2d Session. CITY OF DETROIT. FEBRUARY 12, 1831. Mr. STRONG, from the Committee on the Territories, made the following REPORT: The Committee on the Territories, to whom was referred on the 24th of January, 1831, the memorial of John R. Williams and others, citizens of Detroit, in the Michigan Territory, submit the following report: The old town of Detroit was destroyed by fire in 1805. In April, 1806, Congress passed a law, appropriating ten thousand acres of land in and adjacent to the old town, and authorized the governor and judges of the Territory of Michigan to lay out a new town or city, to adjust the land titles, and dispose of the lands and funds. They were also required to report their proceedings. It does not appear to the committee that this has been fully done. In May, 1830, an act was passed, requiring them to transmit to the Secreretary of State a plan of the town of Detroit. This has been complied with. This plan is called a "Plat of the city of Detroit, as laid out by the Governor and Judges," and is dated the 8th of January, 1831, and certified by John Farmer, by whom it appears to have been made. It is believed not to differ essentially from the "Plan of Detroit by John Mullett, engraved and published by J. O. Lewis, 1830," except in the addition of several water lots in front of those on Mullett's plan. It is to this addition that the principal complaint is made. The memorialists allege that this addition to, and extension of, the city into the river, destroys the value of their water lots, which they purchased in good faith, and with the understanding that no lots were to be laid out in front of them. The committee, therefore, think it advisable to approve of " Farmer's plat of the city of Detroit," with the exception of the addition thereto, as mentioned above, saving to all persons all rights previously acquired. It is due, however, to the governor and judges, to say, that they disclaim, in their communication to the Secretary of State, all authority or intention to do any act which shall prejudice these lot holders. The powers which the governor and judges have by the act of 1806, the committee think ought to be taken from them, and given to the city. The citizens of Detroit are certainly competent to manage their own affairs. It is fair to presume that they understand their own interests as well as any body else can, and that they, like the inhabitants of other towns or cities, ought to have the control over them. But as the governor and judges have not as yet rendered a full account of their acts and proceedings, the committee have thought it due to them not at present to recommend the repeal of the act of 1806, and thus leave them accountable to the citizens of Detroit. The committee, however, have no doubt, that so much of the act of 1806 as gives power to the governor and judges to lay out the town or city of Detroit ought to be repealed, and the power given to the city corporation; and that the governor and judges ought to be required to transmit to Congress a full and detailed statement of all their acts and proceedings, and of the state of the funds growing out of the trust reposed in them by the act of 1806. The committee submit the following bill in conformity with these suggestions. PLAN OF DETROIT. Letter from the Secretary of State, accompanied by a plan of the town of Detroit. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, January 24, 1831. The Secretary of State, in obedience to the act of Congress of 28th May, 1830, entitled "An act relative to the plan of Detroit, in Michigan Territory," requiring the governor and judges of the Territory of Michigan, or any three of them, to make a report of the plan of laying out the said town, under and by virtue of an act entitled "An act to provide for the adjustment of titles of land in the town of Detroit and Territory of Michigan, and for other purposes," and further directing that one copy of the said plan shall be transmitted to the Secretary of State of the United States, to be by him laid before Congress," has the honor, herewith, to lay before the House of Representatives the "Plat of the city of Detroit, as laid down by the Governor and Judges," agreeably to the direction of the act first referred to, and lately received from them at this Department, together with copies of the explanatory papers which have been also received from the said governor and judges. Respectfully submitted. M. VAN BUREN. DETROIT, January 8, 1831. SIR: Agreeably to the provisions of the act of Congress, entitled "An act relative to the plan of Detroit, in Michigan Territory," passed May 28, 1830, we have the honor to forward the accompanying plan, and the observations in explanation thereof. Very respectfully, Sir, We have the honor to be Governor of Michigan Territory. One of the judges of the Michigan Territory. Hon. MARTIN VAN BUREN, Secretary of State. The governor and judges of the Territory of Michigan, in depositing the accompanying plan of the city of Detroit, agreeably to the act of Congress of May 28, 1830, deem it necessary to annex thereto the following observations: On the destruction of the old town of Detroit, in 1805, an act of Congress was passed, authorizing the governor and judges of the Territory to lay out a new town, to adjust the titles, and grant deeds for the lots. In conformity with this authority, a portion of the town was, in 1806, laid out, and deeds granted. But the original plan under which this was done, is not and never has been in possession of the present board. The papers relating to this subject fell into the possession of the enemy during the late war, and were dispersed, and many of them lost; and great inconvenience has been the consequence. After the plan was first adopted, and deeds granted, changes were made, both in the number and form of the lots, and in the streets; but we have not the means of ascertaining these changes. In 1807, a plan of that part of the town included in sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8, was permaTently established, and certified by the then governor and judges. We are not aware that any changes has [have] been subsequently made in these sections; but as neither of the undersigned was then a member of the board, we cannot speak from our personal knowledge of the subject. In section 3, water lots 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, and 119, and in section 4, water lots 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, and 195, have been subsequently laid out to accommodate the shipping interest of the community, and to enable them to extend wharves to the deep waters of the river. The military reservations were not placed at the disposal of the governor and judges, and they are not, therefore, subdivided into lots upon this plan. They have since, with the exception of three tracts, been granted to the corporation of the town, and by them laid out upon a different plan, and many of the lots sold. We have reason to suppose that many deeds were granted before the alleys were laid out in sections numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8, as they are now exhibited upon the plan in our possession, and upon that herewith deposited. Many of the lots, as deeded, cover portions of the alleys; and where this fact is known, the dotted lines represent the alleys themselves, and the black lines the lots as granted; other dotted lines show the boundaries of certain lots, alleys, and streets, according to the plan adopted in 1807, and certified by the then governor and judges, but which being claimed according to the plan of the old town under their former titles by the proprietors, have been granted to them without reference to the lines. of the present city. It will also be observed that three tracts, principally covered with water in section 3, were granted in 1811 in conformity with the lines of the old town, two of which extend further towards the deep water than is shown by the plan previously adopted. It is impossible, for the reasons stated, that we can be certain of the entire accuracy of this plan. It has been compiled by a surveyor from the best materials in our possession; but it cannot be considered as conclusive evidence in determining the right of parties. The difficulty is confined to sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8; all the others, which have been laid out and established since the war, are believed to be correct. The incipient measures, in settling the titles of lots in the old town, in adjusting conflicting claims, and in giving deeds for donations, were taken and principally car |