opponent. 104 Ben Uncas was then allowed to lay before the court what he had 
to offer, mainly a disclaimer of the lands in controversy. 105 On July 25 the 
court with the consent of the parties ordered reversed the award of costs in the 
1705 judgment—acting on the basis of the June 10, 1706, Order in Council. 106 
The numerous tenants in possession of controverted lands, being summoned 
by the commissioners, entered a plea to the jurisdiction, alleging a commission 
to determine individual land titles in a course of equity to be contrary to the 
laws of England, and of Connecticut, and to the colony charter. 107 
Demurrer being made to this plea, it was overruled. Commissioner Horsmanden 
was of the opinion that the Indians were a distinct people, that the 
property of the soil was in the Indians, and that royal charters did not ipso 
facto impropriate lands delimited therein to subjects until fair and honest 
purchases thereof were made from the natives. A dispute as to property in 
lands between a distinct people and English subjects could not be determined 
by the laws of England, but only by a law equal to both parties, the law of 
nature and nations. And it was upon this foundation that these commissions 
had been most properly issued. 108 President Colden dissenting, stated that 
the Mohegans were not a separate or sovereign state, but were subjects of 
England. 109 Further, when special powers out of the course of the common 
104 Proc. Conn. v. Mohegans (1743), 98-108. 
For the colony evidence see ibid., 144—213; for 
that of the Mohegans, ibid., 213-39; for that 
of the landholders, ibid., 239-77. 
105 Ibid., 109-115; Yale Vniv. Lib. MSS., 
Z 117.0047. 
106 Proc. Conn. p. Mohegans (1743), 118. 
107 Ibid., 119-125. 
10s Ibid., 126-27. 
109 Ibid., 127. William Samuel Johnson, commenting 
on the argument of the Mohegans, 
stated: "The Evidence referred to in the 
Notes of the Respondents Proofs we apprehend 
sufficiently shows that the Mohegans 
were neither free, Independent, nor numerous, 
but were only a small part of the Pequots 
from whom Uncas had revolted. The Treaty 
for settling the Country was made with the 
Pequots, and a right to all their Territories, 
which included the Mohegan Lands, was undoubtedly 
acquired by the Consent of that 
People. That the Colony did not consider 
them as Independent further appears by their 
Laws relating to them (which it is Considered 
we have as good a right to adduce as the 
appellants had to Insist upon several matters 
not in the Record) which subject them to 
Punishment for Immoralities, and crimes, and 
enact various regulations with respect to them. 
Mr. Colden's Objections in page 127, is a very 
just one that the Idea of the Mohegans being 
a separate or sovereign state would, in America, 
where the State and condition of the 
Indians is known to everybody might expose 
Majesty and Sovereignty to Ridecule, might 
be of dangerous Consequences, and not to 
be suffered in a Court of Justice etc. When 
the English Treated with them it was not 
with Independant States (for they had no 
such thing as a Civil Polity, nor hardly any 
one Circumstance essential to the existence of 
a state) but as with savages, whom they were 
to quiet and manage as well as they could, 
sometimes by flattery, but oftener by force. 
Who would not Treat if he saw himself surrounded 
by a Company of Lyons Wolves or 
Beasts whom the Indians but too nearly resembled, 
ready to fall upon him and even 
call them Friends and allies too, if he thought 
it would for a Moment repress their Rage, and 
give him time to take measures for his security; 
but you would not therefore Immediately 
call them an independent State (though 
Independent enough God knows) because they 
hunted the same Forest or Drank at the same 
Brook. The Gentlemen should have given 
some definition of a State or Commonwealth, 
it would then have appeared how far these