" The charter of Pennsylvania," said the learned Chief Judge Denio of the New York Court of Appeals, in his opinion in the Rensselaerswyck case, " empowered Penn, the patentee, to erect manors and to alien and grant parts of the lands to such purchasers as might wish to purchase, ' their heirs and assigns, to he held of tlu. said William Pain, his heirs and assigns, by such services, customs, and rents as should seem tit to said William Penn, etc., and not immediately of the said King Charles, his heirs or successors,' notwithstanding the statute of quia emptores" Similarly in New York, the manor grants issued during the time that it remained a proprietary province (namely, those to Thomas Pell in 1666 and to John Archer in 1671) were made by the authority and in the name of the Duke of York as proprietor, and not of the king. After New Y^ork was changed into a royal province, the manor grants were continued by the authority ami in the name of the king. The privileges attaching to the manor grants in Westchester County varied. All of them, however, had one fundamental characteristic. Each manor was, in very precise language, appointed to be a separate and independent organization or jurisdiction, entirely detached from other established political divisions. To give the reader an idea of the formality with which such separation was made, we reproduce the wording of one of the manor grants upon this point, which is a fair specimen. In his letters patent to John Archer for the Manor of Fordham, Governor Lovelace says: " I doe grant unto ye said John Archer, his heirs and assigns, that the house which he shall erect, together with ye said parcel of land and premises, shall be forever hereafter held, claimed, reputed and be an entire and enfranchised township, manor, and place of itself, and shall always, from time to time and at all times hereafter, have, hold, and