'->. 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 h 
 
 // 
 
 ,% 
 
 % 
 
 % 
 
 
 :/- 
 
 f/j 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 11.23 i 1.4 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.6 
 
 1 liuUjgiapillL 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 33 WEST m;»in street 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. U580 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 •1.^^ 
 
 fV 
 
 iV 
 
 \ 
 
 A 
 
 
 <^^ 
 
 ■\> 
 
 ■ U ■ ~ci.\j~ 
 
&? 
 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHIVI/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Inrtitut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notsa/Notas tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa 
 
 Tha Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of thia 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 Ccuverture endommagie 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^ et/ou pellicul^e 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured mapa/ 
 
 Cartes gAographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli4 avec d'autrea documents 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along inferior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serrie peut cauaer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distorsion le long de la marge int^riaure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout«es 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissant dana le texte. 
 mais. lorsque cela itait possible, ces pagea n'ont 
 pas it6 filmtes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplimentaires; 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm* le meilleur exempiaire 
 qu'il lui a itt possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exempleire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage 
 sont indiquAs ci-dessous. 
 
 I I Coloured pages/ 
 
 Pagea de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag^as 
 
 □ Pagea restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restauries et/ou pellicuiies 
 
 Pages disco'oured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages dicolor^es, tacheties ou piquies 
 
 □ Pages detached/ 
 Pagea ditachies 
 
 QShowthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 □ Quality of print varies/ 
 Quallt* in«gale de I'impression 
 
 □ Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel supplimentaire 
 
 nOniy edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 n Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been ref limed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partieilemant 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata. une pelure, 
 etc.. ont iti filmies dt nouveau de fapon A 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce d la 
 g6ndrosit6 de: 
 
 Bibliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are tde best quality 
 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 hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les images suivantes ont At6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplairtis originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont filmds en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film^s 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 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cos: le symbols — ^ signifie "A SUIVRE ", ie 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds d des taux de reduction diffirents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est vilm6 d partir 
 de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivaiits 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 12 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
DECISIOIK OF THE ARBITER, 
 
 Nous, GUILLAUME, par la grace de Diev, lioi dcs Pays-Ban, Pri,mdWrunge.-Xi.»ai,, 
 Grand Due de Luxembourg, ^-c. ^-c. iS'c. 
 
 Avant accepts le» f(.nctions d'Aibitrateui-, qui Nous ont ete conWries par la note da introduction. 
 CImr-e dHnV.resdosEtatsUui. d\VnK/uiuisetparccllcde IVXmbassadcHirExtraordmaire 
 
 ct Pl"nip«tc«tiaire de la (iran.le BretaKue, i Notre Ministre des Aftairca Etrangercs,en date 
 du 12 Janvier 1829, d'aprcs ("art: V. du traiti de Gand, du 24 Dtcembre 1814. et Part: I. 
 de 1. convention concluc enlre ces Puinsances d Londres Ic 29 Septembre 1827, dans le 
 dllVcrend, qui B'est fclevfe entre E'les a« m.jct des limitcs de leur possessions respect.ves: 
 Animes du desir sincere d r6pr Mre par une dfecision scrupuleuse, et impart.ale d la 
 confiance, qu'Elks Nous ont t.mn^.iee, et delcur donner ainsi unnouveau g-age du haut 
 
 prix que Nous y attaclums: . t, • o 
 
 Ayant k cet effet dument examine, et muremeut pesd Ic contenu du Premier Expose, 
 ainsi que de I'Expose Definitifdu dit ditterend. que Nous ont respectivement rem.sle pre- 
 mier \vril cie I'ann^e 1830 I'Envoj e Extraordinaire ct Ministre Plenipotcntiaire des Etats 
 Unisd'Amerique, et I'Ambassadeur Extraordinaire et Plenipotentiaire de sa Majestfe Bri- 
 tannique, avec toutes les pieces, qui y ont ete jointes a Tappui: 
 
 Voulant accomplir aujourd'luii les obligations, que Nous venous de contracter par 
 I'acceptation des fonctions d'Arbitrateur dans le susdit .lilVerend, en portant a la connais- 
 sance des deux Hautes Parties InteressCes le resultat d-i Notre examen, et Notre opinion suv % 
 
 les trois points, dans lesquels se divise, de leur commun accord, la contestation: 
 
 Considerant, que les trois points prerites doivent etre juges d'apris les traites, actes 
 et conventions conclus entre les deux Puissances, savoir, le traite depaix de 1783. letraite 
 d'an.iti.^ de commerce et de navigation dn 1-94, la declaration relative a la riviire Ste. 
 froix de 1798. le traite de pais si-ne Ji Gand en 1814. la convention du 29 Septembre 
 1827, et la carte de Mitchell, et la carte A, citecs dans cette convenUon: 
 
 Declarons, tjiie: 
 
 Quant au premier point, savoir, la question, quel est I'endroit dcsigne dans los trait.^s, ^ J^^^J^t 
 tomme 1' Angle Nord-Ouest de la Nouvelle Ecosse, et quels sont les highlumh separant ,.,^ y,,,^;,, 
 les rivi,ire9, qui se d^cl.argent dans le lleuve St. Laurent, de celles tombant dans I'Ocean 
 Atlanti.|ue, le iongdesciuels doit etre tirte la lignc de limites depuis cet Angle jusiiu'u la 
 source Nord-Ouesl de la riviere Connecticut: 
 
 Considerant : 
 
 Que les Hautes Parties Intdressees rcclament resp-ctivement cette lignc de limites au 
 midi etau nord de la rivin-o St. J..bn, et ont indlMiu' .barnne snr In ravte N. la ligue, 
 quVlles demandent ; 
 
2 
 
 Arbiter'!! Dc- 
 
 ciHioIl, 
 
 Northwest 
 Aniflr of No- 
 va Scotia. 
 
 Con.iitleraiil: 
 
 Qui! scion losoxcmples ftlli'gni'.H, Ic tcrmc /;(i,','i/fm(?J i*'iiiipVique iidu sei;tement ii uu 
 pays montueux ou tMeve, inais encore ii un ♦erraiii, qui, satis Ctre moiitucux, nepare des 
 eaux coulant tlans une direction differcnle, et <|u'uiiisi le tariictcre plus ou moiiiu mon- 
 tueux et eleve du pays, ii travcrs Icquel sunt tirees lesdeux ligius rospectivemcnt recia- 
 mees au nord et au niidi de la riviere St. John, ne saurait lairc la base d'uiie option entrp 
 clles: 
 
 Que le texte du second article du traite de puix dc \TB3 reproduit on (mrtie les ex- 
 pressions, dont on s'est aiiterieurenicnt servi dans la Proclamation de 1763, cl dans I'Acte 
 de Quebec de 1774, pour indiipier les liinites nieridionales du Gouvcrnernent de Quebec, 
 depuis le lac Chanipluin, "in forty-five degrees of north latitude along the highlands, which 
 " divide (he rivers that empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which 
 " fall into the sea, and also along the north coast of the bay des Chaleurs:" 
 
 Qu'en 1763, 17C5, 1773, et 1782, ila^'td etabli.quela Noiivelle Ecosse serait bornee 
 au nord, jusqu'a rextremite occidcntale de la bale des ("haleurs, par la liniite meridionale 
 de la province de Quebec; que ccttc delimitation se retrouve pour la province de Quebec 
 dans la commission du Gouverneur General de Quebec de 17SC, ou Ton a fait usage des 
 termes dc la Proclamation de 1763, et de I'Acte de Quebec de 1774; et dans les Commis- 
 sions de 1786, et postcrieures, des Gouverneurs du Nouveau Brunswick pour cette derniere 
 province, ainsi que dans un grand nombre de cartes anterieures el posterieuresau traits de 
 1783; et que Particle premier du dit traite cite nominativement les Ktats, dont I'-'inde- 
 pcndance est reconnue: 
 
 Mais que cette mention n'inipliquc point Tcntiere coincidence des limitos entre les 
 deux Puissances^ reglees par I'article suivant, avec I'ancienne delimitation des provinces 
 Anglaises, dontle maintien n'est piis mentionne dans le traite de 1783, et qui par ses va- 
 riations continuelles, et par I'incertitude, qui continua d'exister a son ^gard provoqua de 
 temps ii autre des difterends entre les autorites provinciales: 
 
 Qu'il resulte de laligne tir^e par le traits dc 1783 atraven les grands lacs a I'ouest 
 du fleuve St. Laurent, une deviation des anciennes chartcs provinciales, en cc qui concerne 
 les limites: 
 
 Qn'on chercherait en vain a s'expliquer, pourquoi. si I'on cntendait maintenir I'an- 
 cienne delimitation provinciale, I'on a pricisement fait usage dans la nOgociation de 1783 
 de la car(»de Mitchell, publice en 1755, et par consequent anterieure a la Pioclamation 
 de 1763, et a I'Acte de Quebec de 1774: 
 
 Que la Grande Bretagne proposa d'abord la rivii-re Piscataqua pour limite it I'est des 
 Etats Unis, et ensuite n'accepta pas la proposition dc faiie fixer plus tard la limite du 
 Maine, ou de Massachusetts Bay : 
 
 Que le traite de Gand stipula un nouvel examen sur Ics lieux, lequel ne pouvait s'ap- 
 pliquer a une limite historique, ou administrative: 
 
 Et que des lors I'ancienne delimitation des provinces Anglaises n'offre pas non plus une 
 
 base de decision: 
 
 Que la longitude de I'angle Nord-Ouest de la Nouvelle Ecosse, laquelle doit coincider 
 avec celle de la source de la riviere Ste. Croix, ful seulement fixee par la Declaration de 
 1798, qui indiqua cett riviti : 
 
 Que le traite d'amitie, de commerce et de navigation de 1794 mentionne le doute, qui 
 s'etait tleve a I'cgard de ia riviere Ste. Croix, et que les preniimcs iustructiims du Congres 
 lors des negociations, dont resulta le traitd de 1783, placent le dit angle a la source de ia 
 riviero St. John: 
 
 Que la latitude dc cet angle se trouve sur les bonis du St. Liuront selon la carte de 
 Mitchell, reconnue pour avoir regie le travail combine et olUciel des uesotimeup (In 
 
8 
 
 truW tie I'S.'j, au liou i\\\\h\ vcrlii de l;i di'limitnlion du GouvpriiemiMil tie Quebec, I'tm 
 dcvrait la cherclicr uiix hii^liiands sdpaiaut. los rivii-res, qui se dC-chargcnt daiM la riviore St. 
 Laurent, de re.lli's toinliant dans la mer: 
 
 Que la nature du terrain ii I'est de I'angle precitc n'ayant pas tii indii|u(«e dans le trai- 
 t6 dc 178,3, il ne sVn laissc pas tirer d'ars"nieiit pour le lixcr Je prtfcrcnce dans tel endrnit 
 
 phitot nue <'.ans un autre: 
 
 Qu'au surplus, si I'on croyait devoir le rapprocher de la source de la riviere Ste. Croix, 
 et le cherclicr par exemple !i Mw^-lnll. il Kerait d'autant plus possible, quo la limite du 
 Nouveau Brunswick tirfce dc \k au Nord-Est donnat a cettc province plusicu-s Angles Nord- 
 Ouest, sitULS davantage au nord. et k I'est scion leur plus grand eloigne.nent de Miirs- 
 hiU que le nombre de d^gres de l'ani;le n.enti.mne dans le traite a ctfc passu sous silence: 
 ' Que V ir consequent fangie Nord-Ouest de la Nouvelle Ecosse, dont il est ici qucs- 
 tion, avant efe inconnu en 1783, et le traite de Gand I'ayant encore declare non constate, 
 la mention de cet angle histori.iuc dans le traite de 1785 doit etre consider^-e comme une 
 petition de principe. (pii ne presente aucunc base de decision, tandis que si on I'env.sage 
 comn>e un point topographique, eO egard ii la definition, " vi/., that angle, which is formed 
 '' by u line drawn due north from the source of the 8t. Croix river to the highlands," il 
 forme simplement I'extremite de la ligne -along the said highlands, which divide tliosc 
 " rivers that en.ptv themselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into 
 "the \tlanticOcean;"-extremite que la mention de I'angle Nord-Ouest de la Nouvelle 
 Ecosse ne contribue pas it constater, et .,ui, etant ii trouver elle mC-nte, ne saura.t mener ii 
 la decouverte dc la ligne. qu'elle termine: 
 
 Enfin one les argt.mens tires dcs droits de souverainet^ exerces sur le fief de Madawas- 
 ka et sur le Madawaska Settlement, adntis mcme .(ue cet exercice fut suffisamment prouve, 
 ne peuvent point .lecider la question, par la raison que ces deux etablissemens n'embrassent 
 qu'un tevrain partiel de celui en litige; que les Hautos Parties Interessees ont reconnu le 
 pavs situ^. entre les lignes respectivement r6clam6es par EUes, comme fesant un objet de 
 contestati.m, et ,,u'ainsi la possession ne saurait ctre censee d6roger au droit, et que s, I'on 
 ^carte I'ancienne delimitation des provinces alleguee en faveur de la ligne r^clamee au 
 nord de la riviere St. John, et specialement celle me.tUonnee dans la Proclamat.on de 
 1763, et dans 1' Acte de Quebec dc 1774. I'on ne saurait admettre t. I'appui de la l.gne de- 
 mandee au midi de la riviere St. John, des argumens tendant il prouver que telle partte du 
 terrain litigieux appartient au Canada, ou au Nouveatt Brunswick: 
 
 Arbiter's ne- 
 cinion. 
 
 Northwest 
 AnRkofNo- 
 v» Scnti». 
 
 Que la question, d*'-p«uillee des argumens non d^cisifs t-r^s du caract^re plus ou 
 uioins montueux du terrain, de I'ancienne delimitation des provinces, de I'angle Nord- 
 Ouest de la Nouvelle Ecosse, et de I'etat de possession, se r^duit en derni^re analyse ii 
 celles-ci— <iuelle est la ligne tiree droit au nord depuis la source de la riviere Ste. Crotx; et 
 quel est le terrain, n'importe qu'il soit montueux et eleve ou non, qui, depuis cette ligne 
 Lu'ii la source Nord-Ouest de ia riviere Connecticut, s^pare les rivieres se dchargeant 
 dans le fleuve St. Laurent, de celles, qui tombent dans I'Ocean Atlant.que; que les Hautes 
 Parties I.iteressees ne sunt d'accord que sur la circonstance, que la limite a trouver doit 
 are determinee par une telle ligne, et par un tel terrain; qu'Elles le sont encore, t^uts a 
 Declaration de 1798, sur la reponse a faire i. la pretniere question, a I'except.on de la lati. 
 tude k laquelle la ligne tiree droit au nord de la source de la r.v.ere Ste. Croix ,.n,t se 
 terminer: que cette latitude coincide avec I'extremite du terrain qui, depu.s cette l^ne jus- 
 nu'iila source Nord-Ouest de la riviire Contiecticut. separe les rivieres, se dechargeant 
 dans le fleuve St. Laurent de celles qui tombent da.ts I'Ocean Atlantique, ct que .les lors 
 il ne re»te, qu'a determiner ce terrain: 
 
 :li 
 
! 
 
 Arbitrr'itDt- 
 ciiion. 
 
 Noitlnvcst 
 Aniflcof N(>- 
 i;i Siotia. 
 
 Qn'oii »«■ liMiiiit iirdio op.'ruliiiii, on Iniiivc (I'liii i i>lr: 
 
 D'alionl. <Hic »i par I'lidoplioii ilo h> ligiu- icrlnnu-« au nonl il.- In rivicie ;-i. .Ii.li.i. In 
 Orniide Hretn^iu' lie pimmiit pimtfic estiim^! obtenir un terrain (1p i-iiiiidic valeiir, i|iif si 
 el'c iMi( ncccpti' i-n ITH,! la riviere St. Ji.'m piiur fronticre, >'([ ('vnitrd ii la sitiiiitioii ilii pays 
 «-ntrcli'Hrivii'ri'H HI. Jdliii vi Ste. Croix dans le voisinnsf de la incr, et i» la pussi-ssiifn dcs 
 di'ux rivpH dp la riviere 8t. John dans la derniere partie de son cnurn, cette coinpoiisation 
 Morait ccpcndant dt'tniile par rintorruplion de la ronininiii( alion entre le Bns Canada, el 
 leNoiiveau llriiMswick, Hpecialementenlre Qucltec et Fredericton. et qii'on clierclierail 
 vainenieiit. (juels motila auraient determine la Cour de Londres ii consentir il une sembla- 
 bic interruption: 
 
 Que si. en serond lien, en ojiposilion aux rivieres up d/rliargeant dans le (leave St. 
 liaurent. on aurait convenablenient. d'apres le langa^e usit.- en grourapliie. pn coniprendre 
 les rivieres tond)ant dans le» bales de Fundy et dcs Clialeurs. avec celle se jetlant directe- 
 MUMit dans I'Oiian Allaiitiiiiie. dans la (Uniiniination ii;.'niri<|ue de rivii res loinbant dant 
 rOtran Atlanti(|iie. il serail liasardeux de rana;er dans IVspcie parnii celte eati'jjorie leu 
 rivieres .St. John et Kistiirouclie, (pie la li^ne ri^clainee au nord de la riviere St. John Hi- 
 pare immi'diateinent des rivieres se dicl\!ir(i;eaiil dans le lleuve St. Laurent, non pas avec 
 d'autres rivieres coulant dans I'Oi.'an Atlanticpie, mais seules, et d"ai)pii(|UPr ainsi, en 
 iiiterpr.lant la d< liinitiition lixie par un traile, oii cliaiiue exjtression dtiii compter, li deux 
 cas exclusivement spi'ciaux, et ou il ne s"av,it pa» du genre, une expression g.'iu ri<iue, qui 
 leur assignerail iin sens plus lap;e. im (|ui. etendue aux Seomliae I.akes, l\Miol)«cot et K.ene- 
 l)ec.f|uisej((tentdiiec,emcnt.lans l"()c( an Atlantique, tialilirail le prim ip.'. .pie le trait.^ 
 de 1:85 a entendu des hi,i(lilimih si'parant, aussi bien mddiatement qu'imniediatcment, les 
 rivieres se diichargeant dans le lle;ive St. Laurent, de celles. (pii lombent dans POcean 
 Atlanti(|ue — principc ('galeuient r>'alis(' par les deiix lignes: 
 
 TroisiemeinenI, (|ue la ligne reclam e au nord de la riviere St. John nc sepaie pas, 
 ineme immediatement. les rivieres se detliargeant dans le lleuve St. Laurent, des rivieros 
 St. John et Ristigoucne, mais seulement des rivieres, <|ui se jettent dans le St. John c1 
 Ilistigouche, a I'excepl'on de la dernierc partie dc cette ligne pres des sourcen de la 
 riviere St. John; et qu'ainsi pour aniver ii I'Ocean Atlantique les rivieres si'pan'es par 
 cette ligne de celle se detliargeant dans le fleuve St. Laurent, out eliarune besoin de deux 
 interim (liaires, savoir, les unesdela riviere St. John, et de la baie Funily, et les autres de 
 'a riviore Ristigouthe, et de la baie des Clialeurs. 
 Et de 1' autre; 
 
 Qii'on ne pen' expliqner suflTisamment. comment si les Hautes Parties Contrartantc- 
 ont entendu etabliren 1783 laliniileaii niitii de la riviire St. John. c"-tte riviere, a laquelle 
 le terrain litigieux <b»it en grande partie on caractiire distiiictit", a ile neutralistc, et 
 mise bors de cause: 
 
 Queleveibe "divide" parait exiger la contigiiitc des objels, (pii doi\ent itrc " di 
 
 vided:" 
 
 Que la dite limite forme seulenent ii smi extremife occidentale la separation imnu'diate 
 entre la riviere Mettjarmette, et la source Nord-Ouest dn IVnobscot, et ne s^pare que 
 imdiatcmcnt les ri\ e es se dvcliargeaiit dans le lleuve Si. Laurent, des eaux du keniiebec. 
 du Penobscot, et des Scoudiac Lakes, tandis que la liiuiie i.'elair.ee an nord de la riviere 
 SI. John scpare iininediatemont les eaux des rivieres Hisii'j,ouelie el St. Jolm, el iiiediate- 
 inent le- ~( oudiac Lakes et les eaux des rivieres Penobscot ei Kennebec, des rivitics sr 
 detliargeant dans le lleuve St. i.iiurent, savoir, les rivieres Hea\er, Meti>, Rimousky, Trois 
 Pistoles, Green, du Loup, Kainouraska, Ouelle, IJias St. Nicholas, du S;id. la Famine et 
 CImudiere: 
 
 Que meme en mettant hors de rauie 'i-s rivieres Ristigonche et St. John, par li- motil. 
 qn'elles nc pourraienl ttre rensee-; tomUer dan- I'Oiiaii Atlaiiluiiie. la liuiie siM:l.'ntii"ii.de 
 
 -'lar^SZ:"' 
 
»e trouvoiuit encore au»»i pri'. de. Scou.liac Lakes, et des caux du Penobscot, etdu Kenne- Art.jjw'.De. 
 bee, que In Jignc meridionale .le« riviire* Beaver, Meti», Rimousky el autret*, se doclmi - 
 geaiit .lanH le flcuve Ht. Laurent, et formerait auHsi bien que I'autrc uneseparaUon mtdiate j^^^^J^'^ 
 entre cclle»-ci. ct lc» rivieres tombant dann I'Oc^an Atiantiquej »• »«"''» 
 
 Que la rencontre antirieure dc la limite meridionale, lormiuc de la source de la riviere 
 Ste. Croix, on tirouneligne aunord, |K)urrait seuleinent lui a>murer un avanta^c accessoirc 
 •ur I'autre. dann le cas oil I'une ct I'autre limite r<!uui»iient au mcme dugrti les qualiKSs 
 
 exigtSes par les traitCsj 
 
 Et que le sort asmgnf par celui de 1783 au Connecticut, ct au St. Laurent inCmc, 
 ^cartc la supposition que le» deux Puissances auraient vnulu fuire tomber la totality de 
 chaque rivi<!re, dcpuis son origine jusqu'a son embouchure, en partage ii Tunc, ou a 
 I'autre: 
 
 Comiderant : 
 
 Que d'apres ce qui [>rMAe, les argumens alle!;u#» de part et d'autre, et les pieces 
 exhib^es a I'appui, ne peuvent Ctre estim^s assc/. preixmderans pour detcriniiier la pri^fer- 
 cnce en faveur d'unc des deux lignes rcspectivement reclamees par les Hautes Parties 
 Interessces, comme limites de leur possessions depuis la source de la riviere Ste. Croix 
 ius(|u'a la source Nord-Oiiest de la riviere Connecticut; ct que la nature du dilVerend, et 
 les stipulations vagues et non suflisanunent deterniinees du traite de 1783, n'admettent pas 
 d'adjuger I'une ou I'autre de ces liijnes u I'une des dites Parties, sans blessnr les prin- 
 cipes du droit, ctde Pequitii envers I'autre: 
 
 Com'uUranl : 
 
 Que la (juestiim se reduit, comme il a ete exprime cinlessus, a un choix a faire du ter- 
 rain separant les rivieres, se ilecliargeant dans le fleuve St. Laurent de celles qui tombent 
 dans I'Ocean Atlantique; ((ue les llautes Parties Interessees se sont cntendues a I'eRard 
 du cours des eaux. indique de commun accord sur la Carte A, et prcscntant le seul elemeut 
 
 de decision; 
 
 Et que, des-lors, les circonstances dont dcpeml cette decision ne sauraient ctre 6cl!ur- 
 cles davantage, au moyen de nouvelles recUerches topographiques, ni par la production dc 
 pieces nouvelles; 
 
 Nous soMMEs d'avis: 
 
 Qoil conviendra .I'adopter pour limite des deux Etats une ligne tir^c droit au nord 
 depuis la source de la riviere Ste. Croix jus.,u'au pint ovl clle coupe le milieu du thalweg 
 de la riviere St. John; de la, le milieu du thalweg de cette riviere, en laremont^int, jusqu'au 
 point ou la riviirc St. Francis se decharge dans la riviere St. John; de li, le milieu du thai- 
 weg de la riviere St Francis, en la remontant, jusqu'a la source de sa branche k. plus 
 sud-imest, Iwiuellc source Nous indiquons sur la Carte A par la lettre X, authentiquee par 
 la signature de Notre Ministre des Affaires Etrangeres; de li, une ligne tiree droit i I'ouest, 
 jusciu'au iK)int oil elle se reunit i la ligne reclamec par les Etats Unis d'Amerique, et 
 tracic sur la Carte A; de 15, cette ligne, jusqu'au pt)int oil, d'apres cette carte, elle 
 coincide avec celle demandee par la Grande Bretagnc; et de lu, la ligne indi(,uee sur la dite 
 carte par les deux Puissances, jusqu'ula source la 7'us Nord-Ouestde la riviere Con- 
 necticut. 
 
 Quant an second point, savoir. la question, quelle est la source la plus Nord-Oaest ^^^^^^ 
 
 r North westernmost head) de la rivic-re Connecticut: of Connccti- 
 
 ' ' cutriVLT. 
 
 Considerant: 
 
 Que, pour resoudre cette question, il s'agit d'opter entre la riviere de Connficticut 
 Lake, Perry's Slreuni, Indiati Stream, et Hall's Stream: 
 
 2 
 
 ■3 
 
Arbiter'! De- 
 ciiion. 
 
 Northweit- 
 rmtnoit luiul 
 of Connecti- 
 cut river. 
 
 CoruidfranI: 
 
 Que, (I'apr^s I'unage adopte en g^onrapliie, la nourcc ct lo lit d'une rivii-iu nont indi- 
 queii par Ic riom de lu riviere attaclie u cetto nourcc et il ce lit, i-t par leur pluHnrundo im- 
 portance relative, cumporec a celle d'autre* eaux cominuni(iuaiit avec cotte riviire: 
 
 ConaiiUranIt 
 
 Qu'une lettrc offlrielle de 1772 mcntionne di^ja le nom de llallV Brook t et que dan* 
 une lettre oflkielle po»t6rieure, de la mcme annk-. ilu niCmi' liispecteur, on truuve Hall'i 
 Brook reprt'Hent^ coinme une ])etite rivitrc tombant dans le Connecticut} 
 
 Que la riviere dani* lacpielle *e trouve Connecticut Lake, jmrait plus conHid^rable que 
 Hall'8, Indian ou Perry's Stream; que le Connecticut Lake, etlo» deux lacs Hitucii au nord 
 de celui-ci, Hemblcnt lui aHHi)j;ner un plun grand volume d'eau qu'aux trois autres rivierenj 
 ct qu'en I'admettant commc le lit du Connecticut, on prolonge davantage ce lleuve que 
 Hi I'on donnait la preference i une de ce» trois autres rivieres} 
 
 Enfin que la carte A ayant ete reconnue tlans la convention de 18)27 comme indiquant 
 le cours des eaux, I'autorite de cette carte sembic »'et«ndre egalement li leur denomina- 
 tion, vil qu'en cas de contestation tcl nom de riviere, ou de lac, sur lequel on n'efit pas ete 
 d'accord, cflt pu avoir 6t6 omis; que la dite carte mentionnc Connecticut Lake, et que le 
 nom de Connecticut Lake, impli«iue I'api.lication du nom Connecticut u la riviere, qui tia- 
 vcrse le dit lac : 
 
 NoussoMMEs d'avis: 
 
 Que le ruisseau situe le plus au nord-ouest de ceux, qui coiilent dans le plus septen- 
 trional des trois lacs, dont le dernier porte le nomde Connecticut Lake, doit etre considere 
 comme la source la plus Nord-ouest (NorthwtaUmmoat head) du Connecticut. 
 
 Parallel of ^'^ 1"""* "" t.oisieme point, savoir, la question, quelle est la limite i> tracer depuis la 
 the 45th dc liviCre Connecticut le Ion-; du pnrall<s!e du 45e de;;re (le latitude septentrionale, jusqu'au 
 fiUtudc. " ' fleuve St. Laurent, iiomni^ dans les traites Iroquois, ou Cataraguj : 
 
 Conmlirunt : 
 
 Que los Hautes Parties Interessees different d'opinion, sur la question de savoir si les 
 traites exigent un nouveau leve de toute la ligne de limite depuis la rivirre Connecticut jus- 
 qu'au lleuve St. Laurent, nomme dans les traites Iroijuois ou Cataraguy, ou bien seule- 
 ment le complement des anciens leves provinciaux: 
 
 Considerwit : 
 
 Que le cinquidme article du traite dc Gand de 1814, ne stipule point, qu'on levera 
 telle partie des limiles, qui n'aurait pas ete levee jusqu'ici, mais declare que les limites 
 n'ont pas ete levees, et etidilit (ju'elles le serunt; 
 
 Qu'eti effet cc leve, dans les rapport« entre les deux Puissances, doit etre cense 
 n'avoir pas eu lieu depuis le Connecticut juscju': la riviere St. Laurent, nomniee dans les 
 traites Iroquois ou Cataraguy, vQ que I'ancien leve s'est trouve inexact, et avait ete or- 
 donnc non par les deux Puissances, d'un commun accord, mais par les anciennes autoritcs 
 provinciales; 
 
 Qu'il est d'usage de suivre, en fixant la latitude, le principe de latitude observee; 
 
 Et que le Governement des Etats Unis d'Amorique a etabli ccrtaiiies fortifications 
 u I'endroit dit Rouse's Point, dansia persuasion, que le terrain fesait jwrtie <le leur territoire, 
 —persuasion sufiisamment legitimec par la ligne reputce jusqu'alors porrespondre avec le 
 45e degre dc latitude septentrionale: 
 
«iu'il convieudra •'e procfaler k de nouvellc* opirationn pour inesuwr U lalltudo olwf r- 
 »ee, aflnde tracer la limite depui.la rividre Connecticut, lo l.)n« du ,«rallil« du 43e de- 
 gre d.. latitude Heplentrionalr, jui.(|u'au fleuve St. Laurent, nommedan* leu trait.* Iroquoit 
 ou Cataraguy , de maniire, cepei.dant. qu'en tout ca», i I'endroit dit IU.uie'« Point. »e terri 
 toire deH Etat. Uni* d'An.eri(iue n'etendra ju.qu'au fort qui n'y trouve etabli, et compren- 
 dra ce fori, et wm rayon Kilometrique. 
 
 Ain«i fait et donne nous Notre Sceau Iloyal d La Haye, ce dix Janvier dc I'An de 
 Or4ce mil huit cent trcnte un, et de Notre rdgne le dix huiticmc. 
 
 Art>ltOT'tU*i 
 claion. 
 
 (Higne) 
 
 Le Ministre dcs Affaires Etrangiren. 
 (Signe) Vbrstolk ub Soklbn. 
 
 OUILLAUME. 
 
 TRANSIiATIOlV. 
 
 WILLIAM, by the Grace of God, King of the Nttherlan,h, Prince of Orange-Xumw, 
 Grand Duke of Luxembourg, Src. f,-c. 
 
 Having accepted the function, of Arbitrator conferred upon us by the note .of the I-ri^luc- 
 Char.^ d' Affaires of the United States of America, and by that of the Embassador Ex- 
 traordinary and Plenipotentiary of Great Hritain. to our Minister of Foreign AlVa.rs un- 
 der date of the l'2lh January, 18'29, agreeably to the 5th Article of the Treaty of Ghent, 
 of the 24th December, 1814, and to the 1st Article of the Convention concluded between 
 those Powers, at London, on the 29tl, of September. 1827, in the difference winch has 
 arisen between them on the subject of the boundaries of their respective possessions: 
 
 Animated by a sincere desire of answering, by a scrupulous and impartial decision, 
 the confidence they have testified to us, and thus to give them a new proof ot the high value 
 
 " ^Hating,'!! that effect, duly examined and maturely weighed the contents of the First 
 Statement, as well as those of the Definitive Statement of the said diflerence. which have 
 Zrespe;tively delivered to us on the 1st of April of the year 183,,, by the Envoy Ex- 
 traordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, and the Em- 
 bassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of His Britannic Majesty, with all the docu- 
 ments thereto annexed in support of them: 
 
 Desirous of fulfilling, at this time, the obligations we have contracted in accepting the 
 functions o, Arbitrator in the aforesaid difference, by laying before the two High Interest- 
 cd Parties the result of our examination, and our opinion on the three points into which, 
 by common accord, the contestation is divided: ,• . „ „ 
 
 Considering^ that the three piints abovemcntioned ought to be decided according to the 
 Treaties.Acts an.l Conventions concluded between the two Powers; that is to say, the I rea- 
 ty of Peace of 1783. the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce ami Nav.gaUon of 1794, the 
 
¥1 
 
 i- 
 
 Arblter'in*- T)pcl«m«inn rrlativi" to «1ip Rivfr St. rroix of irOfl, tin- Troaly of Pi-ncf nlxiioil «t Ohfnt 
 TniuUtion '" '*"•'• ''"" <•«•>*»"'»"" "• "'•' '^'•"'' September, IBiri and Miteliell'i M»|i, and the Map 
 A. referred to in tliat tonyention: 
 
 Northwetl 
 AnrleofNo- ,.. M 
 
 valcatia. Wr orotARE, that, , ^ 
 
 At to the first point, to wit, the »tuc»tit)n, which is the pUio dmignalcil in the Trca 
 tieii M the Northwrnt Alible of Nova Htoliii, and what ore the IlighlaiHU divilliIl^ the Hiv- 
 em that empty tlicmnelvea into tlie llivor St. Lawrence from thoae which full into the At- 
 lantic (fcean, along which in to be drawn the line of boundary, from that angle to the 
 Northwenterninoat head of Connecticut lliver: 
 
 That the High Interested Parties respectively claim that line of boundary at the 
 south and at the north of the river St. Johnj and have each indicated, ujwn the Map 
 A. the line which they claim: 
 
 Contidtting: 
 
 That according to the instances alleged, the term Highlands applies nut only to 
 a hilly or elevated country, but also to land which, without being hilly, divides 
 waters flowing in tliftVrent directions; and that thus the character more or less hilly and 
 elevated of the country through wliiili are drawn the two lines respectively claimed, at the 
 north, and at the south, of the river Ht. John, cannot form tiie basis of a choice between 
 
 them) 
 
 That the text of the 2nd Article of the Treaty of 1783, recites, in part, tl words pre- 
 viously used, in the Proclamation of irO.% and in the Quebec Act of 1774, to indicate the 
 southern boundaries of the Government of Quebec, from Lake Champlain, "in forty-five 
 " degrees of North latitude, along the liighlan<ls which divide the rivers that empty themselves 
 «» into the river St. Lawrence, from those which fall into the Hea, and also along the North 
 " Coast of the Bay des Chaleurs;" 
 
 That in 1763, 17C3, 1773, and 178^, it was established that Nova Scotia should be 
 bounddtl at the north, as far as the western extremity of the Hay des Chaleurs, by the 
 southern boundary of the Province of Quebec) that this delimitation is again found, with 
 respect to the Province of Quebec, in the Commissi.m of the Governor General of Quebec 
 of 1786, wherein the language of the Proclamation of 1763, and of the Quebec Act of 177-4, 
 has been used, as also in the Comn>is»ions of 1786, and others of subsecjuent dates of the 
 Governors of New Brunswick, with respect to the last mentioned Province, as well as in a 
 great number of maps anterior ami jKisterior to the Treaty of 1783$ and that the 1st Article 
 of the said Treaty specifies, by name, the States whose independence is ackno'vledgedj 
 
 But that this mention does not imply (impli(iue) tlie entire coincidence of the Ixmnda- 
 ries between the two Po-.vers, as settled by the following Article, with the ancient delimita- 
 tion of the British Provinces, whose preservation is not mentioned in the Treaty of 1783, 
 and which, owin- to its continual changes, and the uncertainty which continued to exist 
 respecting it, created, from time to tin>e, differences between the Provincial authorities; 
 
 That there results from the line drawn under the Treaty of 1783, through the great 
 Lakes, west of the river St. Lawrence, a departure from the ancient Provincial charters, 
 with regard to those boundaries; 
 
 That one would vainly attompt to explain why, if the intention was to retain the ancient 
 Provincial boundary, Mitchell's Map, published in 1755, and consequently anterior to the 
 Proclamation of 1763, and t() the Quebec Act of 1774, was precisely the one used in the 
 negotiation of 1783; 
 
 That Great Britain proposed, at first, the river Piscatacjua as the eastern boundary 
 of the United States; and did not subsequently agree to the proposition to cause the 
 boundary of Maine, or Massachusetts Bay, to be ascertained at a later period; 
 
 not 
 
 »n. 
 
 «t 
 17 
 
 d< 
 
 tl 
 
 I 
 t 
 
 :,1mJ.^,. ..,,„.^WJ 
 
. , . 1 r*.ucw ctwimaliun on U.. .pot. wh.ch couUl A'^^'„"- 
 •rh.t »h. Treaty of Oheut •f.pul.U.l fur a ucw c«inm.u TmnJ^Uon 
 
 TUtthelon«i.uae "^J " J^," • f^^ aeUn„i„.i on.y by the IHc.araUon of 
 „ith that of the »<)««« «» ^'»' ***• ^'^ 
 
 *e»'«»'"'':^t-;ri;:iri .*-.-"*•'"* *• "••" "" •""' 
 
 mcnt of Quebec, .t .» to U l"»Ke«i .^^^ j.^,, ;„^„ j^e ncaj 
 
 CUen...lve.-."U.the .Wor Ht. ''^^;JZtu..r..r^r.^ aug.e not UvinK»>een .nd.- 
 Thaithenature of tUepouna «"*^" *^ f^„,„u to locate t».atan«le at on. 
 catea by the. Treaty of 17B3, no argument can 
 place in preference to anUher, j,, ^i,, .o^^ce of the River 
 
 ' Tha' , at all evenU, if '^ --/-^ ^Tnl e U wouUl ,. »o much tl.e more po.ibl. 
 g,.Croi,,anaio<.UforitatMar»Ml. . r -^^^^^^^^ ^..„,, ^,„ ,, ,t 
 
 tut thebounaury of New ^-^f ;. ^^ arther north ana ea»t, accorain^ to thejr 
 Province .everal Northwest an« , - « ^^^^^ ^^^^ _^^^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^^ „, ,,, ,„,^„ 
 
 „eater remotene.. from Marn' IML t.om 
 
 ."^ferred to in the Treaty haa not been -"*j;^^„^^ ,,„,,, ,„« a.iaaca to, havin, been 
 .r,.at, con.eo«ently, the ^-thw^ a^^^^- ^^^^^^ ^^^,^^^,, , ,„ ^ „,.,,,ertainea, the 
 
 unknownin irB-^, and the Treaty o Oh n^^^^^^^^^^^ .^ ^^ ^ considered aa a pet.tu.n of 
 
 „,e„,ionof that historical ange.ntl> y ,„, .aeci.ion, whereas, if cons;.aered aa a 
 
 pnnciple (petition de l-'-PO aft-^ «^ ^ ^.,,. . ,,,, ,„,»e which is formed by a 
 
 loposrnphical point, having reference to th ^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ Highlands," .t forms s.m- 
 
 .. U drawn due north from t^e ---f^^ ^,,.,, ,:,,w those rivers that empty 
 
 p,V the extremity of the hne^^' ^^ ""^ ' « ^^ J,,,,, ,,,,,,. „,, into the Atlantic Ocean "-■ 
 Ithemnelves into the river St. ^^-;;lll^, ,„„e of Nova Scotia aoes not contribute 
 
 ::rs::;-- — ^--"^^^^^^^ - ^'-^^^ ^^ '-^''' 
 
 the line which it is to terminate, ^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^^^^.^,y „,,,.,ea over the 
 
 Lastly, that the -«"-";; ^;^"^'^,^,, Settlement-even aamitting that such exer- 
 Tief of MadawasWa. and over ^^^'^^f^Z. the question, fur the reason that those two 
 cise were sufficiently P--'l--^;"""\ '"Tl.ory in dispute, and that the High Interest 
 .ettlements only embrace a T-^^^^;^ ^veen'the two lines respecUvely claim- 
 ea Parties have acknowledged the ^j'^^ / J ^„, ,,„,, Uieretore, possession cannot 
 e,,bythem.asconstitu.inga.uV -'^^^^^ 
 
 bo considered as derogating from tbe "^b" * ^,^.^^, ^, ,,, „„,,, of the nvcr 
 
 .incesbe set aside, ^^^^\^ ^''^Z^^^^ - the Proclamation of 1763, and in the 
 St. John, and especially that "^'^^ ^'^ " ^J^ted in support of the line claimed at tho 
 
 ;:tri:iongs to Canada or to New Brunswick: 
 
 ^"'"•■'"'■"f .tlon divested of the inconclusive arguments dra>vn from the nature, mor. 
 That Uw <iucsuon, aivesitu «. ^ 
 
io 
 
 Arbiter's Be- or Ie»» hiUy, of the groun...— from tlic ancient delimitntion of the Provinces.—frora th* 
 Tmnslation. XNort iwest angle of N'va Scotia, and from the actual possession, resolves itself, in the 
 Northwest *"*'' *" ^^^^'- which is the line drawn uue north from the source ( f the river St. 
 ^a"l'* "^^'^ ^^roisf' and which x» the ground, no matter whetlier hilly and elevated, or not, which, from 
 that line to the Northwestemmost head of Connecticut river, divides the rivers that empty 
 tliemselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean; That 
 tlie High Interested Parties only agree upon the fact that the boundary sought for, must be 
 determined by such a line, and bv •iach a groundj that they further agree, since the Decla- 
 ration of 179!^, as to the answer t» be given to the first question, with the exception of the 
 latitude at rt-hich the line drawn due north from the source of the St. Croix river is to ter- 
 minate} that saiu iatitude coincides with the extremity of the ground which, from that line 
 to the Northwestemmost source of Connecticut river, divides the rivers which empty them- 
 selves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fpll into the Atlantic Ocean? and that, 
 therefore, it only remains to ascertpir. that ground: 
 That on entering upon this operation, it is discovered, on the one hand: 
 First, that ir, by adopting the line claimed at the north of the river St. John, Great 
 Britain cannnt be considered as obtaining a territory of less value than if she had accepted, 
 in 1783, the river St. John, as her frontier, taking into view the situation of the country 
 situated between the rivers St. John and St. Croix in tlie vicinity of the sea, and the pos- 
 session of both banks of the river St. John in the lower pi.rt of its course, said equivalent 
 would, nevertlic'ess, be destroyed by l\w interruption of the communication between Lower 
 Canada and New Brunswick, especially between Quebec and Fredericton; and one would 
 vainly seek to discover what motive could have determined the Court of London to consent 
 to such an interruption: 
 
 That if, in th-; second place, in contra-distinction to the rivers that empty themselves 
 into the river St Lawrence, it had been proper, agreeably to the language ordinarily used 
 in geography, to comprehend the rivers falling into the Bays of Fundy and des Chaleurs 
 with those emptying themselves directly into the Atlantic Ocean, in the generical denomina- 
 tion of rivers falling into th Ulantic Ocean, it would be hazardous to include into the 
 species belonging to tiiat class the rivers St John and Ristigouche, which tlic line claimed 
 at the north of th? river St Julin divides immediately from river? emptying themselves into 
 the river St Lawrence, ni,t with other rivers falling into the AtlanUc Ocean, but alone; 
 find thus cO apply, in interpreting the dclimitition established by a Treaty, where each 
 word must have a meaiMiig, to two exclusively special cases, and where m mention is made 
 of tlie gcius (genre,) a generical expression which would ascribe to them a broader meaning; 
 or whici, if extended to the Sclioodiac Lakes, tlie Penobscot and tlie Kennebec, whict 
 empty themselves directly into the Atlantic Ocean, would establish the principle that the 
 Treaty of 1781 meant highlands which divide, as well mediately as immediately, the rivers 
 that empty themselves into the river S:. Lawrence from those which fall into the AtlanUc 
 Ocean— a principle equally realized by both lines: 
 
 Thirdly: That the line cliumed at the nortii of tlie river St John does not divide, even 
 immediately, the rivers tlut empty themselves into the river St Lawre- -3 [nnr the rivers 
 St John and Ristigouche, but only Rivers that cmptj themselves into the St. John and 
 Ristisoufche. with the exception of the last part of said lire, neai- the sources of the river 
 St John; aud that hence, in order to reach the Atlantic Ocean, tht rivers divided by vi at 
 line from those that empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence, each need two inter- 
 mediate channels, t. wit: the ones, the river St John t-id the Bay of Fundy; and the 
 others, the rver Ristigouche and the Bay of Chaleurs: 
 
11 
 
 And on the other hand, cr^r^tr^rimit Parties intended, Arbittr'»ne- 
 
 xu ffi^ionilvptnliuncdhow, it Uiehigh t/Ontracung rttriics.!.!* ^^^^ 
 
 That it cannot be sufficiently explaincu now, » ^^ xr»n.Ution 
 
 themselves inw Atlantic Ocean: 
 
 separation between these and the rivers taiiin„ in ^^^^^^ ^^^^ 
 
 ,rftic '"1"'™"'''"°'!'"*."*'',^., „,.785 ,„.taC.nnc.li»t,.nd«v.nl.ll.e St L.w 
 
 And *.. u,o ... •"■^'"';^" :',^;; :,„ .„,d .».. i.K*d » .«,™d., *. 
 
 other: 
 
 Considering: ^AAnceA on either side, and the docnmente 
 
 cxhlbited m support of them cannot ^^ ,,ti,ely claimed by the Higli Inter- 
 
 „,ine a preference in favor of one f^'^^ ^^.^ J,„„,,e of the river St. Croix 
 ested Parties, as tlie boundaries of he l-« ^,^^ ^,^ „,,„,, „ahe differ- 
 
 , «>eNorthwesternmosthea of^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^,3, ,„ 
 
 ;;::if:x"-^^-----"^- 
 
 principles of law and equity, with regard to the otlier: 
 Conaidtring: „„paH„„ resolves itself into a selection to 
 
 A. and affording the only basis of a decision 5 ^^ ^^^^ ^^^, ^ „„t ^c 
 
 .idditional documents: 
 
 1 
 
iZ 
 
 -Vrbitei^gDe. We ARE OP OPINION-: 
 cuuon. 
 
 Twautiolu That it will be suitable [il conviendra] to adopt, as the boundary of tl.e two States 
 
 » line drawn due north from the source of the river St. Croix to ti.e point where it in-' 
 tersecte the middle of the thalweg* of the river St. John, thence, the middle of the tnal- 
 MT^ of that river, ascending it, to the point where the river St. Francis empties it- 
 self mto the river St. John; thence, the mi.ldle of the thalweg of the river St. Francis, as- 
 cendmg it, to the source of its southwesterumost branch, which source we indicate on the 
 Map A, by the letter X, authenticated by the signature of our MinUter of Foreign Affairs- 
 thence, aline drawn due west, to the point where it unites with the line claimed by the 
 United States of America, and delineated on the Map A, thence, said line to the point at 
 which, according to said map, it coincides with that claimed by Great Britain; and thence 
 the line traced on the map by the two Powers, to the northwestcrnmost source of Conncc'- 
 ticut River. 
 
 en^ostu'li , ,^l •;:«"'■''* *'*^ ^''•='""' P"'"*' t» ^t: the question, which is the Northwesternmost 
 of Connect!- h**" of Connecticut river: 
 cut River. 
 
 Considering: 
 
 Tliat, in order to solve this question, it i. necessary to choose between Connecticut- 
 fake River, Perry's Stream, Indian Stream and Hall's Stream: 
 
 Considering: 
 
 That, according to the usage adopted in geography, the source and the bed of a 
 
 iira^b T' "' T T "' ""^ ""■■ "•'^' " "^^^'•^^ *" -<=" --" -J to such 
 nicating with said nver: vuimim 
 
 Considering: 
 
 an J' nT""?' l!"" "'" "'' ''""'^ '"''""•'"^ '^' "'""•' "f """'^ Brook, and that, in 
 an official letter of subsequent date, in the same year. Hall's Brook is represen ed as a Zl 
 nver falling into the Connecticut; ^presented as a small 
 
 That the liver in which Connecticut Lake is situated appears more considerable tlian 
 either Hal Ps Indian or Perry's Stream; that Connecticut Lake aad the two lZs situaT 
 ed norUiward of it. seem to ascribe to it a greater volume of water than to the 1 
 rive.; and that by admittingit to be the bed of the Connecticut, tt col ^tlt ":: 
 IS «^ended farther than it would be if a preference were given to either of the other Z 
 
 Lastly, that the Map A. having been recognised by the Convention of 1827, as indicat 
 
 S a'TlT •^*""^' ''" "'""'^ "''''' ■"*"-"'" ■'■'--eseem t eVrendt 
 their appellation; since, in case of dispute, such name of rive- or lake r..nZ tl 
 
 *T/ialtveg—a. Gcrmm compotind word— YXn/ »nll«„ 
 channel of the rivcr.-'/V„„i„," JM.rullci.-u.'cg, «ay. I, men, l.crc, the .l.epci 
 
13 
 
 We are of opisios: 
 
 That the stream situated farthest to the northwest among those which fall into the Arbiter's De- 
 northernmost of the three Lakes, the last of which bears the name of Connecticat Lake, Tr«n»lation. 
 must be considered as the northwestemmost head of Connecticut river. 
 
 And as to the third point, to wit: the question, which is the boundary to be traced Panllrl of 
 from the river Connecticut, along the parallel of the 45th degree of north latitude, to the g^eofNortli 
 river St, Lawrence, named in the Treaties Iroquois or Cataraguy: latitude. 
 
 Coruidering: 
 
 Tliat the High Interested Parties differ in opinion as to ti.e question — Whether the 
 Treaties require a fresh survey of the whole line of boundary from the river Connecticut 
 to the river St. Lawrence, named in the Treaties Iroquois or Cataraguy, or simply the 
 completion of the ancient provincial surveys: 
 
 Conaiilenng: 
 
 That the fifth article of the Treaty of Ghent of 1814, does not stipulate tliat sucli 
 portion of the boundaries which may not have hitherto been surveyed, shall be surveyed: 
 but declares that the boundaries have not been, and establishes that they shall be, surveyed: 
 
 That, in effect, such survey ought, in the relations between the two Powers, to be con- 
 sidered as not having been made from the Connecticut to the river St. Lawrence, named 
 in the Treaties Iroquois or Cataraguy, since the ancient survey was found to be incorrect, 
 and had been ordered, not by a common accord of the two Powers, but by tlie ancient pro- 
 vincial authorities: 
 
 That in determining the latitude of places, it is customary to follow the principle ol' 
 tlie observed latitude; 
 
 And that the Government of the United States of America has erected certain forti- 
 fications at the place called Rouse's Point, under the impression that the ground formed part 
 of their territory — an impression sufficientiy authorized by the circumstance that the line 
 had, until then, been reputed to correspond with the 45tli degree of north latitude: 
 
 We are of opinion: 
 
 That it will be suitable [il conviendra] to proceed to fresh operations to measure thi- 
 observed latitude, in order to mark out the boundary from the river Connecticut along the 
 parallel of the 45th degree of north latitude to the river St Lawrence, named in the 
 Treaties Iroquois or Cataraguy, in such a manner, however, that, in all cases, at the place 
 called House's Point, the territory of the United States of America sliall extend to tiie fort, 
 erected at Uiat place, and shall include said fort and its Kilometrical i-adius [rayon Kilo- 
 metrique.] 
 
 Thus done and given under our Royal Seal, at the Hague, this tenth day of Jan- 
 uary, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and tiiirty-one, and of 
 our Reign the eighteenth. 
 
 (Signed) WILLIAM, 
 
 The Minister of Foreign Affairs: 
 
 .'Sii^nod) VBUsroi.K de Soele-v. 
 
 4 
 
PROTESX. 
 
 The Hague, I2th January, 1831. 
 
 l-f American '^'"' ^-^ndersijrned, Minister Plenipotentiary and Envoy Extraoniinary of the United 
 ^linistor. States of America, had the honor to receive fioin tlie hands of His Majesty, the King of tiie 
 Netherlands, on the lOtii instant, a document purporting to be an expression of his opinion on 
 the several points submitted to him as Arbiter, relative to certain portions of the boundary of 
 the United States. In a period of much difliculty. His Majesty has had the goodness, for 
 the purpose of conciliating conllicting claims and pretensions, to devote to the Higli Parties 
 Interested, a time tliat must have been precious to himself and people. It is with extreme 
 regret, therefore, tiiat the Undersigned, in order to prevent all misconception, and to vindi- 
 cate the rights of his Government, feels iiimself compelled to call the attention of His 
 Excellency, the Baron Verstolk Van Soelen, His Majesty's Minister of Foreign AtTairs, 
 ngain to the subject. Rut while, on the one hand, in adverting to certain views and consi- 
 derations, which seem in some measure, perhaps, to iiave escaped observation, the Under 
 signed will deem it necessary to do so with simplicity and frankness; he could not, on tlie 
 other, be wanting in the expressions of a most respectful deference for His Majesty, the 
 Arbiter. 
 
 The language of the Treaty, which has given rise to the contestation between the 
 United States and Great Britain, is. "And that all disputes which might arise in future on 
 « the subject of the boundaries of the said United States may be prevented, it is iiereby agreed 
 " and declared, that the following are and shall be their boundaries, viz: from the north wrst 
 " angle of Nova Scotia, viz.: that angle which is formed by a line di-awn due north from the 
 •' source of tlie St. Croix river, to the higldands; along the said highlands which ilivide tiiose 
 «« rivers that empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence, from those which fall into the 
 •• Atlantic ocean, to the northwesternmost head of Connecticst river; thence, down alon" 
 " 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 die river Iroquois or Cataraguy. » ♦ » * » K»s( 
 " by a line to be drawn along the middle of the river St. Croix, from its mouth in the bav 
 " of Fundy, to its source; and from its source directly north, to the aforesaid higldand?, 
 " whicUdiride the rivers that fall into the Atlantic ocean, from those which fall into the 
 " river St. Lawrence." The manner of carrying this apparently exceedingly definite and 
 lucid description of '.oundary into effect, by mnning tlie line as described, and markin" 
 the same on the surface of tlie earth, was the subject, the sole, exclusive subject, submil- 
 ted by the Convention of September, 182r, in pursuance of the Treaty of Ghent, 1814, 
 to an arbiter. 
 
 If, on investigation, that arbiter found the language of the Treaty, in his opinion, 
 inapplicable to, and wholly inconsis.ten; with, the topography of the country, so that the 
 Treaty of 1783, in regard to its description of boundary, could not be executed acronlinn- 
 to its own express stipulalions, no authority whatever was conferred upon him to deter- 
 mine or consider what practicable boundary line should, in such case, be substituted and 
 csLiblished. Such a question of boundary as is he-c supposed, the United States of 
 America would, it is believed, submit to the definitive decision of no sovereign. And in 
 
 [| 
 
1 
 
 15 
 
 llie case submitted to 1Ii« Majcst v, llic King of the Nctlicrlantis, the TTiiitcd Stales, in tor- I'rotest ot 
 iicaring to delegate any Buch power, were not influenced by any want of respect, for that Mjnistpf. 
 distinguished monarcli. They have, on the contrary, given liim the liighest and most signal 
 proofs of their consideration and confidence. In tlic present case especially, as any revi- 
 F'ion or substitution of boundary whatever, had been steadily, and in a spirit of unaltara- 
 !ile determination, resisted at Ghent and nt Wnsiiington, they had not anticipated the pos- 
 sibility of there being any occasion for delegating such powers. 
 
 Among the questions to which the language of the Treaty of 1783, already quoted, gave 
 rise between the High Parties Interested, is tlic following, vi/,: where, at a point due north 
 from the source of the river St. Croix, are '* the highlands vliich divide the rivers tha< 
 " empty themselves into the river St. liawrencp, from those that full into the Atlantic 
 "ocean?" at which samo point on said highlands was also to be fmind the northwest angle 
 of the long established, well known, and distinctly defined, Rrilish Province of Nova 
 Scotia. 
 
 On the sniithern border of tlic river St. Lawrence, and at the average di»ti;r.';p from it 
 of k?s thaji thirty Knglish miles, there is an elevated range or coulinnition of broken 
 highland, extending from Cape Ilosieres, southwesterly to the sources of Connecticut nv- 
 nr, forming the southern border of the basin of the St. Lawrence and the llgiic des vcrsanis 
 of the ri\ers emp'ying into it. The same highlands form also the Itgne drs vcrsanis, on 
 the north of the river Ristigouche, emptying itself into the bay des Chaleurs, the river SI. 
 .lohn with its northerly and westerly branches emptying into the bay of Fundy, the river 
 Penobscot with its iiortlnvesterly branches emptying into the bay of Penobscot, the rivers 
 Kennebec and Androscoggin, whose united waters empty into the bay of Sagadahock, and 
 the river Connecticut emptying into the bay usually called Long Island Sound. These 
 buys are all open arms of the sea or Atlantic ocean; arc designated by these names on 
 Mitchell's map: and, with the single exception of Sagadahock, are all equally well known, 
 and usually designated, by their appropriate names. This ligne des versanta constitutes 
 the highlands of the treaty, as claimed by the United States. 
 
 There is another lignc dea vcrsants, which Great Britain claims as the highlands of the 
 Treatj'. It is the dividing ridge that bounds the southern side of the basin of the river St 
 John, and divides the streams that flow into the river St. John, from those which flow intc 
 the Penobscot and St. Croix. No river flows from this dividing ridge into the river St. 
 Lawrence. On the contrary, nearly the whole of the basins of the St. John and Ristigouche 
 intervene. The source of the St. Croix also is in this very /iirne rfM rersan/s, and less 
 than an English mile distant from the source of a tributary stream of the St. John. This 
 proximity, reducing the due north line of the treaty, as it were, to a point, compelled the 
 provincial agents of the British Government to extend the due north Una over tlds dividing 
 ridge into the basin uf the St. John, crossingifs tributai-y streams to the distance of about forty 
 miles from the source of the Si. Croix, to the vicinity of an isolated hill between two tribu- 
 tary streams of the St. John. Connecting that isolated hill with the ligne des rersants, as 
 just ilescribed. by passing between said tributary streams, they claimed it as constituting 
 the highlands of the treaty. 
 
 These two ranges of highlands, as thus described, the one contended for by the United 
 States, and the other by Great Britain, llis Majesty, the Arbiter, regards as comporting 
 equally well in all respects, with the language ol the treaty. It is not the intention of the 
 Undersigned, in thisph'ce, to question in thesliglitcst degree the correctness of His Majesty's 
 conclusion. But win n ''le Arbiter proceeds to say, that it would be suitable to run the lino 
 due north from the so^.rct if the river St. Croix, not "to the highlands which divide the rivers 
 "that fall into the Atlantic ocean from those wliich fall into the river St. Lawrence," but to the 
 centre of tlie river ht. JuUu, thence tu jmuis up said rixer to the mouth of the river $t. Frorr- 
 
. 16 
 
 Proteit of ci8, thence up the river St. Francis to the source of its smithwesternmost branch, and front 
 MWiter™*" thence by a line drawn west unto the v'"* where it intersects the line of the highlands as 
 claimed by the United States, and only from thence to pass " along said highlands, which 
 •< divide the rivers that fall into the Atlantic ocean, from those which fall into the river St 
 " Lawrence, to the northwestemmost head of Coanecticut river;" thus abandoning altoge- 
 ther the boundaries oi the Treaty, and substituting for them a distinct and different line of 
 demarcation— it becomes the duty of the Undersigned, with the most perfect respect for the 
 friendly views of the Arbiter, to enter a Protest against the proceeding, as constituting 
 a departure from the power delegated by the High Parties Interested, in order that the 
 rights and interests of the United States may not be supposed to be committed by any pre- 
 sumed acquiescence on the part of their Representative near His Majesty, the King of the 
 Netherlands. 
 
 Tlie Undersigned avails himself of this occasion to renew to the Baron Verstolk 
 Van Soelen, the assurances of his high consideration. 
 
 (Signed) 
 
 WM. P. PREBI.B.' 
 
 His Exrellency the Baron Verstolk Van Soklen, ) 
 His Majesty's Minister of Foreign AiTairH. \ 
 
and front 
 hiandg as 
 d», which 
 
 river St 
 ig altoge- 
 nt line of 
 ict for the 
 nstituting 
 - that the 
 
 any pre- 
 ng of the 
 
 Verstolk 
 
 ij.e.'