^> e>. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) A M. ////// ^ /<> %8 1.0 I.I I- IM It 1^ — 6" IM M IM !.8 1-25 IIIIII.4 iiiii.6 ^^ <^ Ti/ ^/,. ^ c^l '>/ ^;^ VI /A ^7^'^i w Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST M(i:f.' «TReET WEBSTfR, ^.Y. M580 (716) 872-4503 iV 'C^^^ ^ N> % V ^ P;7 4 .V M?^ %- CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques k Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques ot bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this 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 n D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagie Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculie Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur □ Bouni Reli6 Bound with other material/ avec d'autres documents D Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intirieure 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 ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t4 fiimdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentairas; L'institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre 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 indiquds ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es Pages restored and/oi Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculies Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages d6color6es, tachet^es ou piqu^es Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6es Showthroughy Transparence Quality of prir Quality indgale de I'impression Includes supplementary materif Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ I 71 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ I I Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ D Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6ti filmies A nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X t 26X 30X 12X 16X 20X 28X 32X The copy filmed hare has baen reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library Division Provincial Archives of British Columbia The images appearing here are the best quaiity possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression, The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —^- (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. 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: L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grAce A le gAnirositA de: Library Division Provincial Archives of British Columbia Les images suivantas ont itt 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 imprimAe sont filmis en commengant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmAs en commen^ant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: ie symbole -^ signifie "A SUIVRE ", le symbole V signifie "FIN ". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film^s d des taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film* A partir de Tangle sup*rieur gauche, de gauche i droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le ncmbre d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m^thode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 hop BOUNUAliY OF THE UNITED STATES. THE BOUNDARY OF THE UNITED STATES. SAN JUAN. The bounclary lire between the United States and Great liritain is now settled from the Athmtic to the Pacific, a distance of more than tlu'ee thousand mihi-s. It has thus been settled at diiVerent times. For a portion of the long extent, the Great Lakes form a natural boundary. For a much longer extent, (he forty-ninth I)arallel of latitude, a purely artificial and arbitrary line has been agreed upon. The only points tliat have given rise to diffi- culty have been the two extremities of tlie boundary at the north- east and at the north-west. It '-^ a little singular that in both cases the trouble has arisen in v le practical interpretation of words intended to define a natural boundary, — a natural boun- dary being one tliat, in theory at least, desciibes itself. The treaty of peace between ihe United States and (Jreat Hritain fixed iho north-eastern boundary in the " highlands whieli divide those rivers that empty tlieraselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean ; " and the question which arose was geographical, — to find just where those "high- lands ''were. On the north-west, the treaty of 1H4parates the continent from Vancouver's Island ; " and the question which arose was to find where that cliannel lies. The former (piestion was settled, after years of controversy, by the Ashburton Treaty, in 184-. The latter (pu'stion arose witliin ii few yeai-s after tlie treaty of 1H4(). From its nature, it liaftled all attempts at solution by discussion between (he two gdvern- ments ; and its solution by arI)itration was agreed to as a part of the Treaty of Washington, of May Sth, 1H71, — the same (rea(y which providiMl (ju' way for (he adjus(ment, a( fJencva, «)f the Alal)ama claims. By tlu! terms of ibis treaty, the German Em- peror was made the arbitrator; ami the representatives of the Fnitfd States and of (ireat Britain at Herlin r«'sj»ee(ivelv were maile (lie agen(s of their governnien(s to conduct (heir eases before him. *•••" nOUNDAUY OK THK UMTKI) STATKS. 2H Tinder tliis arraiicfoineiit, tlie nianac^cmcntof the casp at Berlin, in Ix'Iiiili" of lh(3 United States, devolved upon Mr. IJaiioroft, f)ur minister at tliiit capital ; and he appears f o have prefjared the papers upon the American side, no douht undi'r instructions, more or less general or specific, from the Dejjartment of vState at Washington. On the otiier side, the province of Mr. Odo Russell, the British minister at Berlin, would seem to have been confined to formal acts of communication with the Gi-rman government. Admiral I'revost (who had been commissioner on the part of Great Britain for laying down the boundary under the treaty of 184r)) appears to have brought to Berliii the papers on the iiritish side, and to have resided at that capital during the greater part of the time that the case was under consideration by tii'^ Emperor. These papers were prol)ably prepared in the Foreign OfRce at London, and wer<^ no doubt the work of various hands. We need cite 1)ut two documents in order to state the whole case as it rested with the arbitrator. The first is an extract from the treaty between the United States and Great Britain, 15th June, 184G: — ., Article I. From the point on the forty-ninth parallel of north lati- tu > •.A i^ ,^ i: !■ 'Hi A 242 nOUNDAl'.Y OK Tin: rMTKl) STATKS. iiinl, wliorcas, tlic commissioners niipoiiitc'd by tlii' two liitxli fotitract- iiitl ]i;irtics (o (U'tcrmiiu' tliat porlion of tlie boundary whii-li rmis eoutlicrly through the midillo of tlii' rliaiiiu'I aforesaid, were (inalile to agree u|ioii the same; and, whereas, the government of Her Uritannio Majesty claims that such boumlary line should, under the terms of the treaty above recited, be run through the Itosario Straits, and tlie govern- ment of the United Slates claims that it should be run through the Canal de Haro. it is agreed that the respective claims of the govern- ment of the United States and of the government of Her liritannio Majesty shall l)e submitted to the arbitration and awanl of His Ma- jesty the KmiK'ror of Germany, who, having regard to the above- mentioned article of the said treaty, shall decide thereu])on, finally ami without appeal, which of those claims is most in accordance with the true interpretation of the treaty of June 15, 184G. The earlier treaty thus (lefined the boundary in certain terms ; a difference arose respecting their moaning ; tlie second treaty stat((3 the claiiu of each party, and invites the (Jcrinan Emperor to de- cide which of tliose chiims is " most in auconhmce " with the true interpretation of the earlier treaty. Wiiieh is the jwre m acconhmce with the true interpretation of the treaty of 184'! would liave been a phrase more rigidly in compHance with the strict rules of gramnnir. We mention this point (of course of no practical importance) merely to illustrate the extreme simplicity of the ([uestion presented to the arbitrator. He was not invited to make a new boundary for the two countries. The aibitration, by the act of both parties, proceeded on the theory that the boundary had been, in fact, detevmincd by the treaty of 1846. Nor was he even called upon to examine and de- cide at hirge where the Une should be run in order to accord with the definition of 1840, but was limited to two particular lines, one being chiimed by the United States and the other by Great Britain, as being, in fact, the line described, or attempted to be described, by the earlier treaty. If the (piestion had been put nakedly, without the use of the word " most," or some phrase of equivalent force, even if the cptestion had still been confined to the two lines claimed respectively by each of the two nations, the (lerman Emperor might have answered, and probably would have answered, that neither of those lines exactly fulfilled the conditions of the treaty of 184G, and thus the arbitration would have left the question in dispute precisely where it was before. 1 BOUNDAIiY OF TIIF: UNITKD STATES. 243 We say thnt tlie Gorniaii Emperor niii,rlit liave made (liis an- swer, and probaltly would have made it, liecause that would have been the true answer. The fact is, that the lauguatje of the treaty of 1S4(1, taken hy itself, lictrays an imperfect knowledge of the goooraphy of the premises. It speaks of "the channel whieh sei)arates the continent from Vancouver's I.sland." This form of Janguage would leave no difficulty in interpretation, if we had to deal oidy with the continent and with Vancouver's Island. Ikit even ordinary maps in use at the time, drawn upon a small scale, showed at least one or two islands lying to the east of Van- couver's Island, between it and the mainland ; and the very per- fect surveys which have now been made on both sides show that between Vancouver's Island ajid the mainland there are at least forty or fifty islands south of the parallel of 49'^, most of which are very small, that of San Juan, which is the largest, having an area of scarcely one hundred scpuvre miles. The space ■which " separates the continent from Vancouver's Island '" is, in fact, rather an archipelago than a channel. Among so many islands are, of course, almost as many jtassages. A Kob-Uoy canoe traveller, who should choose to amuse himself by threading his course among them in as great a variety of ways as possilile, would be able to make innumerable voyages from north to south, or in the opposite direction, before he would exhaust all i)Ossi- ble variations. Rut setting aside, on the one hand, narrow j)as- sages navigable for canoes, and, on the other, variations from the principal courses, unimportant as affecting the practical question, the number of passages sufficiently considerable to lay any pos- sible claim to the title of " the channel " is reduced to two, — one to the west and the other to the east of the cluster of islands of which San Juan is the principal and the most western. It was accordingly quite n itural that the dispute should arise, vhich, in point of fact, did arise, as soon as commissioners met on the spot to lay down the boundary. It was natural that Great liritiin should claim as the boundary that one of the two passages among the islands which is nearer the continent, and that the United States should claim that one of these two passages which is nearer Vancouver';- Island. It was natv .1 enough that this dispute should arise ; but in making a chiim for the more eastern jiassage, and in adhering to it ut the last, the agents of Great Britain took the step which led 244 UOfNDAltY OK THE rNITKl) PTATKS. in llio end to their utter (liseoiiilitiire. It is couolusively shown by Mr. liimentft tlmt tliis iiioic eiisU;ni ] i!issii,t,n! never liad u name till it received, (liiriii_t,f tlie diseii-^siniis siil)se(iiieiit to 1840, tliiit of the liosario Straits (a name originally heloni^ini; in u dilVerent hieality ) : and in fact Mr. Hanerol't is inclined to dispnte its rijj;lit (ohe called a channel at all. On the otlier liaiid, the more western channel, that directly between Vancouver's Island and th(! island of San Jnan, has been known from the earliest times as the Canal de Haro, or Arro, as it is written on the older maps, and is, beyond all question, entitled to be called " the channel." This fact is proved by a formidable array of geo- graphical and nautical evidence. Independently, th-erefo;e, of an entirely different class of con- siderations Icadiii!^ to the same conclusion, the (lerman Emperor, when called upon to decide between these two particular passages, with ri'Terence to the words of the treaty of 1m4(I, could scarcely refrain from giving the preference to the ("anal (h; Haro on jjurely geographical grounds. Neither the Canal i]i' Haro, nor what are now called the liosaiio Straits, " separate the continent from Vancouver's Island " in the sense of being all that separates them ; both he between the continent and Vancouver's Island, and the former is the? principal and more important passage. Ihit the decision would have been less certainly in our favor had the British taken from the outset and adhered throughout, to the ground which was proposed in ISoT ity Captain I'revost, their commissioner to lay down the boundary, and upon whii'h they rested their latest proposal in the joint high commission befon; the arbitration was agreed to. 'I'his profjosal Avas in sid)- stance that the words of the Ireatv of 184(! should be regarded as descriptive of the whole Kpar,- between Vancouver's Island and the continent, and that the line should be run through the middle of that space, — cutting through the archipelago of small islands where it might. There would have been a certain plausibility in this solution of the question. But, as will a])pear more clearly presently, it would hav(! in effect given to Grci^t Britain all that is of conse- quence in the question; so that this solution, or even the jires- entation of the (jucstion for arbitrati(»n in any terms which would have admitted such a solution, would have been inadmissil)le on the part of the United States. 1 nOUNDAItV ol' TIIK L'MTr.l) STAfRS. 24; Till' ciisc (if tlif l.'iiitfd Slatt's liy im iiifuns rusted 011 tlio 8treiii;lli ol' the claims ui' the Caiiiil dc Ifaro to tlui titli; ol' "Uio (.•liaiiiicl ■' ill ii jreoj;ra|iliical point ol" vit-w. Mr, liaiicrol't aimed to sliow tliat llu' Canal de liaro was the chaniul in the minds of the jiarties when the treaty of istt) was in!id(>. So far as rc;;ai'ds the <;i-ii(lem('n ciii^ai^ed on tlu! American side, he was perfectly successful. There eisii he no douht that Mr. MeLaue, wlio was our minister in Hnohind at that time, and that tin; leading niemhers of the United States Senate, which ratified the treaty, never entertained a shadow of douht that its ]ani.;iia^e descrihed, and was intended to describe, the Canal de JIaro. Ollicial documents record their contemporaneous expressions of the most uneipiivocal eharaeter, in which the jthrase in the treaty is meu- tioiu'd without suspicion tliat it could mean any thinj^ else than the Canal (h; Ihtro, or allow to Great Mritaiu any tenitory south of th(! i)arallel of 49*^, except the southern extremiry of Vancou- ver's Island, which would have fallen to the United States had the j)arallel of 49° been made the boundary throughout to the Pai'itie ( )cean. This brings us to the history of the treaty of 184G., The convention of 1818 between the United States and Great Britain carried the boundary from tlie I.ake of the Woods (where it had been lel\ by earlier treaties), to the Rocky Mountains, and established it for this extent upon the forty-ninth parallel. At that date, the l)ouiidary of the territory westward from the liocky Mountains was left undefin-'d. For a considerable time, by the consent of both governments officially exj)ressed, it remained free to the ])eople of both countries, without j)r('jiidice to the title, or claims to title, on the part of either government. But from an early day efforts Avere made to define the boundary by treaty. The United States frequently pro])osed to carry the parallel of 49'^ westward to the Pacilic. Great Britain invariably refused this proposition, }>robably uiuler the influence of the Hudson's Bay Company, which ijad some stations south of that parallel. It will be remembered that in those days, when the north- western part of the continent was a wilderness, more regard was had for islands lying off the coast, ports and harbors, and rivers giving access to the interior, than for areas of land upon the continent, however considerable, then difficult of approach and unsettled. 24f, IIOUNDAIIY OF Till-; INlTEl) STATKS. The CdlmnUiii River falls into flif Piicilic Ocfiiii at a point onn- isiclcralilv soutii of 41'^'. It was «• !tli a j^ood deal of dilTiiiilty tliat till' r.iiti>li >tatcsiiu'ii coiihl ]i{'rsiia(lt' IIu'Ium-Ivi's to ny^rve to any bouiidaiy \vlii( Ii ^lioidd ^ivo llif I'liiU'd States uiy tiling' north uf tliL' ('(ilmiiliia River. The forty-ninth ji.rallcl was not oidy north of tlir rinlit liaid< of the Colunihia River diiriii}^' tlu; whole or neariv the \\ liole of the navi<,'-altle part of its courHo, but if ndopti'd as tlie houndary throu<,diout to the I'.ieifio Ocean, it uoidd pass direetly across Vancouver's Island, and throw into the ]iosst'ssion of the United States the southern extremity of that island, ahniit (nit-liflh of its whole areiv; and thus f,'ive to the United States the coniniand l»y land of hoth sides of tlie Straits of Fnca. whicli also lie south of the ])arallel of 4tt", and which, like the Cnhnuliia River, are an important means <»f eomnnnii- cation with the interior, heinj,' the avenue leading to the mouth of Frazer's River and .)ther waters. When* ver, therefore, the discussion came to dose quarters, it was evident that no arranu'cment could he made, unless means could lie found (o satisfy (ircat Hritain as regards the navigation of the ('(ilumhia River and the possession of the whole of Van- couver's Island. For the rest, Rritisli statesmen were quite ready to agree to (he i)arallcl of 4li°. Meanwhile, an excitement was growing up in the United States on the sulijcct ; the strength of our claim to the whole territory fts far north as 04" 40', was asserted l>y ])opular orators; and the two houses of Congress directed ofTicial notice to he given to Great Britain for the tennination of the then subsisting arrangement for tlu' joint occujiation of the whole territory. During this jicriod of excitement earnest efforts were making irrlioth countries to find a way of adjusting the l)oundary, con- sistent with the honor and dignity of lioth powers, and therefore not incnn>istent with the position in which either of them found itself {)laced hy its ])revious action. Siudi an adjustment was found in adhering to the parallel of 4'.!*^ as the princii)le of tlio boundary; hut. allowing to Hritish subjects, the free navigation of that stream, and of its great ncn-thern branch, south of the parallel, and allowing also to Great liritaiii the whole of Van- couver's Island. This arrangement, as regards the boundary, was suggested to Lord Aberdeen by Mr. Everett, upon his own responsibility, in noUNDARY OF TIIK rNITED STATES. 247 1h4:J; and siilistaiiliiilly Uh; sunie arvan^a'ineMt was puldicly jno- jK).-a in I5«).st(in, in Jannaiy, 1S4;"). Mr. Stiir;,ns'.s leclnre was jtrintcd, with a niiiji sliowinif tlic iHiundiiiy lit- jiro- jKised. Cojiit's were circulated in Enj,'land as well as in this country. Althou^di drawn upon a very Hmali scale, the map plaiidy shows the boundary line drawn near to Vancouver's Jsland at the east, and between that island and two small islands lyinj; between it and the maiidand. 'J'lie proposition for thus settlinfj the boundary on the jainciple of the jjarallel of 4!>'^, but Avith such a variation as to alhtw to (ireat Hritain the whole of Vancouver's Island, was received with favor on both sides of the Atlantic. There is no doubt that, with the express purjiose of cominfi, if possible, to an anucable adjustment of the boundary question, which it had been thought essential should be treated in Wa>hinj?- ton. Lord Aberdeen, in 1S48, recalled Mr. Fox, who had been the Hritish minister there, and a])pointcd in his ])lace Mr. I'akeii- lium, who, it was hoped, woidd prove a more successful ne<^otiator. These hopes, however, with rei^ard to Mr. ' I*akenham, were disappointed ; and (inally Lord Alicrdeen, in 1846, prac^tically took the whole matter into his own hands. While the ncLjotiation nominally continued at Washincrton, Lord AbiM'decn caused the drauj^ht of a treaty to be prepared in the J'orei^n Oflice in London, and sent it over to Mr. Pakenham. Mr. Pakenham at oiiee communicated it, as a basis for uej^otia- tioii, to Mr. IJiiclianan, then Secretary of State under Presid«nt Polk. Dfpartiiii:^ in some dcL,n'i'e from recent usa^e, and revert- inij to a frequent |)ractiee of President Washington in his relation.s with the Senate as a jiart of the treaty-makuig power. President Polk submitted Lord Aberdeen's drauoht to the Senate, as a pro- jiosal for a treaty. The Senate, after due deliberation, piu^sed a resolution advisinLC its acceptance. This action of the Senate was anticipatory of the advice and consent required by the Constitu- tion for treaties after they have l)een made. Fortified by the opinion of the Senate, Mr. Puchanan required but short time with Mr. Pakeidiam for the formal "negotiations;" the treaty was afjrecd to by them, and was aifuin laid before the Senate, this time as a treaty already concluded; and again, aftei* due deliberation, the Senate advised and consented to it, this time in the sense of 248 IlDrNDAHY "M- TIIK UNITKI) STATICS. the ronstidilioM ; ami it wiis witl)out (li;lay riitilicd on tlie part of both pivi'ininciits. Loid Alx'rili'cirs (lniiii,fht was sent from Lomloii on tlin ISlh of May, IsK); tin- treaty was signed liy Mr. Miifliaiiaii uiid .Mr. I'akciiham on tlii" lotli of .Iinic, and the vote of the Senate, ndvisin;,' and consenting to the ratifieation, took ])hu;e on the ISth of .Iiiiif, or ])re('isely one eaU'iidar month from the tinie the dranuiit h-ft liOrd AhenU'en's hands. 'i"h(> formal exchair^i! of ratilications took phieo at London on the 17th of Jnly. In these proeeeiUni^s, no alteration of a sinyle word even, so ftvr as regards the honndary lino, was made in the dranglit that waa sent over from Lonch^n hy Lord Aherdeen. From the jx'cnliar way in wliidi the treaty was tlius originated and negotiated, there are no preliminary " protcx^ols" (.'oiineeted with it. There is, it wonld seem, a memorandum of the inter- view hetweeii Mr. Buehanan and Mr. I'akenhani, nt Avhieh the ktter presented the draught. This memorandum is not ])rinted in the volume hefon; us, and jirohalily simply records the fact that Mr. rakenham offered a draught of a treaty. 'J'he language of the draught, now become without change the langiu;ge of the treaty, is left to speak for itself. Under these circumstanc's, in order to ascertain the sense in which the words of the draught were understood hy the parties, it would seem reasonable to refer to the olVieial correspondence of 'Slv. Everett and Mr. McLane, our ministers in London, recording their conversations with Lord Aberdeen preliminary to the draught ])rei)are(l nnder his direction, and to other contempo- raneous records showing the state of ])ul)lic opinion in the two countries on the subject. But Great Britain, in the definitive statement presented to the arbitrator at Berlin, took the ground that this sort of evidence is beside the question. The readers of this journal will probably acquiesce in the technical accuracy of this point. Nevertheless, the evidence which the lawyers on the British side would thus exclude, would seem to be admissible at least to illustrate the language used in the treaty. It is of overwhelm- ing strength, to show that the United States on their side never meant to give up to Great Britain any territory south of the parallel of 49" except the southern portion of Vancouver's Island. The parallel of 49^ was tlie radical principle of the boundary. DOUNDAKY OP THE UNITKD STATKS. 2W A variation to accord to Great Hritaiii a pii'co of Vancouver's Island soutii of that lino was tho ultimatum of concession on the American side, — " nltiniatissinumi," Mr. Bancroft happily calls it. The treaty was jiossiiile of acceptance, because it was believed on our side that it enil)odied and raitlifiill) described this arran'>i'idlel ; and of course liaving not the remotest connection Avith any bound- ary line to be drawn east of Vancouver's Island and south of 40'^. Of course Lord Aberdeen wrote " King George's Sound " by a slip of the pen for something else. For what ? This is sheer conjecture. If it were "Canal de Ilaro," which Mr. Mcd^ane ■wrote on the same day to his chief as the description of the same thing, then every thing is clear as sunlight ; and but for the un- fortunate sliji of the pen this whole controversy need never have arisen, and the arbitration of the German Emperor need never have been invoked. 250 BOUNDARY OP THE UNITED STATES. He certainly did not write " Rosario Straits ; " that name for the channel ehiimed as the luiinithvry hy the British government was then unknown. It has been ins^'eniously su(,'t;'ested that Lord AhovdoiMi simply miscuUi'd the "(hilf of (Jeoroia" in writing " Kiiin' Cioori^'e's Sound." There is a trace of (ieorge, no douht, ill lioih expressions; but this su^'gestion is open to the objection (which seems to us conclusive) that, in that case, Lord Aberdeen, in professing- to describe the boundary, omitted to describe tiie only part which needed description. There is no question that in running westward on the ibrty-niuth parallel, as soon as tlie mainland is left, the water which is reached is the Gulf of Geor- gia ; here must he the northerly point of the water line, which, accordingly, needs no description. There is no question that the Straits of Fuca make the southern part of the boundary line, for they are expressly mentioned by name in the treaty of 1840. It is precisely the piece of the line that comes between its begin- ning on the 49th parallel and its end in the Straits of Fuca that needs description ; and here Lord Aberdeen's unfortunate slip of the pen gives us no light. But whatever may have been intended by the phrase "King George's Sound," it is clear that I^ord Alierdeen had in mind tlie same adjustment of the boundary whieh was understood ou our side, from the fact tliat he concludes his deseri2:)tion with the words " leaving the whole of Vancouver's Island, with its ports and harbors, in the possession of Great Britain." Tliis was pre- cisely the extent of the concession which it Avas believed miglit be made on the part of the United States. If Lord Aberdeen was expecting something more, it would have been no more than prudent, in this instruction to his own minister, to have pointed out that not only Vancouver's Island but the smaller islands lying between it and the mainland were intended to be covered by the language he employed. It must be oljscrved that this was a private instruction from Lord Aberdeen to Mr. Pakenlium, accompanying the draught of the treaty which was to be offered to the United States ; but this instruction was not intended to be communicated to the United States government, and in point of fact was not thus com- municated until many years afterwards. And as late as 1859, Lord John Russell, in citing from the instruction, l)y a most un- fortunate inadvertence, neglected to cite this closing sentence of BOUNDARY OF THE UNITED STATES. 251 tlie description. Happily Lord Napier had shown the original despatch to Mr. Campbell, who very well remembered it.^ Great Britain endeavor-ed to supplement this vacuous piece of evidence with regard to the meaning attached on the British side to tlie language of the treaty of 1846 at the time it was made, by appealing, twelve years later, to the memories of Lord Aberdeen and Mr. rakenham. It is easy to say that diplomatists prover- bially have bad memories, or rather good ones ; but it is not nec- essary to suppose that either Lord Al)erdeen or Mr. Pakenham ])urposely forgot any thing. If the former were so confused about the names of the places that he could not call them rightly at the time, when officially instructing his minister, it is not strange that he could not remember them a dozen years later ; while Mr. Pak- enham had notliiug to ftn-gct. He never was told any other than an obviously incorrect name for the channcd proposed for the boundary ; and, as it woidd seem, lie never had the curiosity to in- q^uii'e of his chief what was mtendcd by " Khig George's Sound." The queBlioii is often asked, why was it worth while to make a controversy upon a territorial question of so slight magnitude ? This question is generally raised in each country with reference to the action of the other, but sometimes, in either country, by large-minded inquirers, in criticism of the action of their own g(jverument in protracting the controversy, ^fhat have the United States gained after all, it is asked, by the favorable decision of the German f^mperor? The whole area comprised between the llf)sario Straits and the Canal de Haro is but a few hundred square miles, and only part of this is land ; San Juan is but a siuall island ; why was it worth while to maintain a controversy and to invoke the machinery of arbitration with no greater interest at stake ? This question is natural. It is best answered, however, by an- other (]^uestion : w^>y was it worth while for Great Britain to insist ' Mr. Arjliibald Campbell was the conimissiotier in behalf of the United States to lay down the boundary under the treaty of 184G, when Captain (now Admiral) I'rtvoBt acted in a similar capacity in behalf of Great Uritain. Their discussions on the spot were terminated in 1857, in tlie impossibility of coming; to an a^'reeiiient. Mr. CampbL'll has more recently been appointed commissioner on the part of tlio United Sla ■ s to inarli the btmndary on tlie for;y-nintli parallel, between the Lake of the Woods and the Hooky Mountains : a similar, but distinct duty, in which he is at present eni,'aged. 252 BOUNDARY OF TIIK UMTKD STATI-S. from tlio lu'uiiiiiing in liiiviiig tlir wlmle (if V;iiu'i)iivcr's Island? The forty-ninth parallel, as we have seen, had alieady ])een adopted as the Ixmndarv fur thousands of miles aeross tiie conti- nent ; why should (iri'al Ihitain rt'peatedly refuse the pmiiosition of the United States to continue this homidary to the I'ticific Occiin, let it cut Vancouver's Island where it mi^ht? 'J'he part of Vancouver's Island south of the iiarallcl is but about one-iifth of the .vhole, so that the c^reater i)art of the island in any case would have bek)n,L;ed to (ireat Britain. The explanation of the earnestness of Great Britain ujion this point is the obvious circumstance that the entrance tVom the Pa- c'fie Ocean into tlie Straits of Fuea lies south of Vancouver's Isl.md; and these straits, with the system of watercourses to Avhich they lead, <^ive access by water to a large extent of terri- tory north as well as south of the parallel of 411"^. Had that par- allel been maintaii'cd as the boundary- (piile to the Pacific Ocean, SiviiiL-- the southern portion of Vancouver's Island to the United States, Ave should have connnanded hnth sides of the entrance to thestraiis, that is, both sides of the water-jjassat^^e from the ocean, not only to our own territory, but also to the British possessions in that part of the continent. P>y insisting- on the southern i)or- tion of Vancouver's Island, Great Britain secured the command of one side of the passai^e, leaving to the United States, as would api)eai-, the command of the other side, — an arrangement i)alpa- bty just and imj)artial. The British goverinnent seems always to have been strongly impressed with the equity of such an arrangement as should give to each country respectively the command on land of one side of the water-passage from the Pacilic by the Straits of Fuea. As early as 1S2(), the United States had i)ro])osed the forty-ninth parallel as the boundary thn.ughout from the Rocky Mountains to the Pa.'ifie, with free navigation by British subjects of the Columbia Kiver. The British government ])r(.posed at that time that the Columbia River shouhl be the boundary from the point where its head watc "s were intersected by the forty-ninth par- allel ; but as that would cut off th(> United States from the Straits of Fuea, the British governm.Mit then formally i)roposed that the United States should have in addition a tract of territory on the Pacific, on the southern side of the straits, to be possessed in exclusive sovereignty. (w nOUNDAUY OK TIIK UNITKI) STATK.S. 253 In yicl(lin,t,s therefore, to Cireat Britain, in 1846, the southern portion of Vancouver's Island, we yielded only to an eqiiitahle plan, of the sincerity of her belief in which (ircat Britain had given the strongest proof, that the two connt'-ics should divide; the command by land of the water-passage trom the ocean into the iiitcrior. But this passage, which begins with the Straits of Fnca, continues by the Canal de Haro ; and it was a necessary sequel of the arrangcuKMit that, while Great Britain commanded one side of \hv. j)assage from Vancouver's Island, the United Slutes should (.'omniand the other, not only from the mainland at the south of the entrance to the Straits of Kuca, but from the island of San Juan, which makes the eastern side of the channel of the Canal di; Haro. In other words, had Great Britain been al)le to substantiate l)cforc the ficrman Em{ieror the claim to the Rosario Straits as "the chaniu'l " mentioned in the treaty of 1840, we shouid have been in this position, that having aciiuiesced in giving to the Brit- ish the southern jwrtion of Vancouver's Island upon their sugges- tion that it was not reasonable that ve should have cnmniaud bv land of li"tJi sides ot the water-passage from t!ie ocean inland, we should in effccd have giveii to thi-m the land command of l)olh si(l,.s, — un arrangement obviously equally unreasonable, and iu all resjiects unsatisfactory. We have contented ours(dves with a general review of those points brought forward in the solution of the conti'oversy which, ill our virw. were of the chief imixirlaucc in affecting tlu' deci- sion. Many others, which are interesting, were ad.luccd, and more or Irss stress was laid upon them \\\w\\ either side. For these we must refer th(> reader to the [lapers themselves, which ha])])ily are not voluminous. Tiie ])rincipal documents are but four in num- ber. The ease in behalf of the United States was opened befoie the Gciinan Kinperor by Mr. Bancroft's " meuKuiar' in IVrcui- b.T, IsTl; at the saine time the "case of (ireal Briiahi" was sul)niitted in belialf of tliat government. In June, l'^7-\ were .Mibmilt.d the '■ reply ot the United Stales" again by Mr. Han- .Toft.andtlic "secoiul and (hlluitive statement " of Great Ibitain. On the -Jlst of October, 187:!, the German Empenn- nuuh' liis award, that "most in aceordanee witli the true interpretadou of the treaty" of 184G "is the claim of the governmeuL ot the vol.. VIII, 17 . 254 BOUNDAllY 01" Till:; UNITKO STATKS. Unit('(I States, that the Ixitiiidury line between the territories of Ih'V lliitannie Majesty and the United States shouhl be drawn throuf^h the Ilaro flianiiel."' Tins is the whok' of tlie award. There is a roriiial preamble, but no arLTUinent or staleiii"nt of reasons for the decision. Tlie only thin;; to be remarked al)()ut it is an accidental slip of the pen in deseribini;' the late Treaty of Washington l)y the date; of the sixth of .May, ISTl. The true date is the ci;//it.h. This error exists in the oriyinal beariuij the ICnijJeror's autogra{)h signa- ture and the impression of the imperial great seal. From the circumstances of the ease, it is not likely to be attended with the inconvenienees which resulted from the similar accident in the use of the phrase '• King (Jeorge's Sound" in the jirepara- tion of Lord Aberdeen's instruction. The error is of no prac- tical conse([Uenee whatever. While the award is thus brief, the pvdiminary statements in behalf of each side are full of interesting matter. Ea' h is accom- panied by an appendix. Evidenee in the shape of extracts from official correspondence, and numerous maps, were broiight for- ward on each side. The second British statement is illustrated by an " historical note," to which is attached, for convenience of reference, a curious tal)le giving the names of all the official per- sonages who have been connected with the negotiations, from Lord Castlereagh to Lord (iranville on one side, and President Munroe t " President Grant, .Mr. John Q. Adams to Mr. Fish, as their secretaries of state, on the other. This table gives *"e exact date of service of the several ministers and others having official part in the negotiations, and is valual)l(! for other purposes be- sides the study of this particular (juestion. All of thes'v' papers make together the fifth volume of " I'apers relating to the Treaty of Washington," accompanying the Presi- tlent's Message to Congress of December, 187:^, — a document of 271 pages, which has been published since the preparation of the last number of this Review. The maps are included ; most of them, we regret to say, reproduced in wretched lithography, un- worthy of the government printing-office, and unlikt! its usual work. It may promote; the convenience? of those who have occa- sion to use the volume, if we remark that the list of maps ju'o- sented in behalf of the United States (a part of which are interspersed among the pages of the text, and a part placed at i BOUNDARY OF THE UNITED STATES. 255 i the end of the volume) is printed at page 189, tliat is, at the end of the second statement of the United States. All of the niajis presented in behalf of Great Britain are placed at the end of the volume, preceded by a list of them. If our sj)aee permitted, we should be glad to give some extracts from these official statements. We believe that none of them have found tlieir way into the columns of the newspapers of either country. The "Memorial" of Mr. Bancroft, particularly, is an admirable piece of composition, whether regarded as an historical monograph or as a diplomatic argument. The country was peculiarly happy in the circumstance that it fell to Mr. Ban- croft to conduct the case in its behalf. He was a member of the cabinet of President Polk when the treaty of 1846 was made, lie was our minister in London wiien the pretensions of Great Britain to the island of San Juan were first broached. In his capacity of minister at Berlin, under the present administration, it devolved on him, in concert with his British colleague, to invite the German Emperor to assume the duty of arbitration ; and it was then his duty to act as the agent of the United States in presenting and advocating their case. That this duty was performed wisely and well, the fact that a favorable result has been attained quietly and smoothly, is in itself a proof. Indeed it is gratifying to be aide to say that the whole affair has been conducted in a manner worthy of the great powers con- cerned. The United States and Great Britain held to their re- spective positions with firmness, argued them with decorum, and the result has been accepted without demonstration of triumph on ont ' 'c or ebullition of ill temper on the other. The case was one eminently fit for arbitration, that is, for arbitration lim- ited to a decision of the actual question at issue. The true statesmanship was shown when the Treaty of Washington was framed. For this, on the American side, the world is no doubt indebted to Mr. Fish and his colleagues in the Joint High Com- mission. A different way of putting the question would prob- ably have led to a different and much less satisfactory result. I. v. 3