
6. 
36 Case of Appellants, 4-5. Cf. MS Conn. Archives, 
2 Indians, #277 i, j. 
37 Case of Appellants, 5. 
38 Case of Appellants, 6; Case of Respondents 
(Governor and Company), 7. 
39 Case of Appellants, 6-7; Case of Respondents 
(Governor and Company), 7-8. 
40 Case of Respondents (Governor and Company), 
7. Cf. Case of Appellants, 6; MS Conn. 
Archives, 2 Indians, #277 m, n. 
41 Case of Appellants, 7; Case of Respondents 
(Governor and Company), 7. 
42 Case of Appellants, 7. 
43 5 Winthrop Papers, 3 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. 
(6th ser.), 214, 254, 276-77.