"^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 1.1 Uig|2B 12.5 £ IS 12.0 IL25 IHI.4 I 1.6 Hiotographic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. MSM (716) 172-4503 V ^ SJ \\ ^\^\ V?^'^ V"^' ^. CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notas techniquaa at bibliographiquaa Tha Inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat original copy available for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy which may ba bibliographically unique, which may altar any of tha imagea in the reproduction, or which may aignificantly change the uaual method of filming, are checkeid below. □ Coloured covera/ Couverture de couleur I I Covera damaged/ D D n D D Couverture endommagte Covera reatored and/or laminated/ Couverture reataurte et/ou pellicula I I Cover title miaaing/ Le titre de couverture manque rri Coluured mapa/ Cartea giographiquaa en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured platea and/or illuatrationa/ Planchea et/ou illuatrationa en couleur Bound with other material/ Relit avac d'autrea documenta Tight binding may cauae ahadowa or diatortion along interior margin/ La re liure aarrie paut cauaar da i'ombre ou de la diatortion le long de la marge intArieure Blank laavaa added during reatoration may appear within the text. Whenever poaaibia, theaa have been omitted from filming/ II aa paut que certainea pagea blanchea ajoutiaa lora d'une reatauration apparaiaaent dana le texte, maia, loraque cela Atait poaaibia, cea pagea n'ont paa iti fiimtea. Additional commenta:/ Commantairea suppltme^nairas: L'Inatitut a microfilm* le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a it* poaaibia de aa procurer. Lea details da cat exemplaire qui aont peut-Atre uniquea du point da vue bibliographiqua, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dana la mAthode normale de filmaga aont indiquAa ci-deaaoua. [~~| Coloured pagea/ D Pagea de couleur Pagea damaged/ Pagea andommagtea Pagea reatored and/oi Pagea reatauriea et/ou pelliculAea Pagea diacolourad, atained or foxai Pagea dicoloriea, tachetdes ou piqudes Pagea detached/ Pagea d6tach6es Showthrough/ Tranaparence Quality of prin Quality inigale de I'impreaaion Includea aupplamentary matarii Comprend du material aupplimantaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition diaponibla r~n Pagea damaged/ r~~] Pagea reatored and/or laminated/ r~~1 Pagea diacolourad, atained or foxed/ I I Pagea detached/ r~~| Showthrough/ I I Quality of print variaa/ r~~1 Includea aupplamentary material/ I I Only edition available/ Pagea wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Lea pagea totalement ou partiellement obacurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont M film6es d nouveau de facon i obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item ia filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document eat film* au taux de r6duction indiquA ci-deaaoua 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X J 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: National Library of Canada L'exemplaire filmt fut reprodult grAce h la gAnArositi de: Bibliothdque nationale du Canada The images appearing here are the bitst quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in Iceeping 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 bacic 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. Les images suivantes ont 4tA reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettet* de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimte sont filmte en commen^ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, seion le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film4s en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la derniftre image de cheque microfiche, seion le cas: le symbols — »> signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, 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 hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre filmAs A des taux de reduction diffArents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reprodult en un seul clichA, 11 est f limA A partir de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. lies diagrammes suivants illustrent la mAthode. X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 S 6 1£^-- 0^ rV 0-5 P/ 1: ^S;>. •B'l *'> i^mm ^isc_; b 'Ifl fagfrnsmmmmmm ..^<^ >^' ')4'-^' .^y -•i*V' ■'"" i iii|i<|;ii|ii I I 'I-; CI ^- "iinii f--v ■ "« H' A* . J-** \ f> . «*,^, f. «.lr- . .;*•' SKETCH or TMK DISPUTED TERRITORY- i 1 t^^wH// ¥■■' . 1- \ / r-^'J '^1 .^^'' ■fi^^r V, ^) A T ^1, .-^^ A N 1^ >- i r ti-uJj^ J- t* J* 4<# i. "i "^^ "" y» r •rf* '■* // .V'.V^ CJ IJ L.F Sl^i T .A T K ^ 7) /X^'. ,!^^ ^'1.-^ .^ ( }: , v^ y J 'i> m^d. If I. fc i' V ;.nT J, ( •.5i:;^MA m'mn^igimuT^ n^-n^t ■' ^ -*'vyt'^ti*' i* i it f-^'f i REMARKS OM TUB DISPUTED NORTH-WESTERN BOUNDARY ov NEW BRUNSWICK, BOROBamo oir thb UNITED STATES OF NORTH AMERICA, WITH An •);|iUnators AKttcli* BY CAPTAIN R YULE, ROYAL ENGINEERS. LONDON: JAMES RIDGWAY AND SONS, PICCADILLY. 1838. VI / {/ M Si REJ^ERENCES TO THE SKETCH. (i!» *■ I. 'I 1. B.K.C.F. is the outline of the Disputed Territory. 2. The line M.A.B.F.C.D.D. as laid down in British inapt^, separates New Brunswick from the United States.— A. is the source of that branch of the St. Croix which was established by Convention in 1798 as the point of departure, instead of G., the source of the western or true main branch. The boundary has been erroneously continued in a straight line, north from A as far as Mars Hill, whence, to the source of the Mettiarmette River, it is disputed by the United States. 3. Supposing that the Con^vention of 1798, establishing the eastern branch to represent the true main branch is irrevocable, tlie the line — • — • — A.E.F. shews how the boundary should be traced according to the just intckpretation of the Treaty of 1783, that is to say — not crossing any rivers or streams, but keeping on the ridge, dividing American waters ou the on«h'«nd, from British waters on the other; thus securing to the two countries the whole courses of those rivers and their tributaries, the mouths of which are known and acknowledged by each party as belonging to the other. ' 4. The line- — •• — •• — •• G.H.I. E.K. shews a line traced from G, the source of the true main branch, according to the same principle as the line A.E.F., viz. along the dividing ridge uf the running waters. If we were to go back to the Treaty of 1783, this is the true boundary. v>f> 'ul^t ^sl 6. B.K.C. traced north from Mars Hill, shews the boundary claimed by the United States. 6. The space (coloured blue) is that which, in 1831, was awarded to Great Britain by the King of Holland ; the remainder being given to (he United States ; this was agreed to by the former, but refused by the United States. ADVERTISEMICNT. I ».V» -tUf TiiiH (juestion wuii cluburatt'ly disciissod when the Britisli urul United States' Governments prepared to submit their respective claims to the arbitration of the King of Holland in 1S30-1, but it has never been brought before the public, resting solely on \\ic Imsis of the fulfilment of the Treaty of 1783. These Notes are not intended fully to supply this deficiency ; but a view is oftered of some of the points in dispute, which, it is trusted, will ap- pear new even to persons who have already paid attention to the discussion. It is proper to premise that recent events* have occurred which shew that the time is not unsuitable for reverting to the state of this question. Another attempt, being a repetition of that which took place in August 1831, has been made to test our vigilance in the Disputed Territory ; and, as before, it has been promptly met by the Governor of New Brunswick. In the month of May last (1837), an Agent who was employed, under the supposed authority of the State of Maine, to take an account of the inha- bitants of Madawasca, north of the river St. John, was seized and committed to prison in Fredericton. The Governor of Maine issued soon afterwards a * This was written in summer, 1837. Oeiierul Order, Huminoning the militia to be ready *' to obey such Orders as the Becurity of the State may require." This a|)peurance of disturbance on the frontier of New Brunswick excited no attention in England ; and it is such marks of indiflerence in their fellow- subjects, so discouraging to the Colonists, on which the United States chiefly rely for final success in their negotiations with this country. The 2nd Article of the Treaty of 1783 to which these Notes relate is as follows : " And that all disputes which might arise on the ** subject of the Boundaries of the stiid United ** States may be prevented, it is hereby agreed and •* declared, that tiic following are and shall be •• their Boundaries, viz. from the north-west angle *' of Nova Scotia; viz. that angle which is formed " bv a Hue drawn due north from the source of St. " Croix to the Highlands, along the said High- '* lands wliieh divide those rivers that empty them- *' selves into the river St. Lawrence from those ** which fall into the Atlantic Ocean, to the nortli- " westernmost head of the Connecticut River; '* thence down along the middle of that river to •* the forty-fifth degree of north latitude ; from " thence by a line due west on said latitude until it *' strikes the River Iroquors, or Cataraque ; thence •* straight to the head of St. Mary's River, and " thence down along the middle of St. Mary's over ** to the Atlantic Ocenn. East, by a line to be " drawn along the middle of the River St. Croix *' from its mouth in the Bay of Fundy to its source, 5 ** and tiHim its source directly north tu the nforesaid '* Highlands which divide the rivers that full into *' the Atlantic Ocean from (hose which fall into the *' St. Lawrence, comprehending all Islands within '* twenty leagues of any part of the shores of the " United States, and lying between lines to be *' drawn due east from the points where the afore- ** said Boundaries between Nova Scotia on the one " part, and East Florida on the other, shall respec- *' tively touch the Bay of Fundy and the Atlantic ** Ocean, excepting such Islands as now or hereto- *' fore have been within the limits of the said Pro- >* vinoe of Nova Scotia." ,;|„„M,M )iii 'lo t'r>|,dni'. »• butt fi'i'»f^j«; r<\uin\ ^i li ,l>'j.liif>v<>i(( rul yjHri ««VMi< •* May 18^8. • ,, ■» , , , \ Since the above was written, the evenfi which have occurred in Canada add greatly to the interest of our relations with the United States, and render it more than ever desirable to bring the Boundary Question to a conclusion. '.. .1- til n »Kuct> iUtn\ ovu'*! W( J ■'''■* ~ -vr ..li <.;/i) - » / 1 v. . A ■'"■' ' > .!U»l''f ', »';!'; 5. »» ! ♦' f.' .Sv- . i{jn; <:" - ■■ , ■*" ' 't ' -i • * • ' " »n .^ // fiU r. "•'■■' ' x^r*i» * • 'T1^*^ ■H •> ,,.;*< » < _i,-<5-;,r.... :,1- f'l ^^ H.'V'i/-'f di M ^ %' 1, 1?: Vl'-x^lf*'*' *t %. • :% . V .> •■.■+.' i^ .j/.lwi; .',?'-.< i<-> V- (• V, «' ^ Mii^ f<:i y^Mv *< tU]yr .tUitUi jP I V o.; l;i:!Oi!Ojiriju»rii ,.f^;J;.iJw'' *>.f 'k.I, !'•'.',»'(() ■'t''': M u m^^i M- itfrtnf/ hVii ;»»'*- ■'» II, '4 J... • M i ■ ( // I. i ij , ,'t ._. _• REMARKS, V- ■'•:* ,.„- , ' -' ^' ■' ^c. Sf-r. .^''^ ;•.,::?.:'; . :^ *■ (( <( (( Several official docurnoiits on this subject were published in the United States, in the early part of last year : they consist of a Message from the Pre- sident, with a copy of the correspondence relating to the " North-eastern Boundary of the United States," commencing July 21st, 1832, and ending March 5th, 1836:* — of Reports presented to the Legislature of the State of Maine, from a Com- mittee which was instructed " to enquire into the expediency of providing by law for the appoint- ment of Commissioners on the part of this State, by the consent of the Government of the United States, to survey a line between this State and the Province of New Brunswick, according to the treaty of 1783, to establish monuments in such places as shall be fixed by said Commis- sioners, and by Commissioners to be appointed on the part of the Government of Great Britain ;*' — of a Review of the subject in No. 93, of the North American Review, of October 1836, and of Articles in Newspapers. The Review is written in a tem- * This correspondence up to a still later date has been laid before Parliament. • , . «( (( «( i 2 ■i)' fn 8.. perate tone, liut the documents from Maine are evidently calculated to excite popular feeling. When any change takes place in our commercial relations with the United States, or any foreign country, we are not long left in ignorance of it, because its influence makes itself felt through a large portion of the community ; but of a question which directly aflects the local interests of our North American Provinces, only we are comparatively both ignorant and indifferent. <•*• 'i Hi^n^iJi It is accordingly under great disadvantages that we discuss with that country any matters but those bearing on our commerce ; for there is scarcely an individual in it who is not acquainted with the whole history of their relations with us, and who does not believe that such subjects are of as much popular interest with us as with them. A native of the United States is not to be convinced, unless he comes to England, that our ignorance of their con- cerns does not proceed from affectation, or from any unwillingness to open our eyes to a sense of their importance, as if the acknowledgment were offensive to our national vanity, •''"u/i 'u* ^3. ^ Under the circumstances of great keenness, of greater perseverance in the attainment of any ob- ject, particularly from Great Britain, and of supe- rior information, especially that depending on local knowledge, on the part of the United States, it appears to be a duty to the people of this country, and of our North American Colonies, to shew how gradually, but steadily, the United State)*, by their I 'T); f. perseverance, have obtained nearly every point hitherto in dispute between us, and we shall make an enumeration of some which occur to us. I. In October, 1798, we yielded the main branch of the St. Croix, and accepted the eastern branch as the boundary, although the western branch was always considered to be the main one, and is even I now so designated, not only by the Indians, but by the inhabitants of the United States along its western bank. ^ By this convention the line from the source of the St. Croix, which was to be drawn North, ac- cording to the treaty of 1783, to meet certain Highlands, was removed so far to the east, that the Americans acquired by it a tract of valuable country.* We were entitled to hope that this act of conciliation would tend to facilitate the subse- quent arrangements for the fulfilment of the treaty. , Instead of which it added to the difficulty. , ^ A line to the north from the true source of the St. Croix, would reach a hilly country sooner than the line from the present monument at A. If this was not known to the United States Commis- sioners, they could not but be aware, that such a line would shortly cross a branch of the Penobscot^ a very important circumstance, which by this con- vention they adroitly got rid of. But although we thus gave up a considerable extent of country, it is certainly consonant with strict justice that any subsequent difficulty in ful- * M. A. B. F.I. G. -See Sketch. Ui m m 10 filling the terms of the treaty arising* from this conventional main branch of the St. Croix should be settled with reference to the eiffect pro- duced by the prolongation of the north Hue from the true main branch. For this we had, and have a right to look to tlie United States Government, and as they have proposed to us to revert to the treaty of 1783, as the exclusive guide, rendering null, of course, all the operations since that time, unless by special exception, in the pending arrange- ments; this important point should be borne in mind. It might fairly be propounded as a question to the United States — what course they would have pursued, had the line north from the conventional source of the St. Croix passed over a branch of the Penobscot, as that from the true source does. But, according to the just definition of a line to be drawn to the *' Highlands," it should never cross any stream at. all, from what branch soever of the St. Croix it shall proceed. It should keep along the ridge, dividing the waters running to the left hand and those running to the right hand ; and it is a ridge of this description which, farther to the westward, separates the waters falling into the St. Lawrence from those falling into the Atlantic ocean. ,..,.,. . -i._ . . ,. Instead of this course of proceeding, we com- mitted the gross mistake of seeking for an abso- lutely uninterrupted range of Highlands, althou*gh, according to every authority, such Highlands mean the dividing ridge of running waters. Then our '# '0111 this Croix feet pro- ne from nd have rnment, t to the ndering at time, rrange- orne in uestion Id have tntional I of the line to '»• cross of the along 10 left and it to the the lantic 4t< Commissioners pas^sively allowed a line to be traced onwards, until it nearly passed a mountain called Mars Hill: there they thought proper to stop, although the line does not touch this mountain, but is more than a mile to the eastward of it, and this they pronounced to be the sought-for Highlands. The United States people complain of the assump- tion by us of this point as a termination to the north line from the monument : a step of such a character is certainly calculated tj injure a good cause : it does not fulfil the required condition of the treaty ; and it bears the mark of a sudden con- viction, on the part of our Commissioners, of hav- ing made a mistake in going too far north, and of being uncertain how much farther they might not have to go on the same principle, so they grasped at this shadow of a right interpretation of the treaty as a desperate resource. But had the north line attained even the summit of Mars Hill, that mountain has no distinct connection with a con- tinuous range of the same character ; it does not even form that description of country which, we have erroneously insisted, should be found by the United States' Government north of the St. John, in order to justify their claim to the line of boun- dary assumed by them in that quarter. «■.">; •2. The next point which we yielded, referred to the line of boundary which was to proceed from the Lake of the Woods, " in a due west course to the river Mississippi ;" but even the sources of that river lie south of the latitude of the Lake of the # 12 : .'•13 Woods. We assented, however, to the proposal oi' the United States' Commissioners, (see Sir Charles R. Vaughan's letter to Mr. Forsyth, dated Washing- ton, December 8, 1834,) that the natural object the Mississippi should be put out of consideration, and that the line due west from the Lake of the Woods should be the boundary ; yet, when a similar rule of construction was proposed by us for determining the north-western boundary of New Brunswick, mark the reply of Mr. Forsyth, in his letter of April 28, 1834 : " This line of demarcation was not estab- lished as the true boundary prescribed by the treaty of 1783," (how could an impossibility be estab- lished as the truth?) " but was a conventional sub- stitute for it of a parallel of latitude." That is, a convention is to be the rule when it shall be favour- able to the United States. 3. We yielded Barnhard's Island, in the River St. Lawrence, of which it commands the naviga- 4. We yielded Grande He, in the River Niagara.* 5. We yielded, at least we consented to yield, according to the award of the King of Holland, dated at the Hague, 1st January, 1831, the terri- tory belonging to us, as being north of the true line of latitude 45", although by doing so we gave up an important military position ; Rouse's Point, on Lake Champlain, which they had begun to * This isiaiid has lately become better known, in the tranfiactionA connected with Navy Island. 6. We consented to yield, according to the same award, a large portion of the still disputed territory, not only south but north, of the River St. John, thus submitting to being cutoff for ever from direct communication with Quebec ; the difference by the circuitous route from that city to Frederictowu being upwards of seventy miles, or about two- sevenths of the whole distance. . 7. At the peace of 1814, we restored the valuable territory of Michigan, which had been ours by conquest from the commencement of the war in 8. At the same peace we also restored East- port, Castine, &c., also taken during the war. There are other points, such as privileges con- nected with the fisheries, which we have yielded. But what have the United States yielded in return? Having made no conquest, notwithstanding their boastful projects and repeated attempts last war, in which they were foiled " by a few British '• troops, and by the loyal and brave Canadians, '* who, on one occasion, unsupported by a single " soldier of the regular army, drove back the " enemy from tlieir territory ;"* never having been able to retain, for any length of time, a spot of grotmd on our side of the frontier, a great extent of which is an imaginary line ; at the peace they had no conquest to restore. Since the peace, we have yielded every point * Quarterly Review, No, (Hi, p. 425. H : in discussion, excepting that which furms the subject of these remarks, but the United States have in return yielded nothing ; and the result of our ever yielding and their never giving way, is, that a territory which has never ceased to be under British jurisdiction, is pronounced, in one of their official documents, to be under a "foreign government;" and their "unoffending citizens'' are "said to have * been dragged from " their rightful homes, in time of peace,' and to " have had ' imposed on them the indignities of " a foreign gaol.'" These unoffending ' citizensj' nowever, presumed to exercise the rights of sovereignty in a territory under British jurisdiction, by proceeding to make elections in August, 1831, under the authority of the State of Maine, for which they were awarded the just punishment alluded to, owing to the firmness and promptitude of Major-General, Sir Archibald Campbell, then Governor of New Brunswick. From what has been stated, it will be evident that tlie pretensions of the United States are of compara- tively recent origin ; and they are admissible now only from the circumstance of their ever having been entertained at all ; and since that territory is very important to us as bearing on the peaceable security of our North American possessions, this country should be put ou its guard against any further iisnconditiouul suritnder of the rights of our Colo- nists to these demands of their neighbours. ms the i States le result ng way, used to iced, in nder a fe.iding id from and to ities of Slimed rritory make tliority were ing to neral, ' New t that para- now been very urity in try ther 'Olo- 15 There is no doubt that the United States did not lay claim to this territory at the time of concluding the Treaty of 1783 ; for, at an early stage of it, they were directly refused the St. John as the boundary ; but they had the cunning forbearance and political sagacity to rest satisfied with the vague description of the boundary given in the Treaty, as their best alternative, because it left such an opening for a claim as would neces- sarily, in after times, lead to discussion ; minor points being obtained in subsequent negotiations, (as enumerated above,) they have eventually, by perseverance, got so much, each step affording a footing for advancing some new pretension, that they now assume, as a line of boundary, one extending for 120 miles along the St. Lawrence, at the average distance of only twenty miles ! ! Indeed the St. Croix, mentioned in the Treaty, with the interpretation thei/ have given to it, is a better boundary for them than would have been the St. John which we refused; and we never could possibly intend, by agreeing to the St. Croix, to place them in a still better position. The whole course of their proceedings has been admirably calculated to gain their point with a nation so proverbially facile as ours has been in the negotiation of American aifairs. First they persuade our Commissioners, in the year 1798, to yield only a branch of an insig:u- ficant river — a trifle to our magnanimous nation ; then they make no immediate objection to our ^ Commissiuners making Mars-hill the tcrmiuution of the North line, but receive it as a point to be discussed, although senbible pf its incompatibility with the conditions of the Treaty, so that at any future and suitable time its absurdity could be rendered available in argument by the easy proof of its weak character. One untenable point being argued on, its ne- cessary abandonment by us weakens the whole cause, and renders the opposite view of it more popular with our antagonists, who may thus, with good show of reason, complain of the spirit shewn by us towards the fulfilment of the Treaty. ; It may be asserted, that, if a nation shall find itself convicted of having inadvertently yielded certain advantages, it is bound to adhere to the decisions of its authorised agents, with all their defects ; but, on the other hand, if a foreign people rigidly exact mistaken concessions to the letter, they should no longer be considered as entitled to share such privileges as are usually granted to the most favoured nations, bound by ties of mutual interest. We are ready to admit, that the letter of the Treaty of 1783, is not clearly against the claim of the United States ; of its spirit, as entirely in favour of Great Britain, scarcely an American, we con- ceive can doubt. In all transactions between parties, their obvious meaning and intention must be considered ; tried by this test, no one c&n suppose that Great Britain 17 lull be hy my conceded such an advantage as is given by this claim on the part of the United btates. itii.^iit«ivr»'"^ A contract which might at first operate against one party may eventually become so changed in its effect, neither party conceiving that it lost any advantage as compared with the other, that both would be willing to leave it untouched : but this Treaty, which is not yet fulfilled, and of which the terms are doubtful in expression, though sure in their meaning, was always against us, and ever must be so. Nothing can change its erroneous, unequitable nature; as wo^ld. be^ th^ case, for instance, in a matter of compromise with respect to an estate, of which the smaller portion might be equivalent by containing valuable timber, soil, or mines. ^.^ fj ».», But the American claim grasps at the whole ; yet any portion yielded to them north of St. John would neutralize the benefit to Great Britain of any compromise. ^^.,,,., ..^j..*,..,,. *.,..*.. ..i?.;. > ,\ ,.^ It was evidently the true intent of the treaty of 1783 to secure to the respective parties the whole courses of those rivers and their tributaries,* the mouths of which were mutually known and ac- knowledged as belonging to the respective parties ; the sources of these were to serve as starting points from which at any time, and for ever, while water • " Les eaux pendantes." Mem. Eng. et Fr. Com, 4to. 1755, p. 184. This rule was followed at the Treaty of the Pyrenees be- tween France and Spain ; also in the discussions under the Treaty of Utrecht on the boundaries of Nova Scotia or Arcadia. B 18 flows, as each successive tributary was ascended to its source, every inhabitant of the country could point out the frontier line. Notiiing more simple than such a boundary as nature thus points out ; to determine it neither commissioners, nor men of science need be sum- moned to the assistance of two Governments wil- ling to agree. In a Court of Equity such a case as this, on a glance at the relative situation of the two countries as to their frontier, would at once be decided in favour of Great Britain. We appear always to have got tired of their im- portunity, and got rid of it by yielding. Yet, if we now blame our Commissioners in 1783 and 1798, the United States people may say that we only yielded points of little value, and must not make a merit of such concessions when the struggle of important interests begins. The argument would be excellent for them now that they have got nearly every thing, and would serve as the ordinary proof derived from every experience how vain it is to expect from them or any other people that a spirit of conciliation, unless mutual, is of any value in national disputes, and if it is not on the contrary very injurious to the yield- ing party, by encouraging a spirit of perseverance in encroachment on the other. Nevertheless we are inclined to do justice to the sincerity of the United States Government for some years past in the negotiation of this matter. 19 It 18 the popular feeling against wLich, by the former mode of conducting it, f'^iat Government and ours have now to contend ; for by not settling it sooner time hati been allowed for a new genera- tion to spring up in the United States, who from their earliest years have imbibed the conviction that we withhold from them a portion of their territory. ' The following is an instance of their usual mode of treating this question : — In one of their recent official documents above mentioned, it is stated that we requested at the Treaty of Ghent *' such a '* variation of the line of frontier as might secure " a direct communication between Quebec and ** Halifax." It is probable enough that in the course of discussion, allusion might have been made by us to such an arrangement as might meet the case of a decision being made against us, but was the chance of this occurrence to be considered as an admission on our side of doubt of the justice of our claim ? Certainly not : it arose merely in the course of the wide range which such discus- sions may be expected to take. Where is the formal proposal by us to obtain the variation of our acknowledged line ? " Resort was then had to ingenuity,'* continues the document ; and the proof adduced is, " that *' there was much doubt whether it does not al- ** ready belong to Great Britain," but there is no- thing to imply either our concession or such a doubt as could be entertained by any person who 20 examines the subject, unless it be that whicli has been virtually afforded by too prolonged a dis- cussion. The United States' writers quote our Commis- sions to Governors, in which are given a descrip- tion of the limits of their separate jurisdictions, to prove what they assert to be our former interpre- tation of boundaries within our Colonies. What right, it may be asked, have they to found a claim on the words of a document, which is private as regards them ? How and where did they obtain it? Besides, a commission of such a nature is drawn up with little care as regards the defini- tion of a boundary, common to another Province under the same Government, since any question between them could be settled by the order of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. One of their Committees reports : " It is time '* indeed for us to begin to search, and in the right *' places, too, in order to put a stop to these per- •' petual encroachments upon our territory and " rights. Our first object should be to ascertain " and trace the North Boundary of Nova Scotia, •' which is the South Boundary of the Province of " Quebec, and see if Canada comes as far down as " Mars Hill." There are no objections to giving the United States' agents every facility to examine the country on the disputed line between New Brunswick and them, but as to the line between Canada and Nova Scotia, which is common to those two Provinces only, the local authorities 21 las is- P- to must look to the encroachment and stop the in- truders. The United States have a very convenient mode of ncgotiiiting with a foreign power. If it is any object which they claim, — the indemnification* by France for a recent instance, — they are unanimous : their national honour is touched ; but when they are asked to yield, then we hear of " State rights:" " You must understand our Constitution :" We " do " insist that no power is granted by the Constitu- " tion of the United States to limit or change the " the boundary of a state or cede part of its terri- " torv without its consent." The general Government calls these ** constitu- tional difficulties insuperable," and the individual State " never will concede the principle that its ter- ritory can be transferred ;" will allow of no award, and declares for the whole claim and no modifica- tion of it. With the bravado of any separate State, the British Government have nothing to do ; it may, however, be considered as a species of feeler, which can be disclaimed, according to circumstances, by the general Government. In the late negotiations, a proposal was made by the Secretary of State of the United States, to Sir Charles Vaughan (letter of April 30th, 1833) that, " if after more accurate surveys shall have been " made, it should be found that the North course, * Indemnification for losses suffered by American citizens during the last war. 22 " from the head of St. Croix, should not reach the " Highlands, which answer the description' of those *' designated in the treaty of 1783, then, a direct " line from the head of the St. Croix, whatever " may be its direction to such Highlands, ought to " be adopted, and the line would still be con- " formable to the treaty." But Sir Charles Vaughan, in his letter of De- cember 8, 1834, remarks, " that the operations of surveying Commissioners can lead to no practical result, unless it be settled beforehand, which are the rivers that fall into the St. Lawrence, and which are those that fall into the Atlantic Ocean," and the question is, whether the term, " Bay of Fundy" is synonymous with *' Atlantic Ocean," or is a geographical feature per se. We contend that it is ; but the Americans maintain not only that the Bay of Fundy is a part of the Atlantic Ocean, but the gulph of St. Lawrence too, and even the Bay of Chaleur within it ; Sir Charles Vaughan points out very clearly the distinction between these two terms,* on which the United States' Se- • His statement is, "that the framers of the treaty of 1783, when they used in the second Article, the words ' rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean,' could not possibly have meant any rivers, whose mouths were situate to the eastward of the river St. Croix, which falls into the Bay of Fundy. It is thought sufficient, on the pre- sent occasion, to advert, in support of this construction of the words of the treaty, to the striking fact that, whilst the river St, Mary, which was to form the southern boundary of the United States, is described in the second Article of the treaty, as falling into the At- cretary of State, in his letter of April 28th, 1835, briefly remarks that, "he is not apprised of any ** thing' new, either of fact or argument, that has •* now, for the first time, been brought forward. *' The inutility of renewing the discussion on this " point is so obvious, that the undersigned deems *' it necessary merely to suggest that, however con- *' vincing and satisfactory the argument of the lantic Ocean, the river St. Croix, which was to form the eastern boundary, not merely in the same article of the treaty, but in the very next member of the sentence, is described as falling into the Bay of Fundy, while a little further on in the same article, the eastern line of boundary, where it terminates at the mouth of the river St. Croix, and the southern line of boundary, where it termi- nates at the mouth of the river St. Mary, are described ' as respec- tively touching the Bay of Fundy' and the * Atlantic Ocean.' Can it be seriously maintained that, in a treaty for settling a question of such vast importance as a boundary between two con- tiguous states, a matter which, of all others, imperiously requires preciseness of expression, the terms * Bay of Fundy,' and ' Atlantic Ocean,' should have been thus set, not once only, but twice in the same article, in pointed opposition to each other, and yet that no real distinction should have been intended to be drawn between them ; but these terms should have been carelessly used as synoni- mous and convertible expressions ? His Majesty's Government conceive that no reasonable doubt can be entertained that, where the St. Croix, the eastern limit o/ the United States, is described as falling into the Bay of Fundy, it is advisedly so described, in con- tradistinction to the other rivers which are mentioned in the same article, as flowing into the Atlantic Ocean. But, if the St. Croix, whose mouth is situate at the very entrance of the Bay of Fundy, is not an Atlantic river in the meaning of the treaty, none of the rivers which discharge themselves to the eastward of St. Croix, and higher up in the bay, can possibly be considered as such." '24 " British Government is to itself, it has been ever ** considered by the United States as altogether " inconclusive." We look upon this reply as un- suited to the gravity of diplomatic correspondence, and as an obvious symptom of what occurs in ordinary argument, when a person, feeling the weakness of his cause, affects to despise anything new that his antagonist can advance. We fully agree with Sir Charles Vaughan, that, under all present circumstances, farther surveys would be useless. Any line, whether due north, or to the west of it, must soon strike the tributaries either of the Penobscot or the St. John ; we have stated above, that it should never cross a running stream, as, before reaching it from the St. Croix, *' Highlands," i. e. the ridge dividing streams, must be reached. --'*^'- It is ako to be observed, that even if the St. John were allowed by us to be an Atlantic river, and supposing that the north line, or the lately proposed line, west of the north line, had reached any one of its tributaries, it could not consistently with the terms of the treaty, quit that tributary to go on to the main branch, when the sources of streams, i. e. the ridges dividing running waters, were the very objects serving to direct the course of the boundary line ; and it would be a still greater anomaly by going north to pass the principal, i. e. the St. John, and then be guided by the tributary ; tributaries having been passed over before, i. No line can* be drawn in any direction so as to 25 reach Highlands dividing running waters, accord- ing to conditions in which both nations agree, unless it proceeds straight to the source of the Kennebec, and the Mettiarmette,* and as this would give more than we claim, it cannot be the line in- tended by the United States' Government by their proposal of April 30, 1833; the effect of which, therefore, is only to delay the final decision. Yet such a line would be only in conformity with the rule proposed by themselves, viz. first, to find the natural object, (of which there can be no doubt,) then to proceed to it straight from any other given point. In this point the conduct of the Americans forms a striking contrast with the frank and friendly spirit evinced by the British Government relative to this affair. '?f = • v*; - •- After the award of the King of Holland in 1831, we did not cease, during a period of three years, to express our readiness to abide by it, notwith- standing its very disadvantageous nature to us, although the Americans at once shewed a dispo- sition not to do the same. - At length, seeing the inutility of waiting until the United States would become actuated by a like conciliating spirit, we reluctantly abandoned the hope of having this question terminated, as of right it ought to have been, as the result of the mediation of the King of Holland. With respect to the territory itself, its possession is to be regarded in several points of view ; either * A line from A tp C. C i 26 as' a means of attack and defence; as a matter of national honour ; or one of mere marketable value. It is obvious that any war carried on in North America, must be purely defensive on onr side, and while we should be weakened by the loss of this ground, the position of the United States would not, by possessing it, be affected as to the power of defence, but would be greatly enhanced in its means of attack. As to the point of national honour, neither party is touched ; it has been hitherto treated only as a matter of local interest. Whatever confidence we may have in the justice of our claim, yet since it has been so long consi- dered as a matter of doubt and negotiation, which never would have been the case had we known the country as it was our bounden duty to do, and schemes of enterprise having been directed towards this territory south of the River St John, more by the American people than by us, it has been sug- gested, in order to assist the general Government of the United States, to indemnify the State of Maine for the loss of that which was looked upon as more than a prospective gain, and which, (how- ever in a public point of view unfounded,) may be so considered with respect to individuals — that a sum of money amounting to the value of land in the adjoining part of the State of Maine at this time, should be advanced for the purpose of contributing towards the purchase of lands for that State in the Western Territory. It has been asserted, by high authority in the «7 of United States, that the territory in dispute is of no use to them. As a mere matter of opinion, from such a quarter, it is of importance. But it is of value to us. Where, then, would be the spirit of the treaty inculcating it, as the duty of the two countries, to establish such an intercourse as may secure to both perpetual peace and harmony ? Would it be shown, in their insisting on acquiring a tract of country which has always been under British jurisdiction ; and, in retaining which, we are entitled to consider ourselves secure from the possibility of imputation of being influenced merely ** by a desire to acquire territory ;" the belief of which, however, is dis- claimed by the United States' Government — (Mr. Forsyth's letter to Mr. Bankhead; Washington, Feb. 29, 1836),— the said tract affording to the United States no additional defence in war, the yielding of the claim to which affects no national feelings ; while, on the other hand, their possession of it would cut off the intercourse between our Provinces during peace, — in war, ^ ould deprive us of barely the means of defence, but none of attack. On our side the object is peaceable : it is security against attack, which every nation has a right to insist on in its negotiations during peace ; on the other side, the object of its possession by the United States is hostile, ambitious, — holding over us the power, not merely to invade, but to stop our inter- course with, the Ci«.nadas at the very commence- ment of hostilities, before they might be even known in England. «8 This could be shown in detail, by pointing out the nature of the country, so as to be obvious even to those unaccustomed to such inquiries ; but a dis- cussion of this nature would be out of place here. In concluding, then, we have merely to call at- tention to the lines in the accompanying sketch, which, whether proceeding from G, the same source of the true main branch of the St. Croix, or from A, the source of the branch established as the boun- dary by convention, are traced on the principle of following up the ridge dividing- British waters falling into the Bay of Fundy on one hand, from the Penobscot or ^American waters falling into the Atlantic Ocean on the other, until we arrive, with out having crossed any stream whatever, at the point C, where the line falls on the ridge, which in a similar manner divides the Mettiarmette, a branch of the Chaudi^re, or British waters on the one hand, from the Kennebec or American waters on the other hand : and this ridge continued until it reaches the parallel of latitude 45", completes the range of Highlands fulfilling, as we conceive, the terms of the Treaty. 1st June, 1837. • '. Norman ancl Skeen, Printers, Maiden Laiip, C'ovent-Garden, !^« -'It -; f" '>.:■"* : ■ : ' out even L dis- ere. * Hat- . * etch, urce 'f Tom ouu- '* ** ^ le of ' Eiters '■ «t' '■ "■('*' fVoiii ' ' - • ) the • ) . • nth « ■^ . the " ^ • ' . liich e, a * . ■- - the Iters intil 4' ft ♦ ■ . ;the r - • - . • ■ the f ' • = ' '■^ ' '. r - i . . ■' ■ * r ; ^ • ^' "■ ' r * M ' ' . 5. ' - * f ^ A ..^ >' %