troversy to whatever method of determination the King proposed, by royal 
commission or otherwise —such determination to be final. Managers were also 
appointed and authorized to draw upon the public funds in presenting the 
New York claims. The act was to become void unless a similar enactment was 
passed in New Jersey within a year. 250 In June, 1763, similar legislation was 
passed in New Jersey, along with an act subjecting the estates of the Eastern 
Division proprietors to indemnification of the province for any expenses incurred 
in running the line. 251 However, the Board of Trade refused to present 
the submissive New Jersey act for confirmation, since it styled William Alexander, 
one of the nominated managers, Earl of Stirling, contrary to a resolution 
of the House of Lords. 252 Therefore, it became necessary for New Jersey 
to pass another act in February, 1764, omitting the objectionable agent. 253 
These acts received royal approbation in July, 1764, and the Board of Trade 
was ordered to nominate commissioners for settling the boundary. 254 In December 
the Committee ordered the crown law officers to draft a commission 
for settling the disputed boundary; the commissioners, largely royal officials 
and not councilors, were drawn from various colonies. 255 Objections being 
raised against the Nova Scotia members of the commission, it was not until 
June, 1767, that the commission, with altered personnel, received conciliar 
sanction. 256 The variation of personnel from the earlier boundary commissions 
was symptomatic of the increasing attempts at centralized colonial administration. 
The commission, closely modeled after the Massachusetts-New Hampshire 
precedent, provided for a further meeting of the commissioners between 
two and three months after rendition of their judgment. At this meeting either 
or both colonies might enter their appeals to the preclusion of later entry; in 
the absence of any appeal the commission determination, confirmed in Council, 
was to be final and conclusive. 257 
The initial meeting under the commission was held at New York on July 
18,1769, when the commission was read. 258 On July 20 clerks were appointed; 
the respective managers produced their authorizations; persons designated 
to receive process were named; and surveyors were appointed. Then New 
250 4 Col. Laws N.Y., 640-42. For the assembly 
proceedings see 2 Journals General 
Assembly N.Y., 714-17. 
251 Acts General Assembly N.J. (ed. by Allinson, 
1776), 254. 
252 JCTP, 1759-63, 409. Cf. Lilly, op. cit., 
194. 
253 Acts General Assembly N.J. (ed. by Allinson, 
1776), 263-65. A further ancillary indemnification 
act was also passed {ibid., 
265-66). See also JCTP, 1764-67, 92. 
254 4 APC, Col, #571; JCTP, 1764-67, 103. 
For the members proposed by New Jersey see 
9 Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.J., 447. 
255 4 APC, Col., #571. 
256 5 APC, Col., #17; JCTP, 1764-67, 392. 
For the objecting New Jersey petition see 9 
Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.J., 589-91. 
257 9 Doc. Rel. Col. Hist. N.J., 630-36; 2 Rep. 
Reg. Boun. N.Y., 752-54. 
268 3 N.Y.-N.J. Boundary MSS, 1.