the area granted under the 1691 charter was coextensive with the area originally 
granted, for New Hampshire claimed that its southern boundary ran 
due west from a point three miles north of the mouth of the Merrimac River 
at the Atlantic Ocean as far as Massachusetts extended. 148 Controversy would 
have been averted if the entire course of the river had been in the same latitude, 
but at some distance inland the river diverted to a north and south course. 149 
Clashes occurring between the provinces over jurisdiction to tax, to levy 
military service, and to issue judicial process, several abortive attempts were 
made at boundary delimitation by the two governments. 150 In 1720 the weaker 
colony, New Hampshire, determined upon resort to England for relief against 
the pretensions of her southern neighbor. 101 With no succor forthcoming and 
Massachusetts making extensive town grants in the controverted territory, the 
New Hampshire Assembly, in 1726, petitioned the King in Council that the 
dispute be settled by an explanation of the Massachusetts charter. 152 The petition, 
however, was consigned to administrative limbo—the Board of Trade. 153 
In the same year Massachusetts offered to appoint commissioners to settle the 
boundary, but New Hampshire rejected the offer, since the matter was depending 
before the King in Council. 154 Three years later, in 1729, committees 
were appointed by both colonies at the behest of Haverhill inhabitants, but 
no settlement evolved. 155 
The New Hampshire supplication to the imperial authorities finally bore 
148 19 N.H. State Papers, 193, 195. 
149 See the maps in 19 N.H. State Papers facing 
p. 628. 
150 Ibid., 180-91. 
151 For the instructions to agent Henry Newman 
see ibid., 193-96, 199. 
152 pc 2/89/276; 19 N.H. State Papers, 200- 
201; Bouton, History of Concord (1856), 77- 
82. On September 12, 1722, the Board of Trade 
had agreed to take agent Newman's memorial 
into furdier consideration at another opportunity, 
but such opportunity apparently never 
arose (]CTP, 1718-22, 380). 
153 pc 2/89/290; 19 N.H. State Papers, 202- 
3. The Board of Trade drafted letters to the 
lieutenant-governors of the two colonies desiring 
them to send over exact descriptions of 
their respective boundaries (JCTP, 1722/3-28, 
292, 295). See also ibid., 337-39, 341-43- For 
the effect of the application upon the landgranting 
conduct of Massachusetts see J. Smith, 
The Massachusetts and New Hampshire Boundary 
Line Controversy, 1693-1740, 43 Mass. 
Hist. Soc. Proc, 77-88. 
154 19 N.H. State Papers, 201-2, 204-5. * n 
September, 1727, Jeremiah Dimmer, Massachusetts 
agent, wrote that he had applied, according 
to instructions, "that indifferent persons 
might be named as commissioners to examine 
into the allegations and proofs of both 
sides on the spot, and send home their report 
for his Majesty's royal sanction; but the governor 
of New Hampshire having obstinately 
refused this equal method upon several pretenses, 
and particularly that they want only the 
King's explanation of a doubtfull expression 
or two in our charter and in their deed. The 
Lords seem willing to look into it; though I am 
satisfied they will find it attended with greater 
difficulties than they at present imagine" (52 
MS Mass. Archives [Letters, 1724—38], 395- 
96). 
155 -phe Assembly of New Hampshire was of 
the opinion that the titles of the Haverhill inhabitants 
would have to be decided by the common 
law and further that the matter was before 
the King for settlement. Therefore, the committee 
for New Hampshire was only authorized 
to run a line, in accordance with that colony's 
claims, to stand until the royal pleasure was 
known (19 N.H, State Papers, 206-10).