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<Kluctions / Institut Canadian da microraproductions liiatoriquaa 
 
^"^'i^. 
 
 Technical and Bibliographic Notaa/Notas tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa 
 
 Tha Instituta haa anamptad to obtain tha baat 
 original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia 
 copy which may ba bibliographically unlqua. 
 which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha 
 raproduction, or which may significantly changa 
 tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. 
 
 L'Inatitut a microfilm* la maillaur axamplaira 
 qu'il lui a iti possibia da sa procurar. Las details 
 da cat axamplaira qui sont paut-Atra uniquas du 
 point da vua bibliographiqua. qui pauvant modifiar 
 una imaga raproduita, ou qui pauvant axiger una 
 modification dans la mithoda normala da fiimaga 
 sont indiquis ci^daaaoua. 
 
 □ Coloured covara/ 
 Couvartura da coulaur 
 
 D 
 
 Coluurad pagaa/ 
 Pagaa da coulaur 
 
 I — I Covers damaged/ 
 
 D 
 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 Couverture endommagie 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^ et/ou pellicula 
 
 |~~| Cover title missing/ 
 
 titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured mapa/ 
 
 Cartea gtegraphiquaa 9n couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blua or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured piatea and/or iliuatrations/ 
 Planchaa et/ou illuatrationa mn couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reiii avac d'autrea documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or diatortlon 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distoraion la long do la marga intArioura 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certainaa pagaa blanches ajoutAes 
 lore d'une restauration apparaiaaant dana la taxte, 
 mala, lorsqua cela Atait possibia, caa pagaa n'ont 
 paa M filmtea. 
 
 id 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 Pagaa damaged/ 
 Pagaa andommagias 
 
 Pagaa reatored and/or laminated/ 
 Pagaa reatauriaa et/ou pelliculies 
 
 Pagaa discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages dicolordes. tachat^es ou piquies 
 
 Pagaa detached/ 
 Pages d^tachies 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of print varies/ 
 Quality inigala de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprand du material suppl^mantaira 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Mition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc.. have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Lea pagaa totalament ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un fauillet d'errata. une pelure, 
 etc., ont it* filmtes A nouveau da faqon it 
 obtanir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 T 
 s 
 T 
 v« 
 
 N 
 
 i 
 
 rl! 
 re 
 m 
 
 D 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplAmentaires; 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
»*!■.;:'«. 
 
 Th« copy filmad hare has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Douglas Library 
 Queen's University 
 
 The images appearing here ere the best quaiity 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and In keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or Illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol -^(meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 IVIaps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hend corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 L'exemplaire f llmA f ut reproduit grice h la 
 gtntrositA da: 
 
 Douglas Library 
 Queen's University 
 
 Les Images sulvantes ont AtA reproduites avec ie 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at 
 de la nettetA de Texemplaire film*, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est ImprimAe sent filmte en commenyant 
 par Ie premier plat et en termlnant soit par la 
 dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impresslon ou d'illustration, soit par Ie second 
 plat, salon ie cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sent fllmAs en commenpant par la 
 premlAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impresslon ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 derniAre image de cheque microfiche, selon Ie 
 cas: Ie symbols —»^ signifie "A SUIVRE", Ie 
 symbols ▼ signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmte A des taux de reduction diff^rents. 
 Lorsque Ie document est trop grand pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seul clichA, 11 est film* A partir 
 de i'angie supArieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant Ie nombre 
 d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 lllustrent la mAthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
^ 
 
EXPOSITION 
 
 THE CAUSES AND THE CONSEQUENCES 
 
 BOUNDARY DIFFERENCES, 
 
 GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES, 
 
 SUBSEQUENTLY TO THEIR ADJUSTMENT BY ARBITRATION. 
 
 (^<:-^^^,i^A/^r; PAV/o^). 
 
 "THB TRANQOILMTT OP THE PEOPLF, THE SAFETY OF STATES, THE HAPPI' ,SS OP THE HUMAN RA> _ 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 ni<m>n(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<piirin;j; was then estimated at .t*.'3,()()(),CX)0, — that 
 grants of this huid had heen imuh', and that many individuals, and 
 some of the most inf1iu;ntial in the United States, were deej)ly in- 
 terested, in a pecuniary point of view, in thr. aecpiisition of tliis 
 property, — (hat the State; of Maine had nh-eady att«!mpt«d to ex- 
 ercise juristliction and to locate townships, and that the central 
 Government had already connived at the assnmpticm of nnconsti- 
 tntional powers by the Statt; of Maine, as appearinjjj to hsad to the 
 further embarrassment of the nepjociations, and the advancement of 
 the American pretensions. 
 
 It is further to b<; remarked that, during; the nefijotnations at jj,,,;^™i;„'; °( 
 the Httcrue, the individual sidected by tlu; United States as its n;- iKiinilT'ni' 
 presentativc? belon<2;ed to the state ot Maine, — was on innuentml 
 memlxM' of that state, and was belitived to have pecuniary interests 
 in its settlement. li(; was moreover one of the Commissioners ap- 
 pointed to draw up tho, case to be submitted to the Arbiter. The 
 representative of Enp;land was not oni; of the diplomatists employed 
 in the same capacity by Gr<'at Britain. 
 
 On the 12th of January, 1831, two days after the Award is ren- ,'^",,„^'u,';;',.r,i 
 dered, the United States' Minister at the Han;ue, protests ap;ainst 
 what he terms " a document purporting to be an expression of His 
 *• Majesty's opinion on the several imints submitted to him as 
 " Arbiter" ! 
 
 The Award reaches the United States in the beginniup; of March, 
 — is communicated to the State of Maine, who hold a secret sitliiip;, 
 the result of which is communicated at Washinoton on or before 
 the 12th of March ; but the United States' Government inform 
 the British Minister that the Award reached Washington on the 
 IGtli of March ! It is then ostensibly coinmnnicated to tlie State 
 of Maine, who transmit to the President a declaration that tliey 
 will not submit to it, and immediately proceed to pass regulations 
 for the purpose of extending the State and Sovereign jurisdiction 
 throughout the disputed Territory, subject to the jurisdiction of 
 £ 
 
 Awn-il jiriv.ttdy 
 i-iMtiiiiunirairr| to 
 Mnine. - Seen t 
 Sittlhu ..r iu 
 I-vpHmiiire. 
 
18 
 
 Rnulli MnaMlHl 
 frnm thf> 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<! United States. 
 Thin (cport eoinmeiUM.s with nforeiict-s to the antttrior de- 
 8criptiotiH, meinoriulp, and negociations ; and fe-artsertrt the ehiiniH 
 and pretenHions overruled or referred to arbitration by the Con- 
 vention of Septend)er, 1827. It dfinie.s tiie authority of that 
 Convention : objects to tlie Award of the Kini; of Holhuid, 
 because of the diminution of his territory and power during the 
 interval between IiIh a(^coptance of the olKce of Arbitrator and that 
 of pronouncing his decision. Tlu; motive of such ohjection being, 
 that that Sovereign became depend«'nt oti England, and therefore 
 favoured British interests. It also deniew that the Arbiter has 
 decided according to the conditions ])roj)osed by the coiu'luding 
 parties : — further, denies that the Arbiter has decided at all ! " The 
 •• Arbiter," they say, " did not pretend to decide, and declared 
 " he could not decid*; tlu; point in controversy between the parties, 
 " but only intended to suggest a mode by which, in his opinion, 
 ** it might be decided. The Arbiter seems to have been impressed 
 " with the limitation of his powers, and that he had no authority to 
 •' decide contrary to the question submitted ; and tliat he was 
 " bound to decide, if he decided at all, in favour of one of the two 
 *' lines claimed by the parties." They maintain, then, that the 
 United States' Government not having asked for " advice," are not 
 bound to accent it. '* The Government of the United States cannot R'-niuuon 
 
 I ■' hintilo tu t 
 
 *' feel themselves bound to adopt or be governed by the advice of the 
 " Arbiter, particularly when his advice was not sought or asked by 
 " them." They then enquire whether " the Arbiter has decided in 
 " pursuance of the authority given him," and after a statement of the 
 case, in the same spirit as the above, they conclud(! that he has not. 
 The report terminates as follows : " In conclusion, your Committee 
 " deem it to be; their duty to the Legislature and to the State, to 
 " declare that, in their opinion, in whatever light the dociunent which 
 ** emanated from the Arbiter maybe considered, — whether as eman- 
 " ating from an Individual, and not from that friendly Sovereign, 
 " Power, or State, &c. — the United States will not consider thcm- 
 " selves bound, on any principle whatever, to adopt it. And 
 " further, should the United States adopt the document as a de- 
 ** cision, it will be a violation of the constitutional rights of the 
 •' State of Maine, to which she cannot yield." 
 
 . i 
 
 Ui« 
 
 liruindi of I lilt 
 
 lii-bulutluii. 
 
Their ftil«*hood. 
 
 il 
 
 20 
 
 It may perhaps be superfluous to observe, that if any objection 
 could be raised to the decision of the King of Holland, because he 
 had lost Belgium, such objection should have been urged before 
 the declaration of the Award ; but the objection, inadmissible, 
 subsequently, if valid, is itself too contemptible to merit observation. 
 
 If the King of Holland had given advice instead of a decision, 
 the course of the United States to adopt was to put that question 
 to the Sovereign Arbiter himself; this plea, therefore, like the 
 former, is wholly inadmissible. The objection, however, is an utter 
 falsehood. The award is rendered with all due solemnity, and 
 couched in the usual and formal terms of arbitration: to the map, 
 marked according to the Award, the Royal Signet is appended, 
 countersigned by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ; and 
 the terms of the Convention of September, 1827, are explicit and 
 imperative : — " The decision of the Arbiter, when given, shall be 
 "final and conclusive, and it shall he carried, without reserve, into 
 " immediate effect." 
 
 This document is transmitted to tlie President, and we have no 
 information regarding its reception — no copy of the reply. 
 
 These proceedings having appeared in the public prints, they 
 were of course brought to the knowledge of the British Minister ; 
 so that it became impossible for him to avoid pronouncing an 
 opinion — against these proceedings, by formal communication, or 
 in favour of them, as it would necessarily be understood, by silence. 
 1 ho British Min- The British Minister is silent. 
 
 ister IS silent. 
 
 The communications sent home by the British Minister at 
 Washington, before the arrival of any instructions from England, 
 maj^ appear at first worthy of little notice ; but, on examination, 
 they will be found (even such extracts as have been given) to 
 contain food for deep reflection, and to throw valuable light on 
 tlie dispositions of the parties, and the position of the British 
 Mission at Washington. On the 12th March. Mr. Vaughan 
 writes : — 
 
 ,si'.'',\'u'!m!!iic"^ " It has been long known at Washington, that His Majesty the King of the 
 
 Netherlands delivered, on the lOtb January, to Mr. Preble, the Minister from the United 
 States, his decision upon the question of boundary referred to arbitration. 
 
 " 1 am asmred, however, by Mr. Van Burcn, that this Government has not yet 
 received the official communication of His Majesty's decisiou ; though it appears that some 
 communication of the import of it has been made by Mr. Preble to the State of Maine, 
 
 Itfceivcd and 
 nilinitted by the 
 United States' 
 (jovemment. 
 
21 
 
 to \7hich he belongs ; as it is stated in the newspapers, that the Legislature of that State The BriUsb mui- 
 
 ,. , ... . , . . V. . , . . , , isttw'DMpalehCT. 
 
 immediately took it into consideration, in a secret session: and it is reported that 
 general dissatisfaction was expressed with the decision of the Arbiter/' 
 
 That the British Minister should learn from the newspapers 
 so important a fact as the Secret Session, reveals his perfect help- 
 lessness ; hence his admission of the extravagant supposition that 
 Mr. Preble should have communicated with Maine, without com- 
 municating; with his Government. It is curious to observe the 
 words " to which he belong?," inserted as justification of the Ame- 
 rican Secretary of State. 
 
 « Washington, March 20th, 1831. 
 
 " The decision of the King of the Netherlands upon the question of Boundary, 
 submitted to His Majesty's Arbitration, was received, by way of Havre, by the Govern- 
 ment of the United States on the 15th instant. 
 
 " On the 18th instant, a messenger was despatched with an official communication 
 of it to the Government of the State of Maine. 
 
 " I understand from Mr. Van Buren that the Award of the King of the Netherlands 
 has called forth a protest against it from Mr. Preble, the American Minister at the 
 Hague, which I have not seen, — but I understand that a copy of it was delivered to 
 Sir Charles Bagot ; and I presume, therefore, that His Majesty's Government; is already 
 in possession of it. 
 
 " This Government has resolved to abstain from any expression of an opinion until 
 they are in possession of the ansiver to their official communication of the Award to tlie 
 State of Maine." 
 
 That the despatches should have been received '* by way of 
 Havre," accounts neither for the delay of two months and five days, 
 in a matter of suoli urgent importance, nor for the strange assertion 
 that the Government had not received the intelliffence throuo-h some 
 of those channels through which the Minister at the Hague had 
 communicated Avith Maine, or which had conveyed the decision to 
 "Washington, where Mr. Vaughan, eight days before, stated it had then 
 been " long known." It serves to shew however that the most frivol jus 
 reason was considered sufficient by the American Government to 
 ofier to an English diplomatist for circumstances the most suspicious 
 and inexplicable ; the statement of the route selected for the arrival 
 of the intelligence, Avhen the American Government thought proper 
 to avow the reception of it, is remarkable, and suggests the idea of 
 a previous communication with the French Government. 
 
 The reference to the State of Maine of a matter of Treaty 
 F 
 
 Reim-sents thfi 
 
 Amrricftn vit>«-. 
 
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, //<a/ you are not prepared to enter into any discussion vpi . such a 
 subject, and that you can only transmit the communication to your Government for its 
 consideration. 
 
 " I am, &c., 
 
 « PALMERSTON." 
 " Right Hon. C. R. Vaughan, 
 8(C, ^c. ifc. 
 
 What may be supposed to be the stunning effect of such a des- 
 patch upon the British Envoy ! Having for week after week ex- 
 pected the announcemejit of a decision, which was to terminate a 
 difference of half a century, he is at length told in a public despatch 
 — that the Minister of England has no time to enter into the sub- 
 ject: — but what need he enter into it at all? — That his instructions 
 would be communicated at some future day; — but what instructions 
 could avail, if not communicated then ? Not to exact the fulfilment 
 of the contract upon the judgment given, was the mockery of all 
 that is held sacred among men — binding among nations. It was 
 to set at nought forms of law — principles of office — habits of busi- 
 ness. The concealment of such abandonment, from the Parliament 
 and the nation, leaves this act referable to other causes than 
 ignorance or negligence. 
 
 The negociations of half a century had proved the national 
 purpose of the United States to keep open this boundary discussion 
 — had also proved the ability with which that purpose had been 
 pursued, and the success with which it had been attended. De- 
 cision was therefore called for, on the part of Great Britain, at 
 the moment of the notification of the award. But so effectual had 
 been the forethought evinced by the Minister of Great Britain 
 in 1827, and so stringent the language of the Convention, that 
 it seems a mystery how it ever could enter into any man's mind that 
 such a compact could be broken. The individual who possessed 
 the power of speaking in the name of England, and of withholding 
 G 
 
 
M 
 
 11 
 
 
 I '■ 
 
 lU lontrniliclioi)' 
 
 It j>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*iklitM<niii>ti 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(<(|iiiHiti<ni nddrosHcd to the advorso |mrty to 
 pi'otMM'd to (\\(>cniion 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<piire into the 
 character «)f the Minister, and into the position and niotives of other 
 powers, who nniy have an interest in the non-adjustnu-nt of this 
 question, and be able to exercise any inllnence over the British 
 INIinister, to «)btain such a restdt. 
 
 The United States, in rejectinii- the Award, either expecte«l the 
 concurrence or the opposition of Kn<j;land. In the first cas(i the 
 {2;nilt of the l<\)rei{:;n Ministi'r of England is clear, and we need not 
 pursue the subject. 
 
 If it anticipated the opposition of Kufjlaml, it became the duty of 
 that (lovernment to consitler tlu> 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<t Eii^linid ti'oiii (III rinhiirniSHtiHtnt and ii (hinder whi(*li would 
 diniiiiish her power, if rvcr cxnMrd iiniiiiiHt theiiiHrlvcH -mid would 
 upi^li U|) to li(<i' the ])ros|)<'ct Hiid (lie iuciiiih of uuitiui;' willi Auicricii 
 to l'(3Hi^4t their a;:;<>!;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(e<l Slates 
 iuid with i'iii'i'land, wilh a, view lo averlinir from themselves the 
 catastrophe of a selllement of the North-east itoinidarv <pa'stion. 
 
 These two I'owers were at that tiaie eu<^a;;e(l in various 
 proj<;ets, tiii^ fruits of whieli Imvi^ siu(;e. appeared, and whieli leave no 
 ilouht as to tlieir ronc<'rt and their ohjeets. I will instance only 
 the three Kuropttan (piestions <lirected l>y 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 <piestion has been nnide, hut tla; best attention which [ 
 have be«'n alih; to j^ive t() the subject, leads me to cctnelude that the 
 objects of both have not been less hostile, nor the policy «)f Hussia 
 less successful, in this matter than in the other two. 
 
 Jhit, in all these, Jlussia — (Trances is but the half-instructed 
 and paralytic coadjutor) --/^//.f.sm Ikih .sneer cdcd, sole/// hif the eo- 
 operation of the Minister of .l'JiH//.att(/, -whn hns placed tlu! 
 diplouuitic functionaries and naval connnanders of (ireat Mritain in 
 the monstrous position of receivinj;' orders signed by tia^ re|)n'sen- 
 tatives of these two pow(!rs,-^|- anil has accustomed J'^n^i'land, Imu'oix', 
 
 lliiNfllri \ I'ltini'i 
 mi' lio.ilU' ii> ilii 
 •I'lllnii.'iil i.r III. 
 N.lt. Ilnlih'llllv 
 r|tl<-Ntl<tli 
 
 ■Ih.v .lIUITll, .. 
 lli>..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 
 f<i ii|N>iitli'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^ <<iitruHted with ho (hdicate 
 a char|];e. 
 
 NotwithstaiidiiiH- the )idviiiila<!;e.H which the Anti-Fiii<<;nHh and 
 war party was thus aUowed so rapidly to liain, the nreiit ma- 
 jority of llu^ y\mericiin people, the whole of llie Soiitliern Slates, and 
 her s(>nators and politicians of the hinhest distinction, wen; still 
 all in favour of th(! adoption of the! Award. Allhon<i,h, I say, the 
 Award had heen virtually Hacrili(;ed liy hord I'almerston ; altlRHi«»h 
 fornnd nn'asnres had lu!en taken ai;iiinst it, not oidy hy a state, 
 hut hy till' p-neral (iovennnent ;* althoujL>;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<j;- the adoption hy America of the Award, hut yet 
 that, from ])articular circumstances, he could not conmiit himself to 
 the English Minister at Washington, hy openly iiistriictinijj him to 
 oppose; its ado|)tion : — what would he the course; which lu; would he 
 likely to pursue I lie would relieve; America from all apprehension 
 as to Enghiud's iusistiuL;' upon the fulfilment of the contract. If 
 remonstrances wen* made hy any jiarty aoaiust the Award, lu> would 
 be careful to <iive them im])(»rtauce. Jf violation of Territory took 
 place, or of tin; rights of -the Jiritish ('rowii, he Avould se'dulously 
 avoid noticiiuj; the occurrence, lie would impose njion the Minister 
 at VV'asliin<i;ton silence and reserve. Me would place in that post 
 no man of commandiii'ji; talents or of i)ractical aecpiaintance with 
 
 riirniinitili- dJH* 
 )Mi>.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» t<i n'jet t 
 the Awanl. 
 
 Th.- rliiiiv- il'- 
 Allkiri's ilut'n 110- 
 thinii,— 
 
 lH'U(>ve.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<j; his place with a diplonnitic otlicer, 
 charj;ed ad interim, and uccreditetl, not to the (iovernuu-nt or the 
 State, but merely to the I'oreij;!! Secretary. These suppositious 
 constituti" a sini|)le narrativ(! of that which has occurred. The cri- 
 tical monu!nt when the American (lovennnent had t<» <lecide as to 
 whether or nt)t it should submit the Award to the Senate, and when 
 the Semite, it' referred to, hud to decide upon it, — arrives; and, as 
 usual, the Jiritish jNIinister departs.* 
 
 This intermission of tlu' representation of Great Britain at 
 Washington, is not for a short interval, for nn interval important 
 only by accident, or of an importance unexpected and unforeseen. 
 The Jirifis/i Mini,^ter is alm'iit (luriinj two i/cars, and that absence 
 dates from the a|i'<i'ression of the subjects oi' tlu; United States anains^t 
 the jurisdiction of the British Crown, and from the avowed fornni- 
 tion of a party to defeat the decision of the Kin<;' of Holland. // 
 was not tilt more than eighteen months had elapsed, that the American 
 Government refused its assent to the Award ! 
 
 To return now to the chain of evidence, at the point where it 
 was last interrupted. 
 
 The last connnunication from Mr. Vau<j;lmn, the British Repre- 
 sentative, on the 20th of April, stated that he was '• prepared to 
 " confonn strictly" to Lord Pahnerston's instructions to do 
 nothing ; and during three montiis that instruction is strictly con- 
 formed to. On the 21st of July, Mr. Bankhead, the Char</d 
 d'affaires, Avrites, *' the same reserve a: has been nmnifested by 
 '* the United States' Government to my predecessor, has been con- 
 tinued to me by Mr. Livingston." He communicates the arrival in 
 America of Mr. Preble, the energetic protester at the Hague, and 
 the approaching departure of Mr. Van Buren for England, the 
 
 * At the recent critical events in Europe and America, the British Ambassador and Minister 
 has ahnost always been absent at the important moment — for instance, the occupation of Con- 
 stantinople by Russia — the capture of St. John d'Ulloa, by the French. There might per- 
 haps have been some motive for the absence of Mr. Vaughan ; but there were two dis- 
 tinn'uishcd English diplomatists, to whose zeal had been entrusted, and by whose abilities 
 had been secured, the settlement of this question. 
 
principal opponent of the; Award in America. The stntc of his own 
 mind may Ix! gathered from what follows: •' I am not altogother 
 " without hopes that the pretouHionH of tiie Stuto of Maine will he 
 " much Hoflcned, and that an acquioscenct' will at last be given to 
 •* the opinion of the Koyal Arbitrator." In u substitution of the 
 word " opinion" for " Award" in the mouth of the Jhitish Chanjd 
 d'ajf'airea, is the evidence of (he success of Lord Palmorston in 
 rendering the British Representative; the coadjutor of the preten- 
 sions of the State of Maine. 
 
 But it is only a month after the dati; of this lust despatch, that 
 the project is admitted, of referring the uuitter to tlu; Senate. 
 
 On the 23rd of August, Mr. Buukln^ad writes, " I h -rn I- 
 *' an authority which I have no n'ason to doubt, that bet( (. ■ 
 *■ President can consent to the provision containtid in the i(>\... 
 •• 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'<it't).t Itn 
 ll>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 re<piest that the jiroiier measures might be adopted, to jjrocure the 
 release of onr Citi/cns, and protect our Territory from iiirasioH." 
 
 TIk' Prcsidi'iit was thus appealed to by Maine to pi'ot(>ct 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 Avliatev<u' taken by Lord Palmerstoti. The readt.'r of the 
 diplomatic correspondence, as published during the Session of 1838, 
 would remain in perfect ignorance of the occurrence of such facts ; 
 all th(! papers referring to them having been collected together 
 and reserved imtil tlu; Sessicm had ended, and nntil the minds 
 of Members of Parliament had been made up on the unintelligible 
 fragments, — or their interest and patience exhausted, by the inex- 
 tricable confusion in which this simple transaction had become 
 involved. 
 
 The objects, howevtu', of tin; opponents of the Award, were 
 now attained ; outrages coinmitt<'d, — jurisdiction att(;mpted — and 
 (lisatsscd in terms that falsified the position of England. Agitation 
 and irritation spread through the Union. The Boundary question 
 elevated in importance ; and insult and aggression — inflicted with 
 impunity on England by a single nunnber of the American Union 
 • — accepted by her with extreme submission. 
 
 From this period, no further aggressions occurred for a space of 
 more than two years. 
 
 rltulfil frtmi 
 INilMTN prt'iinited 
 to rurliunoiit. 
 
 We must now revert to the diplomatic intercourse of the two 
 Governments. 
 
w 
 
PART IV. 
 
 DOUBLE INSTRUCTIONS OF LORD PALMERSTON, AND CON- 
 SEQUENT REJECTION OF TIIK AWARD BY THE GOVERN- 
 MENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 " IIK SEEMS TO lUVK NOTIIINrj AT JIEAUT, DIIT THE OnoD OF MANKIND, AND THE PUTTING A STOP 
 TO MIHCIIIKF."- FiaiMin on tht Urilith Nnjndator (if ll\t Trnily nr HIW. 
 
 As Lord Palmeraton, before making his first vague intimation Rii,Mniin.r, 
 to the British Minister at Washington, of the fact of the decision of SJ,"H"er' °' 
 the King of Holland, and of the ac<|uicscence of England in that 
 decision, had waited until time was allowed for the circulation of 
 Mr. Preble's Protest — until the prolonged silence of England had 
 awakened in America the hope of setting aside the Award — and 
 until the State of Maine had time to come to a formal decision 
 against it ; so now he delayed making the ofKcial communication to 
 the American Government, which he could not possibly avoid, until 
 he had intimation of the practical aggressions and outrages of the 
 subjects of the United States against the British Authorities, arous- 
 ing feelings of hostility throughout the union, calculated to frustrate 
 any effect wliich might hav(! been produc(3d by England's ostensible 
 demand to ])roceed to the execution of the Award. 
 
 But as the Despatch of February 9th, dated as it is, thirty days 
 after the rendering of the Award by the King of Holland, did not 
 arrive at its destination until the li)th of April — that is, until ninety 
 days had elapsed ; so, in the present instance, does a dehiy occur 
 scarcely less calculated to awaken suspicion of systematically- 
 practised deception. 
 
 The memorable Despatches, dated 14th October, 1831, which we ofoct.i4,iK)i. 
 have now to consider, were not received till the 18th of December, 
 being a delay of two months and four days. But without any irre- 
 
 D<'lavnfl)f>xpatch 
 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«!<j;o('iation. It was 
 thcroton! ahsohitoly lu^ccssury that any stcj) of the I'^nglisli fiovern- 
 nient towards rcali/iny; tli(! ohjccts it assninixl to dosin;, shoidd Im 
 taken previously to the presidential i\Iessa|jj(! to Confjnnss — a Mes- 
 sage wherein that very <|uestion wonld assuini; a paranionnt impor- 
 tance; — a Message, which, in consecpience of its expression of 
 opinion on that snhject, was IooUjhI for with the greatest interest, 
 not only throughont tin; Union, hut throughont the North American 
 possessions of (jireat Britain. 
 
 Nor is this all: the assemhlage of the Mend)er8 of both 
 Houses in Washington, was a jxiriod for which the British 
 Minister ought to have been arnu'd and prepared with the utmost 
 solicitude. 1 omit the past; J take the negociation (if that word 
 can be so prostituted) as it stot)d at tlu; time :— a nu^asiu'e, in which 
 Great Britain had a deep interest, Mas to be referred to the decision 
 of the American Senate. The majority, iud(!ed, of the Senate was 
 known to be in favour of it; but there was a number of individuals, 
 active, able, and energetic, using every means which interest or 
 ambition could prompt, ability and ingenuity suggest, or duplicity 
 sanction, to impose upon the nnnaiuder of tlunr compatriots, through 
 a false representation, not only ot the facts, but of the intentions of 
 the British Government. These nu'ans being employed to lead the 
 American Senatt; into a decision hostile to Cireat Britain, what is 
 the dij)lomatic position of Great Britain at Washington? No otHcial 
 step taken, or communication nuule ; — the Kepn'sentive — the au- 
 thorative and titular represisntative of (ireat Britain removcnl, and 
 the Chai'yc d Affaires, ml interim, not nurely left without in- 
 struclons, but having positive Instructions to do nothing! 
 
 Looking upon this state of things, no less unwonted than un- 
 accountable, it cannot fail to strike and to startle the in([uirer, that 
 there is recorded in the Fonjign OHice, as dated, and therefore 
 despatched, on the I4th of October, (and therefore one mouth and 
 twenty-two days before the opening of the Session), a despatch 
 calling upon the American Government to accept the Award ; and 
 at the same time, dealing in a most conclusive and authoritative 
 manner with the objections raised against it by the State of Maine. 
 But this despatch docs not arrive at Washington until after the 
 
 Ilriti-li I'lmiv 
 .1 .Ml.iir. •. left in- 
 -.1111. t.cl 1.. .In 11" 
 II. nil'. 
 
 II.' i.l ..I 111. 
 
 . v.i.ihi.ri ..| till 
 .\»iii.l, rii:..i'.l..l 
 uUl.i^ hi.' Ill II.. 
 I''.il. i.'lilllli.'i. 
 
«iM 
 
 i 
 
 A I 
 
 1 I 
 
 Mi-»*Ht(t' l<> 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 re<piest to it tlie reader's most serious atten- 
 tion. It conunences with instructing the Charf/d d' Affaires to ad- 
 dress, for the first time, an official communication to tlie American 
 Secretary of State, stating the King of Great Britain's assent to 
 the Award of the King of Holland, and re(|uiring the American 
 
 * It is singular, that, (lurinrr t)ic course of this iicgociation, Lord Pahncrston has written not 
 quite one despatch a year; which lias arrived suhsc(|iiently to the meeting of the Session, — 
 oud, of course, to tiie delivery of the President's Message. 
 
 Hull' of Uiiuot Datfur 
 
 Lurd raluirr>ion'!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 ar<jjue the (piestion. 'J'lu! 
 introduction of nrj^nment in this sta<j;(.' of the proceedings is a settino- 
 aside of the ([ueslion lA' ri<j;ht and treaty stipulation, upon which it 
 it now rested ; but the argunumts themselves are conclusive. Lord 
 Palmerston efl'ectually disjjroves, from their own mouths, the 
 frivolous — (were tin; subject less grave, I should say — ludicrous) 
 obj(!ctions, put forth by the o])pon(!nts of this measure. These 
 arguments, employed at an (earlier date, woidd have left no room 
 for discussion ; and, had Lord Palmerston left the Minister -at 
 Wasidngton free to use his own judgmei.t, his Lordship never 
 would have penned them, because they would not have failed to 
 have been used by the Minister himself, — and urged at the moment 
 when they Avere called for, and would have been of use. Uy delaying 
 to instruct, and by forbidding* to discuss, Lord Palmerston allowed 
 the opposition to get root, and to gain head ; reserving to himself 
 the opportunity of appearing to advocate British rights, when that 
 advocacy Avould be of no avail, — and of overthrowing, triuukphuntly, 
 the American fallacies, after thes-j fallacies had produced their efi'ect. 
 This despatch, remaining in the Foreign office, or pi'odnced to Par- 
 liament, becomes pro(tf of his ability ; it stands a record of his zeal 
 for British interests, — "the polar star — the leading princijde of his 
 " policy," and tends further to the complication of this, tlie simplest 
 of all possible (piestions, as it stood on the 10th of January: — an 
 arbitration, sealed, signed, and delivered to parties mutually bound 
 to abide by it. 
 
 Nearly twelve months had bec^n allowed, as we have seen, to 
 elapse, before the British Minister had been permitted to receive any 
 instructions on the sul)ject of the Award. On the 18th Decend)er 
 the instructions just referred to had been received ; and feeble, con- 
 tradictory, and untimely as they arc, not a month — a week — a day — 
 
 i 
 
 r<l l*iitii(f-r«t»ii'a 
 llr"! Ill •inli'li .if 
 <>a 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 
 <if oil iiitcnlioii on 
 till' part of Lonl 
 Pftlmprston to si t 
 d-^itlotlii' Awunl. 
 
 l^t.-Mr. liunk- 
 hftiA nut ocn- 
 
 50 
 
 " Majesty's Government might not be indisposed to enter into 
 " negociation with this Government, with a view to eiFect some 
 " modification by a reciprocal exchange and concession." The con- 
 sequence of this step, as may be expected, immediately appears : — 
 the next despatch, given in extract,* commences " It is with great 
 *' regret, that I announce to your Lordship, that the Senate has 
 " refiiscd to sanction the acquiescence, &c." 
 
 We have thus arrived at tlic conclusion of the first phase of 
 this negociation : — viz. the rejection, by the Senate of the United 
 States, of the Award of the King of Holland, brought about, as I 
 conceive no impartial man who will study even these documents, 
 (selected, separated, and misplaced as they are,) can hesitate to admit, 
 by the acts, positive and negative, of the British Minister. During 
 the eighteen months of suspense and indecision, no step was taken 
 by Great Britain, in any way calculated to bring about an adjust- 
 ment of the difference : every imaginable step was taken to pre- 
 vent it. There is a continuous chain of evidence proving the 
 favourable disposition, during seventeen months, (until the commu- 
 nication of the second despatch of October 14th), of the majority 
 of the Congress and Senate, and of the Pi'csident, towards the 
 adoption of the Award. 
 
 Before leaving this part of the question, I will refer to- and 
 establish three collateral points, — as confirmatory of these con- 
 clusions. 
 
 First, the absence of all censure of ]Mr. Bankhead for the 
 communication of the second despatch of October 14th ; even after 
 the result of that conununication hinl appeared, in the rejection of 
 the Award. Secondly, the indisposition of the Senate to reject 
 the Award, up to the j)criod of iVIr. Bankhcad's communication. 
 Thirdly, the language of Lord Pahnerston in the House of Commons, 
 as entirely corroborative of the views here Q-ivcn of liis intentions 
 in this matter. 
 
 First. — Mr. Bankliead, in his despatch of June the 13th, as in 
 his previous despatches, has expressed his conviction that the de- 
 cision of the Senate Avoukl be favourable to the adoption of ilio Award. 
 It is upon this ground tliat he justifies, it is this fact that he assigns as 
 the motive for, his communication of what he terms " the ulterior 
 
 * As each despatch refers exclusively to one subject, the presentation of extracts from 
 despatches, instead of entire despatches, requires explanation. 
 
51 
 
 > 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 lea<l. N^ot content 
 with this, he now reasons against the Award he had before adopted, 
 and proposes a new negociation ; — after having declared any hew 
 ncgociation *' utterly hopeless." 
 
 Ail<i|<(loii l>v (it, 
 llrllnln of iIk Inn 
 
 Americm". 
 
60 
 
 
 I: 
 
 I'ritpitAiiN HHil 
 
 i.i.i.iihDnKii.i 
 
 l*rop<K>*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<ini/.ed to he \}*\ of sense -and 
 to oxeente, what is admitted to be iinpraetieable. 
 
 Th(> 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; th<! mode and tiie moment of onr war 
 with America.* 
 
 
 • On ilip ocriirri'lu'o of ilie ovoiits in I\I,iiiio, wliicli have directed tlie attention of England, 
 for the Jirst time, to tliis siilijcct, llio ryes of i-vi-ry one i\t Wasliinjjtoii woru turned to 
 the Ilnssiiin Mission. Tlie Anieriean ncw»|m|)eis in wliieli I reail the iieeonnt of the proceedings 
 in Conj^iess nt tlic elose of the Session, had sivcn ii fidl half of iheir ecdiinins to the details 
 of the fesiivilies at the Russian I'mliasay — and to the niutiial hospitalities of the linrghers 
 of New York, and the olVieers of the I'reneli Steam i'ri;;ate Veloee — who received the 
 liononr of Anu'riean eitizenship. Meanwhile, the (iovernor of New Itriinswick speaks n» a 
 soldier oii^ht ; — the Minister at Washiiiy;tnn as,— -alas !- -llriiish dipionialists are now taught to 
 speak. The (list declares his delerniiiiation and ol)liu;atioiis, " at all hazards, " to resist aggres- 
 sion : — the seeond, l)et;s the Anieriean (Jovernineiit to yield — implores the Governor of New 
 Brunswick to withdraw — declares Kngland to be wholly unprepared for War with any one, far less 
 with the ITnitcd Stales, And, in character with the reinainder of these proceedings, the 
 Secretary of Legation is |)uhliely stated in the newspapers to have asserted that the Governor 
 of a British province had exceeded ids instructions; and that he would lie recalled. 
 
 f * ' 
 6'- 1 
 
 w 
 
PAKT VI. 
 
 RECAIMTULATION-- VIOLATION OF NATIONAL COMPACT — 
 IlKTllAYAL HY TIIK FOIIKKJN SKCIIKTAIIY OF TIIK IMJULIC 
 INTKIIKSTS— IMS ASSUMPTION OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL 
 POWKll-ONLY UKM IIDV, I M PKACII M KNT. 
 
 '• iUCil A MAN IS A ri'lll.lC KNI'.MY, Wlin s Ms Till: 1 iilMiA lliiNN <ii' run I'HACK AMI tOMMlIN SAl'liTT 
 
 (IF NATMINN.' — liilM, /I.ikV d. ( Ad/i. xi: 
 
 ;laM(l, 
 
 10(1 to 
 
 Icdiiigs 
 
 ilitails 
 
 IrgluTS 
 
 |l tite 
 
 as a 
 
 lilt to 
 
 rgrcs- 
 
 Ncw 
 
 ir less 
 
 lie 
 
 Titor 
 
 Groat IJntiiin and tlic Unilcd Stiitcn am I)oim«I, hy thv Treaty 
 oi" (ilicnt, to Hiihmit (liircn.'iiccH rcHpcctiii}^ the JJouudary to an 
 Arbiter, and to In* l)oimd l>y 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<i;ation of all international ties sid)sisting 
 betWiun thos(! States. 
 
 Tlu! two (iovernnients have sin;ne<l a convention, on the 29th 
 Septend)i'r, 1827, executory of tin; stipnlation of the Treaty of (iherit, 
 and binding themselves to accept, as final and conclusive, the 
 Award which the Arbiter shotdd pronounc-e ; and to carry it, 
 without reserve, into innnediate execution. This interinitional 
 conipa(!t had solely reference to, and was to be fulfdled in, the 
 single act of the adoption of the Award, when rendered. * 
 
 In conformity with this pid)lic deed, and on the faith of these 
 obligations, the King of Holland was requested by the High Parties 
 "to be pleased to take upon hinisi^lf the arbitratiim of their difler- 
 "tJnces;" and that prince; did so uiulertakc that oflice. 
 ^ On thv. 10th of Jantiary, IH.'il, tin; King of HoUaiul pro- 
 nounced his decision. 
 
 The King of Glreat Britain immediately expressed to the King 
 of Holland, his ac(iuiescence in that decision. 
 
76 
 
 •III! :i 
 ':'! ' 
 
 it 
 
 If 
 
 kit 
 
 The King of Great Britain did not so express to the United 
 States, his acquiescence in that decision. 
 
 The United States made no communication on the subject, 
 either to the King of Holland or to the British Government. 
 
 In December, 1831, the British Government communicated to 
 the United States the acceptance of the Award by Great Britain, 
 and requested to know what the United States proposed to do. 
 
 The United States gave no answer. 
 
 In the month of July, 1832, the Senate of the United States 
 advised the President not to accept the Award ; and also advised 
 him to open a new negociation with Great Britain. 
 
 Communication to that effect was made in July 21st, 1832. 
 
 On April 14th, 1833, after an interval of nine months from 
 the period of the American communication, and two years and three 
 months after the rendering of the Award, the receipt of this com. 
 munication is acknowledged by the British Government ; — the 
 setting aside of the Award, by America, acquiesced in ; and 
 a proposal for new negociations adopted. 
 
 On the 29th December, 1835, the English Government signi- 
 fied to tlie American Government, that it distinctly withdrew its 
 assent to the Award of the King of Holland, which it then 
 designates as a *' territorial compromise, recommended." 
 
 From April 1833, to January 1838, sixteen notes are ex- 
 changed between the British Minister at Washington, and tlie 
 American Secretary of State, containing proposals for negociation — 
 counter-proposals — refusals — and counter-refusals. 
 
 On the 10th of January, 1838, the British Minister at 
 Washington receives, from the principal Secretary of State for 
 Foreign Affairs, a despatch containing these words:—" Both Go- 
 " vcrnments have ao;reed to consider the Award of the King of 
 " Holland as binding on neither party ; and the two Governments 
 " therefore are in this respect as free as they were before the 
 " reference to that Sovereion was made." 
 
 Thus — The British Minister had accepted the Award in the name 
 of the Crown ; had applied to that Award the anterior treaty 
 stipulations; had signified to the King of Holland his acceptance 
 of it ; had signified to the Amcricau Government his acceptance 
 
79^ 
 
 ex- 
 the 
 loii — 
 
 at 
 
 for 
 
 Go- 
 
 g of 
 
 tents 
 
 the 
 
 lame 
 }aty 
 mce 
 ince 
 
 of it. He had not produced it to the House of Commons ; he 
 had resisted in his ministerial capacity the production of it in 
 the House of Commons ; he had refused to assign any reason 
 for the withholding of it. He had obtained the rejection of 
 it by the American Senate — by an intimation that England 
 was not indisposed to open new negociations ; he had sub- 
 mitted to that rejection : he had acceded to a proposition of 
 a new negociation ; he had himself offered projects of negocia- 
 tion : he then withdrew the assent of the British Government 
 from the Award altogether, and finally instructed the Envoy at 
 Washington, that both Governments were entirely absolved 
 from all obligations imposed upon them by the Award, and 
 consequently imposed upon them by the Convention of 1827 
 and the Treaty of 1814 
 
 Further — He had suffered a long series of aggressions against the 
 rights of Great Britain, and the prerogative and authority of 
 the Crown, to be perpetrated without obtaining satisfaction, or 
 demanding it; without making remonstrance, or even commu- 
 nication, to the Government by whose subjects these crimes 
 were committed, until he had encouraged, sanctioned, and fully 
 established, a determined spirit of hostility to the fulfilment of 
 the common obligations of the two States, and until he had 
 diplomatically set aside the i-ights of Great Britain in that 
 question. He had, moreover, by his positive declarations in 
 the House of Commons, excited the American people and 
 Government to resist the Award, had fomented a spirit of 
 hostility, and encouraged the outrages of the population border- 
 ing on the disputed Boundary. 
 
 But — The Award of the King of Holland, founded as it is on 
 international compact, remains binding upon this country, and 
 upon the United States, so long as both are not absolved from 
 such obligations by the same authority as that by Avliicli they 
 were contracted. 
 
 Until such compact is entered into, the proposal of a new 
 negociation on the part of a British Minister, being an attempt 
 to set aside an act, the fulfilment of a convention, is an assump- 
 tion of the prerogatives of the Crown. It is therefore illegal, 
 and is not binding on Great Britain. 
 
 4 
 
78 
 
 The public safety requires an immediate inquiry into the con- 
 duct of the principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in regard 
 to this question ; and if it appears that by his acts, or his negligence, 
 or even his ignorance, these alarming and unfortuate results have 
 been brought about, then are the means furnished, by which to 
 restore our national position, and to transfer, from the Parliament 
 and the Crown, to the guilty Minister, the responsibility of such 
 acts, by his impeachment and condemnation. 
 
PART VII. 
 
 CONSEQUENCES TO EUROPE AND AMERICA, OF THE ABAN- 
 DONMENT OF THE AWARD. 
 
 " THE PAITH OF TIIEATIES TS INTEIIESTINO, NOT OM.V TO THE CONTRACTING PARTIES, BUT LIKEWISE 
 TO ALL NATIONS, AND TO TlIE UNIVEIISAL SOCIETY OF MANKIKU.' — r,i»c(. 
 
 If the previous conclusions are correctly drawn from the facts 
 stated in the papers presented to Parliament, — the setting aside of 
 the Award involves the national disgrace and dishonour of Great 
 Britain, and is an act of state treason. 
 
 Are the Government and people of the United States desirous to 
 take advantage of, and prepared to profit by, such an act ? Arc they 
 prepared to ally themselves to the diplomatic scheme of which it is 
 apart? — to associate themselves widi treason and dishonour; to 
 become the tools of Russian ambition ; and so labour to effect the 
 downfall of Great Britoin ? 
 
 Is England prepare. 1 to violate, before the eyes of mankind, 
 her national honour, to sacrifice her rights ; to adopt the guilt of a 
 dishonest servant; and, by the prostitution of her j)Ower, to confirm 
 those gigantic projocts of am'ition, whicii tend to place in common 
 jeopardy, her ov, n power, and the liberties of mankind? 
 
 Is America in this matter the orii/inator of a policy which she 
 has grasped, — or the instrument of an ambition by which she is 
 used ? 
 
 Is England a party to the proceedings in which she is involved, 
 — or the sufferer from a compact of which she is iynorant ? 
 
 Have either of the Nations deliberately examined and tho- 
 roughly comprehended the subject in debate ; the proceedings of 
 their Governments, or their respective rights and obligations? 
 
 g.HJB^.iWBW-l-^'- 
 
80 
 
 .1 • 
 
 ■) 1 ! 
 
 Does either comprehend the steps they are now taking — the point 
 to which they are now tending — the policy by which tliey are now 
 influenced — the objects for which that influence is now exerted ? 
 
 These points are more particuhirly deserving of the attention 
 of America, seeing that she is the aggressive party, — and, though 
 the disasters may be equal to each, the principal guilt of this 
 unnatural alliance will rest with her. 
 
 But " no American Statesman," it will be said, " has contemplated 
 such results ; there is no desire in the American people for such a 
 catastrophe ; their minds are absorbed in the pursuits of gain — their 
 horizon does not e^ctend to the politics of Europe. The general 
 feeling of the Union was in favour of the adoption of the Award, 
 even if it had not been a matter of treaty, ^t has been set aside 
 by a process of which the nation knows nothing, and in which it 
 was not interested ; and therefore there is no ground whati'ver for 
 the supposition that War between the two countries must ensue, — 
 still less for the assumption tliat union of ends, or concert of means, 
 should be introduced or established between our republican institu- 
 tions and federal union, and tlie despotic autocrat of a military 
 empire." 
 
 It is precisely because the American nation has not understood 
 the politics of Europe— it is precisely because the American States- 
 men have not grappled with this (piestion in its larger diplomatic 
 bearings, nor have penetrated to its individual and moral source — 
 that the United States find themselves at this moment committed, — 
 as they are committed, to a career of whicli they no more compre- 
 hend the conclusion, than they can account for the progress they 
 have made. 
 
 But, it is because they have gone so far, without calculation, and 
 without defined o])ject, that the obligation is imposed upon them, as 
 responsible agents, as members of a free Slate, as originators of a new 
 national type and destiny,— to examini! with solenmity the jx.sition 
 in which they stand ; to scrutinize the motives by which they are 
 actuated ; to compare boldly the temptations with which they 
 an; surrounded, with the consuciuences with which they are threat- 
 ened ; and, at once, to make the election between a futurity of justice 
 and of peace, or an existence of injustice and convidsion. 
 
81 
 
 lid 
 as 
 
 :\V 
 
 on 
 
 ce 
 
 The steps by wliich Amorica has advanced to the present posi- 
 tion of antagonism witli Cireat Britain, have been ab-eady traced : — 
 they have not been taken as the result of a fixed resolve — they seem 
 rather unpremeditated, and almost involuntary ; so that her guilt 
 of aggression — as that of England in submission — has been brought 
 about by the art of a British Minister, the enemy no less of his 
 country than of the United States: by the disavowal of vhosc acts, 
 England and America may at once be restored to amity and good- 
 will ; tlu^ honour of the one, as of the other, retrieved, and the 
 misfortunes threatening both, — averted. 
 
 In thus encroaching upon the undefended and unsupported 
 rights of (ireat Britain, the American diplomatists have followed 
 the natural course of business — the common laws of nature. As 
 the able and the active gain upon the weak and the inert ; as 
 the weight of the solid mass presses upon the slight and yielding 
 substance; : so have the American diplomatists gained from their 
 antagonists, and ])rcsscd upon their neighbours ; occu])ied the posi- 
 tions she has abandoned, aiul disregarded the power of which she 
 was unconscious. 
 
 To proceed in this liiu', recpiired neither concert nor plan ; and 
 the range of their political vision probably never extended beyond 
 personal satisfaction in a supposed trial of strength ; or, at the 
 furthest, an ultimate; incorporation of some British [)rovinces, wliich 
 England might appear to be more disposed to reliiupiish, than 
 America to acipiire. 
 
 A larger view, however, of these subjects, [jrescnts other 
 elements of calculation, and other results. These are, tiie innbility 
 to resist an impulse! given ; — to disguise the fact, or to count(!ract the 
 effect, of unjust advantages gaiiud on one side, and dishonourable 
 sacrifices incurred on the otiier: lieuce the growth of national 
 hatred betwcMU tlu; two ]ieopl(! ; the advancement of the one to a 
 position which the other will not be able to endure, — by which its 
 patience will Ix; exhausted, and its vengeance aroused ; the conse- 
 ipient collision of the two States, and the emidoyment of the whole 
 resources of the one, for the destruction of the other. Jiesides, 
 there is the action of the policy of other States upon these animosi- 
 ties, and the [irospects of ambition opened to the (jreat Nations of 
 Europi', in the lowering of the consideration, in the weakening of 
 
 X 
 
82 
 
 ''' • ; 
 
 riii' 
 
 i] 
 
 the power, in the diminution of the commerce, in the })rostration 
 of the maritime strength, of one or other of the Anglo-Saxon 
 Nations ; and above all, in their mutual animosities and reciprocal 
 destruction. * 
 
 To these calamities both parties arc led by the setting aside of 
 the decision of the Boundary (piestion ; which cannot be sot aside 
 except by a violation of our honour ; which, if set aside, would 
 only be so, through the betrayal by a British Minister, of British 
 rights — and through design on the part of the American Govern- 
 ment to do what is dishonest, and to gain what is unjust. On this 
 point, let us not deceive ourselves : there is no interval between the 
 adoption of that Award, and tlio phuiging of both nations into a 
 career of animosity and injustice, involving reciprocal disasters, and 
 ending in the certainty of tlu; destruction of one, and probably 
 in the ruin of both, 
 
 I therefore now come to the question, — What, to the United 
 States, will be the consequences of entering upon this career? 
 
 As, however, they mp.y not feel, in regard to England, the 
 impossibility of her adopting in this matter a middle course ; as, 
 by the proposition of J^ord Palnierston for a new commission, they 
 may be deceived even now into the idea that England will yield to 
 them the territory in dispute ; it may be advantageous to state the 
 grounds upon which I conceive tliat the submission of England 
 to the progress of the United States northward, must lead to 
 collision witli the United States, or to the downfall of the British 
 power, — the greatest ])ossible disaster, as I conceive, that could 
 befall the United States. 
 
 These conqilications have arisen solely from the secresy in which 
 the (piestion has Ijeen involved, from the total ignorance of tlu; 
 subject in the House of Commons, and from the general apathy of 
 the Nati- ■ in Jl (juestions of foreign policy. There has existe'd, 
 througlioit tlie British ^ ition, a great regard and profound at- 
 taclunei for the American people; a disinclination to construe 
 any doubtful fact unfavourably to them ; an earnest desire to 
 preserve the closest union of political interests, of commercial in- 
 terchange, and national sympatliy. 
 
 These elements are now all changed : and whoever has A/atched 
 the tendency of opinion in England, must have perceived a turn 
 
iiicli 
 tlu; 
 of 
 
 |t(d, 
 tit- 
 
 Tiie 
 
 to 
 
 in- 
 
 lied 
 Lirn 
 
 83 
 
 in its direction, — must be prepared for the setting of a strong tide in 
 a counter sense, and for a re-action, strong, perhaps heedless, in 
 proportion to the tameness and the extent of past endurance. 
 
 Tills, I say, is the feeling arising in this country with regard to 
 its general position ; but its recovery.) energies will be directed most 
 immediately, and Avith most eft'ect, against the United States' prr- 
 severance in its present career. That is the question most innnediate, 
 most sensibly touching us; redoubled hate will spring from outraged 
 afi'ections : and retaliation was never yet slow to follow insults cast 
 upon a powerful people in its mother tongue. England will not be 
 more astounded herself at the energy Avhich she will put forth, than 
 America, at the vengeance she will have so heedlessly aroused. 
 
 The language of the Provincial Senate of Nova Scotia, and 
 its decision, regardless and careless of the opinions of England, 
 furnish the proof of what I say, and are the earnest of what I 
 prognosticate. 
 
 But there is another consideration which Avill tend in no slight 
 decree to unchain the slumberin<>- 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<f frater- 
 nal yearnings spread, linking their hearts ? Is it possible that one or 
 both of them, forgetful of the past, and heedless of the future, — 
 deaf to the promptings of charity, to the dictates of religion, to 
 the voice of honour, and the suggestions of policy, should rush 
 into mutual destruction ? Is it possible that, with infirmity of mind 
 equal to such extravagance of passion, they should so rush without 
 an intention 1 Will they tear down, labouring for their own destruc- 
 tion, the large prospects of their future fortunes ; — raise the Sclavonic 
 
\ i 
 
 above the English tongue ; and place, by the crimes of freedom, the 
 sceptre of the worid in a despot's hands ? 
 
 But it is a vain and useless concession to make, that England 
 must perish, because America is unjust : England, the mother of 
 Nations, the parent of Freedom, and the wielder of the Trident, 
 has her destinies within her own breast. 
 
 True it is, that, for a season, she has been forgetful of herself 
 In the benumbing confidence of security, in the lethargic shadow 
 of repose, she has become heedless of those common interests that 
 sanctify the name of country, and which are wisely given as the 
 spur to individual energy, in the pride of national glor* and renown. 
 
 Thus has confidence m her power been lost, not only in the 
 estimation of mankind, but in her own. Let however visible danger 
 threaten from without, — let some great disaster fall on this land, — she 
 would arise again, but with a power far beyond that which 
 heretofore she has ever wielded : for her assailants have aroused 
 against themselves, the fears or the vengeance of every race of the 
 old world and the new. Break but the spell that binds England to 
 an ally stained with every crime, and she will no longer credit the 
 lie of her own weakness — that sole strength and confidence of 
 her foes. 
 
 1 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 1 1 
 
 PART I. 
 
 No. 1. 
 Extract from tub Fourth Articlu or thb Treaty or Ghent,* 1814. 
 " It is further agreed that in the event of the two Commissioners diilcring upon all 
 or any of the mnttcrs so referred to them, or in the event of both or either of tfiR said 
 Commissioners refusing or declining, or wilfully omitting to act ns such, thev shall make, 
 jointly or separately, report or reports, as well to the Government of llis Britannic 
 Majesty as to that of the United States, stating in detail the points on which they differ, 
 tua the grounds upon M'hich their respective opinions have been formed, or the ground* 
 upon which they, or ef'her of them, have so refused, declined, or omitted to act. And 
 His Britannic Majesty and the Government of the United States hereby agree to refer 
 the Report or Ueports of the said Commissioners to some friendly Sovereign or State, to 
 be then named for that purpose, and who shall be requested to decide on the difTcrcneeB 
 which may be stated in the said Ucport or Ueports, or upon the Report of one Com- 
 missioner, together with the grounds upon which the other Commissioner shall have 
 refused, declined, or omitted to act, ns the case may be. And if the Commissioner so 
 refusing, declining, or omitting to act, shall also wiltully omit to state the grounds upon 
 which he has so done, in such manner that the said statement may be referred to such 
 friendly Sovereign or State, together with the Report of such other Commissioner, that 
 auch Sovereign or State shall decide, cxpartc, upon the said Report alone; and His 
 Brilannic Majesty an i Ihr Government of the Uniled Slates engage to consider the decision 
 <(f auch friendly Sovereign or State as final and conclusive on all the matters so re/erred. 
 
 No. 2. 
 Extracts from a Convention between His Britannick Majesty and thb 
 United States uf America, relative to the reference to Arbitration 
 of tub disputed points under the Fifth Article of the Treaty of 
 Ghent. Signed at London, September 29, 1827. 
 
 Article I. 
 
 *' It is agreed that the points of difference which have arisen in the settlement of 
 the boundary between the British and American dominions, as described in the Fifth 
 Article of the Treaty of Ghent, shall be referred, as therein provided, to some friendly 
 Sovereign or State, who shall be invited to investigate, and make a decision upon such 
 points of difference. 
 
 " The two contracting powers engage to proceed in concert to the choice of such 
 friendly Sovereign or State, as soon as the ratifications of this Convention shall have 
 been exchanged, and to use their best endeavours to obtain a decision, if practicable, 
 within two years afler the arbiter shall have signified his consent to act as such." 
 
 * In the Papen presented to Parliament there is the Fifih Article of the Treaty of Ghent, whirh hat reference to 
 the ditputed Boundary between New Brunewick and the Stale of Maine ; but the Fifih Article of the Treaty of Ghent, 
 ia n far as the aub^equent negocialions are concerned, tioea no more than rej'ir to the Fourth Article, wherein the 
 conditions of the reference to arbitration are atipulated. The omission of this important act ia here supplied ; and that 
 omission ia tlie more remarkable, seeing that the ground assumed by the United States, and by Lord I'almers'on, for 
 tetling aside the award of the King of Holland, is, that he. instead of selecting one of the two lines proposed by the 
 parties, had laid down another line. Now, the Treaiy of Ghent, as clearly as words can express, determine* that the 
 aitfiirenni which might arise, of whatever kind, were to be settled by the award of the arbiter. 
 
 (a) 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 Aktioli VII. 
 ** The decision of the trbiter, when given, shall be taken u final and eonclusive ( 
 and it shall be carried, without reserve, into immediate effect, hj Commissioner* 
 appointed for that purpose by the contracting parties." 
 
 No. S. 
 
 Extracts from thr award of thb Kino of Holland. 
 
 " Animj du d^air sincere de r^pondre par une decision scrupuleuse et impartiale, i la 
 oonflance qu'elle Nous oni t^moign^e, et de leur doiiner ainsi un nouveau gage du haut 
 prix que nous y attachons : — 
 
 "Ayaiit i cet eifet d&tnent examine et mi!krement pes^ le contenu du premier expose 
 ainsi que de \'tx\)on6 d^finitif du dit diifi^rend, que nous ont respectivement remis, le 
 I Avril de I'ann^e 1830, 1'Ambassadeur Extraordinaire ct Pl^nipotentiaire de Sa Maiest^ 
 Britannique, et I'Envoy^ Extraordinaire et Ministre Pl^nipotentiaire des Etats Unis 
 d'Am^rique, avec toutes les pieces qui y ont ^l^ jointes ft I'appui t 
 
 " Voulant accomplir aujourd'hui Ics obligations que nous venons de contracter par 
 I'acceptation des fonrtions d'Arbiirateur dans le susdit difKrend, en portant ft la 
 connnissance des deux Hautes Parties int^ress^es le r^sultat de Notre examen et Notre 
 opinion sur les trois points dans Icsquels se divisc de leurcommun accord la contestation." 
 
 "D^clarons que, — 
 
 "Quant au premier point, savolr, la question. Quel est I'endroit d^sign^ dans ler 
 Trait^s comme I'angle nord-oucst de la Nouvelle Econse, et quels sont les Highlands 
 s^parant les Rivieres qui s( J^chargent dans le Fleuve St Laurent, de celles tombantdana 
 I'Oc^an Atlantique, le long desqiiels doit 6tre tir^e la Ligne de Limites depuis cet angle 
 jusqu'ft la source nord-ouest de la Riviere Connecticut?" 
 
 [After enumerating twenty-eight grounds of his award on this first point, the 
 Document proceeds :] 
 
 " Nous sommes d'avis, — 
 
 "Qu'il conviendra d'adopter pour limite des deux ^tats une ligne tir^e droit au nord 
 depuis la source de la Kivi^re St. Croix jusqu'au point ou elle coupe le milieu du thalweg 
 de la Riviere St. John ; de-la le milieu du thalweg de cette rivi&re, en la remontant 
 jusqu'au point oh la Riviere St. Francis se d^charge dans la Riviere St. John ; de-lft le 
 milieu du thalweg de la Riviere St. Francis, en la remontant jusqu'ft la source de sa 
 branche la plus sud-ouest, laquelle source nous indiquons sur la Carte (A) par la lettre 
 (X) authenliqu^ par la signature de Notre Ministre des Affaires Etrang^res; de-la une 
 liene tiree droit ft I'ouest jusqu'au point ou elle se r^-unit ft la ligne reciam^e par les Etata 
 Unis d'Am^rique, et trac^e sur la Carte (A) ; de-lft cette ligne jusqu'au point oh, d'apris 
 cette carte, elle coincide avec cellc demandee par la Grande Br^tagne ; et de-lft ligne 
 indiquee sur la dite carte par les deux Puissances, jusqu'ft la source la plus nord-ouest 
 de la Riviere Connecticut : 
 
 "Quant au second point, savoir, la question, quelle est la source la plus nord-ouest 
 (north- westernmost head) de la Riviere Connecticut ?" 
 
 [Five Grounds enumerated] — '* 
 
 "Nous sommes d'avis, — 
 
 "Que le ruisseau situe le plus au nord-ouest de ceux qui coulent dans le plus septen- 
 trional des trois lacs, dont le dernier orte le nom de Connecticut Lake, doit £tre 
 consid^re comme la source la plus nord-ouest (north-westernmost head) du Connecticut. 
 
 "Et quant au troisieme point, savoir, la question. Quelle est la limite ft tracer depuis 
 la Riviere Connecticut le long du parallele du quarante-cinq degr^ de latitude septen- 
 trionale jusqu'au Fleuve St. Laurent, nomrn^ dans les Traites Iroquoi ou Cataraguy?" 
 
 [Three Grounds enumerated] — 
 
 "Nous sommes d'avis, — * 
 
 * The Ncond ponnd of objection taken to the iward by the State of Maine and Lord Valmenton, ii that the King of 
 Holland hail not decided, but only recommended a line, and that if he had decided at all, he had only decided on two oM 
 of three points aubmitled to him. It will be leen from then extract* that the award wu ai formal a* poiaible, and that 
 the iame form* and teim* are equally applied to the three point*. 
 
 I I 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 U 
 ut 
 
 ti 
 
 le 
 t6 
 lis 
 
 ur 
 
 la 
 
 re 
 » 
 
 er 
 li 
 
 as 
 
 ;ie 
 
 lie 
 
 rd 
 
 ** Qu'il conviendre de procMer i de noiivrlln operation* pour m^turer la latitude 
 obaervfe, afln de tracer la limite depuit la Riviere Connecticut, ie long du parailile du 
 quarante-cinq degr^ de latitude Mptentrionale, juiqu'nu Fleuve 8t. Laurent, nomm6 dana 
 lea Trait^t Iroquoii ou Cntaragny ; de maniire cependant, au'cn tout caa, i I'endroit dit 
 Roui«'i Point, le territoire dea Etaf Unia d'Am^rique a'etendra juiqu'au fort qui a'j 
 trouve ^tabli, et comprendra ce Fort et ion rayon kilom^ti ique. 
 
 "Ainii faitet donn^noui Notre Sceau Royal, k la llaye, ce Dix Janvier, de I'an de Grace 
 Mil Huit Cent Trente-un, et de Notre Rigne de Dix-huitiime. 
 
 " (8ign^) GUILLAUMB. 
 " Le Mini»tre rlea AflPairea Etrangires, 
 
 " (Signd) VERSTOLK DE SOELEN.** 
 
 PART IV. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 VucouhI Jt^u'mertlon to Charlti Bankhead, Esq. 
 
 •• Sir, 
 
 " Foreign Office, October 14, 18SI. 
 
 *'With reference to my deapatch of February 9, of this year, to Mr. Vnnqhan, on 
 the subject of the award of His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, upon t'ui- question 
 of the disputed boundary, submitted by Great Britain and the United States of America 
 to the arbitration of that Sovereign, I am commanded by the King to instruct you to 
 address a note to the American Secretary of State, to the following effect. 
 
 " Mr. Livingston is doubtless aware that his predecessor in office was informed, 
 verbally, by Mr. Vaughan, that the King, our Master, upon the receipt of the instrument 
 by which the award of the King of the Netherlands was communicated to the British 
 Government, had considered himself bound, in fulfilment of the obligations which he 
 had contracted by the terms of the Convention of arbitration of the 29th September, 
 1827, to express to His Netherland Majesty, Ilis Majesty's assent to that award. 
 
 " It appears to his Majesty's Government, that the time is now arrived, when rx final 
 understanding between the British and American Governments, on the subject of that 
 •ward, and on the measures necessary to be taken for carrying it into effect, ought no 
 longer to be delayed: and I am accordingly to direct that, in making to the American 
 Secretary of State, the present more formal communication of the assent of His Majesty 
 to the decision of His Netherland Majesty, you enquire of Mr. Livins;ston whether his 
 Government are now ready to proceed, conjointly with that of Great Britain, to the 
 nomination of Commissioners for marking out the boundary between the possessions of 
 His Majesty in North America, and those of the United States, agreeably to His 
 Netherland Majesty's award. 
 
 " His Majesty's Government are not ignorant that the Minister of the United 
 States of America residing at the Hague, immediately upon the receipt of the award of 
 His Netherland Majesty, protested against that award, on the ground that the arbitrator 
 had therein exceedc:d the powers conferred upon him by the parties to the arbitration. 
 But that protest was avowedly made without instructions from Washington, and His 
 Muesty is persuaded that the Government of the United States, influenced, like His 
 Majesty, by a sincere determination to give a fair and full effect to the spirit and inten- 
 tion of their engagements, no less than by an anxious desire to settle this long pending 
 difference between the two Governments, in the only way which the experience of so 
 many years has shewn to be practicable, will not hesitate to accept the award of His 
 Netherland Majesty. 
 
 " In deciding to give his own assent to this award, for the reasons above stated. His 
 Majesty was not insensible to the sacrifice which he was thus making of a most impor- 
 tant portion of those claims, of the justice of which, in their full extent, His Majesty 
 continues to be, as he has always been, entirely satisfied. 
 
 << It was impossible for His Majesty to see without deep regret, that, on one branch 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 of the British claims, the award deprived the British Crown of a large tract of coiintrjr, 
 to which it had long been held to be entitled ; while, on another branch of the ciuims, that 
 award, at the same time that it pronounced in favour of the principle of demarcation for 
 which Great Britain contended, introduced a special modification of that principle for the 
 convenience and advantage of the United States, without offering to Great Britain any 
 compensation for the loss thus occasioned to her. 
 
 " But these were not considerations by which His Majesty thought himself at 
 liberty to be influenced, in deciding the question of his acceptance or rejection of the 
 decision of His Netherland Majesty. In whatever degree His Majesty's wishes or ex- 
 pectations may have been disappointed by that decision. His Majesty did not hesitate to 
 act upon the stipulation contained in the Vllth Article of the Convention of Arbitration, 
 that ' the decision of the arbiter, when given, shall be taken to be final and conclusive;' 
 and His Majesty fulfilled this duty with the greater cheerfulness, from the confident 
 hope that in thus completing the engagement which he had contracted, he was finally 
 setting at rest a dispute which had been so long and so hopelessly agitated between the 
 two Governments, to the interruption of that perfect agreement and harmony on all 
 points, which it is His Majesty's sincere desire to see permanently established between 
 Great Britain and the United States of America. 
 
 " His Majesty would indeed be deeply grieved, if he could suppose that the 
 Government of the United States could hesitate to adopt the same course which His 
 Majesty has pursued on this occasion. For what other prospect of an adjustment of 
 this long pending difference would then remain? Commissioners, since the Treaty of 
 1783, have found it impossible to reconcile the description of the boundary contained in 
 that Treaty, with the real features of the country ascertained by actual survey; and the 
 hopelessness of establishing absolutely, in favour of either party, the point vrhich has 
 thus, since the year 1783, been the subject of controversy between them, has now 
 received a new confirmation, by the solemn decision of an arbitrator, chosen by both 
 parties, who has pronounced it to be incapable of being established in accordance with 
 the terms of the original Treaty, that Treaty having been drawn up in ignorance of the 
 real features of the country, which it professed to describe. 
 
 " Seeing that there cannot be a settlement of the claims of either party in strict 
 accordance with the Treaty of 1783, what course would remain, even if the choice were 
 now to be made, but that which was agreed upon by the negotiators of the Treaty of 
 Ghent; viz. the adjustment of the differences between the two Governments by means 
 of an Arbitrator? And how unreasonable would it be to object to such an adjustment, 
 because it aimed at settling by compromise, differences pronounced to be otherwise 
 irreconcileable. That such an adjustment, and not a rigid adoption of one of the two 
 claims to the exclusion of all compromise, was the object of the IVth Article of the 
 Treaty of Ghent, will be manifest upon referring to that Article, in which provision is 
 made for a decision of the arbiter which should be final and conclusive, even although 
 the arbiter, owing to the neglect ur refusal of one of the parties, should have had before 
 him only one of the two claims which it would be his province to adjust. Even the 
 official correspondence of the United States furnishes proofs that such was the under- 
 standing in that country, and among parties most interested in the subject, as to what 
 would be the effect of the reference of this question to arbitration. • By arbitration,* 
 (says the Governor of the State of Maine, in a letter to the President of the United 
 States, dated May 19th, 1827, and previously, of course, to the conclusion of the Con- 
 vention), ' I understand a submission to some Foreign Sovereign or State, who will 
 decide at pleasure on the whole subject, who will be under no absolute obligations or 
 effectual restraint, by virtue of the Treaty of 1783.* And it appears, by a letter from 
 the same functionary, dated the 18th of April in the same year, that Mr. Gallatin had 
 used the following words, in a despatch to his Government on the same subject: 'An 
 umpire, whether a king or a farmer, rarely decides on strict principles of law ; he has 
 always a bias to try, if possible, to split the difference:' and the Secretary of State of 
 the United States, in a letter to the Governor of Maine, written after the conclusion of 
 the Treaty of Arbitration (viz. on the 27th of November, 1827), adverting to the above- 
 mentioned exposition, by Mr. Gallatin, of the usual practice of umpires, and to the 
 
APPENDIX. ▼ 
 
 objection which the Governor of Maine had thereupon stated to the mode of settlement 
 by arbitration, while he defends the Convention in spite of the objection of the Governor 
 of Maine, admits that it is an objection to which the Convention is liable. 
 
 ''These passages will be found in the printed paper. No. 171, 30th Congress, Ist 
 Session, at pages 80, 85, and 99. 
 
 " On every ground therefore. His Majesty feels confident that if the Government of 
 thf United States have not already, before your receipt of this despatch, announced their 
 •asent to the award of the King of the Netherlands, they will not hesitate to enable you 
 to apprize His Mmesty's Government of their acquiescence in that decision. The 
 grounds on which His Majesty's acceptance of it was founded, have been fully explained 
 to you in this despatch, and among the motives which influenced His Majesty on that 
 occasion, there was none more powerful than the anxious desire which His Majesty feela 
 to improve and confirm the harmony which so happily exists on other subjects, between 
 Great Britain and the United States of America, by thus settling, once for all, a question 
 of great difficulty, and for which His Majesty is unable to see any other satisfactoiy 
 solution. " 1 am, &c. 
 
 « (Signed) PALMERSTON." 
 
 " C. Bankhead, Esq. 
 ifc. ifc. ifC. 
 
 No. 2. 
 VitcoutU Palmerston to Charles Bankhead, Esq. 
 
 "Sir, "Foreign Office, October 14, 1831. 
 
 '' Tou will learn from the instructions contained in my other despatch of this date, 
 on the subject of the north-eastern boundary, that the communication which you are to 
 make, in the name of His Majesty, to the Government of the United States, extends no 
 fiirther than to propose a simple and unconditional acceptance of the award of the King 
 of the Netherlands by the United States, and the consequent appointment of commis- 
 sioners to carry that award into effect ; such being, in the opinion of His Majesty's Go- 
 vernment, the only course to be pursued at the present stage of the boundary question, 
 consistently with the respective interests and obligations of the two Governments. 
 
 " You are nevertheless authorized to intimate privately io the American Minister, 
 upon any suitable occasion, that His Majesty's Government would not consider the 
 formal acceptance of the award by Great Britain and the United States, as necessarily 
 precluding the two Governments from any future modification of the terms of the 
 arrangement prescribed in that instrument, provided it should appear that any par- 
 ticular parts of the boundary line, thus established, were capable of being improved to 
 the mutual convenience and advantage of both countries ; and you will state, that, afler 
 the award shall have been formally acceded to by both Governments, His Majestjr's 
 Government will be ready to enter, with the Government of the United States, into the 
 consideration of the best means of effecting any such modification by reciprocal exchange 
 and concession. 
 
 " You will however be particularly cautious, in making any communication of this 
 nature, to guard against the possibility of being misunderstood as inviting negotiation as 
 a substitute for the adoption of the award. 
 
 " Until the award is mutually adopted, any such concert between the two Govern- 
 ments would be impossible, because, each party claiming the whole of the territory in 
 dispute, there is no boundary line between the two, with respect to which modifications 
 ' could be proposed by either party ; but when the award is acquiesced in by both sides, 
 and a boundary line is thus established to which both Governments shall have assented, 
 there will then be a basis upon which exchanges or modifications might reciprocally be 
 effected. " I am, &c. 
 
 "Charles Bankhead, Esq. "(Signed) PALMERSTON." 
 
 IfC. ifC. tfC. . : 
 
 (b) ' \ " 
 
n 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 No. 3. 
 Charlea Bankhead, Esq. to Vitcount Palmeraton. — (Received April 23.J 
 
 (Extract.) " Waahtngton, March 29, 1832. 
 
 "The proceedings of the Secret Se.J8ion of the Council and House of Represent- 
 atives of Maine have lately been disclosed to the public, and it appears that an agree- 
 ment has taken place, subscribing, tuider certain conditions, to the decision of the King 
 of the Netherlands. Those conditions, as given in the Maine newspapers, are, that 
 Commissioners, on the part of the United States, and on the part of the State of Maine, 
 are to be appointed in order to negotiate as to an indemnity to be given by the former to 
 the latter, for the loss which she alleges that she would suffer by ner acceptance of the 
 Netherland arbitration. That the result of this commission is to be laid before the legis- 
 lature for their ultimate acceptance or rejection." 
 
 No. 4. 
 
 Charles Bankhead, Esq. to Viscount Palmerston. — (Received July 13.^ 
 
 "My Lord, " Washington, June 13, 1832. 
 
 " I have heretofore delayed the fulfilment of the instructions which I had the honour 
 of receiving from your Lordship, in your despatch of October 14, of last year, respecting 
 the ulterior views which His Majesty's Government might entertain, when the question 
 of boundary, as awarded by the King of the Netherlands, should have been fully acqui- 
 esced in by the United States. 
 
 " I did so, because the Senate in its executive capacity had shewn no disposition to 
 take up the question, and I thought that the slightest intimation on my part, as to the 
 possibdity of future negotiation, would, perhaps, endanger the favourable decision of the 
 Senate upon the original question, which decision, fully and unconditionally declared, 
 was to precede any other step which might be taken thereupon. However, during the 
 last two days, I learnt that the whole boundary question has been under the consider- 
 ation of the Senate ; and Mr. Livingston informed me, that he hoped very soon to be 
 able to communicate to His Majesty's Government the decision of the United States 
 upon it. I thought that this was a proper moment, informally, to intimate to the Secre- 
 tary of State that His Majestjr's Government might not be indisposed to enter into 
 explanations with this Government with a view to effect some modifications by reciprocal 
 exchange and concession, but that the full and unconditional acceptance of the award 
 by this country must precede any such intention on the part of Great Britain. 
 
 " Mr. Livingston asked me (and he did so informally) whether I was authorized to 
 make or to receive any overture before the President had signified his assent to the 
 award ; I replied, of course, in the negative. 
 
 " I hope that your Lordship will not consider that I have exceeded the discretionary 
 power with which you invested me in bringing fonvard, at this moment, the possibility 
 of a future arrangement being effected relative to the north-east boundary. 
 " I have the honour to be, &c. 
 « Viscount Palmerston, « (Signed) CHARLES BANKHEAD." 
 
 ^c. ^c. ifC. 
 
 No. 5. 
 
 Debates in the House of Cohhonb on the North-East Boundary, 
 From 1831 to 1837. — (Extracted from the Mirror of Parliament.) 
 
 MARCH 14, 1831. 
 Mr. Robinson. — "I rise, in pursuance of the notice that I have given, to move 
 that an Address be presented to His Majesty, for a copy of the decision of the King of 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 Vll 
 
 ar 
 
 »g 
 in 
 
 li- 
 
 to 
 he 
 he 
 d, 
 
 le 
 
 Holland on the question of the boundary line of the North-west Coast of America. I 
 shall not occupy much time in addressing the House ; but it is necessary that I should 
 make a short explanation of the nature of my motion. In one of the articles in the 
 Treaty of Peace between this Country and the United States, it was stipulated that 
 Commissioners should be appointed with a view to decide the important question 
 regarding the Boundary line hetween the provinces of New Brunswick and Lower 
 Canada, and the United States of America; and that, in case of difference arising 
 between them, the subject should be referred to the decision of a friendly power, agreed 
 to by both parties. As the Commissioners did not come to a satisfactory conclusion, 
 the matter was referred, in 1827, to the decision of the King of the Netherlands. I 
 understand the decision of that Sovereign has recently been given; and that the 
 Minister of the United States refuses to abide by it. 
 
 " In the agreement between the two Countries, it is stated, that ' in the event of 
 the Commissioners differing upon all or any of the points so refen'cd to them, or in the 
 event of both or either of the Commissioners refusmg or declining or wilfully omitting 
 to act as such, they shall report, jointly or severally, to their respective Governments ; 
 and His Britannic Majesty, and the Government of the United States, hereby agree to 
 refer the report or reports of the said Commissioners to some friendly Sovereign or State 
 to be then named for that purpose, and who shall be requested lo decide on the differ- 
 ences which may be stated m the report or reports.' And further : — 'And His Britannic 
 Majesty, and the Government of the United States, engage to consider the decision 
 of such friendly Sovereign or State to be final and conclusive on all the matters 
 so referred.' 
 
 "After a period of three years, the Monarch to whom the question was referred 
 has decided. The King of Holland was the party to whose judgment the matter was 
 left ; and he, I understand, has declared in favour of the claim of this Country. The 
 House, I think, has a right to know the particulars of this case, and why the matter has 
 not yet been set at rest. This is a most important consideration, as regards some of our 
 most valuable Colonies ; and the particulars ought to be made puolic, without delay. 
 The decision, whatever it may be, will be attended with important results both to this 
 Country and the Colonies, as well as to the United States. I am not able to speak 
 positively — but probably the Noble Lord will be able to give some information — as to 
 a rumour afloat on this subject. It has been veij generally reported, that when the 
 American Minister heard .that the decision of the King of the Netherlands was against 
 his Government, he protested against this decision, and appealed to his own Country 
 from it. But, at any rate, this House ought to be informed whether any decision has 
 been given by the King of Holland, — and what that is, whether it is favorable or not to 
 this country. If the American Government has now thought fit to refuse to abide by 
 this decision, or to protest against it, surely it is of sufficient importance that the House 
 should be acquainted with the particulars of it. 
 
 "The territory which is the ground of dispute is of great extent and value, and is of 
 great importance in a military point of view. It remains to be seen whether this country 
 18 tamely to yield to these demands of the American Government, or whether that terri- 
 tory is to remain in the possession of this country as it is at present. The people in the 
 North American provinces ought to know immediately what they are to expect, and 
 whether this Government intends to abide by the decision given by the King of Holland. 
 
 " I trust that there is sufficient firmness in the English Ministry not to abandon the 
 advantages which they may litive obtained by this decision. I feel assured that if the 
 King of Holland had declared against the claim of this country, there would have been 
 too high a feeling of honour, on our part, to hesitate for one moment as to the course 
 which ought to be pursued. The Americans however will again attempt to gain time by 
 negotiation, for the chance of something arising in their favor. They generally have got, 
 and I fear, unless some great improvement takes place in oiur diplomacy, they will con- 
 tinue to get, the better of us in negotiation. 
 
 " It will be in the recollection of the House that it is now nearly seventeen years 
 jtince the treaty of Ghent, when this question was referred to the Commissioners for their 
 

 VIU 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 decision. I could urge many reasons why the information I now move for should be 
 granted ; and unless the Noble Lord, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, is prepared to 
 say, that granting it would be attended with detriment to the public service, I shall 
 press for it. 
 
 " I beg leave to move, 'That an humble Address be presented to His Migesty, pray- 
 ing, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions, that there be laid before this 
 House, a copy of the decision of His Majesty the King of Holland, on the Boundary 
 line of the North- West Coast of America.' " 
 
 Viscount Palmerston. — " I think that I have a right to complain of the 
 course pursued by the Honourable Member, who, in his eagerness, has assumed the ob- 
 jections that may be urged against his motion. The Honourable Member has no right 
 to assume whether or no any decision has been given on this question, and still less, 
 whether or no it is in favor of, or adverse to, the claims of this country. I feel it my 
 duty to oppose the motion, because the transaction to which the Honourable Member 
 alludes is as yet an incomplete transaction, and negotiations connected with it are still 
 pending. He has no right to make the gratuitous assumption that he has entertained 
 respectmg it. 1 shall not attempt to answer the observations of the Honourable Mem- 
 ber, as 1 think that by doing so I should necessarily be drawn into explanations which 
 I feel I ought not to enter into. 
 
 " With respect to the present motion, I feel bound to declare, that, as a Minister of 
 the Crown, I do not feel myself justified in assenting to it. It remains for the House to 
 determine whether or no it will place sufficient relionce on the declaration I have now 
 made in my Ministerial capacity — that the motioii of the Honourable Member cannot 
 with safety be assented to ; and this because the matter in question is not yet finally 
 closed. 1 do trust, however, that the time is not far distant at which I shall feel myself 
 at liberty to give all the information now applied for, and that that information will prove 
 satisfactory to the Honourable Member and the House — meanwhile I shall certainly give 
 my negative to the present motion." 
 
 Mr. Robinson. — " I have no doubt that the House will agree with the Noble 
 Lord, after the declaration he has just made, as a Minister of the Crown. I, however, 
 do contend, that whenever two Governments, — our own and another, — have been 
 negotiating for thirteen years on any given point, afterwards submit the question for the 
 decision of a neutral power, and at the expiration of that period find that a settlement 
 of the matter takes place, this House should know what has been done in the businesa 
 in that interval; so that whatever impediments may exist, or have existed, may be 
 removed. I complain of the singular procrastination which has attended this nego- 
 tiation, and 1 must express my astonishment that hitherto, in any negotiation in which 
 we have been engaged with the United States, they should have got the better of us. 
 If the decision of the umpire selected had been in favour of the United States, our 
 Government, actuated by those honourable motives which influence them in all their 
 negotiations, would have immediately yielded. The American Minister, however, 
 finding that the award was likely to be unfavourable to the pretensions of his Govern- 
 ment, protested. I feel assured that if an English Ambassador had acted in this way, 
 his conduct would not have been approved of by this house, or by his country. I 
 lament that the matter has not been settled, as the protracting of the negotiations in 
 this way is productive of singular annoyance to the inhabitants of our North American 
 Colonies. 
 
 " I assure the Noble Lord that I did not suppose that the production of the 
 documents I now apply for would be attended with inconvenience, for I should be loath 
 to do any thing calculated to embarrass His Majesty's Government. I shall not press 
 my motion ; but I must consider that the Uaited States have had an advantage over this 
 country which ought not to have been allowed in this affair, and which has arisen from 
 the weakness of our own Government in allowing the matter to be referred back to the 
 United States." 
 
 Viscount Palmbrston. — " I trust that the House will not suppose the cir- 
 cumstances of the case to be such as they have been stated by the honourable gentle- 
 
% 
 
 APPENDIX. • ix 
 
 man, in consequence of niy not answering him. I repeat, that I do not feel justified in 
 assenting to the motion." — The motion for the. address was then put, and negatived. 
 
 MARCH 3, 1835. 
 
 Mr. Robinson. — " Seeing the Right Honorable Baronet in his place, I wish to ask 
 him whether any, and what progress has been made in the negociations with the United 
 States, respecting the settlement of the Boundary line between them and our Colonies?" 
 
 The Chancellor of the Exchequer. — " I am afraid that I shall not be able to 
 give the Hon. Member an answer to iiis question regarding the boundaries in as brief 
 terms as those he has employed for his question. It is one of the most important topics 
 with which the British (government can have to deal. The difficulty seems to be to set- 
 tle the precise boundaries of the province of Maine on the part < the United States, and 
 of New Brunswick on the part of his Britannic Majesty. '1 le dispute arises out of 
 some vagueness in the terms of the Treaty of 1783. According to that Treaty, the 
 boundary was to depend upon certain high Lands, as they were called, extending to the 
 River St. Lawrence. Now, those high Lands have never yet been discovered — and, 
 indci'l. I believe they are not to be found. The question was, by the consent of both 
 
 Eartirs, iL'I'erred to the King of the Netherlands; and three points were to be settled by 
 is Arbitration. Oh two of them the King of the Netherlands gave a decided opinion, 
 but the third remains undetermined, because it was physically impossible to fix upon the 
 position of the high lands, as laid duwn in the Treaty of 1783. The King of the 
 Netherlands, therefore, proposed that the matter in dispute should be amicably com- 
 promised, and the British Government was willing to abide by the terms of compromise he 
 should point out ;* but the Government of the United States would not give its consent." 
 " A new Survey was suggested by the United States ; and we expressed our willing- 
 ness to concur, if a preliminary understanding were come to upon certain points. One 
 of them was, that the Bay of Fundy should be taken to be part of the Atlantic Ocean.f 
 A despatch was sent out on the subject in the r-ourse of last autumn, but sufficient time 
 has not yet elapsed for us to receive an answer. Negociations are, therefore, still pend- 
 ing ; and the President of the United States has refused to produce certain papers, lest 
 he should compromise any of the interests he is bound to protect. I believe that there 
 is an earnest desire, on both sides, to come to an amicable adjustment of the only remain- 
 ing question of litigation. A proposition was made by this Government in the month of 
 October last, and it is impossible for us yet to know whether the preliminary arrange- 
 ments will or will not be accepted." .^. 
 
 * [These mis-statements, or ratlier this complete falsiBcation of the facts and the truth, 
 made by Sir Robert Peel, shows how Lord Palmerston had adjusted his records, 
 measures, and men, before leaving office, to impose upon his successor. — After this, 
 of course, the other party is committed to the measures of Lord Palmerston. 
 [There are two points worthy of attention. First, Sir Robert Peel does not conceive 
 that there was any ground for suppressing what he knew (or what he heard) to be 
 the state of the case. Secondly, there was no member in the House of Commons 
 able to expose the falsehood of the statements, or the fallacy of the arguments put in 
 his mouth. One might suspect that the English language had ceased to be an avail- 
 able vehicle for any national purpose. — It is, however, the language used in America.] 
 
 t [By reference to the article from the New York Albion, pp. xi, xii, it will be seen that 
 the arguments of Maine are adopted by Sir Robert Peel.] 
 
 APRIL 24th, 1837. 
 " I will avail myself of this opportunity to ask the Noble 
 
 Sir Robert Peel 
 
 Secretary for Foreign Affiiirs, in what position our diffi:rences are with the United States, 
 as to the Northern Frontier ? I wish to know whether they are adjusted, or whether 
 any progress has been made towards their adjustment ? " 
 (c) 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 VisooDNT Palmebston. — " There have been a great many commwneatwnu npon the 
 subject, between the Governments of the two countries; and 1 can assure the Right 
 Hon. Bart, that the Government of each is animated by a sincere desire to come to an 
 amicable arrangement. I must do this justice to the Government of the United States, 
 and to the late President especially, to say that the Central Government has laboured 
 under great difficulty with regard to the negociation, from the circumstance of its discre- 
 tion being limited by certain independent actions on the part of the Government of Maine. 
 There have not, lately, been any written communications upon the subject ; but many 
 verbal communications have taken place between the Government of this Country and 
 the American Minister here, as well as between the British Minister in America and the 
 Government of the United States. The whole correspondence on the subject has been 
 published, by order of the Congress, in the United States ; and, when it reaches this 
 Country, the Right Hon. Bart, will see all the official communications that have taken 
 place upon the subject. I am sorry, however, to say, that there does not seem to be any 
 prospect of an immediate settlement of the question." 
 
 Mb. Hume. — " Would there be any objection to lay before the British Parliament 
 the papers that have been published upon the subject in America }" 
 
 SiB R0BER7." Peel. — " I beg to ask the Noble Lord whether the state of Maine is 
 in the occupation of any portion of the disputed territory ?" 
 
 Viscount Palmerston. — " The whole of the Territory is, / believe, at present in 
 our possession ; with a clear understanding however, that neither party is to exercise 
 within the limits any rights that belong to a permanent sovereignty." 
 
 Sib Robebt Peel. — " I do not exactly see how that arrangement can have been 
 made. The land must be occupied by one party or the other. Am 1 to understand that 
 it is at present occupied by British subjects ?" 
 
 Viscount Palmerston. — •' The district is not inhabited.. The Territoiy is chiefly 
 covered with forests ; and it has been agreed that neither party shall cut wood in it until 
 the question is finally settled. As regards ihe question put to me by the Honourable 
 Member for Middlesex, I beg to state that there can be no objection to produce all the 
 correspondence that has taken place upon the subject, except that it would be a departure 
 from a very wholesome rule generally acted upon in this country, of not producing any 
 papers relating to negociations still pending. As the papers in question, however, have 
 been published by order of Congress, I do not see that there can be any objection in 
 placing them before the House." 
 
 Mb. Roebuck. — " The Noble Lord cannot be aware that the government of Maine 
 has passed some regulations which operate severely upon the neglected and destitute 
 condition of the inhabitants of the disputed Territory. The Noble Lord says, that Great 
 Britain is in occupation of the Territory, but that she cannot enforce the rights of occu- 
 pation. The truth is, that at this time there are a great number of persons who are 
 cutting down trees, who are peopling the land, and who are called — a large portion of 
 them — citizens of the United States. The population consists, indeed, of refugees from 
 both sides the territory — rogues and vagabonds — who find there a safe asylum from the 
 laws of either country." 
 
 Viscount Palmebston. — "The Honourable and Learned Gentleman must refer 
 to another part of the country, and not in the territory in dispute." 
 
 [Such are the words dropped, in the Imperial Senate of this mighty Nation, — during 
 six years, — on the subject of a disputed Frontier and a National Treaty 1 
 
 [In tracing the debates on Foreign Policy, during the course of the Peace, I find that 
 information is constantly refused, on the plea that it might endanger the success of 
 the matter under negociation ; — but I also find that, though information has been 
 invariably with-held, failure has been as invariable.] 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 MERITS OP THE BOUNDARY QUESTION. 
 
 From the Albion New York Paper, March, 1839. 
 
 [Ab the inquiry to which these pages have been devoted commences with the Award of 
 the King of Holland, it would have been beside the question to. enter at all into the 
 negociations preceding that act, and the merits of the dispute which was brought to a 
 close by that decision, — indeed, to refer to the anterior question would only serve 
 to perplex the reader, to confuse the argument, and to cut away the grounds on 
 which the matter rests. However, a plain and simple exposition of the stats of the 
 case, independently of the arbitration, may not be without interest ; the more so as 
 that which follows is an American statement, and one which, as it carefully avoids 
 all reference to the Award, is clearly not the production of a man who sees the 
 . question in a British point of view.] 
 
 " The subject of the North-eastern Boundary s( fully absorbs public attention, that 
 we may be pardoned for occupying a large portion of our paper with it. We are the more 
 anxious to do so, because the opinion so generally prevails that nothing can be said in 
 behalf of the British claim. It is indeed affirmed, and generally believed, that England 
 is claiming what she knows is not her own, and that her designs are altogether dis- 
 honourable and even fraudulent ; but she is never dishonourable, and it is therefore but 
 fair after we have heard so much in favor of Maine, that something should be said on the 
 other side. We shall endeavour to do this as briefly as possible, and then refer our 
 readers to the Award of the King of the Netherlands — a document, we may remark, 
 drawn up with great clearness and impartiality — which will be found in the preceding 
 columns. 
 
 " We must take it for granted, that all our readers who feel any interest in the 
 matter, understand the preliminary fact of the case, viz. that the difficulty has arisen 
 from a misconstruction of the 2nd article of the treaty of 1783, made at Paris between 
 Great Britain and the United States at the close of the revolutionary war. This article 
 we insert above, as it may be necessary to refer to it in the course of the few observations 
 we are about to make. It will be observed, that, in tracing the boundaries, it is declared 
 that the line shall commence at the ' North-west angle of Nova Scotia, viz. that angle 
 which is formed by a line drawn due north from the source of the St. Croix river to the 
 Highlands, along the said Highlands which divide those rivers that empty themselves 
 into the River St. Lawrence, from those which fall into the Atlantic ocean, to the North- 
 westernmost head of the Connecticut river,' &c. Under the Treaty of Ghent a Com- 
 mission was appointed to run this line, and to ascertain the true position of those High- 
 lands, but unfortunately the British and American Commissioners disagreed, and the 
 matter remains unsettled to this hour. The British Commissioners asserted that the 
 Highlands commenced at Mars Hill, while the American contended for a range of hills 
 one hundred miles further to the north. These points will bs found designated upon the 
 map now before the reader. 
 
 " The gist of the case lies in a nut-shell. It is clear that the north-west angle of 
 Nova Scotia of the Treaty, must be sought for at those Highlands which separate waters 
 flowing into the River St. Lawrence and into the Atlantic Ocean. Now do the High- 
 lands contended for by Maine at the north of the River St. John, separate such waters ? 
 Certainly not. They separate waters flowing into the St. Lawrence, but not into the 
 Atlantic, and consequently a main requisition of the treaty is unprovided for. By a 
 reference to the map it will be seen, that the rivers which flow to the south of these 
 Highlands are the Restigouche, which falls into the Bay of Chaleur ; and the St. John, 
 
sU 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 which empties itself into the Bay of Fundy. No river in that part of the line flows into 
 the Atlantic, and therefore those that do exist, cannot be regarded as the true streams, or 
 those required bv the treaty. But, say the Maine claimants, this is immaterial ; for as 
 the Bays of Chaleur and Fundy ultimately reach the Atlantic, they must be considered 
 as the Atlantic itself.* This is geographically incorrect ; the Bay of Fundy is the Bay of 
 Fundy, and nothing more ; so is the Chesapeake. As well might wc call the Baltic and 
 the Mediterranean the Atlantic Ocean ; but if we did so, what schoolboy would not cor- 
 rect us ? Besides, the terms of such an important instrument as a treaty cannot be so 
 loosely construed ; every word must bear its true and precise meaning, and nothing 
 more. No expounder of law can possibly say that the general term 'Atlantic Ocean/ 
 means and comprehends every bay, inlet, and gulf that may ultimately flow into it. If 
 BO, where is the utility of giving such bays, inlets, and gulfs, distinctive names at all ? — 
 jBut the treaty itself settles this point, for it makes a clear and broad distinction between 
 f the ' Atlantic^ and the ' Bay of Fundy.' This is visible to any one who will peruse the 
 2nd article inserted above. The east line, it says, shall be drawn ' along the middle of the 
 Saint Croix from its mouth in the Bay of Fundy ;' and that all islands shall be compre- 
 hended and given to the United States lying within twenty leagues of the coast, Mhere 
 the aforesaid boundaries, between Nova Scotia on the one part and East Florida on the 
 other, shall respectively touch the Bay of Fundy AND the Atlantic Ocean.' Now here 
 the negotiators of 1 JSA have drawn a clear distinction between the Bay of Fundy and 
 the Atlantic Ocean, which is immediately fatal to the claim of the State.of Maine, for the 
 Highlands designated by h6r do not separate rivers, falling into the St. Lawrence and 
 into the Atlantic Ocean, as prescribed by the treaty, but rivers emptying into the St. 
 Lawrence, and into the Bay of Chaleur, the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and the Bay of 
 Fundy. A treaty must be construed like an Act of Parliament or an Act of Congress, 
 and no such latitude of construction could be given as claimed by the State of Maine to 
 any legislative act whatever. 
 
 " But the American diplomatists fortify their position by citing the boundaries of 
 the Province of Quebec, as set forth in the Royal Proclamation of 1 763 and other British 
 documents. Such citations would certainly be useful if it were apparent that the nego- 
 tiators of the treaty of 1783 intended to make the southern boundary of the province of 
 Quebec form one part of the north-west angle of Nova Scotia : but no such evidence 
 appears — on the contrary the strongest presumption exists that neither party intended 
 to carry the line north of the St. John. If it had been the intention to carry the north 
 line to the southern extremity of the Quebec Province, why was it not so specifled ? The 
 Royal Proclamation above mentioned was then extant, and perfectly well known to Dr. 
 FrankUn, Mr. Adams, and Mr. Jay, and it is inconceivable that they should have been 
 silent on such an important point, had it been their intention to carry the line into that 
 vicinity. But, say the jurists of Maine, behold the similarity in the words of the Treaty 
 and of the Proclamation. The latter says ' the line shall cross the River St. Lawrence and 
 Lake Champlain in 45 degrees north latitude, pass along the Highlands w hich divide the 
 rivers that empty themselves into the St. Lawrence from those which fall into the sea, 
 and along the north coast to the Bay of Chaleur.' Here the single word sea makes an 
 important difference, and clearly indicates the distinction to be drawn between that com- 
 prehensive monosyllable in the Proclamation and the niore limited term ' Atlantic Ocean,' 
 employed in the treaty. The 'sea' means the ocean in general; the 'Atlantic,' the At- 
 lantic in particular — the one is comprehensive, the other distinct and limited, and upon 
 this point the whole question turns. 
 
 " A vast number of collateral arguments are brought forward on the British side 
 which our limits do not allow us to quote ; we shall however mention a few of the more 
 prominent. 
 
 " If we are to be governed by the treaty, it is impossible to depart from its strict 
 letter ; and if it be found that the words of the instrument ore incompatible with the 
 geographical delineations of the country, and that neither party can satisfactorily 
 establish its line — it follows that a new one should be adopted by mutual and friendly 
 
 ^ See paje a, ante.— Sir Robert Peel'i Siatement in the House of Coininons, Note (t). 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 xiu 
 
 
 agreement. It was with this view of the case that the Kine of the Netherlands 
 recommended a compromise, and designated the St. John aqd the St. Francis aa the 
 basis of that compromise. It was also in accordance with the same friendly spirit that 
 the British Government, only a few months since, offered to make an equal and exact 
 division of the whole tcrritoir, and take one half — an offer, in our opinion, most just, 
 most rational, and in the highest degree expedient. 
 
 " The north-west angle of Nova Scotia of the treaty was conventional, rather than 
 geographical, and the treaty prescribed the mode of finding and fixing that angle. The 
 American Commissioners of 1 783 first proposed as a boundary the river St. John, from 
 its source to its moutli, and if this had been agreed to, where would the north-west angle 
 of Nova Scotia have been thm ? Of what utility would have been the southern boundary 
 of Quebec in that case ? Surely, if it had been the settled purpose of the negotiators 
 to fix irrevocably the north-west angle where the western line of Nova Scotia intersects 
 the southern limits of Quebec, the treaty could not have been silent upon a point of 
 such moment. The King of the Netherlands pointedly alludes to this defect. 
 
 " The British Commissioners refused to surrencfer the whole territory washed by 
 the river St. John, because the demand was exorbitant, and the American Commissioners 
 abandoned it for the same reason. Now, can it be supposed, as the Award remarks, 
 that England would consent to give up more land to the north of the St. John than at 
 the south, especially when such surrender cut off her communication with Canada? 
 Such an arrangement never could have been meant or intended by either party. 
 
 " In the Preliminaries of Peace, entered into in 1 782, we find the following : — 
 
 " * It is agreed to form the Articles of the proposed Treaty on such principles of 
 liberal equity and reciprocity, as that, partial advantages (those seeds of discord) being 
 excluded, such a beneficial and satisfactory intercourse between the two countries may 
 be established, as to promise and secure to both, perpetual peace and harmony.' 
 
 " Now look at the map, and sec if the boundary as claimed by the United States 
 corresponds with this injunction. Does this line yield no partial advantages to Maine, — 
 those * seeds of discord ?' 
 
 " Let any candid person draw a line from the city of St. John to the city of 
 Quebec, and see if it describes a good and sufficient boundary to Great Britain. 1> 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/