IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) 1.0 I.I 1^ us |Z8 |25 22 2.0 1-25 1.4 1 1.6 < 6" ► V] vQ / ^>>V o / Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 87^-4503 v.. %° CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/iCIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian InstituM for Hfstorical Mrcrorepr _ HOT ALLOW THAT THE EIGHTS. FRONT- B3, SOVEREIONTY, AND OTHER POSSESSIONS OP NATIONS, •« mMAIK UNCERTAIN, SUBJECT TO DI' JTE, AND EVER READY TO OCCASION BLOODY WARS. "—I'olM'i ton ^ • MAT WE GIVE THEM AS LITTLI :AUsE A3 POSSIBLE TO RECOLLECT THAT THEY ARE NOT BRITISH SUBJP TMrmm -17n. .: ADDRESSED TO THE CHAMBER OF COMMERr^ OF SHEFFIELD, * 12th APRIL, 1839. NOT PUBLISHED. LIVERPOOL: PRINTED BY MITCHELL, BEATON, AND MITCHELL, DUKE STREET. '•t^ch^:-^:^'^.:^'^ - wmmmi ' " ^P, t5^/- ayf V, \ ti ♦ ■;, ^"\ • 'X J. \ V \ Copif qf a Resolution patted at a Meeting qf the Chamber of Commerce, held at the Cutler's Hall. Shiffitld, March 26th, 1839. Resolved, That this Meeting regards the settlement of the question of the North-east Boundary Line, still pending between this Country and the United States, as of vital importance to the commercial interest of both Countries ; and that the Secretary be requested to write to David Urquhart, Esq., soliciting his views upon this interesting and important subject ; especially with reference to the rights of Great Britain, and the effect which the non-settlement of this question may have upon our Trade. Sheffield, March 21th, 1839. J.. 1)" Sir, Annexed I hand you copy of a Resolution passed unanimously at a Meeting of our Chamber of Commerce. The importance which the North-east Boundary Line has now assumed, and the great difficulty of forming a correct opinion upon it in the present state of the case, has impelled us to seek at your hands, that information by which we can the better understand its bearings. Knowing as we do, the amplitude of your information on all diplomatic questions and international affairs, we hope you will pardon this trespass upon your time. The great willingness with which you entered into many subjects of deep interest in a com- mercial and national point of view, when we had the pleasure of seeing you here, em- boldens us to take this step. Hoping that your health is sufficiently restored as to enable you, without the liability of further injury, to comply with our request, I beg to subscribe myself, Sir, Your very faithful and obedient servant, CHARLES CONGREVE, Secretary, To David Urquhart, Esq. ^ ^ J / •• Speke Hall, April \2th, 183S). Sir, My delay in acknowledging the receipt of the Resolution of the Chamber of Commerce of March the 26th, and in replying to your letter of the 27th, has been occasioned by my immediate and entire application to the task you have assigned me. The Papers presented to Parliament, have been so arranged, the Diplomatic trans- actions so adjusted, and the Documents so worded, that it has been a task of no ordinary difficulty to arrive at the simple facts ; and still more difficult to render them intcUigible, to make them clear, and to prove them true. The best consideration which I have been enabled to give to the subject, has brought me to the conclusion, that the complications and dangers of this question spring solely from the non-execution of the Award pronounced by the King of Holland ; to accept which, both Nations were, and are, bound; — no international act having abrogated its authority. It appears to me that I have satisfactorily established the following points; — That there has been a settled purpose on the port of the British Minister to set aside the Award ; and, consequently, to disguise the truth, and to falsify the facts : — That not to have exacted and enforced the execution of the Award, after its adoption by the British Crown, was a dereliction of duty, — a violation of the nation's rights ; it was to degrade the dignity of the Crown, and to involve this Empire in difficulty and danger : — That this neglect has resulted, not from culpable negligence, but from criminal intention, exhibited in a variety of circumstances, extendmg over a series of years : — That the enforcement of the Award is now the only admissible ground of adjustment : — That to abandon the Award, is to sacrifice our public rights and national honour ; and to fulfil and accomplish the scheme of foreign hostility, of which the Secretary for Foreign Affairs has been the agent. If the Award of the King of Holland is binding on Great Britain and the United States ; if its fulfilment (were it not binding,) is the only practicable settlement : then it is imperative on the nation to arrest any attempt at a new arbitration. The convictions which I state now, when collision is imminent, I have already Btated at Sheffield. Long before the occurrence of the events which have directed your attention so intently and painfidly to Boundary " differences," I have pointed out that question as the most alarming, and that transaction as the most disgraceful, in the wide range of our dangers and our dishonour. That it required an armed assault by one of the States of the American Union, to call any attention to such a subject in the Parliament or the Nation, is the amplest proof of the negligence that prevails — of the disasters which that negligence may pro- duce, and the ruin it must ultimately entail. By the disregard of the mercantile class for all that nations have hitherto deemed prudent and considered just, the public service of this constitutional state has been reduced to a position, in which a negligent or a criminal Minister has only to sacrifice a British interest, to secure the support of every foreign influence hostile to Great Britain. He secures also the support of the party to which he belongs, by committing it to a false line: — he is secure of the silence of the party to which he is opposed, from igno- rance of facts and consciousness of error. In regard to this question, the party in power is committed through the Foreign Minister; — the party in opposition is committed through the misconception of the question when in office in 1835 ; — the third party has expressed in both Houses the doctrine, that the claims of Great Britain are unjust. No one, in cither House, was found to contradict this assertion, except the Minister by whom the facts had been misrepresented. The rights secured to Qreat Britain by treaty, the result of triumphs on land and sea, bought by British blood, and purchased by two thousand millions of treasure, arc an inalienable portion of our national and individual property. They are beyond all other rights ; they are our existence as a nation and a name. The abandon- ment of any one of these, touches the honour and the welfare, the political independence, and the individual possessions, of each member of the State ; it is treason to the Nation, the Constitution, and the Throne. The integrity of our national rights is the source of prosperity — the basis of security — the bond of Government — the condition of allegiance. Bankruptcy, war, convulsion, and disloyalty, are the results of the infraction of treaties, — of the dishonour to that which is the personification of our unity, the expression of our rights, the emblem of our power, the record of our fathers, and the promise to our sons, — our National Flag. The recollection of the interesting days I spent at Sheffield, and of the zealous and enthusiastic adoption there by the leading men of all parties — of British and National interests, leads me to feel no small gratification in addressing to the Chamber of Com- merce of that Town, this exposition of a Question, which I conceive dangerous, only because misrepresented, and a correct comprehension of which is a duty in every Briton — a duty to America as well as to England — to mankind as well as to his country. I have the honor to be, Sir, Your obedient, humble servant, D. URQUHART. To CHARLES CONGREVE, Esq. Secretarii In l/i« Chamber of Commerce, Sheffield, :d !n P. S. Applications on the same subject having reached me from other quarters, I have thought it better (as well as from it? length) to send you my Analysis in a printed form. The shortness of time, my seclusion here, and consequent inability to refer to authorities, have been serious obstacles to the elucidation of this subject ; and I have from the first cause also to apprehend repetitions and omissions. ■'^./ri ■ .=_ •^ . CONTENTS. . ♦ *** • PAIIT I. ' „o.. ■Tin OF THB QIIgiTlON, DEFOIIE HEFKIIENCE Ti) THE KINO OK HOLLAND * » PAH I II. THE llECEPTION OK THE AWAHD (IF THE KINd OF HOLLAND IN ENOI.ANI) AND IN AMEIIICA, AND THE MEASUKE8 TIIB1IEU1>0N ADOPTED UY THE UUVEIINMENTS OF OUEAT BItlTAIN AND THE UNITED STATES 1« I'AUT III. * UUTBAOES CCMMITTED BY SIJDJECTS AND SllloKUIN.VTE AUTIIOllITtES OF THE UNITED STATES ' ^f AGAINST THE RIOUTS OF THE HIUTISH CKOWN 3t "IR PAUT IV. DOUBLE INSTRUCTIONS OF IX1RD PALMEllSTON, AND CUNSEIJLENT REJECTION OF THE AWARD BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES 4S PAur V. COURSE OF NEG0CIATI0N8 SUnsEUUENTLY TO Till! REJECTION OF THE AWARD BY THE UNITED STATES 6T OlIJKCTlONH TO TIIR AWAlin (tF TUB Kl.Nd OP Ildl.LANI) 79 PROJKI'T OI' * NkW CuMMIttSION 74 PAHT VI. RECAPITULATION— VIOLATION OF NATIONAL COMl'ACr-niiTllAYAL IIY THE KOIiEION SECIIETARY OF THE PUBLIC INTERESTS-IIIS ASSl'MI'TION OK INIONSTITUTIONAL POWER-ONLY IIE.MEDY, IMPEACII.MENT 74 PAIIT VII. CONSEQUENCES, TO EUROPE AND AMEliICA, OF THE AIIANDONMENT OF THE AWARD 7» APPENDIX; (PART I.):— Extract vrom tur Fuvrth Autici.k nr tup. Tkkatv or Oiiknt, (IHlt.) 1. Extracts prom a Convkntiiin hktwkk.v His IlKir.wMcK Majksiv and tiik Usitku SiATrs of Amkkic\, REI.ATIVB to TIIR ItKFEHKNCK TO ARItlTHA noN )IF TIIK IHSIM'TKI) POINTS CNUKR TIIK FIFTH AllTl- CLK OF tin: Tufatv OF OiiEST. .Signed 111 I Ion, Si'ptcrabcl' 20, 18J7 I. Extracts from tiik Awarii of thk Kino of Holland ii. APPENDIX; (PART IV.):- Corhespondexce detwef.v Loud Palmerston and Ciiarlfs IUnkiikaii, Esi; lii.-vi. Derates in the Housk of Commons on the North-East IIoi'ndauy, puom 1831 to 1KJ7. — (Extructed from the Mirror of Parliament) \-i.-x. Merits op the Boi ndarv Oie^tion.— (Extrnctcd from tlio Albion New York Paper, March, 18,10 xi. EXTBAcn PBOH Cuannino's Letter on tub Annexation op tub Texas xir. •«T» FiOK 19, Lihi 13, ERRATUIVi. Fvr " concluding " — read " contending *' * •1^ m* *' n m i « » ■ m 1 , # 4 1 t • < • » t # .. "r h^'i^ilralfi'iftlBTi-^ ;£s^.v£ wa. . ^.^i) ^ .y' ,, '"l , m > • PART I. :t STATE OF THE QUESTION BEFORE REFERENCE TO THE KING OF HOLLAND. " Tho Amaiiiwi Connnluicmrn lurr rnrtrbnl tho EnKll*b Dktlonuy wlUi nrw (rrini ami phruMi— rpci|in>c>l tdf knrifi, Air tiiitonw, nwaiu U» xl'tultfa of one of III* putlei ;— uiil it RgultUuu uf bauuiltrlui,— Mcinlon of Itrrllorjr."— £ari aioniml, 1783. By the treaty signed in Paris, in 1783, between Great Britain and the United States, by which tlie independence of these States and their sovereignty were recognized, a Boundary Line was fixed, separating from the United States the possessions still remaining to Great Britain in North America. In the adjustment of this frontier, between the Atlantic Ocean and the Connecticut River, the physical features of the country were so vaguely and erroneously laid down, that it was found impracticable to trace a frontier that should coincide with the constructive line of the Treaty, and the (assumed) natural features of the country, constituting points in that line. This region, however, bring at the time uninhabited, little in- terest was excited with regard to the territory in dispute, or the claims in abeyance. The astute and resolute representatives of America, who, in the framing and interpreting of treaties, in assert- ing or in infringing rights, have so invariably profited by the loss of this country, had succeeded it would appear in introducing into the original treaty an intentionally faulty definition of localities,** con- • " Language cannot be found too condensed and severe to characterize the terms of the first Provisional Treaty of Peace in 1783. Mr. O^waM, our Plenipotentiary, who adjusted it with Franklin and Jay, after his return to England, and when waited upon by the Merchants of London, that they might inform him of the concessions and sacrifices he had made, both confessed his ignorance, and wept, it is said, over his own simplicity." — Young's "North American Colonies," page 29. " Mr. Oswald — that extraordinart/ Geographer." — Lord Stormont. B liuorrwtnoM of the tenuH of Ui« Tn«ty of 17H:I. Thifiiiicorrcclur.n intentiotiul on Ui« pnrtol'tliu United Sliib's. 6 Extent or the Dis- puted Territorj. Jurisdirtion of OreatBrilubioTer the whole. vinced that all ambiguity would be resolved in their favour, and that every shock would tend to weaken the fabric of Britain's remaining power in America, to the benefit of the young and ambitious Union. With such expectations, — such confidence in their own powers, and justifiable contempt for the diplomatists opposed to them, ambiguity and incorrectness in the wording of the Treaty, became a primary and a paramount object to the United States, presenting as it did the means of realising, cautiously and systematically, results which successful war could scarcely have secured. The region, throughout which was pretended to be found, or sought to be established, by either party, the limits of their territory, as defined by the treaty of 1783, extended over no less a space than five degrees of latitude, and four of longitude : an amount of no less than twenty millions of acres of rich and fertile soil, well watered and admirably situated, was claimed by each of the parties; the claim of the British being at one time carried as far as the Kenebec, and that of the United States to within ten miles of St. Lawrence on the north-west, and to the St. John's on the east. Between the peace of 1783, and 1812, negociations had been carried on between the two governments; and a gradual retrocession of the claims of Great Britain took place, until they were confined within their present limit. The United States, on the other hand, abandoned its pretensions to the St. John's ; but maintained, to their fiillest extent, its claims to the north and west. There was thus left in dispute, a territory amounting to eleven millions of acres, but cutting deeply into the English possessions, and intercepting the communication between Quebec, Nova Scotia, and Cape Breton. Over this territory, which had now become partially occupied by British subjects, the jurisdiction of Great Britain was established — it had never been questioned, nor ceased to be exercised. During the war between England and America, the Americans did not take possession of this teriitory ; and it remained at the peace as it formerly did, — in occupation of Great Britain, (so far as occupation extended), and under her jurisdiction. At the peace between the two countries, England — having then triumphed in Europe, and having the full power of her naval and military resources available for the contest with America, if she had chosen to prolong it — generously proffered peace; and heedlessly made it upon conditions, which, in every instance, seemed only intelligible by the triumph of America, and the defeat of England. America bad declared war against England, in consequence of a disputed right of search, to recover her seamen, and of other no less grave subjects of difference, arising, not out of counter pre- tensions, or hostile interests, on the part of the two countries, but being merely consequences of the exercise of England's belliger- ent rights. Peace was signed, without the settlement of any one of those questions, which induced the United States to declare war against this country — and which, therefore, must revive, when England has again recourse to the same measures. The conse- quence of leaving these questions unsettled was the certainty of a war between England and America, on an occurrence of a war between England and any other power. Thus, hostility of inten- tions and interests, came to be introduced into the relations of these powers, by the existence of cause for future collision. And as, under these circumstances, the certainty of rupture with the United States, 'in case of England being involved in any European war, was a heavy drawback on England, and a serious blow to her consideration, — so it was, in a proportionate degree, a national gain and a diplomatic triumph for the United States. The United States furtlier acquired the right of free traffic with our eastern possessions, whilst she obtained from England the formal surrender on her part of all right to traffic with the Indian tribes throughout those regions designated as being under the "jurisdic- tion of the United States " ! The United States further obtained from England those rights of navigation, subsequently known under the designation of reci- procity treaties ; and it is singular, that whilst England withheld such rights from all other powers, she yielded them to the United States without an effort. When she did subsequently grant them to the Northern Powers, it was as it were by compulsion,— and the concession gave rise to great and not yet quieted exasperation and opposition. These concessions made to America passed in perfect silence. Another triumph for America was secured in negociation, in an enormous sum paid by Great Britain, as an Indemnification for Siplonulio tri- nmpluofUieDni. led StMn at tbe Peace of 1814. Caiuea of the war left open. United Stales ac quire tbe tneiom of Indian trade. Great Britain ex- cluded from traffic with American In- dians, United States ob- tain relaxation of Navigation Imws. Obtain imlcmnity for slaves. I K # runaway Slaves, in consequence of the ambiguous wording of the Treaty.* -si. ^SmII'iSiJ^ I^ *^6 treaty of 1783, England had made to America, on the SIS mdl^ Co: subject of fisheries, concessions the most unwarrantable and the most unjust ; — it was expected, alike in England and in the Colonies, that at a peace signed under circumstances apparently so favourable to England, these obnoxious concessions should be set aside, and that the right of fishing on their own coasts should be granted to the North American subjects of Great Britain, so as to put them on a footing with the inhabitants of all the other shores of the ocean, and the subjects of every other crown. But interests and rights were alike disregarded; and a negociation, conducted in secret, ended in the Convention of 1818, by which still larger concessions were made to the Americans, and greater sacrifices imposed on the Colonies of Great Britain: — nor was it enough that stipulations so disadvantageous should have been m^J^ptwiC signed; even the remaining restrictions imposed upon the Americans have been broken and infringed, with the most perfect impunity, from the signing the treaty, up to the present hour.-f- Such being the superiority of the American diplomatists over those of Great Britain ; in proportion to the ambiguity and the difficulty of a question, would be the chances of American ti'iumph and British discomfiture. At a period when England had the power (physical I mean, of course, for England seems incapable of using or comprehending any other) of enforcing on the United ofBrittihiubjects with impunit)- * England and the United States having agreed to refer the differences arising, as to the true meaning of the 1st Article of the Treaty of Ghent, to the mediation of the Emperor of Russia, a Convention between Great Britain, the United States, and Russia, was signed on the 12th July, 1822, at St. Petersburgh, whereby a Joint Commission was established for settling the value of slaves, and for carrying into effect the Award. The Convention was signed — Charles Bagot, Nesselrode, Capo-d'Istrias, Henry Midd'eton. The amount fixed was, I believe, about £500,000. England instantly submitted to the Award. The Emperor Alexander employs less formal expressions than those used by the King of the Netherlands. He says, " Invite par la Grande Bretagne et les Etats Unis d'em^ttre une opinion comme Arbitre dans les diff'erends, &c. L'Empereur considerant, &c. est d'avis." t A Committee of the House of Assembly of Nova Scotia, appointed in 1837, to inquire into the Fisheries, in commencing their Report, state that it " exhibits a melancholy picture of the evil consequences flowing from the indiscreet negociation between Great Britain and the United States of America; and the flagrant violations of subsisting Treaties by the citizens of the latter, and the riecessity of promptly repelling such invasion of our inherent rights." %i States her own conditions, and compelling submission to any terms, the United States extorted from and bound England to concessions SSsJ^iJTff"" and terms which no other nation would have yielded, save to a Si''Sii£TOS'of conqueror. In regard to the disputed territory, what did the United States seek — what did they extort ? They sought for nothing more than the terms of the Treaty of 1783. These terms were sufficiently 1 ambiguous and incorrect: they had nothing further to desire. A limit however was placed to the indefinite prolongation of ""tiTdlrSiU." the dispute, by a stipulation that, in the event of differences arising "" between the Commissioners appointed on both sides for the purpose of laying down the Boundary, such differences should be sub- mitted to an Arbiter, whose decision should be final and conclusive. In settling the Western Boundary, the two Governments com- pletely overlooked the nat jral features of the country. The words of the treaty of 1783, "by a line to be drawn from thence to the ii •' River Mississipi," are not admitted as requiring that the Mississipi ' ' should be a point in the frontier ; yet the Mississipi is not a doubt- ful geographical fact ; — whereas, in that part ot the Boundary which was kept open to dispute, the terms of the treaty of 1783, " the north-west angle of Nova Scotia," which is not a natural feature, and not an ascertained point in geography, is again re- asserted, and re-committed to treaty stipulation, as the only ground of settlement. That is, the Treaty, where clear,* is at once set aside ; where confused and impracticable, insisted upon as if a people's existence were at stake. I refer to these, to shew that in every stage of the proceed- ings, and on every point where the interests of the two countries were at variance, the Aiint'can diplomatists gained the advan- tage; that in fact they proceeded in a systematic and consecu-ii tive course of aggression — but proceeded with as much caution as determination : decided, when seeing their antagonist waver ; cautious and reserved, whenever the suspicion of England became r.v^akened. No less patient in waiting their time, than dexterous in fc:eizing their opportunity, we find them, throughout fifty years, re-appearing with new forms, and speaking in altered tones, but returning always to the point where they had left off, and * The adoption of the Mississipi would have greatly extended the British possessions. , C w ConTtntloD of Sept at, 1U7. New Commlision, nnder tku Cod- vcntion. resuming the thread where it appeared to be broken. Such their confidence in their own superiority, that it seems to them a triumph to create grounds of difference! v^. .>. The treaty of Ghent, in 1814, having thus sent England and America back to their old disputes of thirty years, new negociations were opened, and commissioners were again appointed ; — the result of which was the same confusion as before, and both parties found themselves as far as ever from any hope or chance of settlement. But the extension of occupation throughout the disputed district, and the consequent prospect of inevitable collision between the two nations, induced the Cabinet of Great Britain to look more seriously upon this matter ; and, armed as it was, by the treaty of Ghent, with the power of referring the matter, in case of sub- sequent differences, to the final decision of a Sovereign Arbitrator, it required from the American Government the execution of that stipulation. To prevent the possibility of further misintelligence, difference, delay, or negociation, a formal Convention was entered into by the two parties, on the 29th September, 1827, establishing with forethought, and defining with minuteness, the conditions according to which the litigation before the Sovereign Arbitrator was to be carried on, and solemnly binding both nations to adopt, " as final and conclusive," the decision of the Arbiter, and to carry it " without reserve into immediate effect." Under this Convention new commissioners were appointed by both Governments, and the whole of the facts and arguments were resumed on both sides ; these statements, with a single rejoinder from either party, were to constitute the documents to be laid before the Arbiter. The statesmen in England more particularly interested in bringing about this settlement, were Mr. Canning, Lord Aberdeen, and Mr. Charles Grant (now Lord Glenelg); while the reclassification of the documents, and the preparation of the case to be submitted to the Arbiter, were confided to the zeal and ability of three of the most distinguished (or rather the three most distinguished) names in British diplomacy.* On the lOth January, 1829, the documents were presented • Mr. Addington drew up the first document : Sir Stratford Canning the second. Vaughan was Minister at Washington. SirC, rt SelecUoo of Um King of BoUiod u Irbittr.— all flntl AwanL to the King of Holland, the selected Arbiter, and on the 10th January, 1831, the King of Holland communicated to the Pleni- potentiaries of both the contending parties, at the Hague, his final Award. The only point secured by England in 1814 against the un- bounded concessions made to the United States, was, the stipulation to refer the Boundary differences to arbitration. Thirteen years, however, were suffered to elapse before any steps were taken in ful- filment of that stipulation. I am inclined to attribute the fact of the Reference to arbitration to the new and powerful position assumed by Great Britain, when she possessed a man of genius for a Minister. From a people so grasping as those of the United States, to obtain a right, seems to be the gaining of a victory : for a nation so heedless as Great Britain not to sacrifice a contested point, is a thing requiring explanation, and only to be accounted , for by the extraordinary circumstance of a British Minister direct- ing his attention to interests, unconnected with Party. Thus was settled a question, which in importance is second to cSSSSS?'"' "" none as affecting the interests or the destiny of this country. Thus was settled a question, which, in difficulty and complication— in the extent of time over which the negotiations had extended — in the natural and artificial obstacles attending its adjusting — exceeds that of any negotiation upon record of ancient or modern times. Thus was concluded a negotiation, in which the diplomatic ability of Great Britain was exhibited in a light no less novel than brilliant ; and no less advantageous to the Public, than creditable to the men by whom it had been effected. The practical results of this decision were as follows : two- f^fj'^ "' "^^ thirds of the disputed Territory were awarded to America, and one-third to Great Britain : that is to say, that of the Territory originally in dispute, and of the Treaty of 1783, little more than one-seventh fell to the share of Great Britain. It might therefore be supposed that England had no grounds of congratulation upon the amount of soil which fell to her share. But it is to be observed, that the object of the United States was to con»o„en«. of o tlju aqjiutment keep the question open, and, by keeping it open, to have the power of constant action upon our North American Colonies, and of diploir.atic communion and concert with every European power in 12 r:9 I Award of the King or Uollauil bind- ing on both pai^ tins. any degree unfriendly to Great Britain ; that thence accrued a continuous source of irritation in America against Great Britain — of agitation in the North American possessions of Great Britain — and combinations of an unfriendly nature, and a secret character, in the Cabinets of Europe : that America, pressing, in her gradual growth, at once upon the disputed territory, and upon the Colonies of Great Britain ; — menacing, from her position, — and intent, through her spirit of acquisitiveness; — became from year to year more capable of injuring, and more disposed to injure ; and, consequently, that, collision being the ultimate point to which this progression could only tend, the question of collision between Great Britain and America was one which it became the duty of every European Cabinet to examine : and, being satisfied thereof, that conclusion remained an element of their own calculations, and a condition of their policy. The whole of these complications and dangers were at once swept away by the decision of the King of Holland ; and that decision, opening a prospect of harmony and good-will between the cognate races of the United States and Great Britain, placed England immediately in a new attitude, and a new position, as re- gards the Powers of Europe, and, by assuring the concord, in peace and harmony, of the maritime Powers of the two hemispheres, the aggressive projects of the territorial empires of the North and West received such a check, and so great a discouragement, as to promise a long continuance of peace in Europe. By the award of the King of Holland, England obtained that northernmost portion of the disputed territory which was necessary to secure her position in the Canadas, and to connect her various possessions in North America ; while America, obtaining the largest share of that which she coveted, — Land, had every reason to remain satisfied with the decision. By the fact of the settlement, and by the strengthening of the British frontier, the temptations were removed for those projects of aggression, which, at that period, the majority of her people, and the most enlightened of her statesmen, depre- cated and disavowed ; and which endangered her own prosperity, .and her political existence, in the chances of future collision with Great Britain. > , i This award of the King of Holland is now a matter of treaty stipulation, by which England is bound. Although during eight Id years the British Minister for Foreign Affairs h&s in his communica- tions with the United States characterized that obligation as not binding — although he declares it in his dispatches to be set aside by the British Government — yet, as no formal international act has abrogated the convention of 1827.. by which the decision of the Arbiter is established as finally and unreservedly binding on both parties, I conceive that the Award of the King of Holland is so binding, and that it constitutes at this hour one of the treaty obligations and rights of Great Britain. unr-fpr^^mT^' 11' \'. PART II. RECEPTION OF THE AWARD OF THE KING OF HOLLAND IN AMERICA, AND MEASURES THEREUPON ADOPTED BY THE GOVERNMENTS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES. •' I HOPB, SIR, WHEN THOSE PAPERS ARE PRODCCED, THAT THEIR CONTENTS WILL NOT BE PARTIAL, MEAGRE, AND UNSATISFACTORY— THAT THET WILL NOT BE CONFINED MERELY TO THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THE NEGOCIATINO PARTIES, BUT THAT THEY WILL INDICATE THE VIEWS AND POLICY OF GOVERN. MENT, DURING THE WHOLE OF THAT LONG AND IMPORTANT TRANSACTION.— Lord nin(oii, F<>. a(A, IMM. On the 10th January 1831, the King of Holland declared his Award, and officially communicated it to both governments through their representatives at the Hague. It is impossible to speak of this document without saying that the King of Holland, by the labour he had bestowed on the investigation of this involved and intricate question, and by the ability and judgment he displayed in his subdivision of the question, and his decision upon it, is entitled to the gratitude of the interested parties. Never was award delivered in 80 explicit and detailed a form— never was an award so fortified by the statement of grounds of decision against the doubts of ambiguity or the suspicion of partiality; — and, in taking this unusual line, of detailing his grounds of decision, he probably was influenced by the apprehension that, being at the moment threatened by the fleets of one of the parties, he might have been suspected of vindictiveness against that party, and partiality towards the other. It appears by the official papers lately published, that the adhesion of Great Britain to this Award was finally expressed to the King of Holland so soon as it reached this country; but the first public notice of this event, so important to Great Britain, occurred in the House of Commons on the 14th of February of the same year. It had become public that this question had been finally settled, and that the Award of the King of Holland had been Ouuteler of Ihe Award. AMt'iitufEiKrlan-t ooraoiunicatttd t/i King of HolloiKl. le Awtnl rrAiird lliiuM uf Com* AMmlnrRAnluxl noliiHitmiinlmlrtl til Uw I'nilnl Htaln. rendered. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was questioned ^ on the Hubjuct, and tliu decision was asked for. The Foreign Minister, liowcvur, refused to give any information, or to produce any papers. This Arst step will perhaps be considered, by men of business, conelusive, ns to the chariieter of the whole transaction. An arbi- tration is concliidt'd, and being formally accepted by one of the parties, is binding on both ; it is a compact settled, a contract signed. The refusal to state the fact — to produce the decision — is, on the part of the Secretary of State, a contradiction of the final character of tlu^ transaction, and is an invitation to the adverse party to refuse its assent, if so disposed. It is further fearfully compromising the «lignity of the country, by refusing to produce, on the score of uueoueluded negoeiation, the decision which the Crown had already declared to be final. It reveals, from the earliest perioil of this transaction, (w/iich imlccd takes its origin from the settlement of the question), that tlie real vitiws of the Foreign Se- cretary were at variance with the ostensible policy and objects avowed by the State. The second consideration that presents itself is, that his Britannic Majesty oHicially annotinces to the King of Holland his acceptance of the Award ; l)ut makes no such communication to 'the President of the United States. It Mas however not less essential to make such a communication to the latter, than to the former ; — indeed, much more so, — and the neglect of such a ste]> wos in fact a virtual con- tradiction of the communication made to the King of Holland : for negligence could not be admitted as an explanation, nor " pressure of other business" as a pretext, for the omission of so important a duty. From the relative geographical positions of the Hague, London, and Washington, it became, on that ground alone, the part of the British Minister to take the initiative ; and the American Government must have expected to receive tli(> formal communication from the British Government, together with the decision itself. Moreover, the whole course of the proceedings of the United States having been directed to keep this question undecided, and that of Great Britain, to bring about a decision, — silence on its part at this moment could not fail to be interpreted as a proof that some secret influence in England paralyzed the action of its government, and favoured the hostile views and pretensions of the United States. 17 of ity. m the Wo nuist now turn to the steps taken hy the American Go- rilTuaUilJuk.. vernment. It is nrohal)lv known to tlin reacU-T tluit tlic State of Maine was i)i.po.iuon. •■■.t more particuhirly interested in tins matter, — that it had prononnced """* ' *'''"•• the most decided opinion res|)eetin|ij it, — that th«! vahu; of the pro- perty it aimed at ae llrtllah MinUtrr, nil (aJm imkito. I Pllt))lc nets of the SutU' of Maine. Grrnt Britain. The British Minister, informed of these proceedings by the prcHs, statcH in a despatch to his Cliief, that he had requested from the United Htates' Government copies of the documents, and was tohl that '• the Government had not yet received any account " of them ;" copies of the whole documents having, as it subsequently appears, hvvu transmitted to the President twelve days before, — shewing in tliis earliest stage the deception practised with complete success on the British Minister. Up to this period the British Minister had remained without any communication whatever from his own Government ! • • Tim President, in communicating the Award, ostensibly, to Maine, carefully avoids any the slightest expression of opinion, — transmits the protest of Mr. Preble, equally without the slightest in- dication of censure or approl)ation of the extraordinary step he had taken, but stating that step to be without instructions. The message concludes thus, " under these circumstances the President will rely " with confidence on the candour and liberality of your Excellency, " and tin* other constituted authoriti(!s of Maine, in appreciating " the motives which may influence that course on his part, and in '* a correspondent interpretation of them to your constituents, in " whose patriotism and discretion he has equal confidence." Thus, on the threshold of this subject, we have satisfactorily defined the position of the United States Government ; that of tacit acquiescence in the Award, but a resolution to wait, and watch the tone and attitude of England, in the hope of setting it aside. The Governor of the State of Maine, on March 25th, 1831, com- municates to the Senate and House of Representatives of that State, the message of the President, with the documents : and responds to the request of the President for a candid and liberal interpretation of his motives in the future course he might adopt, by declaring that the State of Maine relies with confidence on the central Government "for the enforcement of its claims against the power of Great Britain." These earliest proceedings of Maine may however merit a more special notice, as they contain the germ of the ensuing discussions and events. A joint Committee of the two Houses of the State is appointed to deliberate, and on the 31st of March they make a long report to il lU ited rt to their severiil Imnses. It in l»y them iiimiiiiiioiiMly aduptuil, uccrptctl by the (iovcrnor, uiid tinnsniittcd to the l*rcsid«!iit of th«-. Aitirhumt vlewN. pi 22 npSi'nw'thT Stipulation between States is the clearest proof of the hostility of the Government to a settlement of the question, and the suspending of a reply till they receive the decision of Maine, as if the power re- sided in that State, or as if the opinion of that State were doubtful, exhibits a settled plan of misreprcisentation and deception, of course # not without an end and object, which, to avow, would be to frus- trate, and which to attain, required deception. On the 12th of April, Mr. Vaughan writes : — • " Wc arc lit length in possession of the manner in which the Governor and Legislature of Maine have received the Award of the King of the Netherlands, — as, on the 5th instant, a newsjiaper published at Portland, the seat of Government of that State, commenced the publication of documents which had been officially communicated by the President, when the Award of the King of the Nethcrlji.uds was transmitted to the Governor. " The first part only of these documents, published in Maine, has yet reached Washington, and I have the honour to enclose a copy, extracted from a newspaper. " I have endeavoured to procure from the Secretary of State, a copy of the pro- ceedings of the Legislature of Maine, which will in time appeiu in the newspapers ; but the Government has not yet received ony account of them." These enclosures, exhibiting the violence and excitement of the State of Maine, are published in the second series of papers, marked (B), which appeared several months after those we are examining ;* consequently the reader is left in total ignorance of these events, and it is thus utterly impossible for him to comprehend the bearings, even of the fragments of evidence that are placed before him. On Mr. Vaughau's application for information regarding the transactions in Maine, he receives a refusal, to which he evidently submits, without murmur and without suspicion. In his unreserved communications with his chief, lie does not even say — I am told that " the Government has not received the documents." He says, in justification, self-volunteered, of the American Government, " but " the Government has not yet received," &c. By the resolution of Maine, already quoted, the Government of Maine had, on the 31st, communicated all the documents to the UtIiNvivi't! by Iho AlluTicaiitiovrru- meiit. * Not only is an interval of several months allowed to elapse between the publication of the papers thus separated, and thereby rendered unintulligible; but publication of tlic second is reserved until the Session is closed ! They bear no date but 1838 ; consequently, on subsequent reference to them, the fact of this separation is concealed. There is no reason assigned for the interval, or ti>e separation ; and none, certainly, in the matter or the circumstances. 23 ICnf{Ianil,fiiriiicirf tliAnthri'ditniitltB President. This then furnishes the proof, if that were wanting, of the deception practised on tlie British Minister, and of tlie concert between the General Government and the State of Maine. It is remarkable here, as throughout tlie whole of these pro- ceedings, that there is no single statement of the American Govern- ment borne out — no promised hope realised ; — and yet on no sin- gle occasion is a statement made by it, not implicitly admitted by England — not a hope expressed that is not immediately taken up and repeated by tlie British Agent or Minister. It had now exceeded tiiree months from the period of the de- cision of the King of Holland, and no intimation had been received "^"'"i""'""" at Washington of the views or intentions of the British Cabinet — no step had been taken on the part of England in any sense whatever — no step more hostile could have been taken than inaction. Meanwhile, the activity and calmness, the decision and repose of the Government of the United States were truly remarkable. Two Acu.ii.v.,fti,r days after the rendermg of the Award were not sunered to elapse, ""'»"■" without a Protest being entered against it by the Minister at the Hague. The United States' Government protest immediately to us that that Protest is unauthorized, while the Protest is significantly conveyed by a message to the State of Maine. The American Government had secured the means of a double communication of the Award of the King of Holland ; two separate constitutional steps take place on the part of the State of Maine — the one s(!eret, the other public, with an interval between them admitting of interme- diate reference to tlic su})reme Government. The first announce- ment of the Award is made to the American people with circum- stances calculated to divest it of all authority ; this announcoment is so made by the Government without any formal or informal act or word, on the part of Great Briti/ii, expressive of any interest, intention, or opinion, regarding this matter. But to whatever expectation the negligence of the British Government might have given rise, still there was one ground upon which her rojiresentative might rest. To the assertions "that the " King of Holland had exceeded his powers," — " that he had not " decided the question," — " that the State of Maine would not " consent," — " that the Central Government could not enforce the ♦* Award," — the British Minister might have answered : — •' To such I 24 rifflt JMitnictinnn •if l.onl l»alrai'l^ nloH iTivivcd, -April I'.ltb. Tho character, iiiitl cni)Ni^]iicnccn, or tlial Onpatch. frivolities it is superfluous to reply. To Maine and its Resolves England has nothing to say. This is a (picstion of grave and solemn treaty stipulation between Nations. I have not yet received instructions, but when I do — it will be to call upon the United States to proceed to the execution of the Award, delivered in conformity -with the Convention of 1827, and the Treaty of Ghent." His strength, so far, would lie in his having no instructions. If the British Minister did not use this language, it was how- ever that which he nuist have felt. It is what (!very American must have felt. The non-arrival, therefore, of despatches from England, howev(>r unaccountable, must still have served to excuse or to weaken the eft'ect of the silence and inaction of the British Minister. However, on the 19th April, 1831, the British Minister was re- lieved from his anxiety by the arrival of despatches from Downing Street. The despatch referring to the award of the King of Holland was not a long one, as indeed it required not to be. But, together with the Award in question, strange; to say, it contained another do- cument, which was no other than the disavowed protest against it of the American Minister at the Hague. Sliort as is the despatch to which the signature " Palmerston" is attixcd, it contains subjects of deep reflection, and is the conunencement of a long series of ter- giversation and falsehood, of which tlie calculated consequences necessarily are — even in case of the triumph of Britain — mutual bloodshed, and common disaster. " Viscount Palmerston to the liiyht Honoruhle (', R, Vaughan. " J'lreii/H Office, February 9, 1831. « Sir, " I have now to transmit to yo»i a copy of the decision which his Majesty the King of the Nethcrhuids has connnunieated in dupHcatc to the representatives of Great Britain and tlie United States at tlie Hague, upon the (juestion of disputed boundary submitted by the two Governments to Ilis Netherland Majesty's arbitration. " I am comjwiled by the pressure of other business to delay luUil a future opportunity whatever observations I may have to make to you. ujmn the terms of t/tis decision ; against which you will perceive, by the enclosed copy of a paper communicated by the American Envoy at the Hague to His Majesty's Ambassador at that Court, Mr. Preble has thought fit to protest in the name of his Government. " I can only acquaint you by this opi)ortunity, that whatever might be the sentiments or tvishes of His Majesty ujion some of the points embraced in the decision of His Netherland Majesty, His Majesty has not hesitated to acquiesce in that decision, in fulfil- 35 ji. ments f His fulfiU It Bavriijt'cn Uit Awanl. ment of the obligations which His Majesty cotuiders himself to have contracted by the w. PBimimuin'. terms of the Convention of arbitration of the 29th of September, 1827 ; and His Majesty """ "'"''"'''■ " it persuaded that such will be the course adopted by the Government of the United States. " If, however, contrary to this expectation, the American Government should determine upon taking any step of the nature of that which has been adopted by Mr. Preble, and should make to you any communication to that effect, before you shall have received any further instructions from me on that point ; you will inform the American Minister, //iir.Jy/i',s llip llntisli Minister. 26 the truth from England, could alone have dared to conceive the project. No American could have aimed at such a triumph : No other Enulishman contemplated such a crime. The only means of accounting for negligence in a British Secre- tary of State, on such an occasion, or for the excuse of *' pressure ** of other business" — is, that it could not have entered into that individual's mind to suppose that the Award could be resisted. But *he despatch itself docs suppose resistance ; — it encloses the very protest of the American Minister at the Hague (which his Govern- ment had taken care to proclaim unauthorized), as the only docu- ment to guide the views or reflections,* of the British Minister : — it limits the duties of a Minister to the functions of a post-master, and prepares him to exhibit and announce the longing of the British Government for the re-echo from Washington of the (to all but Lord Palmerston) perfectly insignificant, unnoticed, unanswered, pseudo-protest of the American Minister at the Hague. The pr.e- text, therefore, of " pressure of business" for leaving the Minister uninstructed, I take to be as destitute of truth, as, if true, it would be repugnant to reason. If the despatch had concluded with " You are not prepared " to enter into atit/ discussion on such a subject," the effect on the British Minister, and through him on the American Government, would have been that England considered the matter finally adjusted ; — but the words that follow, " Vou can only transmit the " communication, &c." shew that the English Government had not made up their mind. Thus this despatch did convey the most positive instructions ; thcrefcn-e the pretext of " pressure of business" is no less inapi^licable to the circumstance than unreasonable and untrue, and reveals a process of perplexing what is simple and confusing what is plain, which must have been, even to a man of talent and dexterity, a heavy pressure on his legitimate avocations. Let any one place himself in the position of the British Minister, on receiving this despatch, and he will at once feel all the doubt and bewilderment Avhich such a communication must have * It is singular that whilst Lord Palmerston encloses the protest of Mr. Preble, lie does not enclose the reply of Sir Charles Bagot to that protest; nor is this reply at all given in the pub- lished documents : — although that reply was communicated by the President to the State of Maine, n produced. By being relieved from responsibility, he became a cipher. It being enjoined him not to act; he would receive the impressions made upon him, — be the channel of these to England, and the echo of them, as English, to Washington. This despatch is placed at the head of the communicated papers, as if it were the commencement of bona Jide negociations. The document that follows it is the protest of Mr. Preble ; so that the reader's mind is at once impressed with the idea that he is about to commence the negociations; whereas in the very first document, he has arrived at the conclusion, — and, if he reads it ariglit, has dis- covered the whole truth. And what is this truth I The frustration of the Award, and the sacrifice of all the anterior negociations and con- tracts, through the studied vagueness and the calculated contradictions of a single despatch of twenty-three lines ! The papers, as already observed, are separated into parts, and the documents necessnry to their mutual elucidation are kept apart, and published with the interval of months : — the separation, the transposition, and the selec- tion, so calculated to bewilder tlu; reader, that no member of either House of Parliament has ventured to deal with the sul>ject ; and so completely has the question been rendered unintelligil)le, that no individual in this country seems to be aware, that the setting aside of the Award of the Kino- of Holland is the enigma that is to be solved ; and is the sole and uni(jue cause of past, present, or future complication or collision. Though I am arguing this (piestion on its intrinsic merits, and judging it according to evitlcnee furnished solely by the func- tionary Avhose conduct is arraigned — evidence, diluted, pre])arcd, and pre nted by himself— y(!t there is a consideration which tlie inquirer ought to weigh, and of which he nnist not for a moment lose sight, if he deems it of value. In investigations of a legal charaet(T, the motive of the acts, and therefore the truth, lies within tlie subject-matter, and is contained in the statement of the facts ; but, in diplomatic transactions, the motives may lie without, as well as within; and the truth may therefore have to be sought in external circumstances. In the present case, the course of the British Mi- nister, judging of it by the facts before us, is incomprehensible. It is a simple case of the implementing of a contract, presenting no difficulty in the performance, — admitting no ambiguity in the po- Tlil» ili'spnlrli mode tu ni<|>i'»r the L'oiniiicricr- mcnt of rie({ooiii- tlond. Tran-ttu-tion un- inti'lliKibli! in ilaeir. if tM M'tUvf) or l4tnl l*iklitMti iitiMl tnu«t hnrr ItHikcil to Fon'itiit iiii* Iftln. KuMlKAiulFrnnoe Mi)rA>ii>il 111 |in>. jfctj* hiwiili* to (JroAt ihitiuo. 28 licy of tlie Stntr, tlic ohligatioiiH of tin* (^rown, or the tlutirs of tlio MiiiiHtt'i*. Tlu'sj' iiro nil on ono V\iu\ and roncrntrutcd in n Binp;lu point. A r(<(|iiiHiticniion was all that had to be done — was that which eonld not he omitted, llrfnsal on its part, if refiiHal there had been, wonld hav(' ref»ard<'«l tin; Parliament ami the Nation, not her Mini.ster and (Jahiiu't ; for what C-ahinet wonld hear wneh n'Hponsi- bility as std)mission to, and eoneealment of, the violation of a national compact ( This st(>p not havinj>; been taken, tlni snbjeet itself fur- nishes no eine to the act of the Minister ; — supplies ns with no intellip;ible motive for dejiartinp; from routiiu' forms, duties, and interests. In this dilennmi it beounes necessary to in cpu'stion of collision with England. It must therefore, (unless through a short-sijvlitedness or nep;ligence with which it ni'V(>r yet has be«'n charp;eal)l(! or charged), have sou«»'ht to fathom the views of siich ^•reat ])owers as nuist, by their opposition «)r concurrence, reiuler neoociation or an appeal to j'hy- sical force fruitless, or succ«\ssful. Russia and Fiance are these powers. 1 therefore assume that tin* United States could not have entered upon this line, without the assurance of the concurrence of Russia and France a^'ainst Eno-land, or t)f the Foreign JVlinister of England against hersidf — which in fact was much mon^ than tlu^ snpport of the otluT two, carrying as it did along with it the support of these two ]>owers. Mut Russia and France were at the time actively engaged in general projects of aggression — in opposition, if not to the policy, at least to the inttTests, feelings, and rights, of Great Britain. They could not therefore have looked with inditfercncc on a settlement 2y which woiiM los«' th«!tn t\\v \UuU\ Itatos ns an nvcntmil iilly — re- lii^v!;reHsiouH. In the fidiilineut of their diitieH, the MiuiMterH of these Slates must have heeii prepared to take sueh iiUMisun'H as were within their reach, both with the lJni(ey cotd'erences hehl in Down- infjf-stnx't: — First, the atliiirs of (ireece; st-coinlly, the afi'airs of tim East; thirdly, the affairs of Help;iuin. In reji;ard to the first, their C()ncurrence to sacrifice the rit;litsof l'inn;land has heen estahlished.* In regard to tln^ second, their connnon disniemlierinent of the Ottonuui I'imijire is before the eyes of all men. -As renards the third, ( Bclfvium), tin; residts have not yet apjiean-d, ami no exposi- tion of the ilii •I'lllnii.'iil i.r III. N.lt. Ilnlih'llllv r|tl<-Ntl..ilUll Ihi'I'i. "]ii|iilh>ll ot tilt Ihillill .MlNlmi't. * See Di|il(imatii: History ol' (Irci'cc, l)y II. II. Puiisli, \'.ni\. ^ Not only are comiiiiiiKls thus ^ivcri to iTprcsLMitiilivcs of Eiinl.iiid ; Ijiil llicy arc onlcrcil to make tliiMr r('|ir('sciitations to tlicir own (■ovcriiinciit, coiit'orni wilh tlionn of thiir rollcngucs (of Russia mid Fiance). Not only iire they tliiis oriicivd and inslnieted, hut dwjmccd and rr-ciillad by foreign functionaries. For iiistiuice : the Dutch (ioveniincnt brings a diarge against the Minister of England at Urusseis ; it is of course addressed, not to the Conference , but lo I/ird I'alnierston. The l)rilisi> Minister receives an order instantly to quit Brussels, siijned by the Ambassadors at London of Russia and France. The diplomatist whose person is so selected to vilify and degrade the Dritisii name is then sent Ambassador to — Constantinople. H ■itrr' 30 f Irtnl I'nlnirr^lnn fiitli'ii with ilifin In viiihiu Il.rly of Ml. ^ Hiiuhnn to \A WliiiriNion H un«l llu' world, to ht; governed by Hccrct concliivos of HusHian diploniiitists. ** Wliiit then nniHt Iinvc been the |)OMition of Lord Puhnernton with reiinni to the ^f((rth-^>ast Hoinwhiry t|iiestion ? Mnut not. the motives, which prouipted his previous eonduet, huv«! prompted him hi're-miisf not (he Diet of suhservieney to Hiissiun views mi one instanee, hiivo eompeMed him to t'oHow her dietates in all? — Without a kno\vled<2;(M)f' these external inllnenees, the impiin'r is lost, and eonfnsed in eominjL>; to jiroofs of tin' hostility of u British ]Miiiist(>r to the inten'stsof (Ireal, Mritain. He eonsetpiently perverts what he sees, to escape from a conelnsion at which he revolts ; besides, few nu'ii liavisln'cii in a position toeompn^hend how the Minister f)fu eonntry ne<;leetin|L!; its interests can be redm cd to snbservi(!ncy to u f«)rei;j;n power: unable to c()m|)reh«'nd the .Motives of the num, they resist the evidence of their senses and tlu' com bisions of their reason, as re^-ards the acts of the Minister. Ifaviiio- explained tln^ character of Lord I'aluK'rston's despatch of iM'bruarv, I now I'ome to the etfect which it produced. Mr. A'aufihan's reply displays, as its jn'omiui'iit featun*, -as the first object of his attention, -tlu^ Proti'sf ! IJut he a;j;ain repeats to Lord Palmerston, that thc> Am(>rie:in Secretary (notwithstandin<>; Lord Palmerston's assumption, that it was " in tfic name of his Covvrn- " nu'tit") "expressly stated that it had been nnide by Mr. " Prel)le, without instructions fntm his ( lovernment." Mr. Vauiihau communicates then, from flic Nncspaiwr, the proceedin|ijs of jNLiine, — enumerates tiie whole of the aro'uments and obstacles that had been iiulustriously put forward, and which threatened, uur(>sisleil as they were, to set aside the decision of tlu^ l^big of Holland. Hut, with all these documents in his poss(>ssiou, — documents which j)roved tht> deception practised upon him, eitiht days bi-fore, by the I'uited States' (loverunu'ut, does Mr. Vanti'lian yield to the impressions nujtle upon him by Lord I'almerstou's despatch of l''ebruary S)th, enjoiiiiuo- hiui to stand with folded arms and compn>ssed lips, the unmoved spectator ot' proceedings at once so (>\tra\a«i;iut and alarmiu;;'. With the phantom of the Protest incessantlv before his eves, he says, " should tin; American " Cioverument nuike any communication to me of the nature 31 " of Mr. Pnihld'M TrotoHt, 1 hIiiiII ho y)ri ntorm " Htrictlji to wliiit your LonlMlii|) Hiijrfr(>sfs": tlic sirs uc i^ nut oiu- wliicli would coniinonly he; Hiipposcd ♦•> r('(|iiir(' |U'(|mriition, or to mliiiit ot'doiiht (IS to HtrictncMM ot'iK^riorniiiiicc ; hut, in this ciist!, the trriiis lire happily srh'etcd, and show ihi; importuiUM' which thc^ Mi- iiintcr felt to h«i attached to the. jK-'rloriiuiiMre of— «(;////////. Hiit Mr. Va(i)j;hau wan too ahht a man to he huit^ <nators and politicians of the hinhest distinction, wen; still all in favour of th(! adoption of the! Award. Allhon;li the itiea of a S((c,ond refenMUM! to the Semite had heen extensively s|)read, and had heen p'lienilly ado|)ted, still it was clear that the Senate, left to its natural impulses, would, hy tin; same motives that h>d it to adopt the Convention of 1S27, now adopt tin; Award nmdered aceordiiif^ to the t(!rms of that (Joiivention. Let us now supposi! for a moment that Lord Palmerston had an ohject in prevcntin would be careful to .iliiili«>r thr AiiifrirHtl |Hn|>|i III I. til iidi>|iiiiiii of tilt) Award. MeiiriR that eouM have U'vn devip«d to rru>4lriaf it. * The Protest of Mr. PrcMn, tlioiii;!! formally (lisowncd, yot, liaviii;:; been suljscqttrntly pul), lisluMl n.^ a Statt^ paprr, and liavinij boeii roccivid as such by (in-al Britain, became in rcahly the Protest of the Govcrnnu'ut. 'l'hi>«< iiii'ftii« (iilitpirit by Ia>t>\ I'litiui'niton. Pt'iiHrlurr of Uif* llrilUh Mliiiilrr. llritUli Miiilslcr It ukn rinhtrt'u iiionUi* fur Uip Scimu» tve.H In nn ail- justoiriit. tlio Hiihject timttiT, — or, fuKlin^ hucIi ii luuu in tliut ufHcu, ho would remove him. Ahovt; all, at any critical moment, ht; would lower the authority ol" the British Mission, by removint; the titular re- prcsrntative, and hy 8U|)|)lyin\... •• Award, it will be necessary to receive the approbutioi *' Senate, as the President has no power in himself to ali uatj any " part of the territory of an' individual state." To all these despatches, — to these sundry communications, extending from the month of Marcli (when eouuueueed the first secret Session of the State of Maini'), down to that of the 4th of October (which we shall shortly touch upon), communicating the aggression of the State of Maine upon the dispute«l Territory and the jurisdiction of the British ('rown, — no reply whatever proceeds from the Secretary for Foreign Afliiirs. With this momentous (piestion suspended by a thready shivering in the wind, the Minister, — a man of recognized ability, conversant with the anterior details of tlu; negociation, atul intlueutial from his character, and the general estimation in Avhieh he was held, — is suffered to abandon his post. No Extraordinary Mission is on its way to meet and confer, on some neutral islaiul. Nothing of the kind. Tlie jNIinistcr withdraws — his post is left vacant — ilm Secretary of Legation is left in charge, and without instructions. The year rolls on ; his despatches are unreplied to. The Session of Congress approaches, the members tlock to Washington, — he turns his oyes in vain to the rising s in, but no counsel comes to hiin from the East. The question is td be referred to the Senate — he has no protest ready. The messajio of the President is to be prc- Thf rtiarii' il'- Arlkln-i »*¥• Um tirm* I'mtilnjrril Mii'iic. 'Kll, li'Knia that lifAwiinl il til ))i' rnp.| 111 till Si-. i;m , i!. of iiii' .:. . |>itrliin'h Mllil>lrr: Clf till' S.i i,|,iry uf 1.1 LM'tii'l 'ii lilt' ll'H, Mint vIIIIhiiU lll.1ll-lll'tll l> f ! V 1 ' 34 pared; the day for its delivery arrives ; and not a single syllable dare the Representative of Great Britain articulate on any one point, — no fallacies can he refute — no truth assert — no enemy confute — no friend confirm or secure. Washington, the President, the North-east Boundary, the Award, and the British Charg^ ^affaires, are as completely forgotten in Downing Street, as if Columbus or Canning had never lived, — as if another hemisphere had never been discovered; nor SI New World called into existence. / • '■'S- PART III. OUTRAGES COMMITTED BY SUBJECTS AND SUBORDINATE AUTHORITIES OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST THE RIGHTS OF THE BRITISH CROWN. " AN EKOLISH MINISTrB WOCLD BE UNWOHTHY OF HIS OFFICE, WHO SHOULD SEE ANOTHER STATE SWALLOWING Ul> TERKITORIES IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF IllilTISH COLONIES, AND NOT STRIVE BY ALL JUST MEANS TO AVERT THE DANOElt."-67ianninf; on thf Texas. The dispositions of the State of Maine being well known ; the violence of its population having been already experienced ; it was to be expected that a decision of the question would lead to commotion and aggression, and that outrages would be resorted to, as a means of preventing its adjustment. In this view, too clear not to have been taken ; with these consequences, too evident not to have been anticipated ; the hands of the Colonial Govern- ment of Great Britain ought to have been fortified by increased military means, and a firm and announced determination to resist all attempts at disturbance. But, as the English Government had not called upon the United States to proceed to the execution of the Award, — the hopes of Maine may be imagined, and its acts anticipated. We pnss therefore, naturally, (as from cause to effect), to the annoiincement : — " Attempt of the Authorities of the State of Maine " to exercise Jurisdiction* within the Disputed Territory, " October and November, 1831." Known disposi- tiuus of Maine. To ouutigfs coui- uiittt'd by its un- thority. Sir A. Campbell to Charles Bankhead, Esq. "Sir, " Fi-edericton, Netv Brunswick, September 13, 1831. " I have the honour to inclose, for your information, some documents from Lieut. Maclauchlan, at present in charge of the boundary line between the United States and • The words " exercise jurisdiction" are not applicable to the fact. The attempt made was to annex the territory to Maine. Jurisdiction has reference to the administration of justice, which was in no case attempted. It was attempted to institute State Government, and to seduce British subjects from their allegiance. I .'ill C'titnmfsofMBine Lxuiiseii by the tri-neral Goveni- mcnt. 36 this province, by which you will perceive that the authorities of the State of Maine have actually taken possession of part of the territory now in dispute between the British and American Governments. " I cannot believe for a moment that these proceedings, so lamentably calculated to interrupt and destroy the peace and harmony existing between the two countries, can be sanctioned or approved of by the American Government ; and I am sure you will there- fore feel it to be your duty to call at once upon the American Government to put a stop to measures of so dangerous a tendency ; measures, which, if persevered in, must infallibly lead to consequences the most prejudicial and injurious to both countries. • " I have the honour to be, &c. " Charles Bankhead, Esq. "(Signed) "ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL, ifc. ffc. ^-c. " Lieut.-Govemor." The argumentative clmracter of this letter is remarkable. All the agents and authorities of Great Britain seem to be individuals left to reflect, to act, and to shift for themselves. Mr. Bankhead, in addressing Lord Palmerston on this subject, makes the following observations : — " As this proceeding was so much at variance with the spirit of forbearance inculcated by the President in his despatch to the Go/ernor of Maine, at the period of the receipt of the decision of the King of the Netherlands, in this country, and one so likely to produce unfriendly feelings between the respective parties, I lost no time in submitting the com- plaint of General Campbell to the Government of the United States ; and I trust that such a communication will be made to the Authorities of Maine, as shall prevent the recur- ence of such irregularities until the question of disputed Territory shall be finally settled. "The General Government is most anxious to avoid the slightest collision between the State of Maine and His M.ijesty's provincial officers; and Mr. Livingston expressed his regret that any occasion had been afforded by the State of Maine, to embarrass the harmony and good-will subsisting between the two countries." Mr. Livingston's regret Avas superfluous— not the sliglitest embarrassment disturbed the luu'mony — not the faintest shadow overcast the good-will subsisting between the two countries, througli this or any other " occasion" furnished by tlie State of Maine. In reply to a timid remonstrance from Mr. Bankhead, the American Secretary writes as follows: — " The Honorable Edward Livingston to Charles Bankhead, Esq. "(Extract.) "Department of State, Washington, October 17, 18>n. " Immediately after receiving your note of the 1st instant, I wrote to the Governor of the State of Maine for information on the subject of it. I have just received his answer, of which I have the honour to inclose two <;xtract^ . By the first you will per- ceive that the election of town officers in the settlement of Madawaska, of which com- i I the tl le 37 plaint was made in the papers inclosed in your letter, were made under colour of a general law, which was not intended by either the executive or legislative authority of that State to be executed in that settlement; and that the whole was the work of inconsiderate individuals." It is in proof, that they were authorised by the State. " It is therefore of no avail, and can have no more effect than if the same number of men had met at Madawaska, and declared themselves duly elected members of the British Parliament. The Act interferes with no right, it comes in actual collision with no established power: — not so the punishment of the individuals concerned. This is at once a practical decision of the question, may lead to retaliatory legal measures, or what is ivorse, to illegal violence; for if the Lieutenant-Governor of New Brun'Swick feels himself obliged, as he says he does, to enforce the authority of the laws within what he thinks the boundaries of his province, will not the same feeling excite the Governor of Maine, under the same sense of duty, to pursue the like measures? And thus the fruits of moderation and mutual forbearance during so long a period, will be lost for the want of a perseverance in them, for the short time that is now wanting to bring the contro- versy to an amicable close. It is therefore. Sir, that I invite your interposition with His Excellency the Lieut.-Governor of New Brunswick to induce him to set at liberty the persons arrested, on their engagement to make no change in the state of things until the business shall be finally decided between the two Governments." This is treating the British Minister as a child. The delibe- rate and official act 'of the State of Maine is asserted not to have been intended: the violation of the British jurisdiction is asserted not to be sanctioned ; and thence the double inference is drawn, that the violators are innocent, and that punishment inflicted upon them would legalize retaliatory measures. The United States' Govern- ment do not, however, conceive their imprisonment to be illegal, but, out of a kindly regard to both parties, request their release as a favour; and counsel the British Crown to obtain from the prisoners a guarantee for its future security, before releasing them from gaol. Extract of Sun-lNCLosuuE. " The measure (says the Governor of Maine) that is said to have been adopted by the inhabitants of that territory, of voluntarily organizing themselves into a corporati(in, was unexpected by me, and done without my knowledge."- A falsehood, as may be seen by Mr. Livingston's own note. The public acts of the State of Maine, authorizing and ordering the proceedings, are to be found, Papers (B) page 10. (Second Extract.) " A copy of this letter from Messrs. Wheelock and Savage is herewith transmitted, by which it further appears that they, together with several other citizens of this State, K OutrO(,'i> aiivocu- U'ii by tlif rniU'-l States' (invtni- ment. 38 have been arrested by the British authorities, and trahsported towards Frederieton for the purpose of being there iini)risonc(l. Tiiey were arrested within the territory of this State and of the United States, and, ns citizens of the United States, now claim the aid and j)rotection of their Government and country." " Tlic territory of this State and of the United States," refers to the disputed Territory. On receiving this note from the American Secretary, putting the remaining absurdities out of the (luestion, tlie British Minister had but one course to pursue in regard to this inclosure ; which was to refuse to hold any di})kimatic intercourse with the AmVrican Government, while it used, or suffered officially to be used, the designation of " territory of Maine," or " territory of the United States," as applied to the territory in dispute : by suffering this falsification of language, all that was contended for, was given away. On this, Mr. Bankhead writes to Lord Palmerston : — " Washington, October 21, 1831. *' 1 have great satisfaction in accjuaintiiig your Lordsliip, that tlie language held by the General Government, upon this subject, has been of tlie most friendly nature" And further : — A.ivm«,.v niiiiii- " / httve vcutured to submit to his (Sir Archibald CampbeWsJ early consideration, Miiii't.r" " the motives which the American, Secretary of State brings forward in favour of the release of the persons at present in custody at Frvderirlon. " I venture to hope that my conduct upon this occasion will not be' disapproved of by llis Majesty's GoverunKiit." But, before the arrival at Frederieton of tliose satisfactory assurances, and conclusive "motives," — new events had occurred. Sir A. Campbell to Charles Bankhead, Esq. "(Extract.) "Frederieton, October 4, 1831. " Since 1 had the honour of addressing you on the 13th ult., relative to the extra- ordinary proceedings of certain agents of ti;c State of Maine in that part of the disputed ten'itory called Madawaska, further and more serious aggressions than those therein mentioned have taken place, for the avowed purpose of usurping the sovereignty of a large portion of llis ^TaJesfy\^ dominions on 'both' sides of the River St. John. " The enclosed documents will clearly shew the alarming extent of these aggressions on our territory by the presumed agents of the neighbouring State; together with the legal measures w hich we have, in consequence, been compelled to adopt, in order to moke the jurisdiction of our laws be respected by all classes throughout this province." Ni'w Dutniiii' Vinl.il.it tiiml. \\ 39 aid isions h the muke C. T. Pehrs, Esq. to Sir A. Campbell. " (Inclosure.) " Madawaska, September 24, 1831. " I have tlie honour to lay before your Excellency copies of statements, under oath, which I have been enabled to collect, of the proceedings of a number of the inhabitants of this settlement, tending to disturb tlie peace of the place, calculated to estrange the French inhabitants from their allegiance, induce them to acknowledge themselves citizens and subjects of the United States of America, and transfer the possession of this district of the province to that (lovcrnnient, and constituting a high and serious ofl'ence against the law, in open contempt of the King and his Government." " The conduct of the persons who hf.ve been concerned in these transactions is the more aggravating, as they evidently appear to be the instruments and agents of the State of Maine ; with a view entertained by that Government, through their instrument.ility, to obtain possession of the tract of country at present in dispute between Great Britain and the United States, which both those Governments have solemnly pledged themselves by the Convention entered into between them, that nothing shall be done by the one or the other, pending the proceedings for settling the dispute, which may alter the relative situations of either party. " The proceedings of these persons, aided by the conduct of certain other agents from the Government of Maine, who, by the jjapers which I now have the honour to lay before your Excellency, will appear to have been secretly passing through the settlement and intermixing with the French inhabitants (of which the great majority consists), lias, I regret to say, evidently had an eti'ect of unsettling tlic minds of a great number, if not almost seduce them from their allegiance to His Majesty's person and Government." The depositions follow, — mentioning also the administration to British subjects of tin oath of allegiance to the United States. The United States' Crovernment, it will b(> observed, disavowed uJliVmm.^,'" the acts of these subordintite agents, but yet claimed for them »'utI,! ' ''" immunity. The British Minister does not even attempt to deal with the question ; but, with great satisfaction, admits the argu- ments of the American Secretary of State, and makes himself the channel of the retiuest to tlie (iovc^rnor of New Brunswick, for the **,urrrnfr.'i by liberation of the prisoners. The Americans, haviuL!: secured this position, -.' .«itate not to <>t"re.rprison advance (the State of Miiine takiuLi; tlu^ initiative) to the iustlKcation l'm.',;u'!n^t'V of the offenders : —thus consTitiitmg the caption (the release from which Avas ol)taiiu>d as a hivour), an act of violence and aggression on the part of (jireat Britain. No. j. — 'Jhiirh's liankheitd, Esq. to I'iscoini/ Pdlnu-rston. — i Received December IJ".^ " (Kxtract.) " U'dshiiiijtoii, Xuvemher 20, IS.H. "Tlic Council of tlie State of M;'iuc, in tlii'ir late exti'aordiniiry sitting, have forwarded to Washington a report," couched in very strong language ; and orders have been given to tlie ditlcrent brigades of militia on the frontier, to hold themselves in readiness to support the views of the State, with reference to the neighbouring pro- vince. Notwithstanding this threatening proceeding, / am /lappi/ to find, i^-c." ■rq 40 M fm ,11 I'liMii* net iif tlip Nidi' iif Maiiii', I nliAl Statri' lloTeninirnt con- I'lir^ ill till' ^ii'ws ■jf Miiiiu'. So ilo.'. 111.' Ilri- IKli Mini^l.r. Statb ok Maink. " (lnriostm\) • «' In ('oiincil, Novrmbcr 7, IS.U. " Tlu- Conimittct' of llic wluiU- t\)iiiicil, to wliicli \vn» iTfcrrcd the mihjcct of the recent transiietioim nt Miulawaskn, nsk leave to report : Tliat, in eoniinon with their felh)W eili/.ens, tliey view with feeUnj;;s of just indignation, the iniwarrantahU' and oppressive aets of tiie antliorities of the Hritisli Provinte of New HnniHwiek, in hriulini; the territory of this State with n viiHtnrijforre, and arresting a nuinher of our peaceable citizens, eonipeliing otiiers to conceal themselves in the wilderness, and ahaiulon their homes, in order to escape the violence with which they were threatened. " In this violation of the sovereignty of the State, we perceive the contiimalion of that system of encroachment, Mhich, by onr forbearance, tht; Provincial (lovcrnment have It. ng been enabled to practise for the purpose of extending their jtossession, ami afterwards relying on that jiossession, as the oidy foundation of the extraordinary claim they still jjcrsevcre in making to a considerable portion of the State. * * * " On the li!tli day of September lust, they (the iiih(it>ittints of MndawaskaJ held a Toum Meetini/ for the jiiirpose of eleetiiii/ a liejireseiitativi', vs rei/iiireU by the lawn and consti- tution of thin State. "For these nets, four of the citizens have been arrested by the authorities of New Hriniswick, carried out of the State, and arc now confined in jail at Frederiekton, in execution of a sentence pronounced against them, after the form of a trial in a Court of that ))rovince." It coiu'liidcs with 11 stiitcmcnt tliat the Citnornor had atldrosscd to the (J(Mi('niI (iDvoiiimiMit - " An urgent rect thorn from Itirasion ! \h\ ^vas appealed to- -to obtain the release of agents whom, with the slightest sense of honour, he onoht to have been the first to |)unish ; and whom the. (iov(>rnment, with tiny sense of its dignity id)r(>iid tuiy ri>gard to its supremaey or power at home, otiii'ht to hiive souiiht to abiuidon to the itistiet; tluiy had ontrasred. And what does the Pn>sident do? — He stx^ks to ol)tain their release. What does J^nohvntl do? — (inint their release! I'hat is not enoiijih: the Jiritish Agent piuis, as if to insult the English tongU(>, the follow- injr words: — " H'aHliiiigton, Novemlicr 28, 1831. " The President, upon the receipt of this intelligence, liaviny completely diiavovted the proceediiiffD of Maine, and at the same time called upon the (lovernor of that State to discountenance any attempt to exercise jurisdiction over the disputed territory, imtil the question of boundary, as decided by the King of the Netherlands, should be formally brought before the Senate of the United States, 1 thought it my duty so far to give 41 effect to the pacitio intcntionH of the President, ns to solicit the cnrly attention of Sir Archibnld Cnmpbcll to the wishes of this Oovcrninent, witli respect to the persons who Imd been guilty of these irrcffularities, and who were in jiiil nt Krcdericton, " / /ifli'e//JY'fl/ #a/«j;/flr/«onin acquaiiitinj^yoiir Lordship that (icncrul Campbell has deemed it proper to exercise his prerogative in favour of the prisoners, and they have ac- cordingly been released from confinement, and their fines have been remitted. " / have great /ileamre in thus being enabled to communicat(! to your Lordship the satisfaction which has been evinced by the President of the United States, in consequence of the very conciliatory spirit in which Sir Archibald Compbell has acceded to the wishes of the American (iovernment in this transaction." Thcs(3 outragrs took place in the montlis of Au{>;iibt nnd Sep- tember, not in October and Novemb(!r, as lieaded in the documents presented to Parliament. There appears to have been no notice of them Avliatevxpatch ufl-V-b.tt, IH31 I n.u. of oiitiw.. of October — (h'tDbpr nitliiU- tutud fur August. •! Ko instructions ■rrivf pn'vioualy to tlio Messat^ to CoDgrefli, 44 gulnrity, acciclcntnl or intnntionnl, in tills respect — no one who has perused the preciding account of the outrages committed against Great Britain undvv the authority (of the state of Maine — and there- fore) of the United States, can fail to incpiire what steps were taken hy Lord Palmcrston on so grave and alarming an event? In what strain had he remonstrated ? In what terms required the instan- taneous execution of the Award of the Sovereign Arbiter ? The Header naturally looks to the next despatch from Lord Palmcrston. He finds in it no allusion at all to the subject. Its date is the Nth H(! turns then to Papers (B) for the date of these outrages. — The date, as given in the Index and the Heading, is October, 1831 ; of course he will inter, that when the despatch of 14th October was penned, Lord Palmcrston could have had no knowledge of the outrages committed. It is true, that whoever read these documents when they appeared, had no means of making such reference ; because the papers connected with the transactions of Maine were withheld until after the close of the Session. But there is evidence that thct/ were both printed at the same time ; because there is reference made in Papers (A) to the paying of Papers (B). An examination of these will show that the outrages, indexed in October, occurred on the 19M of August; consecjuently the intelligence had six weeks to reach London (by other channels than Washington), before the transmission of Lord Palmerston's instructions, supposing the despatches of October 14th to have beon transmitted on the day they were dated. A violation of the jurisdiction of the British Crown, by authority, and M'itli flic declared intention of taikng possession of the land, the subject of arbitration, is committed on the lOtli of August; despatches from the British Minister, received at Washington four months after, take no notice of the fact ; in the presentation of the papers to Parliament, the statement of these outrages is not presented together with the diplomatic correspondence ; when presented, the date of October ( in the Index and heading) is given, instead of August. There is another circumstance, worthy of consideration in con- nection with the period of the arrival of this despatch at Washington. The Session of Congress was to open in the be- ginning of December ; the President's Message to both Houses 46 Icon- at be- lusen l)(!CUirie now ii most im|)ortiiiit cvjjut in tliis dlscusHion, which was he|^inllin^• to assiiinc th(! chunictur of a new n«! Cot)' HTfM ')f l)f«. A, I.>r INiliiKnton'n ririt lh>!t|>Hti'h 1)1 '1.1. UUi. mil. iirri>i'». 40 Mossapr is tlclivcrod.* When it doos nrrivo, it is uccoinpanicd with a socriit inHtructioii, in an opponiti* hchhc ! The Mrssagr of tho Pr('»i(h'nt to the (Jon«^re.sK of the Oth December, 1H.'JI, is however any thinj^ hut inifavotirahle to the Award, althougii ahstaininj;' from |)r()nouiieitiL^ an opinion. In reference to th(> Treaty of (Jlient, to the Convention of 1827, he Bays, '• The Kino; of the Netherlands having, hy the advice of the " late President and His Hritannic Majesty, heen (h'signatcid as " such friendly Sovereign (who shoidd be invited to investigate " and make a decision upon the points of difference), it became my " dutij to carrt/ with good faith the. agreement no made into effect." On tlu! 18th December, Lord Pahnerston's diispatch of the 14tli October arrived at Wasliington ; and as this document is ihe most imjiortant of those tliat Inive been machi public, and is the key to the ensuing transactions, I have transferred it in cxtenao to tlic Appendix, and reion'!i ItrHpntoh. llir rrt-siilt iits Mc!«sn|[i'. Arrival nt tVaitblngton. In 18.T1 Oetoher lllh. December (ith. Decem'jer 18th, 1832 (See note * below.) 1833 Decemiicr '21st. December ,>iii. February 10th, 1831. 1834 October 30lh. December '.'nd. December 8th. 1835 Octot)er 30th. December 8tli. December 27tli. 1836 (No Communication,) 1837 November 19th. December .Oth. January 10th, 1838. Tliere are five annual despatches, independent of the first despatch of February Oth, 1831, and that of February 2,1tli, 18.33. The time occupied in the transmission of these seven de- spatches (which constitute the negociations of seven years) is 390 days. The despatch of Febmary 9th occupied in its passage 72 days; those of the 14th October, 1831, (iGdays; and the mean time of transmission, during the whole period of negoeiation, tiiut is to say, between the dale (assumed to be the date at Downing Street) and tlie arrival at Washington, is 5.'3 days and 18 hours. The average time occupied in the passage of common commercial letters has been, from the year 1831 up to the establishment of steam communication, twenty-nine days. •Despatch of February 23lli, 1833, is in reply to a note of Slst July, 1832; anJ therefore ought to be the despatch of 1833. ^ i !l ki 47 Oovcrnnii'iit to prdcocii to the execution of tliiit Award. It tlicu recalls to notice ami lni|»ortan(!o the protest of iMr. I'rcMe, und proceeds to siiy that, notwithstandini; that protest, I [is Dritannic Majesty is pctwHuietl "that th(i (loverniiient of the United States " will not hc/titiitc" to accept the Award ni' III^ Netherhuul JNlajesty : — thus neutralizing; the effect of the first conununication, by a selec- tion of terms which shewed that the Jilnnlish (iovernment considiired the future decision of the United States as optional, and not imper- ative. Lord Palmerston then jjroceeds to ara II, IKII; 111 rhariti'ltr •mil rllii'L tWp^ I.d. Palnunton'i second Despitob contradicts the Bnt. or even an hour, are they suffered to remain without subsidiary instructions, by which, whatever effect they could produce was entirely effaced ! — Another despatch, of the same date, (Oct. 14,)* and of course contained in the same bag, prepares the British Charg^ d' Affaires, to look to a new negotiation as being the "ulterior", and therefore real views of His Majesty's Government. This despatch will also be found, in extenso, in the Appendix.-f- Lord Palmerston commences by stating that, in reference to the other despatch of the same date, the simple and unconditional acceptance of the Award is " the only course to he pursued consistently with the '* respective obligations of the two Governments." He continues, " You " are nevertheless authorized to intimate privately, upon any suitable " occasion, a modification of the Award by a reciprocal exchange or " concession." " You will, however," he adds, " be particularly " cautious in making any communication of this nature, to guard " against the possibility of being misunderstood as inviting negoci- " aftion as a substitute for the adoption of the Award." From such instructions, what would any man comprehend, save chifgfdAfftirc. ^Q^ jjg ^j^g ^.Q obtain — without appearing to invite — negotiation as a substitute for adoption. The instructions in themselves are contra- dictory and self-destructive ; but as the contradiction destroyed in the British Agent's mind all idea of a determination of England that the stipulation should be fulfilled, it rendered him incapable of doing that which his duly required, viz. — the enforcement, by every means, of the adoption of the Award, and the energetic expression of the determination of England, that it should be so accepted ; furthermore, it placed that Agent in a position of dilemma, so that, whatever line he took. Lord Palmerston had reserved to himself tlie faculty of disavowing his act, and disgracing him, — a position, if calculated for nothing else, eminently calculated to render . him timid and inefficient. Mr. Bankhead, in the first instance, communicates to the Ameri -an Government only the first despatch of Oct. 14th, and the Bewilders the mind of the * It is singular that the office-number of none of the Despatches is given. There is, on one occasion, a reference by number to a Despatch, containing the opinion of the President expressed to the British Minister, which I am unable to find, and which is* certainly not to be found, by its reference, in the published document;. t See Appendix, part 4, No. 2, page v. "•i5ti!;;;a?:;:'?5^'.T,s«ir:^vi«t:ii,is 49 if mm the the American Secretary of State declines answering (a new authority having now intervened) until the decision of the Senate had taken place. For more than three months the question then remains in suspense ; but, on the 29th March, 1832, Mr. Bankhead discovers through the newspapers, that Maine had agreed,! under certain con- ditions, to subscribe to the Award, and that the United States Go- vernment had taken steps to adjust the diflFerence to the satisfaction of Maine.* It thus appears that, after all the temptations held out by Lord Palmerston, the general integrity of the Senate, as that of the Executive, was still unprepared for this flagrant violation of Na- tional compact ; but the British Chargd ct Affaires, after waiting six months from the period of his communication of the first despatch of Oct. 14th, receiving no reply to his despatches — no communication from the Foreign Office — has commenced to become alarmed lest he should not be fulfilling the real and " ulterior views " of his chief, as communicated by his second, and secret, Despatch of October 14th ; and, consequently, on the eve of the decision of the question by the Senate, he intimates to the American Secretary of State the substance of that second despatch. In reporting this step to Lord Palmerston, he commences with excusitig himself for having reserved, up to that period, this second despatch. " I did " so," says he, "because the Senate had shewn no disposition to " take up the question, and I thought that the slightest intimation " on my part as to the possibility of future negociation, would " perhaps endanger its favourable decision." Is not this reason most clear and imperative for not making the communication at all ? Used, as it is, as an excuse for not having done so before, it proves the conviction impressed upon his mind, that the ostensible views, conveyed in the first despatch of October 14th, were not the real views of his chief. If one moment could have been selected more favourable than another for endangering the decision, it was that moment, when the Senate was about to come to its decision: consequently, "I " thought," says Mr. Bankhead, " that this was the proper moment " informally to intimate to the Secretary of State that "His Miinh,lH3V, Ame- rican OoTL'mment still inclined to adupt the Award. The CharKr d - AflUires suspects that the ostensible Despatch of Oct. 14tb, doea not re- present the real views of Lord Pal- merston. Mokes use uf the Secret Despatch. .Tustities lliuiself for nut doing so before. I I See Appendix, Part 4, No. 3, page vi. N M In:/! If I' ' ''■ ■ i \] Consoqurnt rpjoe- lion ofUif Award. CoIlHtoraJ [iroofii from " views of His Majesty's Government." The subsequent rejection of the Award proves, either that his opinion of the disposition of the Senate had been erroneous, or that his communication had been the means of altering the favourable disposition which previously had existed. In the one case, he showed himself perfectly incompetent to fulfil the duties of his office ; in tlie other, he had acted in direct violation of the interests of Great Britain, and had consccjuently become liable to the extrcmest penalty of diplomatic delinquency, — and Lord Palmerston had no alternative between censure of tliat servant, and dereliction of his own duty. But, as Lord Palmerston, in confiding to him the secret proposal of ncgociation,.had, by the peculiar construction of the language he had used, thrown upon him the entire responsibility of its employment, and directed him ^o be particularly cautious, in making any communication of this nature, to guard against the possibility of being (mis)understood as inviting negociation as a substitute for tlie adoption of tlie Award; — and as Mr. Bankhead himself had stated " that the slijihtest intimation on " his part as to the possibility of future negociation might endanger " the favourable decision of the Senate" : — it is clear that he had contravened the positive instructions of his chief, and had acted in opposition to his own emphatically expressed conviction of his duty. If therefore Lord Palmerston, with the whole facts before him, with the rejection of the Award coming after the dangerous intimation of negociation as a substitute for adoption, did not visit with his severest censure, the functionary by whom that intimation had been so unfortunately made, — it follows, that he had placed him in that position of embarrassment with a ])urpose — and that the unfortunate step so taken, was that which Lord Palmerston desired. Second. — On the return of Sir Charles Vaughan to Washington, it was impossible he should not in some degree reconsider what had taken j)lace during his absence, and in the despatch of his, dated July, 1833, (of which only an extract is given), he makes an obser- vation upon the authority of the Senate, to the effect that it was limited to advising and consenting to ratify, or adxising the instruc- tions to be given previously to opening a negociation ; adding, that when in the month of July it advised the rejection of the Award of the King of the Netherlands, it took the initiative in the process of negociation which it directed the President to open at Washington. Sir C. Vaughan was therefore of opinion that they luid not ■-M.— Si'liul. nftli" fniti.l St^ll■^, fa- v.mrnble d) thi- Aw.iiil, up tn tlio ciiiii'ininifmioii I'f till! Snr.1 11,'s. pilUllufO.t. 11. 52 i authority constitutionally to intorfoir, and that in this instance they had departed from tlunr constitutional ])raetice. There was indeed no use in alludin|^ to the subject jit that time, or in speaking at all in that sense to Lord Palnuu'ston ; but this indication alone, from Sir C. Vau|2;han, is sufHcient to shew tluit unless he had he(m renioved from Washington, even the despatch of Feb. J)th would not have sufficed to keep him silent and indifferent, wluni intrigues and misrepresen- tations such as these were employed to obstruct a measure of which his ostensible instnu'lions n>(piired the adoption. Sir C. Vaughan, in iuldressing the American Secretary of State, bursts out more indignantly against the decision of the Senate; "When the undersigned finds so important a measure " defeated by a bare majority — when the nmjority of only one " decides the Senate to optMi a new m^gociation, ifcc." This was in March, 1834, cons(>(piently twt) years after the rejection of the Award. It is the first time that any allusion has been made on the part of England ; and slight and ileeting, timid and inoffensive, as is the renvark, it calls forth a. long and eomplicatetl nsply from the American Stn-retary of State. And 1 reler to the corresj)ondence, for the purpose of obtaining tlu; Evidence of Mr. M'Lean, the AnnM'ican Secretary of State, as to the disposition of the Senate — " The C\nnmitt(>e," says .Mr. M'Lcan, under date, Afarch 31st, 1834, " to whom tln^ President's Message was n-ferred, anil to whose Report " Sir Charles has alluded, expri'ssed the opinion that in this case " (a (piestion referring to the practice of the Senate), the United " States were not bound by the decision »)f tlu; Award, as such ; K«v,mnn.i, ,iiM«v. " though, on qronmls of cvimlicnciu a nmjoritv td' the Committee " wen> favourable to its adoption, and therefore they reconnnended *' a positiv(^ and affirmative resolution, &.c." As the note from Avhieh this is an extract is an attiMupt to prove (and })roceeds on the assumption that it does establish), that a considerable majority in the SiMuite \vtn*e unfavourable to tin,- Award, this admission is valuable ; and not less so, on account of the grounds assumed for their adherence to the Award, — not the conviction that the Award was binding, but that — it tens cvpcdlcnt ! thus shewing (whatever the truth of the previous assertion,) the desire then prevalent in the breasts of the Senators of America, to concede even what (the American Secretary asserts) they deemed a right, or to make vition of ihe Sc- huti' towiH-tls the Ananl. ndniiltcil i>> thi> Anit'rii^n NertvtnryofStnti'. Mt,*- ■■■■•-■ ^ . fj-.-,.-^...v^a,i.^fS;fe«^;. ^ 53 the Awunl by Uifl NonaU'. wliat they considered a sacrifice, to maintain harmcJny and good- will with Great Britain. But Mr. Bankhcad, in communicatino; the rejection of the .MoJ'ir-Mninin. Award, speaks of tiu; Senate in the foUowinf;- terms : — " This siib- " ject was submitted to that body early in the Session, and aecom- " panied by the earnest wish of the President, that the Award shonld " be agreed to. The message was referred to the Committee on " Foreign Relations, who reportcnl their opinion that the President's '* views sliould be acceded to. A motion was then made, that the " votes of two-thirds of the Senate should be considered necessary to " pronounce a final opinion. This enabled the opponents of the mea- " sure to defeat the views of Government ; and finally, the Senate " withheld their assent to the Award of His Netherland Majesty, and •' recommended to the President to enter into farther negociations " respecting the Territory in dispute." Again, Mr. Bankhead, on the 28th of July, says, " I take the liberty of transmitting to your " Lordship an account of the proceedings which took place in the " Senate, in their executive capacitj^ during the discussion upon " tlu! Award of the King of the N(!therlands. Your Lordship will " observe by the perusal of this paper* that the Senate Avas divided " into three parties : the first composed of those who desired the " acceptance of the Award ; among them Avas Mr. Tazewell, the " Chairman of the Committee of Foreign Relations ; the second was " composed of those who thought that the (piestion did not come " under the cognizance of the Senate ; and the third party included " those who were opposed to the acceptance of the Award. The " nvfortiinate wordhuj of that Instntment, which might imphj " mediation as well as decision, has sivcu a stronu: hold to those " who M'ere opposed to that measure." Here then, on the testimony of the American functionaries, that is, of the adverse party ; and of the British functionaries, tiuit is, of the over-reached parties ; there is })roof of the favoural)lc disposition of the Senate to whom the decision was referred ; so that the rejection by that body can be attributed only to the impres- sion produced upon them, that England would not take unkindly their decision against herself, or even, that the English Ministry This important inclosure is not given. feiMFili^l^' 64 ; 1 1, , !IM! • m. Ttao Hrnrito had no ftirtht'r action tiii Uie Conveation of 1827. desired tliat tfie Boundary question should not be settled. These facts being before Lord Pahnerston, he has no censure to convey to the A^v.nt through whose means these dispositions were sacrificed, and re-entrusts him with the representation of Great Britain at Washinston. In entering into this point, it must not be for a moment forgotten, uftiliisSoa ^'*^* *'^*^ Senate had nothing to do with the question ; that the Senate had already considered the Convention of 1827, as absolute and final ; and whatever had been the decision of the Senate, or whatever the steps of the American Government, no course was left open to the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, except to require the immediate execution of the decision of the Arbiter. Had tlie United States resisted, it remained but for him to make his report to the Government, and for the Government to go to Parliament, and to transfer to Parliament the responsibility — too grave for any administration to assume; — that of the admission of a declaration by a foreign power, that the obligations by Avhich it had become bound to this country should not be fulfilled. I now come to the third point : viz. Lord Palmerston's conduct in the House of Commons. Immediately upon the reception of the Award of the King of ?ubii™lL"f uTo Holland, the natural, the necessary course for the Foreign Minister, was to declare that decision to Parliament and the country ; and, thereby support the action of the British Minister at Washington, fortify himself at home by the national support, and exhibit to the United States the decision of Great Britain to carry it into effect. The negociations were terminated — the affairs wound up — the decision given — t\m assent of His Majesty notified to the Sovereign Arbiter ; and consequently there was nothing further to do. There were no negociations to be embarrassed by publicity — there was no honest or then intelligible motive for secresy or reserve — there was every motive for instantaneous publication. There was indeed a necessity — from regard to the feelings and interests of our North American Colonies, not less than with a view to any possible resistance on the part of the United States — at once to proclaim the conclusion of the negociations and the decision of the Go- ^bii?™'^""°' vernment. No such step however is taken by Lord Palmerston; and these extraordinary transactions exhibit no step more extra- W.— Ld. Polmrr- stou's conduct in UieHousfofCom* moiia. 55 ordinary than this concealment, where every public motive and every private feeling of the Minister combined to call for the pub- lication of a fortunate event — of the only diplomatic success which perhaps England ever obtained. On the 14th February* a Member of the House of Commons, interested in the North American Colonies, puts a question to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and requires to knoAV whetlier •e negociation hag it j completed, and whether there is any viurjection to the production of the decision. Lord Palmerston, with tliat peculiar adaptation of phraseology, and that facility of perverting the sense of the question to which he replies, Avliich characterize each of the well-weighed periods that escape from his lips, answers in the follov^ing terms : — " I am not aware of any " circumstances which Avould render it incumbent on His Majesty's " Ministers to lay that decision before the House: if the honourable " gentleman, or any other Member, have a specific motion to make " on the subject, it is of course in his power to do so." Upon this, Mr. Robinson gave notice of a specific motion upon the subject, and when it comes in this shape before the House, Lord Palmerston resists the production of the document ; refuses to assign any reason for so doing ; " appeals to the House for '• sufficient reliance on the declaration which he makes in his " Ministerial capacity," to resist the production of the document. He will make no statement upon the subject ; he will assign no reason for his silence : but " he trusts that the House will not " consider the circumstances of the case to have been such as have " been stated by the honourable gentleman, in consequence of his " not answering him."f TiOnl Palmerston is queHtioni'il on the Hut^fvt KefUwe to yire any reply. Motion msdf for protluctlun (if tli« Award:— Lord Palmerston reKuu it. « The first despatch of February 9th, as has already been stated, did not reach its destination until two months and ten days after the day when it is assumed to bn dated. There were, con- nected»wilh the substance of that despatch, reasons for supposing tnat this delay had not been accidental, and that the despatch had been post-dated, or th;it its transmission had been postponed. It is not unlikely that the interest which had been manifested, even by one Member of the House of Commons, was a motive for hastening this first comniunication. i t The discussion in the House of Commons on the r4th March, appears to me to be so important, that I have given it in the Appendix. 1 have also added two subsequent discussions, including all that transpired in the House of Commons during this prolonged negociation. — See Appendix, pp. vii-x. !(' i 56 KiiU« lUtftnTnl tlVCH Iff •llcll itAlriwnt. liuiKiiivn' in llto Sti\tc "'f Miiiuc His nssuinption, that the (correct) statement of tl>c case was fulsti — his throwing; himself upon the confidence of the House,, in his Ministerial capacity, to avert the expression of that decision which the English (lovcrnnient had in reality taken — can leave no doubt as to his havinji; tluui d(>liberately formed the plan of setting aside that decision ; and of his luiviu}^, from the earliest hour, conunenct'd a systematic suppression of the truth, and falsification of the facts; thereby to be eiudjled to carry this purpose into execution, and bewilder and mislead opinion after it was eftected. The conception of such a scheme might be considered heroic, were it not that the j)erfect ease with which it has been executed, and the complete delusion Avith which it has been followed, shows that facilities so great must have bi^en calculated upon. In a degradi>d ag(>, not even crinu^s can have the character of grandeur. The eH'oct u])on the United States, of language like that used in the House of Commons, by a IJritish Minister, — language repeated again with an interval of five years, — it is needless to point out or to conunent upon. The purpose for which it was intended, Avas realized ; and into the ofticial documents' themselves, strange to say, has slip])ed the midence of its cft'ects. Sir John Harvey thus Avrites to Lord Glenelg: — (18.37.) " I will take car(> to keep your Lordshij) and Her Majesty's " Minister at Washington, promptly informed of all that may occur " connected Avith these vexatious ])roceedings ; to Avhich I have *' been assured that some (doubtless Avilful) misconception on the " part of the people of Maine, of a declaration imputed to Lord " Palmerstou, in his place in the House of Commons, some months " ago, if it did not actmdly give rise, yt't is believed to have given " an increased degree of confidence on their part." • W- PART V. ? COURSE OF NEGOCIATIONS SUBSEQUENTLY TO THE RE- JECTION OF THE AWARD BY THE UNITED STATES. "IIESTIH TIIYHELF IN ANY THING, KATHEK THAN STAND IDLK." iltlioit (lU tuolfit fry SoeriUii, ami rtptrUilhf Xtlt'tphon.j The Award is tlius at length rojcctod by the United States! — What was now to be done ? — Tlie question could not solve itself. Events could not occur, to alter or to modify circumstances thus intractable : time could not change interests thus opposed. Stij)ulations, conventions, commissioners, negotiations, — had, over and over, been tried in vain. Judgment itself had been discarded with indignity and contempt. Still, it was impossible to discard that judgment, and yet to appear to do nothing. We will now trace the course of the subso(piont interchange of proposals, which, it is to be assumed, were honestly entertained by the proposers, and believed capable of effecting a more advantageous settlement than the Award which they had rejected. On the 21st July, 1832, the United States announce to Great Britain, in the most summary manner, the rejection of the Award, and projiose a new negotiation. This is the first communication of the United States. Sir C. Vauglian is then sent back. He is instructed to assent to the rejection of the Award — to assert the conviction of the British Government, " that it is utterly hopeless to " att(Mnpt to settle the question by a new negotiation" — and to assure the American Minister, *' that upon receiving satisfactory expla- " nations, they will enter upon the new negotiation in the most " friendly spirit and the most sincere desire, &,c. " An interchange AwtrJ rgnii'il. American pnnw sill ur IS'IJ. Sir C. Vimghan st'tit barii, Iii- smicU'il to aduiit tilt.' n-jt'ctiuii;— to iltTJart' ttirtlicr iifffiH-iatious huiK-lt'ss: — To a-ssert the r«>n(liuc.s.H ol the llritiHb Govcrn- mmttoiicguoiate. 58 ; %d ■ I 'I' I'ltl^ iirKiirliiUoh IWU. tlu'ti onwiu'H (»f lonp;, iuvolviMi, aiul f'ruitlcH;'* not«'H. Sir C Viiugiiiiii is now ullowed to discuHM ; lu; is siiHiTcd to oxiiihit tlir viiluolfssncsH of tlu! propositions, and the f;i«>undh!ssn(!ss of tin; hopes of ad- justment. Mr. Vail, (in the mean time), in Lonthtn, on tho invitation of Lord Pnhuerston, advancing th(>, very points that Sir Charles Vaupjhan, at Wnshin}j;toii, is hift to contradict. Ilu! first disetission of the American proposal, occupies tho yei' 18M.'J, and eighteen folio pagrs of the produced papers. — The third aimual Pnsitlential Message comes round, without any notice of them bring deigniul by Lord Palmerston, and, as Jisual, his despatch arrives after tho Session has op(!ned. 'riio American (iovenimenl, with the most i)erfect coolness, assert: — •' These ilifHculties arise; from a denial of tho poAver of tho Gcn«!ral " (jroverinnent, muler the constitution of the United States, to " dispose of any portion of /c/vvVo/y/ heloiKjimj to eifhcr of the States " composing the Union." Hi'iice all negotiation was vain; and this single stat»>nu>nt nmst instantly have put an end to all discussion, had there becMi any real objtjct in debate. To this Sir Charles Vaughan rei)lies : — "Till- uiulcrsigiinl will lose no tin\e in siibniittinp; the prDpositidii nimlc by the (jovcrnmcnt of Uio Unitril States to His Majesty's (lovcrnnieiit ; as tlu; Pri'sideiit, it apju-ars fVmn Mr. M'tionn's Icttrr, is not nnthori/.od, after tho rcoent proceedings in the Senate, to npve npon a conventional line of bonndary, withont the consent of the State of Maine ; which it is i.ot probable woidd be i;iven, while there renvains a reasonable prospect of discoveriii}; the line of the Treaty of 17*^3." Sir Charles Vaughan however remonstrates thus M'ith his chief, in transmitting the Anu'rican nott> — " To admit the pretensions of Maine, would be to allow the ertecta of the Treaty to be construed entirely to the advantage of the United States," " It is surely therefore for the two Ooverinnents to remedy any defects in the original contract, and to carry it into complete execution, witliout reference to the pretensions of any particular State." " It is utterly impossible to eslalilish a division of the disputed Territory according to that Treaty, and yet we arc assured that certain insunuouniable constitntionol diiheuitics must restrict the (lovernmjnt of the ITniteil States to treat only ujwu that basis. " At the time when T£is Majesty's (loverinncnt is called upon to deliberate upon the only deviation from his restrictions which the I'rcsident feels himself authorized to make, I cannot refrain from submitting to your Lordship these observations, upon the pretensions of Maine which have im])osed restrictions upon the powers of the executive directed to settle this question, and upon the hopelessness of amving at any satisfactory result, if we are to adher to the letter of the Treaty." m And all tliis tiikcH placn in tliu i'nvv. oftlu! prcHcriptivd jiirisilic- tion of (jn'jit Hritain, ovur tli(! diHputdd Territory ! Sir Clmrlcs Vuuglmii says — NflCnrmllui) " Tlu! rejection of Mr. liiviiiK^itoirH itropoNitioii, and tlic iinpoMHibility of cngiiging nvkwih the Govern inctit of tlie United StuteN to trcut for u convintioniil line, inunt Ituve the cH'ert, 1 preiiunie, of IrnvinK t)ie (liHpnicd territory in the possesHion of Iliw Miijcty, unh>NH it should Ntill l)e Irtl at the option if tliis (iovernment lo actjuiesce in liic boundary gufftfen/eil hy the Kin;? of the Nethcrlandst." actjuiesce utetl Uy the Kin;? of the Nethcrlandst." OhstTVii, ill i\u> tcMin " siiirfrcstt'tl," tli(! (hpnrtinv- Iroin llio term dccmun, -hhhvvUi rniploytid l)y (irrat .Brituiii. Till! new proposal hroiinlit out hy this jiroccsa is — a project of negociiition without a pronpect of a nettlcmcnt vuly nn a meaiiH of over''<)iniiijj; stipposiid " coiistitiitioiial dilliciiltitiH." TUv rightn of Groat Britain arc thus nunlc to depend on tlui optit»ii of the United States : — tlie Minister of Enf,!;lund, who sanctions t!i(! evistenc(! of a fleet of fifty pennants within ten days' sail of London, on the gronnd of u Russian rtsview, prepares to justify the aggressions of America on our North Anuirican Colonies, hy the "constitutional '• dilliculties" of the United States. The new proposal is, that Connnissionrrs be appointed to settle "n line, de.iuatinij only from the defective description in the Treatif of 1783, bif permitting a search for highlands, in am/ direc- tion westward of the line due north from the St. Croix laid down in that Treaty," To deviat«! from a treaty in oni; point, is to invalidate it in all ; for it cannot he deviatcul from, in any respect, excepting hy an authority that extends to all. The pretence for rejecting the Award of the King oi' llollsmd was, that it had departed from (it was assumed) tin; terms (as were assmnod) of the Treaty of 1783. This is met hy a counter pro|)osal on the part of Great Britain, conveyed in two despatches, dated Decend)er 21st, 1833; wherein Lord Palmerston ))roposes the adoption of seven of the grounds of decision containi^d in tin; Award of the King of Holland, while agreeing to reject the conclusions to which they leav (it, llrllnln of iIk Inn Americm". 60 I: I'ritpitAiiN HHil i.i.i.iihDnKii.i l*rop*li uiil n'huali of IKIA, iturntorUic ugooiUloiu. .Hpw: In his second Despatch of the same date, he virtually admits the pretended '• constitutional obstacles" on the part of the United States, by enterinj; into a discussion on the subject. The arguing of these propositions occupies another year ; and then comes the periodical despatch of Lord Palmcrston for the year 1834. It is dated October 30, and concludes thus: — ** Hia " Majesty s Government having once submitted this point" — [the question of the Atlantic and St. Lawrence rivers,] — " in commoifi " icith others, to the judyment of an impartial arbitrator, by whose " award they have declared themselves ready to abide, they cannot now " consent to refer it to any other arbitration." Of what use is saying that he will not refer to another arbitra- tion, when he never has exacted the execution of the decision which resulted from the first ? The notes continue to be exchanged ; and on April 28th, 1835, the American Secretary of State proposes another new Commission, which is replied to by Lord Palmerston on the same day in 1835 as his despatch of the previous year. The following arc specimens of the communications, and of the negociators : — " The President has derived a satisfaction proportionate to liis deep sense of its iniportM",ce, from the success which has attended the past cflbrts of the two Govern- ments, in removing existing, and preventing the recurrence of new, obstacles, to the most liberal and friendly intercourse between them." Lord Palmcrston, on the 30tli October, 1835, says, — " His Majesty's Government have observed with the greatest ])leasure, during the whole of the communications which of late; have taken place on this (juestion, the friendly and conciliatory spirit which has been manifested by the President of the United States ; and they are themselves cijually animated by the sincercst desire to settle this matter by an arrangement just and honourable for both parties. " His Majesty's Government are fully convinced that if the repeated attempts which they have made to come to an understanding on this subject with the Government of the United States, have not been attended with success, the failure of their endeavours has been owing to no want of a corresponding disposition on the part of the President, hut has arinfu Jrom diffiridlies on his side over which he has had no control. " The time seems, however, now to be arrived, when it has become expedient to take a review of the position in which the discussion between the two Governments staiuls ; and by separating those plans of arrangement which have failed, from those which are yet susceptible of being adopted, to disencumber our future communications of all useless matter, and to confine them to such suggestions only as may by possibility lead to a practical result. \] M " Ilii M^csty'i Uovernmcnt, on rccciviiiK tlio Award of the Kiiifi; of the Nclhcr- lanils, annouiifed, without any hcRitntioii, tlieir willingneiiB to abide by that Award, (/* it ihould be equally accepUd by the United Statei." The Jicceptnncc, or the non-ucccptance, of tlie American Governnudit, formed no part of the decision of England. The de- cision of England was ahsolnte — it was n«!ver stated in any way to be contingent on any view or measun;, policy or act, of America. Who ever heard of the acciuiescenee oi'both parties, after judgment* being required to make it binding? T'ley bound themselves before judgment, solely with che view of over-ruling resistance. If the adoption of an Award were optional, who would submit differences to an arbiter — who would arbitrate? I'he proposition is so preposterous, that it requires but to be pointed out, to < isplay the character of the whole transaction; and this passage alo*^^' , u it was the only one pub- lished, could leave no doubt us to the intentions of he principal actor. But the statement is moreover i'o.i-i : Lord Palmcrston, in October, 1835, dares — what he did not d>.re in 1831 ; and, confident of the in- capacity of the men with whom he has to deal, he asserts in 1835, that the monstrous proposition he gives utterance to then, had been already uttered in 1831. I'he opposition having been some months in office, and become committed, he couU' now proceed with greater decision. The terms, explanatory of the proceedings, have been used by Lord Palmerston himself. The communications were " all useless •• matter," and contrived so as not to lead by any ** possibility *' to a practical result." He continues : — "But their expectaiu!:. .vera not realized. The Senate of the United States refused, in July, 1832, to ;ubscribe to the Award; and during the three years which have elapsed since that time, although the British Government has more than once declared that it was still ready to abide by its offer to accept the Award, the Government of the United States iias as often replied that on its part that Award could not be agreed to. "The British Government must now, in its turn, declare, that it considers itself, by this refusal of the United States, fully and entirely released fropi the conditional offer whin,, it had made, and you are instructed distinctly tij announce to the President, that the British Government withdraws its consent to accept the territorial compromise RECOMMENDED by the King of the Netherlands." Then comes a refusal to accede to the proposal of the President ; uriusu ,.roMo.»i after that. Lord Palmerston makes a counter proposal : — he suggests ''*°'!^°'"' Q 62 y H • ; Britilli iiropoul rejected by the Tnitcd States.— Counter propoMl rejcrt».Ml bv Eng- Ncftociations of 1*17. treating for a new conventional or partition line, which " His " Majesty's Government conceive that the natural features of the disputed Territory would afford peculiar facilities for drawing." The King of the Netherlands gave to England one-third, and to America two-thirds. The division would have taken one-fourth from the American share, and added one-half to that of Great Britain: if the United States refused to accept so favourable a proposition, Lord Palmerston was perfectly safe in proposing a partition. This proposal is rejected by the United States, who re-propose the River St. John as boundary. This in turn is rejected by England. The United States require to be put in possession of the specific mode of appointing Commissioners according to the previous proposition of Great Britain ; promising, when put in possession of such information, — " a reply ".' A>»new Minister then arrives. — He is left without any commu- nication from Lord Palmerston for eighteen months. Twenty-five months after his former despatch. Lord Palmerston writes: — " Viscount Palmerston to Henry S. Fox, Esq, " Sir, "Foreign Office, November 19, 1837. " Various circumstances have hitherto prevented Her Majesty's Government from giving you instructions with reference to the negotiation with the United States, upon the subject of the North-eastern Boundary. Those instructions it is now my duty to convey to you. " I have accordingly to request that you will express to the Government of the United States the sincere regret of that of Great Britain, that the long continued endeavours of both parties to come to a settlement of this important matter, have hitherto been unavailing ; but you will assure Mr. Forsyth, that the British Government feel an undiminished desire to co-operate with the Cabinet of Washington, for the attainment of this object of mutual interest ; and that they have learned, with great satisfaction, that their sentiments on this point are fully shared by the existing President. " The communications which, during the last few years, have taken place upon this subject, between the two Governments, if they have not led to a solution of the questions at issue, have at least narrowed the field of future discussion. " Both Governments have agreed to consider the Award of the King of the Nether- lands as binding upon neither party ; and the two Governments therefore are as free in this respect as they were before the reference to that Sovereign was made." Before this composition has traversed one-half of the Atlantic, the President (the agitation in Canada having commenced), ex- presses himself to Congress in the following strain : — 63 " It 18 with unfeigned regret that the people of the United States must look back upon the abortive efforts made by the Executive, for a period of more than half a century, to determine, what no nation should suffer long to remain in dispute, the true line which divides its possessions from those of other Powers. It is not to be disguised that, with full confidence often expressed in the desire of the British Government to terminate it, we are apparently as far from its adjustment as we were at the time of signing cne Treaty of Peace in 1783." During the course of these anomalous negociations, not less anomalous were the practical relations of the two Powers. — The neighbouring American states, invited to aggression by the con- duct of the English Government, the language of Lord Palmerston in the House of Commons, and the bearing of the British Minister at Washington: while the tone of the Colonial Minister maintained confidence among the British Colonists, and the Military Governors of these Provinces " asserted and maintained " at all hazards,* the prescriptive rights of jurisdiction of the British Crown. It is need- less to dwell upon the effect of this excitement upon the public mind of America ; and the evidence afforded even by the parlia- mentary papers suffices to show that this excitement had its imme- diate cause in the language used by Lord Palmerston in the House of Commons. While the Foreign Office carefully abstains from any de- cision, or from any act, in connection with these outrages, a very considerable amount of importance is given to them, in the ap- parent negociation between the two States, to which they give rise. The aggressions of Maine, which are detailed in Part III, and which were made so powerfully to tell upon thd rejection of the Award, never called forth any expression of opinion what- ever upon the part of Lord Palmerston. These outrages, (with a dispute about the cutting of timber, two years afterwards), were, however, the only positive measures of aggression resorted to by the (Jnited States, until the approach of the troubles in Canada. In regard to these aggressions on the disputed Territory, there is a singular exhibition of unavailing activity and idle business; giving rise, for the time, to an appearance of zeal for the public service, and leaving behind a mass of utterly useless matter, well calculated to repel any inquirer. Between the 4tli of October, 1831, and the Excited fitatc of the Boundary l*rovmces con- trasted with di- plomatic iiiPrt- * Sir Archibald Camplicll.— Jaiuiary 20, 1834. .■-.i:.'*^-,.^•.■.o. */:i Canada. Fifty- li»P riimmuiiicii- tiomt Uicn'U]>on. 64 4th of March, 1834, seven communications were addressed by the Governor of New Brunswick to the British Minister at Washington ; to these, there arc three replies. There are seven communications from the Minister at Washington to the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. There are twelve notes exchanjjed between the British Minister at Washington and the American Secretary of State. Besides these twenty-nino diplomatic papers, there arc a host of documents, — statements, declarations, affidavits, and public acts, — occupying in all twenty-six folio pages ; and of which Lord Palmer- ston takes not the slightest notice, and from which no result of any kind appears. I cannot help adding another specimen of this diplomatic intercourse. Mr. Bank head transmits to the Foreign Office, on February 21st, 183G, an account of an assault, committed by the inhabitants of the State of Maine, in the territory of Lower Canada, in October of the previous year ; " the scene of Avhich," says Lord Gosford, " was not in the disputed territory." In this despatch there arc nineteen inclosures, and they occupy twenty-four folio pages. Neither Lord Pahnerston nor the American Secretary seem to take any notice of the communication. However, on the 12th of January of the followiug year, the American Secretary replies by a few lines, enclosing thirty-three documents, in contradiction and reply ! These occupy twenty-six folios. This correspondence occupies fifty folio pages, and ends with a despatch from Lord Pahnerston, who, after twenty-two mouths' delay, writes thus to Mr. Fox, on the 22nd of July, 1837. *•' With reference to your despatch of the 25th of January last, relative to the outrage that was committed in October, ISJr), within the ('anadian Frontier, by certain citizens of the State of New Hampshire, — 1 have to instruct you to point out to the Ameriran Secretary of State, the unjustifiable violation of territory indisputably British, which was committed on the occasion referred to ; to erjiress a conviction that Kuch ( , art must incur the disapprobation of the President; and to say that, if it has not bi'cn punished, its impunity must have arisen from some insurmountable difficulties of constitutional action," It is a novel procedure in diplomacy, to suggest an excuse for an injury as the means by which redress is to be obtained ! To advance an hypothesis in an irrelevant matter, and to cast an impu- tation on the constitutional character of an independent State, has, •» 65 the rtain (/ to (ably (hat has ?» of for To kas. I holicve, been hitherto unheard of iii international correspondence. So compU^te a displacement of tlie question at issue — so entire a departure from the forms of the subject and the style of the office — so artful a leading away of the mind of the reader from the inten- tion of the writer, and from the effect of the communication — could not have fortuitously presented tlu^mselves to the writer's mind ; nor could ideas so disjointed, and propositions so unnatural, have been brought together in a single phrase, except by an ominous concert of ability and design. It will have been observed that throuffliuut these nejjociations, .luriMii.ii.min ~ o ' u„, ,ii>|iuli'il lirri- England practically held the whole cpu^stion in her hands ; that Ku5ii,ri!"" "' the prescriptive and recognized jurisdiction over the disputed territory was vested in her, and formally established. One of the principal objects of the outrages tliat were committed on the northern frontier, and of the specific and public acts of the Representatives of the State of Maine, appears to have been the confusing and invalidating of this right and of this jurisdiction on the part of Great Britain. It is upon this point tliat the Avarlike proceedings, the intelligence of which has recently reached this country, entirelj' hinge. Until the Award of the King of Holland is carried into etlect, this is the only point upon which any diftevence can by possibility arise. This question is of the deepest importance, therefore, as being the end to which (if design there be), all these complications are directed ; and to which, at all events, they tend. Unless this right is confused, it cannot be set aside ; and if not set aside, the non-settlement of the ({uestion leaves the disputed territory in the hands of Great Britain. t^ ijlN The first attempt against the jurisdiction of the British Crown took place in 1831, for the purpose which we have seen. That be- ing iicc-omjdished, no furtlicr movements Avere attempted until the end of 1887 ; when, (according to the opinion of the Governor of New Brunswick,) the State of Maine proceeded to violent measures with a view to fomenting the troubl(\s in Canada. In a n'])ort of the Counnittee of the House of Representatives of the State of Maine, 2nu lebrimr;;, 1837, we have, the folloAving : — " We come now to tlie recent transactions of the British " Colonial authorities, sanctioned, as it apjjcars, by the Government " at home ; and we regret to perceive in them also those strong 11 4 Attcinjtt of Muini- iu lKt7, lo extr- eisi- juri>diili"n, tnrnmtrii wilh 66 *• m. Jurisdiction in tilt) disputed teiri I'iry discussed. " indications of continual and rapid encroachment, which have " characterised that Government in the whole of this controversy. " Mr. Livingston, in his letter of July 21, 1832, proposes that ' until " ' the matter be brought to a final conclusion, both parties should " • refrain from the exercise of jurisdiction,' and Mr. Vaughan, in "reply, (of April 14, 1833,) on behalf of his Government, 'entirely " ' concurs.' — Here then the faith of the two Governments is pledged " to abstain from acts of jurisdiction until all is settled." The passages referred to are as follows : — " Until this matter," says Mr. Livingston, " shall be brought to a final conclusion, the " necessity of refraining, on both sides, from any exercise of juris- " diction, beyond the boundaries now actually possessed, must be " apparent, and will no doubt be acquiesced in on the part of tlie " authorities of His Britannic Majesty's provinces, as it will be by " the United States." Sir Charles Vaughan replies : — •' His Majesty's Government " entirely concur with that of the United States, in the principle of " continuing to abstain, during the progress of the negociation, " from extending the exercise of jurisdiction within the disputed " territory, beyond the limits within which it has hitherto been " usually exercised by the authorities of either party." Here, first, is to be observed, the flagrant perversion of t) utli, even in quoting public documents, by the representative of a (so styled) Sovereign State ; and this Avith perfect unanimity, leaving no ambiguity as to the character of the men or their proceedings. The exhibition of such lawlessness and rapacity — of such cunning and dishonesty, pervading the whole mass of a neighbouring Province, is a melancholy and alarming prospect for England. But are not these dispositions, and this immorality, the result of her own pusillanimity and misconduct ? We have further to observe, in the extracts from the diplomatic correspondence, the art with which Mr. Livingston displaces the question. To propose to refrain from extension of jurisdiction beyond the boundaries actually possessed, was to propose that which Avas absolute nonsense. To extend jurisdiction, beyond the bounds possessed (put for established) would be aggression — crime — hostility. The object of the passage is, to convey the existence of coequal rights of jurisdiction ; but, protecting himself at once 67 »g against detection of the aim, and the recoil, in its failure, of this insidious attempt, the American Secretary carefully avoids any designation of the district wherein it is proposed that such co-ordi- nate forbearance should be exercised. After nine months, the English Minister replies, in the words of Lord Palmerston's despatch of February 25, 1833, " The English " Government entirely concurs in the principle of abstaining from " extending the exercise of jurisdiction"; — that is, from violence and hostility, the region of which he allows no longer to remain indefinite and indistinct; he boldly sets down the words — " within the "disputed territory"! He thus crowns with success the furtive phrase of Mr. Livingston, and raises the United States into coequal rights of jurisdiction in that territory with Great Britain ; as if, indeed, he had " nothing at all at heart, but the good of mankind, " and the putting a stop to mischief." But even eight years of falsehood and deception have not sufficed to efface all evidences of the truth, nor have all the public servants of the Crown, connected with these transactions, received the impression which the Foreign Secretary has so laboured to stamp upon them. In 1835, Lord Palmerston having been for a while re- moved from the Foreign Office, Sir C. Vaughan* addresses to Downing Street a clear and distinct statement upon the subject : — " As no part of th.e disputed territory has ever been withdrawn " from the sovereignty of Great Britain, in consequence of the " defective description of the line of boundary in the Treaty of •' 1783, American citizens cannot have acquired, justly, a title to " any lands, from the State of Maine, or of Massachusetts, as " asserted by Mr. Lincoln ; and there cannot be any pretence for " disputing the uninterrupted exercise of jurisdiction over that " territory by the British authorities of New Brunswick." the ime nee nee * The Diplomatists and the Statesmen, conversant with this subject, — are : — The two gentlemen who prepared the Case; — I\Ir. Addington, Sin Stuatfuiid Canniso.— Dijgincwl. The Minister, acquainted in detail with previous negociations at Washington ; — Sin C. Vauoiian. — Unemphueil — quasi Disgraced. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, when the Convention of 1827 was proposed ; — Loud Aberdeen. — In Opposiiin ; TiiEREFORF. — "All Enemy." The Negociator of that Convention. — Lord Glenelg ; — . . — llemoved, in time, from the Cabinet. Whatever light these individuals may possess, — and I do not know that any one of them has suspected Lord Palmerston's motives, — they are thus put out of the way : — their opinions treated as those of public or " personal enemies." 68 Britisl. jurisdic- tion hi tliitput«d territory contestcit I>y AniericA, KiKlit of juristlic- tion uncquivoral. Sir Archibald Campbell, on the 20th of January, 1834, says : " I am most happy, however, to find that it is not contemplated [by " the Americans] to make any further attempts to exercise the " rights of sovereignty within the conventional frontier. Our " provisional rights of jurisdiction and of occupancy have been " too frequently, and at all hazards [sic], asserted and maintained, to " leave any doubt as to the course we must again pursue, if the " construction of this road be persevered in, or other encroachments '* made upon the lands in question." i In November, 1837, the British Minister at Washington, speaking of the opinions or the American Secretary of State, uses these words : — " Acquiescing, to a certain extent, — reluctantly and " douhtingly, — in the claim of Great Britain to exercise jurisdiction '* icithin the disputed territory until the Boundary question shall " be adjusted ; and conceding this point only so far as to recognize " the British Jurisdiction as resting upon an ' arrangement,' and an " ^understanding,' and not upon a right." Having no instructions, and guided only by the above-quoted opinion of Lord Palmerston, in liis despatch of February 25, 1833, (which was an admission of the first step of the American Govern- ment in this matter) — what could Mr. Fox do, save, like his predecp^/ors, assent to >vhatever was stated, yield whatever was contested, and learn whatever he was taught ! The question of jurisdiction in the disputed territory, was as distinct and clear a point as tlie Sovereignty of the Crown in the British dominions. It could admit of no doubt — of no equivocation. That Mr. Fox should be left in the predicament of not knowing what to reply — that he should have suffered the equivocations of the American Secretary — would seem to show that tlie diplomatic service is incapable of transacting any business, however trivial, or settling any point, however clear. If so, it had better be done away with. Power inicontroUed — authority luichecked—cannot long exist without destructive effects on the interests of those who entrust, and on the character of those who are entrusted. In the question of jurisdiction, then, as in each other branch of tlic subject, Lord Palmerston has done nothing to refute unsound arguments, or to resist unjust claims ; ou the contrary, he has invited the advancement of claims, in opposition to the rights he 68 as ich ind las he was commissioned lo defend, — he has suggested arguments destruc- tive of the views he pretended to advocate. In summing up the negociations from the year 1831 to 1837, I have reserved the important ipiestion of the navigation of the St. John for separate notice. When, in October 14th, 1831, Lord Palmer- ston hinted at negociation, and at a system of compensation as a substitute for the adoption of the Award, he must have had in view the certainty of an instantaneous demand from the Americans, of the navigation of the St. John. The navigation of the St. John, and that river as a frontier, was the original claim of the United States ; the abandonment of that claim on their part, was the only occasion on which a point advanced by America had not been secured, or a pretension put forward had been w^ithdrawn. To whisper, therefore to the United States, the word " negociation," was to say : — " Re-assert your claim to tlie St. John." No sooner does Mr. Bf^nkhead, in fulfilment of his instructions, whisper nego- ciation, than the claim to the St. John is re-asscrtcd ! That such was the necessary result of Lord Palmerston's proposal, is too clear to admit of any object in proposing it, save that which was obtained by its proposal : but that such was his ol)ject, is established by the terms in which he replies to the proposal. He pretends to reject it; but in such terms as in reality to adopt it, and establish it as a claim against Great Britain : — " It icill be impossible for His Majesty to adinit the principle upon which it is attempted to treat these two questions as necessarily connecied with each other. IVhatever might he the eventual decision of His Majesty tipon the latter question, if treated separately, and whatever may be His Majesty's disposition to promote the harmony so happily subsisting between the two countries, by any arrangements which might tend to the convenience of the citizens of the United States, without being prejudicial to the essential interests of his own subjects, His Majesty cannot admit any claim of right on the part of the citizens of Maine to the navigiition of the St. John, nor can he consider a negociation on that point, as necessarily growing out of the question of Boundary. — February 23, 1833. By refusing to admit this claim as necessarily connected with the Award, he does admit it, as standing alone. He does admit it, therefore, not in a relative, but in an absolute manner; he does admit it — not as a contingency, a consequence of negociation already undertaken, of principles already in dispute ; he admits it as a thing distinct— as a new original — as springing from a sepa- s As tu (lie ntTigt- tionontie St. JoLd'i ririr. Queittiitn of tli^ River St. Jnlin admittt-il at li SUbjlH't I'f III Y^ ciation ty tiitat firitaiu. It 70 & l^Tfi PnlmfDiton demos, tbnnitth Uie Colonial Sccrr- tory, Uie rziKtcnco nf nepociaiion as u> the St Joku'ft ItivtT. liOrd Palmorston fiml thi' I'nitiii State's' Govorn- nit'iit citmliiiio to 'Usuuise Aixl ptr- pli'x the (lurstion. rate source — as flowing from a one-sided faculty, to exact, and not to bargain, and involving therefore, if it means anything at all, superiority of right or of power, — resting the right to exact on inability to resist. But, it may be asked, what were the Colonial interests about, all this while ? If the House of Commons and House of Lords were negligent in sucii matters, if the Colonial Legislatures had no representative in England, if public opinicf. was dead to every ques- tion beyond those which touched the selfishness of its local passions, — could the commercial community remain ignorant of such proceedings, or indifferent to them ? The commercial community is divided, unorganized, possesses no attributes, performs no func- tions, has no distinct existence in the State. But the Corporation of the great Metropolis of the Empire ? It has nothing to do with national questioua. Then, at all events, the Chamber of Commerce of London ? No such body exists ! There wos no associate body in the country, conceiving itself to be at all interested or to have any right to interfere in the matter of the North-East Boundary, excepting the North American Association, who having heard some- thing of the right of navigation of tl:e St. John being drawn into the negociation, became alarmed. They sought an interview with a Minister of the Crown upon this diplomatic question. The interview was not, however, with the Minister who alone was the manager of these matters. They expressed their apprehensions to Mr. Stanley, then S(!cretary to the Colonies, and received from him the emphatic assurance that the claim to the navigatioi of the St. John had been "peremptorily negatived" by His Majesty's Ministers.* Thus had Lord Palmerston practised a deception on the Colonial Minister, and rendered the colonial department effectively subser- vient to the prosecution of his views. And what is all this negociation about? Nothing, — absolutely nothino;! That America aimed at oaininc; advjintaoes is clear: but the disposition to do so was prompted by the occasion. It did not appear in the early stage of the proceedings. When she did articulate pretensions, so groundless were they, so inadequate her means, that it would be futile to imagine that the end she sought, or the See Report of the North American Association for the year 1833. 71 ans, the advantages iShc gained, had their origin elsewhere save in the sup- port of the British Minister. The Americans, when deahng with an honest Minister, have shown sufficient dexterity in perplexing and confusing questions ; but what must not be the results in confusion, of concert between thorn and n dishonest and dexterous man, whose power and ability, from the hour of his committal to this fatal line, tnust have been exerted to disguise every step, how- ever simple, and to confuse every question, however insignificant, — in order to make himself necessary, and thus secure that tenure of office which was rocpiisite to prevent detection. What have been the results of their joint labours ? The complete bewilderment of the House of Couunons ; the complete perversion of the public mind. One man — an English Minister, at once the tool and the strengtii of foreign ambition, holds in his hands the parliamentary majority of his party, the subserviency of his opponents, the apathy of the nation, and the support of every foreign power that has aught to dread in England's strength, or any thing to covet in her weak- ness. His colleagues are his dupes : the various departments of the State, his instruments ; the Colonial Minister speaks at his bid- ding ; the Horse Guards disposes of the military — the Admiralty, of the naval force, at his command ; his words in the House of Commons lull the nation into indifference, and at the same time arouse the border population of America to aggression. The firm bearing of the Colonial Governors prepares for the collision, which their weakness in military force invites ; while he himself, in his own immediate department, can put falsehoods into the mouth of England— sanction hostility — ^inspire the spirit, and suggest the pretext, of aggression. These may be strange sounds, and startling thoughts, but they are fiicts : and you have the proofs before you. But wliy refer to these minor things. Has not this man spoken falsely in the name of the Sovereign of England ? Has he not abrogated a national Tr(>uty, and cast to the winds a solemn Award, after its adoption by the Crown ? Has he not done this of his own will, for his own purposes; by his own act, for his own behoof.^ The Crown and the Parliament have submitted, in silence and in ignorance, to his assumption of their prerogatives, and to the exercise of them for the violation of the Sovereign's faith, and the prostration of the Nation's power. Cnntnl of Ui« Voniim MiDltttr ovi>r the Admlnla- trntion, the Pmr- lioment, anil the NttUun ; antl om- crrt with f'urtiigu Powera. ForripTi Mjiti^tcr Qssiiiiu's the itrf- n'KUtivo of thi- Crowu. 72 Objections to the Aivardof the King of Holland. First Ohjcction. — Tlint tlie Awanl was not pronounced according to the Authority jriven. Reply. — The Award is in, strict conformity to the authority given. The Arbiter was authorised to decide on all and every sub- ject of Boundary uhich had arisen, or could arise. And the Award, Avhcn rendered, was to be carried, without reserve, into immediate effect.*' Second Objection. — That the decision was not in conformity to the Treaty of 1783. Reply, — The " differences" had reference to the interpretation of the Treaty (of 1783). If the parties had ogreed in the inter- pretation of that Treaty, — no reference would have taken place. The terms of the Treaty of 1783 contain a description of localities.,'!* admitted by both parties to be incorrect. The Treaty of Ghent, and the Convention of 1827, in stipu- lating a reference to arbitration, did $o to remedy recognized defects : that they existed, was the ground of the arbitration : that the arbitration should be final, was the object of the compact. The terms of the Treaty of 1783 have been infringed. The frontier of the Mississipi, secured by it to England, has not been given to England : — that Treaty is therefore invalid, and binding in no part. r ^a •Terms of Submission. — The two Powers request of the King of Holland, " that he would please to take upon himself the arbitration of their differences." See also Convention of 1S27, Treaty of Ghent, (Appendix,) + Probably the difficulties in regard to the Treaty of 1783, have arisen from the substitution of the word " North," for the word West, from tlie source of the St. Croix. That is the com- mon sense direction of the Boundary ; and it would avoid the difficulties of intermediate waters between the St. Lawrence and the Atlantic. An indicative, but unlettered line, in Mitchell's Map, seems to confirm this idea. In the same Article of the same Treaty, a line is directed to be drawn due West from th« North-west point of Lake Superior, to the Mississipi, — the Mississipi lying South of that point- The men employed by America in the negociating of that Treaty, were Franklin and Jay. — The negociator on the part of Great Britain was Mr. Oswald, — a roan utterly ignorant of the subject, and wholly unfitted for the undertaking. 78 'g The American Govornment hns proposed, since the rendering of the Awnrd, a new negociation, on the basis of departure from that Treaty. Therefore, objiction to the Award of the King of Holland on the pretext of inconformity with the Treaty of 1783, is unfounded, — is the reverse of the truth, — is frivolous, — is not acted on or believed by the Government of the United States. Both objections are utterly contemptible ; and the admission of either for a moment, would render the diplomatists on the British side (on the supposition of integrity) .so obnoxious to reproach and "contempt, as to be committed to America, and against this country, through the dread of exposure. These pretexts were originally put forward by a single State, and by a few interested individuals. Repeated, year after year, without contradiction, — they came to be admitted and acted upon by the American legislature. By the very dishonesty of the grounds assumed- by the very absurdity of the arguments advanced — has the determination to enforce their pretensions on England's weak- ness become fixed and resolute. Thus, the perversion of language (the source of all human disaster), has equally degraded and disgraced the American State, and British diplomacy. The negociations, in the parliamentary papers, extend over six years. They commence from the receipt of the Award of the King of Holland, and its adoption by England ; that is to say, from the settlement of the Boundary Question : and they are directed to un- settling that Question, — by violating the Award, and reversing the decision of Great Britain. The communications from Downing Street may be summed up as follows : — In 1B31, the Award was, by Lord Palmerston, -j ^^"'^^^"^'^^^ the In 1832, In 1833, In 1834, In 1835, In 183G, In 1837, —forgotten. — relinquished. r rejiroposed — < superseded — \jre-asserted. — abandoned, —forgotten. — cast away. 74 The Project of a New Commimou. The projrct of ii ni'W eomniissiou is tin* uccdinplishiiWMit of tlio tnmsiu'tioMS wliicli Imvr \wv\\ I'xposcd. Hut tliis project will now no lon|j;rr he \\\v secret ilced of a Mininfcr with this, at h;»st, to say — that h(^ staked his head njioii the die. Now, it will \w i\\v. net of th(! Nation. No '* Ministerial capaeity" (responsihility) stands any lonpT ln'tween these transaetions and the lip;ht of day. On tin? nation therefore, and its representatives, will now lie the responsi- bility of this new and |)ul>lie viohitit)n of national faith — this ontrago on connnon sense,- ii new connnissii)n -to (ind, what is known not to exist — to interpret, what is reeo object of the new proposal is of eonrse the same as that to which the pn'vions neu;oeiations have been directed. By it the Par- liament will be formally cianmitted. Suspicion in the nation, and interest on the sid)jeet, will be laid at rest ; whih^ the warliki; dispo- siti(»n of till' Unitiid States will be kept np and in(!reased. I'hns will nuasnres be nuitnred with ecpial pro;j;ression in the East and in the West: and, when India is ripe for insurn-ction, JVrsia prepared for assanlt, Alexandria for revolt, Constantinople fi)r oeenpation, — (and with frii;'htfnl rapidity do those I'ates approach), -then will bo determined at St. Petershnry; thy Ids decision. Tlu; |i(!ace of tlu)se States reposes on that Trealy. To violatt; it, on any one jioint, is to abro- gate it in all. 'I'lie violation of the stipnlation which rtinders arbi- tration final, wonld be abro- eiun'siies of Enijland, when we begin to examine our position, and to inquire into the objects, views, and means of tlie United States : and it is this,^ — ^that, while daring our power, and defying our vengeance, she lies completely at our mercy. — But it can admit of no (piestion, and of no doubt, that, if England is aroused to action, the settlement of the TSiorth- East Boundary (Question remains the only means by which the United States can ward off a storm which must overwhelm her. But it may be said, the restoration of England to enerjiy, is a mere supposition : England has endured so long, and lost so much, that she has no spirit or mind remaining for the assertion of right or the resistance to wrong. Let us concede that jioint for a moment, and (waniine its conse(piences. The submission to tlie abroo;ation of the Award of tlie Kinff of Holland is the carrying out of the |)olicy of the ])resent Eoreign Minister : it is the accc-implishment of the designs of Russia. Now, if, as already stated, the restoration of England dej)ends upon the overthrow of the present fatal sj^stem of diplomacy, and the consequent arrestation of the designs of Russia, — it is clear, without going a step further, that to set aside that Award establishes that fatal policy, supports a traitor in the Councils of Great Britain, gives Russia a triumph over England, enabling her thereby to continue 84 , t if i with impunity lior afftijrossions on the British dominions in the East and in the West, ot" establishing her supremacy over France, the United States, Persia, &c. compromising them separately against Great Britain, and rendering their (henceforward necessary) concert, practicable only through herself. In fact, it is the triumph of her delegate in London, — combining the representation of the two antagonist systems that divide the world. Tiie setting aside of the Award of the King of Holland increases and prolongs the irritation between the two people ; the sacrifice of right and territory brings the United States into an attitude of menace, and a position of aggression : — they reach the St. Lawrence — they cut off the ISorth American po^essions of Great Britain from each other — shut it out from Canada -they blow the spirit of discord and faction throughout the whole ot these provinces — they become strung, in the degradation of British power, in the indig- nation of the loyal subjects of tlie British Crown. Our attached and intelligent fl-llow citizens across the Atlantic, will vainly jiroffer that aid, in our cause as in theirs, which we shall have shewn ourselves unable to ree«^ivr, and unworthy to use. Will not this position of the IJ:iited States, co-operating with Russia's eastern and southern allies, insure and hasten the downfall of the fabric of JJritisli dominion ? Can such motives exist, or such objects be in })roj(>ct, without alliance and without concert between the United States and Russia ? Are not these the eonsecpieuces that How froui the al)rogation of the lioundary Avvard ( A\'as not the setting aside of that Award the work of Russia's agent ? AV^ere not these the conseipiences to which she looked in recpiiring that service ( I therefore^ assume that to set aside tlie Awaril of the King of Holland is to bring about collision l)etween America and England, or to b;; the aeeomplishmeut and the seal of a scheme for the dismemberment oi' the British Empire. There is, therefore, no middh; cours(> for America, b( twecMi ac- ceptance of the Award, and single or conjoint collision with England. It is not by accumidation of wealth, or extension of dominion — it is not by the possession of armies or of navies, that greatness is at- tained or tran([uillity secured. These things, important and valuable as they are, yet are not the sources of power. There is a possession beyond these: by which these arc created; witiiout which they arc 85 IC- kl. useless, — national character. A Nation's destinies are in its mind ; its circumstances flow from its (jualities : its strength lies not in its political institutions, but in its individual charucter. Wherever Men are just and prudent, the Nation wiil live and prosper. It will, above all things, revere and preserve the moral attributes which alone ennoble the human race. It will not be unjust to others: it will endure insidt or injustice from none. We read in history of the fall of nations through the decay of their institutions : but if history really were the handmaid of philosophy, weshould learn that the decuy of institutions is an effect, and not a cause ; — that things which men's opinions create, interpret, and apply, have no existence — whatever tlie form they wear, whatever the name by which they are known — save in the spirit of the age. Whatever produces unworthy desires or ignoble subserviency in the people of a country, exposes to hazard the politic body — because the parts have been corrupted ; renders feeble and valueless its forms of Governme^nt — because principles of honour and a sense of dignity are wanting in the men. Implant in a people an object of jiolicy which is not just, — cause it to submit to an act which is dishonourable, — and you instantly sink the value of each individual of which it is composed, and lower at once institutions, power, and character ; diminish the value of possessions, and of existence, — for whatever detracts from the morality of a people, diminishes its happiness. For three hundred years has Europe been kept in a state of agony and convulsion, by the desire of France to secure the Rhine for a frontier ; and France has not yet extended to tlic llliine which she luis so frequently overpast. Each succeeding century has found her witli mnture designs, and confident expectations, relying on the iieedlessness of the otiier powers, and on the depth and penetration of her own diplomacy : each struggle has left her discomfited and overpowered, and unpossessed of the Rhine. On each of these oc- casions the attempt of France was only practicable by having lulled or deceived England, or by having bought with money the Ministers of the British Crown.* What have been the moral consequ.nces to lit- l>n • Indeed, the Sovereign of England has himself been a pensioner of France ; but France was not then forming desigi s immediate v injurious or necessarily hostile to Great Britain. She only bought inaction from the British Cabinet, so as to separate England from the policy of the Con- tinent, and to leave the Netheilands at her mercy. Happy had it been for herself, as for Europe Ire 86 f t li M"* ii i -1 France ? What the fate of the dynasty — what the end of the in- stitutions, under which those unjust p* ejects were formed and exe- cuted ? The New World was to read a political lesson to us of the old. May the moral of the old not be cast away on its young am- bition — and, tainted already with crimes from which the oldest civi- lization recoils, let it not suppose that the experience of the past is not available for it, nor that retributive justice is to slumber over violence, because it is disguised as free, or excused as new. An apostle of national justice, worthy of better ages and of nobler times, has arisen among our descendants in the West. In the seclusion of remoteness — under the shade of priva-^y— engaged in the holy ministry of the altar — this extraordinary man has grasped the political relations of the old and the new world, with a precision, and exposed them with a power, — which the land of his birth, as that of his ancestry, has hailed with cold and fruitless admiration. i To attempt to exhibit to America the ruin of its character — the destruction of its institutions — the downfall of its political ex- istence — as the inevitable consequences of a career of aggression; — the deluging of Europe and America in blood, as the result of an insane purpose of greatness and dominion ; — would bui be to follow the argument exhausted by Dr. Channing.* I refer to his letter on the Texas, to Mr. Clay; — from which, extensive as has been its cir- culation, I have extracted some passages — confident that those who have already read them will re-peruse them with increased interest and advantage. and mankimV if she had been less successful in these attempts, or if the institutions of England had been less unhappily formed for the management of Foreign interests. It is curious to observe a nation, exerting all the energy of a free people to resist a shadow of undue prerogative, and placing it in the power of a foreign intriguer, or the mistress of a Sovereign or a Minister, to plunge it in war, or to cause it to violate its most sacred rights and duties.— E.g: — See Sir Wm. Temple — On the Treaty of Nimeguen. * See Appendix, page xiv. I cannot omit stating that the question of the Texas, so far back as tiic year 1833, had engaged my most serious attention, and has been to me, looking to it from the shores of the Euxine, as the key to the events of the world. The perusal of Dr. Channing's letter produced on me an electrical eflPect. — That such thoughts should in this age exist any where ! That such views should proceed from America ! 1 the in- and exe- 118 of the >ung am- dest civi- le past is ibcr over es and of he West, privacy— nary man Di-ld, with le land of 1 fruitless laracter — litical ex- ression; — suit of an to follow letter on en its cir- lose who interest IS of England ous to observe rogative, and Minister, to .See Sir Wm. ar 1833, had shores of the such thoughts 87 The attempt c»f Dr. Channing to arrest the spirit of violence, or the lust of plunder, amongst his countrymen, was made during the first aggressions up»)n a hirge scale against the Province of Mexico. He justly considered that event, not as an accident, but as the result of inherent national immorality, and as the com- mencement of a long series of future violence, wars, and '.^i ''asters. His arguments l)'>re on considerations of a moral kind; and >ai. ihv Tiis- fortune which llic United States, as a nation, v is prm -liiig loj; it- self These : his trong — Iiis unassailable positions ; havivfg how- ever establiah<< '•se, he proceeds to unrol before liis countrymen another aspect ,, m-ity ; — he points out to them the ci'i'tainty of collision m ith Enghxnii, (although at that time, designs against the Canadas, nor aggressions upon the disputed territory, appeared in the distance, but as ineidentully among a hundred other results of a purpose of aggression), and he pointed out the impossibility on the part of England, of submission to the assaults of the United States on any people whatever : the imperative obligation resting on the British Cabinet, not merely to prevent an extt nsion of her dominions, alarming to the peaceful relations of the world, but also to curb and repress, in the people of the United States, the spirit of aggression. — That spirit, easily arrested at its source, would be irresistible in the full current of its accumulated streams, and acv'elerated course. The responsible guardian of the interests and destinies of a neigh- bouring people, could not contemplate, without dismay, the deve- lopment of such a spirit in America; nor avoid, without criminality, to use every just and honourable means to repress its growth, and resist its progress. England has falsified the prognostics, and disproved the con- clusions, of Dr. Cluuiniiig. England has been heedless of the alarms which he entiTtained, — she has been blind to the motives he has exposed ;- -felt, or seemed to feel, no interest in tlu' present or the future, to entertain no sense of duty, or instinct of preservation. England has thus abandoned Dr. Channing, with the friends, in America, of England and of peace, to the contempt of their com- patriots. Those who, with him, respected alike England's power and her intelligence, and who had raised their voices to say to their countrymen, " Venture not there — it is unjust — it is moreover, in- "jurious to England, and she will not suffer it," have learnt to IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) & A K %^ 1.0 1.1 Ui|2£ |2.5 |5o i"^" imiH 2.0 IM 11:25 i 1.4 lii& 1.6 Photogr^hic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 87!2-4S03 l\ ^s '\. C^.. <^ U ■^ 14% fe li disbelieve reason, or to despise England;— have learnt that nothing was too unjust for England to approve, and nothing too injurious for her to suffer. ^ ? America has commenced to speak of war— to threaten England. Is this a result of the perversion of its own reason, or a justifiable conviction of the degradation of that of Great Britain ? It is a natural result of long endurance of injustice, that they should threaten violence : but new enquiries will not fail to be made, and conclusions, startling to America, may be the result. ' i ' With a Government, weak in its central authority, disjointed in its constitutional power;— with a People, destitute of national patriotism, sacrificing every feeling to gain, and bending every faculty on acquisition, — disunited in popular sympathies, divided in imme- diate interests, distinct in ulterior aims, — haughty in the exaction of submission, suspicious in the yielding of authority, — untrained to war, unbroken to discipline ; — with a Country, extended, unoccupied, exposed, — undefended by frontiers of difficulty, unprotected by fortresses of strength ; — with every neighbour a foe — a servile in- surrection threatening within, — and the Indian prowling around, maddened by injustice and desperate in revenge ; —to enter into a war, except a war of necessity, and a war of justice, would be an act of madness, not a measure of policy. Let us suppose however, that collision takes place — let us sup- pose the United States re-enacting the tragedy of 1812, and march- ing her armies to the St, Lawrence. In the last war, when England was in arms against France (then mistress of Europe,) and could not send a single soldier to Canada, did not the United States incur defeat after defeat ? Was not army after army captured ? And did that power not reckon then on a bloodless triumph : and was not the result all but fatal to her political existence ? No elements of strength have grown up since then ; no fortify- ing of popular judgment — no strengthening of executive authority : — the United States are, now, as weak as then : no better fitted to judge, and more liable to err, — to be carried away by popular passion, and to be acted on by foreign intrigue. The American Union is now more likely to plunge into war, because England ceases to steady its judgment, by imposing respect for justice ; and less likely either to muster strength for the struggle, or to exhibit 89 y.( judgment in its conduct. What could America do against England? — Invade Canada? Does she conceive that the conquest of Canada can be eflFected, except with the destruction of the power of Great Bri- tain : or that England, recalling her energies, as she has always done in war, will not bring them all to bear on a contest for existence ; — strike the Union at all points at once, and by the weapons the most dreadful — legalized by necessity. ! A struggle arising between the two, either the United States or England must perish. America being overpowered, it requires no argument to show that England must exact conditions, and that the rival portions of the Union would assert pretensions incompatible with its existence. If England be overpowered, success will scarcely be less fatal to the United States, than discomfiture. The name, character, industry, and commerce of Great Britain, constitute a large portion of the national existence of the American Union, by exciting its emulation, and preserving its feelings of nationality. Great Britain gives strength to its Government at home, by competition of character, and rivalry of dominion in America; and maintains its independence in the world, by controlling the ambition and neutralizing the power of the old Governments. England's power and position, are the real band of the Union : remove these, and it will be found that there is none within. The annexation of the British possessions to the United States, would lead to a separation of sovereignty, to trans- atlantic complications and collisions ; blasting all the anticipations and the hopes with which the patriotic of the United States, and the philanthropists of the world, have contemplated its future growth and greatness. The genius of the old world would re-assert its influence over the new, and exercise that influence, as it has ever done, in each distant region it has reached, to the destruction of individual worth, and national strength — of patriotism, and of peace. If the United States have so essential and so paramount an in- terest in the preservation of Great Britain — England has, no less, a vital interest in maintaining the independence and promoting the well-being of the United States. England has, in this, a moral as well as a political interest : — she is led to it by compunction for the past, no less than by the hopes of the future. 90 *" If England has to lament the overreaching policy, the ambitious aims, and immoral acts, of the American Government, — she has also to reproach herself with having inspired her transatlantic progeny with* contempt for justice — alike by her conduct towards them, and by her conduct to herself. It was the violation, not less impolitic than criminal, by Eng- land, of the rights which she had conferred on her Colonies, and of the principles she had established in the breasts of her subjects, that drove the United Colonies into the dire necessity of rending asunder every tie that belonged to nationality; — of extinguishing the associations of race — the aspirations of loyalty. Could a people behold crimes committed by the authority they had been taught from their earliest hour to revere, — violence and folly enacted by the fatherland which it was their pride to vindicate, and their happiness to love, — without revulsion in all their moral being, disturbance of eveiy settled principle, without disregard for the supremacy of justice and honour, — the swaddling bands of infant nations, without the corruption of those sympathies and affections, which bind men into societies, and societies into States ? The Anglo-Americans, commencing with a triumph over their best feelings, proceeded in their revolution to triumph over consti- tuted authority ; — but, not having taken up arms to defend their hearths and homes, their patriotism lay not in associations of local interests of race or of country, — but in a point of honour — an abstraction, dignified by the defeat of England. They spoke not of their country, but of their institutions : — the political disputations that arise in the decrepitude of decayed nationalities, had per- verted the simplicity of their early affections. In preserving to the letter the forms of their colonial government, they thought themselves the imitators, the equals— of Athens and of Rome. The nervelessness of the new creation was disp'r d in designating, and causing to be regarded, their achieved s nee and triumphant sovereignty, as a political experiment f — Sucii men the descendants of Anglo-Saxon fathers ! Thus demoralized, their first step was to re-enact on the Indian, the lessons of injustice they had learnt from their parental state. Each district brought into cultivation — each successive extension of territory and dominion, was extorted by violence, or 91 to ght 'he ind int Ints Jthe ital Ive or abstracted by fraud, from the "lords of the soil;" and each successive wave of population, as it spread in a widened circle around, marked its flow with blood. The settlement of the new race upon the virgin soil, was effected by the extirpation of the charities of nature, and the outrage of the rights of man. Among the chief sources of American weakness, — glaring amidst the proofs of constitutional fallacy and of human injustice, is the state of the Negro, ar.d the condition of the coloured race. But here, too, has not England with humiliation to remember, that that system was her system, — that the crime of which she has ceased to be guilty, had been by her transmitted to her American progeny, as a principle of law, and an hereditary possession. A popular opinion arose in the southern portion of the Union, in favour of invading the neighbouring country ; and that mea- sure was announced, adopted, and carr* ed into effect, in the manner of a proposal touching some municipal or parochial regulation. Public opinion justified it; a free press advocated it; and a people proud of their institutions carried it into effect : exhibiting a departure from those ordinary feelings of integrity and honour which had hitherto been admitted in common by all men, — and, at the same time, a disregard ibr the existing authority of the State, which I believe has never before occurred in the history of man ; for even rebellion in the old world has been united by a principle or controlled by a leader. Dr. Channing asks whether they are pre- pared to take the new position in the world of a " robber state :" — but robbers have never yet been known destitute of authority among themselves. What prospect does such an event present to the neighbours of the United States ? What prospect for itself ? Eng- land, — whose interests in the independence of Mexico were not less than her interests in tlie independence of this Island, — extends no protecting shield before that State ; articulates no word to save it from this disaster — the American people from this guilt — the Ame- rican Government from this degradation. Yet, one word would have sufficed. England — Avhosc most anxious efforts ought to have been directed, and whose whole power, if necessary, ought to have been exerted, to arrest the progress of a spirit of aggression in the United States, — carefully avoids the indication of any interest or of any opinion on that subject ; when an expression of her inten- 92 tion and her d^tennination would have effectually overawed and repressed that spirit. She is indeed the first to hail, and first to con* firm, the triumph of this injustice.* The United States, thus mentally constituted, thus morally instructed, next turned the lawlessness of their ambition, directed with the cunning of the Indian, against Great Britain herself. And here again has Great Britain to bear the disgrace of their attempts, and the penalty of their success. Her contemptible submission was the cause of their boldness, the justification of their injustice, by yielding up every contested right, and sanctioning each advanced pretension. Commotions take place in Canada : the people of the North, emulating those of the South, look on Canada as a new Texas, on England as another Mexico. Armed bands proceed to carry war into the provinces of a friendly power; and constituted authorities applaud, support, and co-operate. England, differing in this respect from Mexico, find excuses for such acts in *• the constitutional difficulties" of the Government of the United States ; —the perpetrators, when discomfited, withdraw in peace to their homes, experiencing, and fearing, no retribution from the power they have offended, or from the state to which they belong : and, instructed by the " harmony prevailing between the two Govern- " ments," consider such acts as honourable enterprizes. — Then fol- lows, — the new assault on the disputed territory. It is because England has been false to herself, that the United States have not been true to their own interests. It is because England is allied to her foes, tliat the United States have been false to her. The interests of both are then identical. England, by the assertion of her own rights and the performance of her own duties, can still preserve both. Thus much as to the relations and interests of the two States, in connection with each other : but the question pending between them is, unfortunately, now contingent upon foreign influences and combinations. ■-^•a- ^: * Witness the Commircial Treaty between England, and the Sovereign State of Texas, of 65,000 inhabitant)!. 93 ties, exat, In assuming a position of hostility to Great Britain, is America not influenced by the idea of support from Russia and from France ? Is she not influenced by the knowledge of the hostility of these powers to England ? It cannot be that America should have ventured upon her present line, without confidence in such support : and it is precisely this which casts the darkest shade over her national tendencies. Let us therefore examine this position : — Russia, France, and the United States, leagued against England in an unjust cause. ; in opposition to all that is honest in these countries themselves : and constituting every independent people throughout the world, the allies of Great Britain. What would be the consequence ? England must either triumph or sink. If she triumphs, France and Russia return to their natural position — America is ruined. If England sinks, the United States acquire, for the moment, extended frontiers ; but no share of England's power. In that very extension lies the certainty of dissolution. The separation of the parts of a cognate race, of an unjust and acquisitive character, can present but the prospect of incessant rivalry, and unnatural hatred : of a futurity realizing the fable of a soil sown with dragon's teeth. But what would be the action of the policy of Europe, under such circumstances, on the United States ? We are supposing the power of England overthrown ; consequently, there would be no further balance in Europe, to the combined aggression of France and Russia. But it is not only that there would be no balance to these powers; — they would have absorbed into themselves the ele- ments of the strength of England and Turkey. If Russia and France have, since 1815, been concerting views of ambition on America ; — if they have both exhibited, already, a determination to extend their dominions, and to secure influence in that region ; to promote quar- rels between the states, and disaffection among the people, of the transatlantic world ; is it not to be anticipated, that their triumph over England would be followed by their domination in America, North and South ? Will she look for respite in the subsequent collision of France and Russia? But France and Russia will not come into collision while they are kept in check by any respectable power in America. It is to be supposed that Russia will preserve 2a X , 94 her supremacy in intellect and diplomacy ; if bo, she yf\\\ use France for her ends : and when Russia is in possession of the Dardanelles, she will command France and Europe. — The high-way of the sea, and the roads to a hundred people, will be in her hands ; the materials for war secured in her arsenals : in her granaries, will be locked the bread of F.urope — in her store-bouses, the commerce of the world. " I trust, however, that for such anticipations the time is not yet come. I trust it is not yet too late to rest the question ou the basis of justice ; to appeal to Anglo-saxon sympathies, not yet effaced. A semi-barbarous race, the subjects of different crowns, with their language separated into distinct dialects — yet impelled by the memory of a common origin, and attracted by the instinct of future glory and supremacy in their union, — exhibits to those who speak the English tongue, a subject of humiliation in. its mutual sympathies, — an object of dread in its growing power. Can the Sclavonian subjects of the Russian sceptre glory in mutual affections to which the sons of Britain are dead ? Can the Sclavonian sub- jects of the three North-east powers of Europe, look with the kindness of fraternity on each other, and sigh for the day of their union< — whilst no such impulses are known or felt throughout the forty millions of educated and polished inhabitants of the British Isles and of the American Union ? The children of a common ancestry, the co-inheritors of political freedom, the joint masters of the seas, the common explorers of the remote regions of the earth, the favoured children of science, the subduers of time, distance, difficulty, and nature itself — do they own no honourable and honest pride associated with their common name ? Throughout such a population — so distinguished, and so blessed — are n e American Commissioners of 1783 would not have asked for such a line, nor would those of England have yielded it, and, consequently, it cannot be in conformity to the true intent and meaning of the Treaty of that date. " The whole question has been submitted to an impartial arbiter — the King of the Netherlands ; that' monarch has investigated it, and given his award, which \\ ill be found in this day's impression. This award the State of Maine refused to be bo ind by, although England, notwithstanding it gave her the smallest portion, expressed her willingness to accede to it. " There was no reason to suppose that His Majesty of the Netherlands was unduly favourable to England, for at that period a hostile English fleet was at iiis door, endeavouring to dissever his kingdom ; which was ultimately done, and Belgium wrested from him. " We have made these remarks for the purpose of showing that England has some justice on her side, and is not acting the fraudulent part that is represented. The position assumed by the State of Maine, and in part by Congress, places England in a painful situation. The whole territory is insisted on, and if Great Britain yields it, she cuts herself ofl" from Canada, and renders herself incapable of sending succours during the winter to her loyal population in those provinces, and thus place in imminent jeopardy their safety. Are the United States, then, prepared to force on England the dire alternatives of war or the loss of Canada ? We hope not, most fervently, especially when the matter in dispute is comparatively of little value, and of doubtful title. We trust that the sober good sense of the American people will calmly examine this matter, and enable the President and his Cabinet to present to England some less obnoxious alternative. Let the case be once more referred to a third power — let moderation and justice guide the councils of both nations ; but never let two kindred people again imbue their hands in each other's blood." (d) "^r ■■~r.-?E',^iyir '^J^ lif APPENDIX. EXTRACTS FROM CIIANNING'S LK/lTKIl ON THE ANNEXATION OF THE TEXAS. I [Though nddrcascd to America, tlicsc words nre no less ominuua to Enghuid. The crimes of nations otf'rct not the perpetrators or the victims nlonc. It was in England's power to prevent tlie disasters here descrihcd ond prognosticated : it whs her duty to have done so. The perusal of these lines, hcsides awakening Englishmen to a sense of their position in the actual crisis, may lead them to reflect on the duties associated with their great fortune, ond on the prospect of bloodshed ond misery, of violence and injustice, in every quarter of the Globe, resulting from their unKtness for the station they occupy. I pray Gonthat it may lead them to think on their children's fote : ond on the execration that may yet be heaped on their name, where it has hitherto been revered.] "Some crimes, by their magnitude, hove a touch of the sublime; and to this dignity the seizure of Texas by our citizens is entitled. Modern times furnish no exam- ple of individual rapine on so grand a scale. It is nothing less than the robbery of a realm. The pirate seizes a ship. The colonists and their coadjutors can satisfy them- selves with nothing short of an empire. They have left their Anglo-Saxon ancestors behind them. Those barbarians conformed to the maxims of their age, to the rude code of nations in time of thickest heathen darkness. They invaded England under their sovereigns, and with the sanction of the gloomy religion of the North. But it is in ii civilized ogc, ond amidst rciincmcnts of manners ; — it is amidst the lights of science and the teaching of Christianity, omidst expositions of the law of nations and enforcements of the law of imiversal love, amidst institutions of religion, learning, and humanity; — that the robbery of Texas has found its instruments. It is from a free, well-ordered, enlightened Christian country, that hordes have gone forth, in open day, to perpctrotc this mighty wrong." " We boast of our rapid growth, forgetting that, throughout nature, noble grow ths are slow. Our people throw themselves beyond the bounds of civilization, ond expose themselves to relapses into a semi-barbarous state, under the impulse of wild imagination, and for the name of great possessions. Perhaps there is no jjeople on eorth, on whom the tics of local attachment sit so loosely. Even the wandering tribes of Scytliia are bound to one spot, the graves of their fathers ; but the homes and groves of our fathers detain us feebly. The known and familiar is often abandoned for the distant and untrodden ; and sometimes the untrodden is not the less eagerly desired because belonging to others. To this spirit we have sacrificed justice and humanity ; and through its ascendancy, the records of this young nation are stained with atrocities, at which communities gro.vn grey in corruption might blush." " Texas is a country conquered by our citizens ; and the annexation of it to oiir Union will be the beginning of conquests, which, unless arrested and beaten back by a just and kind providence, will stop only at the Isthmus of Darien. Henceforth we must cease to cry, Peace, peace. Our Eagle will whet, not gorge its appetite on its first vic- tim ; and w ill snutf a more tempting quarry, more alluring blood, in every new region which opens southward. To annex Texas is to declare perpetual war with Mexico. That word, Mexico, associated in men's minds with boundless wealth, has already awakened rapacity. Already it has been proclaimed, that the Anglo-Saxon race is destined to the sway of this magnificent realm, — that the rude form of society, which Spain established there, is to yield and vanish before a higher civilization." -* APPENDIX. Xf " A deadly hatred burno in Mexico townrdn thin country. No stronger national ■entimcnt now IhikU her scattered provinccN together, than dread and detcotation of Republican America. She is ready to attach herself to Europe for defence from the United States. All the moral power which we might have gained over Mexico, wo have thrown away ; and suspicion, dread, and abhorrence, have supplanted respect and trust." " I am aware that these remarks are met by a vicious reasoning which discredits a 1>eople among whom it finds favour. It is sometimes said, that nations arc swayed by aws, as unfailing as those which govern matter ; that they have their destinies ; that their character and position carry them forward irresistibly to their gaol : that the stationary Turk must sink under the progressive civili/ntioii of Russia, as inevitably as the crumbling editicc fulls to the earth ; that, by a like necessity, the Indians have melted before the white man, and the mixed, degraded race of Mexico must melt before the Anglo-Saxon. Awiiy with this vile sophistry ! There is no necessity for crime. There is no Fate to justify rapacious nations, any more than to justify gamblers and robbers, in plunder." " Hitherto, I have spoken of the annexation of Texas as embroiling us with Mexico ; but it will not stop here. It will briiig us into collision with other states. It will, almost of necessity, involve us in hostility with European powers. Such are now the connexions of nations, that Europe must look with jealousy on a countrj', whose ambition, seconded by vast resources, will seem to place within her grasp the empire of the new world. Ancl nut only general considerations of this nature, but the particular relation of certain foreign states to this continent, must tend to destroy the peace now happily subsisting between us and the kingdoms of Europe. England, in particular, must watch us with suspicion, and cannot but resist our appropriation of Texas to our- selves. She bus at once a moral and political interest in titis question, which demands and Milljustify interference." " England has a political as well as mor.il interest in this nucstion. By the annexation of Texas we shall approach her liberated colonics ; we shall build up a power in her neighbourhood, to which no limits can be prescribed. By adding Texas to our acquisition of (^lurida, wc shall do much toward girdling the Gulf of ^Icxico; and I doubt not that some of our politicians will feel us if our mastery in that sea were sure. The West Indian Archipelago, in which the European is regarded as an intruder, will, of course, be embraced in our over-growing scheme of empire. In truth, collision with the West Indies will be the most certain effect of the extension of our power in that quarter. The example, which they exhibit, of African freedom, of the elevation of the coloured race to the rights of men, is, of all influences, most menacing to slavery at the South. It must grow continually more perilous. These islands, unless interfered with from abroad, seem destined to be nurseries of civilization and freedom to the African roce." " Will u slavcholding jjcoplc, spreading along the shores of the Mexican Cnlf, cul- tivate friendly sentiments towards communities, whose mIioIc history will be a bitter reproach to their institutions, a witness against their wrongs, uiul wiiosc ardent sympa- thies will be enlisted in the cause of the slave ? Cruel, ferocious conflicts, must grow from this neighbourhood of hostile principles, of communities regarding one another with unextinguishable hatred. All the islands of the ArchiiM'l.igo will have cause to dread our power; but none so much as the emancipated. Is it not more than possible, that w..rs, having for an object the subjugation of the coloured race, the destructidii of this tempting example of freedom, should spring from the proposed extension of our dominion along the Mexican Gulf? Can England view our eucroaclunents without alarm?" " An English Minister would be unworthy of his office, who should see another state greedily swallow up territories in the neighbourhood of British colonies, and not strive, by all just means, to avert the danger." " By encroaching on Mexico, we shaHthrow her into the arms of European states, shall compel her to seek defence in transatlantic alliance. How plain is it, that alliance with Mexico will be hostility to the United States, that her defenders will repay them- selves by making her subservient to their views, that they will thus strike root in her soilj monopolize her trade, and control her resources. And with what face can Ave resist avi APPENDIX. * the aggrctiioni of others on our neighbour, if we Btvc an example of nwreuion ? Still more, if, by our wlvancen, we put the colon let of Kngland in new peril, wjth what face can we oppose her occupation of Cuba? Suppose her, with that masniticent island in her hands, to command the Mexican Uulf aiul the mouths of the xTississipi ; will the Western States find compensation for this formidable neighbourhood, in the privilege of flooding Texas with slaves ?" " Thus, w ars w ith Europe and Mexico are to be entailed on us by the annexation of Texas, And is war the policy by which this country is to flourish? Was it for inter- minable conflicts that we formed our Union ? Is it blood, shed for plunder, which is to consolidate our institutions ? Is it by collision with the greatest maritime power, that our commerce is to gain strength ? Is it by arming against ourselves the morni sentiments of the world, that we are to build up national honour ? Muitt wcof the North buckle on our armour, to fight the battles oi slavery ; to fight for a possession, which our moral principles and iust jealousy forbid us to incorporate with our confederacy ? In attaching Texas to ourselves, we provoke hostilities, and at the same time expose new points of attack to our foes.* Vulnerable at so many points, we shall need a vast military force. Qrcat armies will require great revenues, and raise up great chieftains. Are we tired of freedom, that we are ]>repared to place it under such guardians ? Is the republic bent on dying by its own hands? Docs not every man feel, that, with war for our habit, our institutions cannot be preserved ? If ever a country were bound to peace, it is this. Peace is our great interest. In peace our resources arc to be developed, the true inter- pretation of the constitution to bn established, and the interfering claims of liberty and order to be adjusted. In peace we are to ('ischarge our great debt to the human race, and to diflusc freedom by manifesting its fruits. A country has no right to adopt a policy, however gainful, which, as it may foresee, will determme it to a career of war. A nation, like an individual, is bound to seek, even by sacrifice)^ a position, which will favour peace, justice, and the exercise of a beneficent influence on the world. A nation, provokii'<]; war by cupidity, by encroachment, and, above all, by eflbrts to propagate the curse oi slavery, is alike false to itself, to God, and to the human race." " This possession will involve us in new Indian wars. Texas, besides being open to the irruption of the tribes within our territories, has a tribe of its own, the Camanches, which is described as more formidable than any in North America. Such foes are not to be coveted. The Indians ! that ominous word, which ought to pierce the conscience of this nation, more than the savage war-cry pierces the ear. The Indians ! Have we not inflicted and endured evil enough in our intercourse with this wretched people, to abstain from new wars with them ? Is the tragedy of Florida to be acted again and again in our own day, and in our children's?" " But one thing does move me. It is a sore evil, that freedom should be blasphemed, that republican institutions shoidd forfeit the confidence of mankind, through the unfaithfulness of this people to their trust." * If theie consequencea have not fallen as yet on tlie I'niteil States, it ia that France encouraged the outragei, u commiiiiug that people against England ; and a Mininter of Knglaml, — false to hii country, did not repress the wrong, and did suppress the truth. if THE END. HITCBEIX, BEATON, AND MITCHELL, PBINTEIIS, DCEE 8TBEET, UVEBPOOL. A/