IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

1.1

Uig|2B 12.5

£ IS 12.0

IL25 IHI.4

1.6

Hiotographic

Sdences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. MSM

(716) 172-4503

^\^\

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/

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/

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

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.

1£^--

0-5

^S;>.

•B'l

*'>

i^mm

^isc_;

'Ifl

fagfrnsmmmmmm

..^<^

>^'

')4'-^' .^y

-•i*V' ■'""

i iii|i<|;ii|ii I

'I-;

CI ^-

"iinii

f--v

■ "«

A* .

J-**

. «*,^, f. «.lr-

. .;*•'

SKETCH

or TMK

DISPUTED TERRITORY-

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»

•rf* '■* //

.V'.V^

CJ IJ L.F

Sl^i T .A T K ^

/X^'.

,!^^

^'1.-^

(

, v^

'i>

m^d.

i' V

;.nT J,

(

•.5i:;^MA m'mn^igimuT^ n^-n^t

■' ^

-*'vyt'^ti*' i*

i it

f-^'f

REMARKS

OM TUB

DISPUTED NORTH-WESTERN BOUNDARY

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.

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.

».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,

** 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?:

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)'

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

'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.

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

: .'•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.

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-

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

lull

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.

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.

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

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

las

is-

P-

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.

" 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

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

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

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

Tom

ouu-

'* **

le of

Eiters

'■ «t' '■

"■('*'

fVoiii

' ' -

•

) the

•

) . •

nth

■^ .

the

" ^

• ' .

liich
e, a

* . ■-

the
Iters
intil

♦ ■ .

;the

r -

• - .

• ■

the

' • =

'■^ ' '.

r -

. ■' ■

r ;

• ^' "■ '

' ' . 5. ' -

f ^

..^ >'