T H E 
 
 A ORTH EASTERN BOUNDARY 
 
 or THE 
 
 UNITED STATES. 
 
 BOSTON: 
 PRINTED BY PEIRCE & PARKER, 
 No. 9 Cornhill. 
 1832. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The following Essay on the controversy between the 
 United States and Great Britain, in regard to the North- 
 Eastern boundary, was published in the April No. 
 (the 75th) of t!ie North American Review. It has been 
 thought that an extensive circulation of it among the 
 citizens of Maine might probably aid in the promotion 
 of the cause of truth and the country at the approachinor 
 elections. In that hope, it is now republished in the 
 present form. The accompanying map gives a distinct 
 view of the territory in question, and of the several 
 lines which have been established and suggested as 
 boundaries for the State. 
 
 The Essay is attributed, we have no doubt truly, to 
 a citizen of Maine of distinction, who has been more 
 than once officially employed by the State and General 
 Government in tlie negotiations upon this subject, — who 
 is intimately conversant with the details of the question 
 in all its parts, and who for his general soundness of judg- 
 ment and high literary attainments, was eminently qual- 
 ified to discuss it with all the necessary precision and el- 
 egance. We cannot doubt that the argument in favor 
 of the integrity of the territory of Maine, in the form 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 in which it is now presented, will be read with great 
 satisfaction, and with the most beneficial results. 
 
 Independently of the various important interests involv- 
 ed in the approaching Presidential Election, and which 
 are common to the people of Maine, with all the other 
 citizens of the United States, the former have at stake 
 the great and momentous concern of the INTEGRITY 
 OF THEIR TERRITORY. It has for some time past 
 been the determination of the Jackson party, to deprive 
 the state of Maine of about a fifth part of her territory, 
 by a regular BARGAIN AND VOTE, to a foreign 
 power, with the ultimate purpose of fortifying their own 
 ascendancy at home. The project has been arrested for 
 the present, by the noble resistance of the people and of 
 their representatives in the Senate of the United States. 
 But it is still entertained, and if General Jackson is re- 
 elected President it will be immediately secured and 
 carried into effect. 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 It is said of Sir Orlando Bridgman, who was 
 advanced to the seals on the dismission of 
 Clarendon, that being ' afraid of deciding 
 wrong, he labored to please both sides, and al- 
 ways gave something to each of the contending 
 parties, that came into his court.' Upon this it 
 is added hy Dr. Lingard, on the strength of 
 old Roger North, that ' he lost his reputation.' 
 This is a casualty, which we should be sorry to 
 see occur in the case of the illustrious head of 
 the house of Orange Nassau, who has struggled 
 manfully to maintain his solemn rights to his 
 petty territory, and has preserved a title to the 
 respect at least of Europe, in the strenuous 
 and energetic hour of his adversity. Maia- 
 tiendraiy indeed, was the motto of his regal 
 arms ; and he has manifested a most invincible 
 and exemplary repugnance to the reduction ot 
 his agreed and established limits. A well con- 
 sidered article in Blackwood's Magazine for 
 *1 
 
6 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 October last, eulogizing the wisdom of the 
 C()iiii;ress of Vienna, in creating the kingdom of 
 the .Netherlands, as a master-piece of Anti- 
 Gallician policy, pronounces its disseverance 
 to be the greatest crime in ihe conduct of Eu- 
 rope, since the partition of Poland. That is a 
 matter, however, with which we do not concern 
 ourselves. We respect the principle of the 
 King's opposition, so far as it is founded on the 
 plighted faith of public stipulations, and we can- 
 not avoid being struck with the singular rap- 
 prochement, as it was expressed in the Court 
 Journal of the Hague, between the relations of 
 the king of the Netherlands and the Govern- 
 ment of Great Britain, by which the latter was 
 so soon called upon, recijirocally, to interpose 
 on the subject of boundaries. From the cold 
 shoulder shown toward liim in the last speech 
 from the British throne, it may be inferred, that 
 the merit of his amicable proposal for the com- 
 position of the dispute between that country 
 and this, is in the way of being as indifferently 
 requited on one side, as it is of being ac- 
 knowledged upon the other. The British Gov- 
 ernment, we understand, have signified their 
 acceptance of his a\fard ; but he has not yet 
 signified his acceptance of theirs. He appeals 
 with earnestness to the public faith of Europe, 
 and the positive obligations of treaties. 
 
 The topic of controversy, which has passed 
 under the consideration of the King of the 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. / 
 
 Netherlands, is one which we wish to deal with 
 tenderly, and at the same time, truly and faith- 
 fully. We are sensihle of the propensity of an 
 umpire, as pointed out by Mr. Gallatin, to 'split 
 the difference;' and can easily suppose, with- 
 out imputing any obliquity of intention to a pro- 
 ceeding, which iTiay be accounted for on very 
 obvious principles, that the arbiter might have 
 conceived he was verily fulfilling the final pur- 
 pose of the parties, in having recourse to his 
 opinion, as a pacific expedient for cutting the 
 knot, which resisted any more learned mode of 
 solution. We might choose to adopt the more 
 charitable supposition, rather than countenance 
 any miserable apology of political expediency, 
 to varnish over the weakness of compromising 
 those commanding principles of sovereign law, 
 which maintain their equal ascendancy over 
 thrones and globes. 
 
 Some prescription might possibly seem to 
 exist, for treating this as a difficult and doubtful 
 affair, from the long pendency of the ancient 
 quarrel concerning the limits of Acadia, under 
 the treaty of Utrecht. That controversy was 
 brought no nearer to a close, by the commission 
 established after the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle; 
 and, as is well known, never came to any deter- 
 mination. The En2;lish undertook to exiend 
 the limits of Acadia up to the Penobscot, in 
 order to extinguish the Frencli pretension to 
 the country ; while the French, by an artificial 
 
8 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 construction of the article in question, under- 
 took to confine the cession to a part of the 
 present peninsula of Nova Scotia. The re- 
 mark of Barbe Marbois, in relation to the com- 
 parison of French and English titles on this 
 continent, applies here, — that they throw very 
 little light upon the subject. The dispute in 
 this quarter existed not so much on the St. 
 Lawrence, as the Atlantic ; and after reconnoi- 
 tring the field of controversy attentively, we 
 believe it was found to contain little or nothing 
 to the purpose of the present question, and that 
 the idea of any advantage from referring to it 
 was abandoned. We may treat this to})ic now 
 as somewhat famili'«r to our readers, and take 
 it up without much preface ; meaning to pursue 
 a general line of remark upon it, in support of 
 those views of the right, which have heretofore 
 been taken in this journal. Any further con- 
 sideration of this somewhat dry subject is so far 
 from being precluded by the opinion delivered 
 by the King of the Netherlands, that it only 
 seems to furnish occasion for directing attention 
 more strongly imd distinctly townrd the promi- 
 neni points of debate, and ascertaining w'hether 
 they have been sufficiently regarded. The 
 long deliberation which has been exercised by 
 thti Government of ihe United Stales, upon the 
 propriety or expediency of accepting the re- 
 sult of that equivocal arbitration, affoids anoth- 
 er opportunity of expressing our apprehension. 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 9 
 
 that the principal facts in relation to this ques- 
 tion have either been grossly overlooked, or 
 greatly misunderstood. We refer mninly to 
 the evidence of the existence of the northern 
 boundary of what was Massachusetts, now 
 Maine, in the first place ; and the determina- 
 tion, thence resuhing, of the point co-incident 
 with the north-west angle of Novia Scotia. It 
 is, indeed, aptly remaiked by the Committee of 
 the Massachusetts Legislature, that ' the objec- 
 tion to the proceedings of the King of the 
 Netherlands has no connexion with the merits 
 of the case as between the two parties.' He 
 has not pronounced upon them. The Gover- 
 nor of Massachusetts justly observes that 'the 
 reference of the boundary question to the King 
 of the Netherlands has been wholly ineffectual 
 to its just decision.- He has palpably departed 
 from the plain terms of the submission, and 
 substituted a proposition to a compromise ol 
 difficulties, for an award upon the matter direct- 
 ly in issue between the parlies. As an arbiter, 
 his office strictly was, to apply a descriptive line 
 of boundary to corresponding a^ppearances on 
 the face of nature. Rejecting tliese, he has at- 
 |tempted to establish a new course of division, 
 denoted by monuments totally dissimilar, and 
 through a tract of country distant and widely 
 different. By no rule of municipal or interna- 
 tional law, can such decision be made of bind- 
 ing obligation. There is no occasion to inquire 
 
10 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 into the extraordinary influences, which may be 
 supposed to have produced it.' 
 
 We consider the historical existence of this 
 part of the treaty boundary in dispute, as dat- 
 ing in truth from the termination of the contro- 
 versy concerning the hmits of Acadia, and the 
 execution of the arrangements devised by the 
 British crown, consequent upon the peace of 
 1763. That was the era of a totally new sys- 
 tem of foreign relations in regard to this coun- 
 try, — all that formerly belonged to France on 
 this side of the ]Mississippi being surrendered. 
 It was distinctly marked, also, by the entrance 
 of Great Britain upon a new plan of colonial 
 policy, in regard to the limits of her old posses- 
 sions upon this continent. This was adopted, 
 for the purpose of curtailing the dimensions of 
 these provinces in the rear, and at the same 
 time of securing to the crown the great tracts 
 of unsettled territory, the adverse title to wliich 
 was now extinguished. The colonial charters, 
 comprehended princijially between positive paral- 
 lels of latitude, were considered as extending 
 inimitably toward the Pacific, so long as it was • 
 convenient to opjjose them to the pretensions of | 
 France, and vvliile the actual progress of the { 
 colonies in that direction was ih waited by the 
 movement of the French power across from 
 Canada to Louisiana. The crnqucst of Can- 
 ada was followed by a coup (Pctut of the British 
 Government, which may bear a limited com 
 
 ( 
 
 I 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 11 
 
 parison, for the sake of illustration, to that 
 which ensued in France, upon the capitulation 
 of Algiers. Like that, it evinced the instinct 
 of arbitrary authority, alarmed for its absolute 
 ascendancy, to strengthen itself on the occur- 
 rence of some new political advantage, — and 
 sought to keep down principles of innate power, 
 that are not, capable of being subdued by re- 
 scripts or edicts. Little did England, any more 
 than France, indeed, contemplate the prodi- 
 gious career of consequences opening from the 
 issue of their last conflict at arms, affording a 
 free play to the active principles that had plant- 
 ed this continent from the pressure of a foreign 
 hostile force upon the frontier. But it is no 
 part of our present purpose, to travel out into 
 that immense region of moral and political re- 
 sults, flowing from the causes which conduced 
 to the emancipation of America, — consequen- 
 ces, which neither this age nor another is des- 
 tined to see exhausted. The leading act, to 
 which we have referred as fixing the earliest 
 proper date to the present matter of dispute, is 
 the well-known proclamation of 1763. This 
 state paper was far better known in a former 
 age ; but its importance has been revived by 
 the circumstance of its having given a ge- 
 ographical definition of boundary, which was 
 incorporated afterwards into an act of the Brit- 
 ish Parliament, and eventually into tlie treaty of 
 peace between Great Britain and this country. 
 
12 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 That this proclamation had a bearing upon 
 the subject ol this boondary, there could hardly 
 seem to have been room for question. It was 
 the first public document, emanating from the 
 crown, describing an extent of highlands, di- 
 viding rivers emptying themselves into the St. 
 Lawrence from those which fall into the sea. 
 This description begins indefinitely, after leav- 
 ing the forty-fifth parallel of latitude east of 
 Laice Champlain, and terminates toward the 
 Bay of Chaleurs. But this description was 
 fiot the mere manufacture of that proclamation. 
 We know it may seem to be a piece of super- 
 erogation to a great portion of our readers, who 
 take an intelligent interest in public topics, to be 
 at pains to produce proof in regard to the truth 
 of facts, as familiar as any in the history and 
 geography of the country. Ufitur testibus non 
 necessariis in re non dubia is a reproof of which 
 we should be very cautious, if we had not be- 
 fore our eyes the most pregnant and extraordi- 
 nary evidence, not merely that these facts have 
 been called in question, and the force of them 
 denied by those who have been extremely ear- 
 nest to avoid :hem, but that they are somehow 
 disposed of in tiie report of the arbiter, either 
 as irrelevant or not properly established ; — his 
 opinion having the effect, moreover, either of 
 disaffirming their existence or divesting them of 
 their chaiacter. The more highly we are dis- 
 posed to deem of the moral and intellectual 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 13 
 
 qualities of that distinguished person, who was 
 selected among the sovereigns of Europe to 
 pronounce his judgment upon the subject, the 
 more we are inclined to ask, whether it present- 
 ed itself in its proper relief to his mind. We 
 pass without observation, the idea of finding the 
 boundary in the bed of a river ; and we are led 
 to reflect with more consideration on the proofs 
 afforded by hisiorical and geographical circum- 
 stances, by public acts of the highest solemnity, 
 and a long course of policy on the part of Great 
 Britain, in regard to the fixed character of the 
 north-eastern boundary. 
 
 This question, as we have observed, did not 
 arise between France and England. We men- 
 tioned, however, in a former article, that the 
 commissions of some of the governors of Can- 
 ada, while it was in possession of France, ex- 
 tended ten leagues on the south side of the St. 
 Lawrence. Such seem to have been the com- 
 missions of the Sieur de Laiison, and the J^i- 
 comte d^Jlrgenson, in the seventeenth century. 
 We find also, in 1684, a petition from French 
 inhabitants to the King, describing themselves 
 as living on the coast of the south side of the 
 river St. Lawrence down towards les Monts 
 JYotre Dame ; and, in a memoir addressed to 
 the King, by M. de Meules, Intendant of New 
 France, also in 1684, upon the extent of the 
 territory of Canada, it is stated, that the lands 
 in Canada, from the entrance of the river St. 
 2 
 
14 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 Lawrence to ten or twelve leagues about Que- 
 bec, are scarcely any of them fit to raise wiieat, 
 on account of the chains of mountains which 
 render these places inacessible. Si Voii con- 
 sidere les terres du Canada depuis le Cap Bre- 
 ton, qui est V entree du Jleuve Saint JLaurent 
 jusques a 10 « 12 lieues uutour de (Quebec, on 
 y trouvera peu de terres propres a semer dii 
 bled froment, a cause des chaines de montagnes, 
 qui rendent ces lieux inacccssibles. 
 
 But, without going back to an earlier period 
 than that which we have before mentioned, as 
 being the proper epoch of this question, we 
 may refer to tlie map prefixed to the volume of 
 memorials published in London by the British 
 Commissioners upon the limits of Acadia, in 
 order to support a set of facts, which it has 
 suited the fancy of a later day to represent as 
 fabulous. It may be remarked that this map, 
 together with the volume, was published in 1755, 
 when both parlies joined in an appeal to the pub- 
 lic opinion of Europe in the same form. The 
 British Ministers, also, communicated their jus- 
 tificatory memoir the same year;* and the war 
 had actually broken out in America, — that war 
 in which our Washington first became conspic- 
 uous. Coeval with this map was likewise pub- 
 lished that which is called Mitchell's, under the 
 
 * The British memoir was written by the liistorian 
 Gibbon. 
 
r 
 
 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 15 
 
 patronage of the Board of Trade and Planta- 
 tions. We put the two maps together, because 
 they belong lo the same period and come in 
 apposition with the circumstances of the time, 
 and because they both agree in giving a geog- 
 raphical representation of the natural features 
 of the country, corresponding in the main, 
 though manifestly not copied from each other, 
 with the general description we have had of 
 them from that time almost, we may say, if not 
 quite, to the present. In both maps, New Eng- 
 land is bounded by the Atlantic on one side and 
 the St. Lawrence on the other; in both, the 
 boundary from the Atlantic runs north, inter- 
 sects ridges of highlands lying between the 
 rivers St. Lawrence and St. John, although in 
 Jeffrey's map, (published by the Commission- 
 ers,) it was drawn from the Penobscot, and in 
 Mitchell's from the Maguadavie, which he de- 
 nominated the St. Croix. On the Commis- 
 sioners' map, there are two St. Croix laid down 
 between the Penobscot and St. John, one being 
 the Passamaqunddy and the other the Magua- 
 davie, and a due north line from eiMier would 
 strike the range of highlands laid down on that 
 map. On the Commissioners' map, the high- 
 lands are delineated as extending in continuous 
 ranges along the whole length of the river St. 
 Lawrence from the Connecticut and Chau- 
 diere, to the extremity of the cape or projection 
 of Gaspe. On this map, they rise in elevation 
 
16 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 toward the east and assume the appellation of 
 Albany or Notre Dame mountains. On iMitch- 
 ell's map, these are called Ladij mountains. 
 The latter map differs from the other, in giving 
 to tlie ranges of highlands further up the river 
 St. Lawrence, as well as in the quarter below, 
 a more rolling and diversified direction,- — in 
 some parts obliquing or inclining more to a par- 
 allel with the various sources of the different 
 rivers, instead of marking them off by a uniform 
 dividing course. In neither of the maps, are 
 there any traces of higlands south or west of 
 the river St. John, to the north of either of the 
 rivers St. Croix ; nor any where indeed above 
 those rivers, east of the Penobscot. On the 
 ( ommissioners' map, it may be mentioned, that 
 the St. John is also called the Clyde^ to keep 
 up in some manner, it is probable, the mere 
 distinction betvveeiT New England and A'ovrt 
 Scotia, which was of less compass than Acadia, 
 unless the Penobscot was to be considered the 
 St. Croix. The western limit of Nova Scotia, 
 by the original grants, was the St Croix, to 
 whatever river that name was to be affixed. 
 
 There is no species of evidence that address- 
 es itself more sensibly and satisfactorily to the 
 mind, on a subject like this, than that which is 
 found in the language of m;i|)s and charts. 
 Tiiere is a more lively commnnication ol knowl- 
 edge on some points to the eye, than the ear. 
 Language of lliat kind is more universal, tlian 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 17 
 
 that of books and manuscripts. Every son and 
 daughter of Adam is said to be interested in 
 geography. These delineations of the observ- 
 able parts of the globe, are drawn from all the 
 living sources of information. They expose 
 themselves to perpetual observation and cor- 
 rection, and no gross error can go long uncor- 
 rected. Tlie aspect of the country elevated 
 above the shore is one that would present itself 
 to the navigator, while its profile might remain 
 comparatively obscure and unperceived upon 
 the interior. These elevations approached, on 
 one side, the St. Lawrence, and on the other 
 the Bay of Chaleurs, where there were fishing 
 stations. It can hardly be conceived, that all 
 these appearances, which figure so frequently 
 in the geographical documents of the day, can 
 be resolved into optical illusions. At any rate, 
 if such were the faith of the age, it serves to 
 establish the understanding of any act in rela- 
 tion to the subject. For the state of opinion 
 and feeling prevailing at that period, we may 
 refer to the American History of Douglas, 
 which was under revision from 1746 to 1760. 
 At this last period, it will be noted, the conquest 
 of Canada was not completed. 
 
 An edition of Douglas's Historical and Po- 
 litical Summary of the British Settlements in 
 North America, was published in London, in 
 1760. In the peace of Utrecht, he maintains 
 that it was omitted to settle a line between the 
 *2 
 
18 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 English colonies and those of France, from 
 north to soull) ; and that it would be desirable 
 to attend to this, in the proposed negotiation lor 
 peace. Referring to natural boundaries as the 
 most advantageous, he represents the river St. 
 Lawrence, the lakes Ontario and Erie, and the 
 Apalachian mountains, as an eligible French and 
 English boundary. The river St. Lawrence, 
 it will be recollected, was considered and treat- 
 ed by Great Britain, as the southern boundary 
 ofCanada. The eastern part of New-England 
 extended in its full breadth to the bank of that 
 river; and it was not contemplated, at that mo- 
 ment, that the French were to be dislodged en- 
 tirely from the St. Lawrence. He then lakes 
 ' a cursory view,' as he terms it, ' of the south- 
 ern or British side of this great river, and of 
 the lakes Ontario and Erie, and of the Apala- 
 chian mountains, or blue hills'; and proceeds, — 
 ' From Cape Rosier es, at the southern side of 
 the river St. Lawrence, to La Riviere Puanie, 
 or the Indian tribe called the Mission of Bisan- 
 court, over against Les Trois Rivieres, are 
 about four hundred miles. The barrenness of 
 the soil, the impracticableness of the mountains, 
 which lie but a small way south of the s^reat 
 river, the rapidity of the short rivers or runs if 
 water from these mountains, render the coun- 
 try inhospitable, there being no proper water 
 carriage for Indian canoes.' He afterwards 
 passes to the southern portion of his proposed 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 19 
 
 boundary, the Apalachian mountains, or great 
 blue hills, land which he describes as much 
 elevated iii the air, and appearing, at a consid- 
 erable distance, of a sky color. But it is fjr 
 the fact of a commonly-known and well-deter- 
 mined range of highlands bordering on the St. 
 Lawrence, and extending from Cape Rosieres 
 to opposite Trois Rivieres, that we quote this 
 descripiion of Douglas. The short rivers mark 
 the declivities. The account of tlie soil, and 
 the aspect of the coun'ry, agree with that given 
 by the French the century before. A map is 
 published with it, presenting various ranges of 
 Iiighlands in the vicinity of the St. Lawrence, 
 and mouth of the St. John ; and public atten- 
 tion is particularly called to the subject of a 
 boundary. 
 
 Some attention has been drawn of late, to 
 the situation of a small French Acadian settle- 
 ment or colony on the border of the river St. 
 John, above the Great Falls. This is a rem- 
 nant of the ancient French population of Aca- 
 dia, of whose removal f>'om their farms, and 
 banishment from Nova Scotia, so painful an 
 account is given from Halliburton's History, in 
 a former number.* A brief and touching ac- 
 count of the character and sufferings of those 
 early inhabitants of that territory, is given by 
 Barbe Marbois, who pronounces them an ex- 
 cellent race of Frenchmen. The language 
 
 * January, 1830. 
 
20 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 which they speak is said to be of purer French, 
 than that in use among the Canadians ; and 
 their ancestry has been identified with the dis- 
 banded regiment of Carignan, — raised at a time, 
 when the impoverished ranks of the French 
 noblesse, excluded by the hereditary prestige 
 from all other employment, were content to oc- 
 cupy the humblest stations in military life. Dif- 
 ferent pretexts have been assijrned for the ex- 
 pulsion of these people from Nova Scotia, the 
 most familiar of which is that of their sympa- 
 thy with the fortunes of their European breth- 
 ren, in their conflicts with the English arms on 
 this continent. Douglas says that, — ' By the 
 peace of Utrecht, the French in Nova Scotia, 
 upon their taking the British Government oaths, 
 were to continue in tlieir possessions ; the not 
 appropriated lands, by the King of Great Bri- 
 tain's instruction, were reserved for protestant 
 subjects ; notwithstanding this instruction, the 
 French Roman Catholic subjects, as they swarm, 
 make free with these crown lands.' 'There- 
 fore,' he remarks very coolly, in a note to tliis 
 dry text, written jirobably at the first publication 
 of his work, 'they must be removed by some 
 subsequent treaty, — or be elbowed out, — or 
 their language and religion must gradually be 
 changed.' And again he suggests, with much 
 sang fioid, that ' tiie regiments in garrison at 
 Louisburg may be conv»'yed to Nova Scotia, 
 and cantoned among the French settlements, — 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 21 
 
 after some short time, to be disbanded with some 
 encouragement of lands, and other th'ngs, as 
 settlers. Thus we may by degrees elbow the 
 French out of their langunge and religion, — 
 and perhapjs out of their lands.' 
 
 An Indian barrier was proposed by France 
 to England, in the negotiations at Paris, in 1761, 
 upon the country of the Ohio, and the region 
 toward Canada. But this was rejected by Mr. 
 Pitt ; and the treaty of Paris, which put an end 
 to the dominion of France over the whole ter- 
 ritorv, produced the nroclamationof 1763. This 
 was a great act of State policy ; the design of 
 which was, as already adverted to, to circum- 
 scribe the colonies, and, under color of fonning 
 Indian reserves, in reality to convert the inte- 
 rior of the country inlo a grand royal domain. 
 It was so devised, as to create a geographical 
 barrier to the advance of the colonies in that 
 direction. The crown seems to have been con- 
 sidered as coming into the possession by con- 
 quest ; and, in succeeding to the pretensions, 
 appears also to have adopted the views of 
 France, — that is, of environing the colonies with 
 a frontier that should oppose their further pro- 
 gress, and prevent their developement. It is 
 mentioned in the Annual Register of 1763, 
 which records this proclamation, thut great 
 pains were taken to come at an exact knowl- 
 edge of every thing in regard to the state of 
 the recent conquests on this continent ; and, 
 
22 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 in framing the new Government of Canada, it 
 is stated in that work, that, after quiiting Lake 
 Champlain, and departing from the forty-fifth 
 parallel of latitude, the line was carried ' ciuite 
 to the Gulf of St. Lmcrence, through the high- 
 lands which .separate the rivers which fall into 
 the great river of Canada, from those which 
 fall into the ocean.' We quote this well-known 
 work, merely to show the popular understand- 
 ing of that part of the proclamation. 
 
 This mode of marking off the limits of the 
 colonies to the west and north-west, hy n line 
 along the heads of tlie rivers falling into the 
 Atlantic, was a favorite one in forming that pro- 
 clamation. It contained a prohibition, that, ' no 
 governor or commander-in-chief of our other 
 colonies or plantations in America, (besides the 
 Governments of Quebec and Florida establish- 
 ed by that act,) do presume for the present, 
 and until our further pleasure be known, to 
 grant warrant of survey, or pass patents for any 
 lands, beyond the heads or sovrces of any of the 
 rivers ichich fall into the Atlantic ocean from 
 the west or north-west. It was hutlier declared 
 to be the royal will and pleasure to reserve, for 
 the present, ' under our sovereignty, protection, 
 and dominion, for the said Indians, all the land 
 and territoiy not included within the limits of 
 our said three new Governments, or wiiliin the 
 limits of the territory grant(Ml to the Hudson's 
 Bay Company, as also all the land and territo- 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 23 
 
 ries lying to the westward of the sources of the 
 rivers ivhichfall into the sea from the west and 
 north-west, as aforesaid.' This Hmitation of 
 the practical jurisdiciion and extent of the colo- 
 nies, seems to have reached from the Ohio to- 
 ward Lake Ontario ; and pursuing the line of 
 demarkation, established as the southern boun- 
 dary of the Government of Quebec, — which 
 constituted a considerable part of the exterior 
 boundary of the Provinces, especially those of 
 New-England, — along the forty-fifth degree of 
 latitude, it is described as ' striking to the 
 JVorth-east, along the highlands, which divide 
 the rivers that empty themselves into the grand 
 river St. Lawrence, from those which fall into 
 the sea; and also along the North coast of the 
 Bay de Chaleurs, and the coast of the Gulf of 
 St. Lawrence to Cape Rosieres.' This idea of a 
 limitation of the Atlantic provinces, by the 
 sources of rivers falling into the sea from the 
 West and North-west, seems to have been ex- 
 tended from the Florida coast on the Gulf of 
 Mexico, to the Gulf of St. Lawrence ; and 
 was further carried into effect in the division 
 of the province of Quebec from the territories 
 of New- England and Nova Scotia, by the ad- 
 ditional mode of description thus expressed for 
 the purpose of absolute certainty, and to render 
 this last line of demarkation as definite, as the 
 parallel of" latitude crossing Lake Champlain 
 was supposed to be. 
 
24 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 We may notice, in passing, how much more 
 the limits of the old colonies of Great Britain 
 were abridgeri, by the complete triumph of their 
 joint arms, and the final success of the negotia- 
 tions, than they would have been, if the French 
 had not been entirely expelled from their pos- 
 sessions. In the various projected expeditions 
 to Canada, in the conquest of Louisburg and 
 that of Nova Scotia, it was the opinion of John 
 Adams, to the last, that New England had ex- 
 pended more blood and treasure, than all the 
 rest of the British empire. JVova Scotia was 
 originally and pro|ierly a British Province, 
 granted, in the first place, after the accession of 
 James of Scotland to the English throne ; and, 
 although yielded up by the policy that jirevailed 
 in the courts of Charles 1. and Charles II. in 
 the treaties of St. Germains and Breda, recov- 
 ered once by Cromwell, and again by New 
 England, in 1G90. It was then incor|)orated, 
 with the intervening territory of Sagadahock 
 and the Province of Maine, in one common 
 charter with the Province of Massachusetts 
 Bay. It was again relinquished to France, by 
 the treaty of Ryswick, in 1G97 ; re-conquered 
 by a force from New England and Great Bri- 
 tain, and finally ceded by France to Great Bri- 
 tain, in 17 12. It was not formally re-annexed 
 to the Province of Massachusetts ; and the 
 power of that Province over it was suspended, 
 during the dispute concerning the limits of Aca- 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 25 
 
 dia. The grant of JVova Scotia to Sir Wil- 
 liam Ahxander, as well as that of the territory 
 of Sagadahock to the Duke of York, extended 
 to the river St. iMwrence ; and that whole 
 country continued to be considered a British 
 possession, after the treaty of Utrecht. We 
 may, therefore, regard these territories as com- 
 ing within the description of that principle of 
 limitation, \^'hich Great Britain thought fit to 
 apply to the proclamation of 1763, of marking 
 off her Atlantic colonies by the sources of riv- 
 ers, falling into the sea from the west and north- 
 west. The application of that principle was 
 strenghtened upon this frontier, by the well- 
 known heights of land, adjacent to the river St. 
 Lawrence, and dividing the rivers flowing into 
 it, from those emptying into the ocean ; and 
 the same, whether falling into the Bay of Cha- 
 leurs, Miramichi, or the Bay of Fundy. All 
 these streams were equally determined, as flow- 
 ing from the north or north-west. 
 
 In erecting the Province of Nova Scotia, in 
 1763, it was built upon the base of the new 
 Government of Quebec, established by the 
 proclamation. The proclamation was dated in 
 October. The commission to Governor Wil- 
 mot, by which the Province of Nova Scotia 
 was defined, was in November, 1763. The 
 northern and western, or inland boundaries, 
 were thus described, viz. To the northward, 
 by the southern boundary of the Province of 
 3 
 
26 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 Quebec, — ' and to the westward, although our 
 said Province hath anciently extended, and 
 doth of right extend, as lar as the river Penfa- 
 gonet or Penobscot ; it shall be bounded by a 
 line drawn from Cape Sable across the en- 
 trance of the Bay of Fundy, to the mouth of 
 the river St. Croix, by the said river to its 
 source, and by a line drawn due north from 
 tljence to the southern hoinidanj of (^uebec.^ 
 This description constituted the north-ivest an- 
 gle of JVova Scotia. 
 
 The Annual Register, for 1763, contained 
 a new map of the Biitish dominions in North 
 America, wiili the limits of the Governments 
 annexed thereto, by the treaty of peace, and 
 settled by the proclamation. On this map, the 
 southern boundary of the Province of Quebec 
 is marked as passing along fronv Lake Cham- 
 plain, in the forty-fifth degree of latitude, to the 
 north of Connecticut river, and then alons; high- 
 lands, approaching ihe river St. Lawrence, and 
 rounding north of the river St. John, to ihe 
 head of the Bay of Chaleurs. On the snme 
 map, a line is drawn directly north Irom the 
 river St. Croix, u itil it strikes the r'ulge of high- 
 lands north of the St. John, along which the 
 southern boundary of (Quebec is continued. In 
 the former maps, such as Mitchell's and Jeffe- 
 ry's, which have been mentioned, this line went 
 acroFs these highlands to the St. Lawrence ; 
 but here it is interrupted and stops short. The 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 27 
 
 same map appears in subsequent editions of the 
 Register, to the end of the American war. 
 Here the north-west anale of JVova Scotia Is 
 mnrked out to the eyes of all the world. 
 
 The Province of Massachusetts, which other- 
 wise might have well revived its right under 
 the charter of William and Mary, to go even to 
 the Gulf of St. Lawrence, was thus restricted 
 on the east to the river St. Croix ; and one side 
 of its territory was taken off. To tliis proceed- 
 ing, however, we do not hear of any objections 
 being made by the Province. But die south- 
 ern boundary of Quebec, then established, pre- 
 sented another barrier to the north, which was 
 not regarded with satisfaction. The grant to 
 the Duke of York in J 664, which has been 
 mentioned, was of ' all that part of the mainland 
 of New England, beginning at a certain place, 
 called or known bv the name of St. Croix. 
 next adjoining to JVew Scotland, in Amer- 
 ica, and from thence along the sea-coast,' to 
 Pemaquid river, and thence to the Kennebec, 
 ' and so upwards, by the shortest course to the 
 river Canada, nortliward.' This grant, which 
 was conOrmed by Charles again, after the trea- 
 ty of Breda in 1674, was incorporated, as we 
 have mentioned, to its vAJiole extent, in the Pro- 
 vince charter. Some little obscurity, indeed, 
 was cast upon this point, by Mr. Gallatin, in his 
 edition of the Land Laws, and a suggestion 
 was dropped by him, that there was probably 
 
28 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 some omission, in the description of the Pro- 
 vince chnrter, to square the northern boMnd-ary 
 of this intermediate territory witli ihe Gorges 
 grants, with vvliich he compared it. T'^is no- 
 tion was furlljer countenanced, by a hasty ex- 
 pression in a letter of that gentleman to the 
 Secretary of Stale, after the conclusion of peace 
 at Ghent, a paper not |)repared lor any public 
 purpose, and brought out upon the call of what 
 is termed the Russell Correspondence. This re- 
 iriark was, that the territory to the north of forty- 
 five degrees, eastward of the Penobscot river, 
 did not belong to IMassachiisetts, as would ap- 
 pear by recurring to her charters, but that the 
 property was in the United States. Mr. Galla- 
 tin has since shown, that he was com})letely 
 mistaken in that respect ; and nothing, indeed, 
 is .necessary, beyond a recurrence to the char- 
 ters, to make that mistake manifest. In the 
 Province charier of 1G91, it is true, there is a 
 declaration, that 'no grants of any lands, lying 
 or extending from the river of Sagadahock to 
 the Gulf of St. Lawrence and Canada rivers,^ 
 &z:c. by the Government of the Province, should 
 be valid without the assent of the crown ; be- 
 cause, in fact, the j)roperty of that territory had 
 accrued, through the succession of the Duke 
 of York, to the crown, and therefore the crown 
 harl a perfect right to limit and control the dis- 
 position of it by the savimr ol the charter. Sub- 
 ject to this reservation of a confirming power, 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 29 
 
 tlie Government of Massnchuseits seems to 
 liave been authorized to make as good grants 
 witliin that region, as in other portions of its 
 territor}'. 
 
 It is plain enough from these circumstances, 
 as we may presume to believe, that Massachu- 
 setts had no interest in inventing an artificial 
 harrier to interrupt her own progress, as a Pro- 
 vince, to the St. Lawrence, Tlie opinions of 
 the Attorney and Solicitor General of the 
 crown, Yorke and Talbot, both afterwards 
 Lord Chancellors, had been pronounced, 
 (1731,) that the intervening tract of territory 
 between the Kennebec and St. Croix was 
 granted by the charter to the inhabitants of the 
 Province, and that the rights of Government, 
 granted to the Province, extended over it. 
 The Lords of the Board of Trade, as it seems, 
 sanctioned the publication of Mitchell's map in 
 1755, bounding this territory, with other parts 
 of New England and also Nova Scotia, upon 
 the St. Lawrence. The royal proclamation of 
 1763, however, established a barrier of high- 
 lands, portioning off a strip of tiie country con- 
 tiguous to the river St. Lawrence, as a part of 
 the Canadian Government ; and the Lords 
 thereupon began to think, that the Massachu- 
 setts Province could at least claim no right to 
 the lands on the river St. Lawrence, notwith- 
 standing the opinion formerly expressed on that 
 point, though they did not deny her jurisdiction 
 *3 
 
30 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 over the territory. Massachusetts had made 
 grants east of the Penobscot, but not upon the 
 St. Lawrence ; and while she was desirous of 
 obtaining a confirmation of those grants from 
 the crown, the crown also warned a release of 
 the right of Massachusetts to the south bank of 
 the St. Lawrence. Lord Hillsborough interio- 
 gated the agent of the Province, Mr. Mauduit, 
 whether he had any authority from the Pro- 
 vince, relative to the lands upon the south of 
 the river St. Lawrence. It seems to have been 
 proposed, that if the Province would relinquish 
 to tlie crown tlie claim under their charter to th.e 
 lands on the St. Lawrence, designed by the 
 proclamation to form part of the Government 
 ot Quebec, the crown would make no question 
 concerning the validity of any of their grants of 
 lands, leaving them to the St. Croix> and from 
 the sea-coast of the Bay of Fundy to the bounds 
 of the province of Quebec ; and JMr. Mauduit 
 and Mr. Jackson came to the conclusion, which 
 was communicated to the General Court, that 
 ' the narrow tract of land, which lits beyond the 
 sources of all your rivers, and is watered by 
 those which run into the river St. Lawrence,^ 
 misht therefore be conceded to the crown, 
 which considered it of so much importance ' to 
 preserve the continuity of the Government of 
 Quebec' 
 
 The Quebec Act of 1774 only transposes 
 the description of the proclamation ©f 1763, be- 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 31 
 
 ginning at the other extremity, and returning 
 ' by a hne from the Bay of Chaleurs, along the 
 highlands which divide the rivers that empty 
 them>elves into the river St. Lawrence from 
 those which fall into the sea,' to a point of lati- 
 tude (45°) on Connecticut river. This well- 
 remembered act of Parliament followed the 
 forty-fifth parallel of latitude to the river St. 
 Lawrence, and through Lake Ontario, and 
 upon the south-eastern bank of Lake Erie to 
 the boundary of Pennsylvania, and by the west- 
 ern boundary of that Province to the river Ohio, 
 and along the Ohio to the Mississippi. All the 
 territory to the north of this line and south of 
 the Hudson's Bay Company's limit, was incor- 
 porated, as belonging to the crown of Great 
 Britain, into tlie Province of Quebec. This 
 was a more absolute and decisive demarkation 
 throughout its extent, than that which was trac- 
 ed by the proclamation of 1763 ; but it was a 
 result of the same policy. There can be no 
 question, we suppose, that both the royal proc- 
 lamation of 1763, and the parliamentary act of 
 1 774, were innovations upon the Province char- 
 ter of Massachusetts ; and the propriety of our 
 referring to these measures at all, in vindication 
 of our title to the remainder of our territory, has 
 been questioned, on the ground that they were 
 complained of in the colonies, as being infringe- 
 ments. Still they may be referred to as acts of 
 the British Government, although we might 
 
32 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 have bad no cause lo be contented with ihem. 
 They may be referred lo as authoritative acts of 
 that Government, establisliing the bounds of 
 their recently acquired empire, between which 
 and their elder dependencies on the seabord, 
 they were anxious to establish such an indus- 
 trious partition. We may well refer to those 
 acts as establishing the existence of certain mon- 
 uments, to which they distinctly and carefully 
 refer themselves, as separating the inferior tri- 
 butaries of the St. Lawrence from the more ma- 
 jestic streams, that find their way, like the St. 
 Lawrence, to the ocean. And alihougli we 
 may have originally demurred to the rightful- 
 ness of these arbitrary arrangements, it was 
 never denied that this delitnitaiion was within 
 the plenitude of British power, so far as it relat- 
 ed to New England. It was in regard to the dis- 
 position of the western territory, that the great- 
 est objection was made, in respect to the strip 
 taken off from the St. Laivrence, as well as the 
 separation of Nova Scotia. The Province of 
 Massachusetts, as appears from Mr. Mauduit's 
 communication, seems to have acquiesced ; in- 
 deed we have never heard of a question raised 
 in regard to their final operation on this fron- 
 tier. 
 
 We may refer to these acts, therefore, we 
 conceive, notwithstanding they were abridg- 
 ments of our limits, as public declarntwns of 
 facts; and the proclamations of them made by 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 33 
 
 those who had the means, and the best means of 
 knowledge in their possession. Few have the 
 mfMns of seeing and judging with their own eyes 
 of the truth of these facts, but all may be said to 
 have access to these archives, which have been 
 hung up on high, and give to these plain and pal- 
 pable descriptions the character of truisms in po- 
 litical geography. These highlands stand forward, 
 upon the proud front of the public faith of Great 
 Britain, as though they were visibly marked on 
 the horizon to our view. Officially there may 
 be those who, at this late day, may affect to 
 doubt their existence ; but if they do not exist 
 as they are described upon the face of nature, 
 falsehood is then stamped upon the face of those 
 royal and imperial documents ; and confidence 
 is impaired in the solidity of those principles, on 
 the strength of which we ought to be able to 
 repose with as much certainty, as we might 
 upon the constancy of the laws of nature. 
 
 Besides these solemn and authorative asser- 
 tions of the British crown and pailiajgent, there 
 is also the universal evidence of the maps that 
 were published from that period in England, it 
 is sufficient to say, to the close of the Atnerican 
 war, although the remark might be extended 
 down to a much later day. In all the maps 
 published during these twenty years, there was 
 a continuous and visible representation of high- 
 lands, receding to the right of the waters falling 
 into the St. Lawrence, and to the north of all 
 
34 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 the waters flowing into the Atlantic or any of 
 its bays. There were as many as twenty maps 
 of this description, presented to the umpire. 
 There were the common maps, designed to 
 exhibit the geography of the country ; maps of 
 the continent ; of the British dominions of North 
 America ; and maps to illustrate the history of 
 those dominions. There were Danville's maps, 
 improved with English surveys; there were 
 maps corrected from the materials of Governor 
 Pownal ; there was the American Military 
 Pocket Atlas, published at the commencement 
 of the Revolution, to show the seat of war in 
 the northern colonies ; the map of the Province 
 of Quebec ; and Faden's map of North Amer- 
 ica, from the latest discoveries, engraved for 
 Carver's Travels, in 1778 and 1781. On all 
 these maps, we believe, without exception, the 
 north-west angle of Nova Scotia is laid down in 
 the same manner, by a line from the St. Croix, 
 north of the St. John. 
 
 With re^rence to these maps of the country 
 from 1763 to 1783, they may be adduced not 
 merely for the evidence they afford of the geo- 
 graphical state of the country at that period in 
 themselves, but because they go to establish 
 the full belief, that then was and has ever since 
 been entertained, in respect to those great fea- 
 tures of rivers and higiilands, by whicii ihe 
 face of the country was markerl. Let the fact 
 be as it may, this was the opinion of the age, 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 35 
 
 and it shows what was universally thought and 
 understood to be the truth, at the time of the 
 treaty of 1783. This evidence addre;5sed it- 
 self to the eyes of every man in Europe or 
 America, at an era of great interest and inquiry. 
 It furnished a panorama of the country to those 
 who never could expect to be able to trace the 
 outline except from the plate before them, and 
 carried its knowledge into every library, into 
 every public office, and almost into every compt- 
 ing-room in the kingdom or on this continent. 
 It was the guide of the tourist, it was the com- 
 panion of the man of science, and the manual of 
 the military officer. There can be no suspicion 
 of any fabrication. These maps were all pub- 
 lished in London, under the observation, if not 
 under the actual sanction, of the colonial de- 
 partment. So far back as Mitchell's map, 
 which was published in 1755, and the map 
 published by the English commissioners on the 
 limits of Acadia in the same year, and before 
 these objects can be imagined to have been 
 raised into existence in opposition to us, these 
 ajijjearances present themselves. For fifty 
 years, maps of this description have been pub- 
 lished and sold at a shop in the Strand, facing 
 toward Charing Cross. If it be suggested, 
 
 that these maps are copies from one another, 
 
 which in some respects they are very far from 
 being, — what better proof can there be of the 
 steadiness and singleness of convictien upon 
 
36 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 that score, and which extended down, unabated, 
 for half a century ? The pertinence ol lliis 
 species of proof was called in question before 
 the arbiter. Map A, it was contended, was 
 the only piece of evidence of that kind, proper 
 for his consideration ; and this map A, was a 
 mere plan of the territory in dispute, adjusted by 
 Mr. Gallatin and Dr. Tiarks, and annexed to 
 the convention. It was nothina bnt chalk. But 
 the physical existence of the highlands describ- 
 ed in the British acts has not been disproved, 
 although it has been disputed. Further surveys 
 of that region from one end of the direction 
 given to the other, (an operation which has 
 never been accomplished since the treaty of 
 Ghent,) may vary the altitude of these high- 
 lands ; but they can never alter the state of the 
 fact as to the fir:n opinion of the age, and the 
 actual intentions of the British Government in 
 respect to this boundary, in all its proceedings, 
 from the peace of 1763 to the treaty of 1783. 
 What may be asserted wiiii confidence, even 
 at this day, when nuich has been done, and it 
 is impossible to say withoijt any success, to de- 
 face tlie lines and monuments which were well 
 established in former times, is this ; that there 
 is a historical chain or connection of highlands 
 sweepinir round the heads of our great rivci'Sj 
 lohich flow into the Atlantic^ namely^ the Ken- 
 nebec, Penobscot and St. John, and slielving 
 comparatively very near to tlie coast of the 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 37 
 
 river St. Lawrence. Such was the state of the 
 fact in the public mind, at the peace of 1783. 
 
 The second article of the treaty of 1783, in 
 order, as it premised, ' that all disputes which 
 might arise in future on the subject of the boun- 
 daries of the said United States may be pr event- 
 ed,'' established their boundaries in the first 
 place in the following manner ; from the north- 
 west angle of Nova Scotia, viz. that angle which 
 is formed by a line drawn due north from the 
 source of ttie St. Croix to the highlands, — which 
 (highlands) divide the rivers that fall into the 
 Atlantic ocean from those which fall into the 
 river St. Lawrence; — and again, as they are 
 described in another part of the same article, — ■ 
 along the said highlands which divide the rivers 
 that empty themselves into the river St. Law- 
 rence, from those which fall into the Atlantic 
 ocean, to the north-westernmost Isead of Con- 
 necticut river, he. This is the beginning of the 
 description designed to prevent all disputes ; 
 and it is most remarkable, that the present dis- 
 pute arises in relation to that point, at ivhich 
 the boundaries of the United States commenced; 
 — that point which beyond all others is believed 
 to have some positive character of certainty at- 
 tached to it. That is the point which, it seems, 
 from the opinion of the King of the Nether- 
 lands, was not only undefined, but left in a con- 
 dition incapable of ever being defined. It was 
 singular, indeed, that the first step in the pro- 
 4 
 
38 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 cess should have been a false one. It would 
 be most singular, that that which was adopted 
 as an axiom, should not only prove to be a 
 problem, but turn out to have no proper exis- 
 tence whatever. 
 
 With the knowledge of these maps before 
 them, for it ajjpears as a fact that sundry others 
 besides Mitchell's were consulted, and with this 
 knowledge necessarily common to the English 
 as well as American negotiators at Paris, they 
 adopted the existing highland Canadian boun- 
 dary, — to be intersected by a direct north line 
 from the St. Croix ; and still further to char- 
 acterize and confirm this homier of higlilands, 
 they describe it as dividing the rivers that fall 
 into the St. Lawrence horn those that descenil 
 into the Atlantic. The phraseology is thus 
 guarded, and varied, and reiterated, as if to 
 preclude the possibility of ' dispute.' Indeed 
 it was pointed out, in defence of the treaty, in 
 the parliamentary debate nj)on the preliminary 
 articles, as its great excellenct^ ' that it so 
 clearly and plainly described the limits of the 
 dominions of Great l^ritain and Anicrica, that 
 it was impossible they could be mistaken; there- 
 fore It was impossible there should in future be 
 any dispute hetween them on the score of 
 boundaries.' In the House of Lords, the treaty 
 was censured with severity for suirendering the 
 keys, the bolts, the bars, the i)asses, and carry- 
 ing-places of Canada ; and the higldands de- 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 39 
 
 scribed in the treaty were distinctly recognized, 
 fis being iiear the river St. Lawrence. A map 
 was engraved to accompany and illustrate the 
 reports of the debates in Parliament on the 
 Preliminary Articles, and was published in sev- 
 eral forms, in which the highlands are laid 
 down precisely according to the former maps 
 from 1763. Haifa dozen maps were publish- 
 ed in London in the year 1783, delineating the 
 boundaries of the United States ; and these 
 were succeeded by others in London and Paris 
 within another year for that purpose. It is 
 needless to say, that they all agreed in that 
 feature of the territory which now forms the 
 subject of dispute, and the force of which is 
 now designed to be done away by the dubious 
 opinion of the King of the Netherlands. 
 
 To pass to a later period in the history of 
 this subject, — in the British argument under 
 the 5ih article of the treaty of 1794, concern- 
 ing the St. Croix it was insisted that the north- 
 ern limit of Nova Scotia was a line along the 
 highlands, which divide the rivers that empty 
 themselves into the river St. Lawrence, from 
 those which fall into the sea. This argument 
 directly identified the northern limit of Nova 
 Scotia with the southern boundary of Canada, 
 as before established. And taking this as a 
 base, it sought to find the river St. Croix by de- 
 termining in the first place the north-west angle 
 of J^ova^^ Scotia, projected from the highlands. 
 Another operation was considered and acknowl- 
 
40 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 edged as incontestible at the same lime, viz. 
 that the north line requisite to form this angle 
 ' must cross the St. John of necessiiy^'' — but it 
 would cross it, it was said, as an advantage to 
 Great Britain, in a part of it where it ceu^es to 
 he navigable, that is, above the Great Falls, 
 ' almost at the foot of the highlands.' This ef- 
 fect was admitted at that day (in 1798) with- 
 out any demur by Mr. Liston, then British 
 minister in this country ; and at that moment, 
 no person had ever thought of denying it. It 
 resulted as a dead certainty from the physical 
 formation of the country, for the reason given 
 by the British agent. That was, that the sources 
 of the St. John are to the westward, ^ not only 
 of the western boundary line of Nova Scotia, 
 but of the sources of the Penobscot, and even 
 of the Kennebec' It may be added, although 
 somewhat in advance, that in the argument de- 
 livered under the 4th article of the treaty of 
 Ghent, relating to the Passamaquoddy Islands, 
 by the British agent, it was ajrain allowed, that 
 the north-west angle of Nova Scotia, mentioned 
 in the treaty of J7S3, was the same as the 
 noilh-uest angle of Nova Scotia, as con- 
 stituted in conncclion with the Province of 
 Quebec in 1763. The map evidence laying 
 down the boundary, according to the treaty of 
 178.>, between the United States and Nova 
 Scotia and Canada, as that bouiidary is de- 
 scribed in a note to Lord Ilariowby in 1804, 
 'alonLT the hiiihlamls boundius: to the southern 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 41 
 
 waters of the St. Lawrence,^ is continued by 
 an unbroken succession down to the war, in 
 1812. 
 
 Even after the close of the last war with 
 Great Britain, in 1815, we have the descrip- 
 tion of the boundary in question, in a work of 
 so much authority and importance, as the ^Topo- 
 graphical Description oj the Province ofLotver 
 Canada, by Colonel Bouchette, Surveyor-Gen- 
 eral of the Province, afterwards employed as a 
 surveyor under the treatv of Ghent, and now 
 the author of the large statistical work on the 
 British dominions in North America, recently 
 published in Londo-n. His description is so 
 clear and conclusive, that we venture to quote 
 it again. From the high banks opposite the 
 city of Quebec, he describes a gradual ascent 
 towards a first range of mountains. ' Beyond 
 this range, at about 6fty miles distance, is the 
 ridge generally denominated iheLand^s Height, 
 dividing the waters that fall into the St. Law- 
 rence from those taking a direction toward the 
 Atlantic ocean, and along whose summit is sup- 
 posed to run the boundary line between the ter- 
 ritories of Great Britain and the United States 
 of America. This chain commences upon the 
 eastern branch of the Connecticut river, takes 
 a north-easterly course, and terminates near 
 Cape Rosieres in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.' 
 
 We might adduce also the splendid maps 
 published by Colonel Bouchette at the same 
 *4 
 
42 north-ea:,tern boundaky. 
 
 lime, dedicated to the Prince Regent, intendecJ 
 to accompany bis work, and to illustrate the 
 description. We might also refer again to the 
 work itself for particular descriptions of several 
 parts of the highlands, observed and sketched 
 by Colonel Bouchette ; but we fear to pre- 
 sume too far upon the patience of our readers, 
 in pursuing this almost exhausted topic ; and it 
 would be only repeating a summary of them, 
 which will be found in a former number of this 
 journal."^ It affords a picturesque representa- 
 tion of ridges or ranges of highlands, from the 
 swell of land, in which the Connecticut river 
 takes its rise two thousand feet above the level 
 of the sea, — and whence continual falls mark 
 the shorter descent of the Chaudiere, to uhat 
 may be termed the trosachs of the Temiscouatu 
 portage^ and thence supposed to continue to the 
 Gulf of St. Lawrence. It is through this pass 
 that the road from the St. John to the St. Law- 
 rence, effected with great difficulty about the 
 time of the conclusion of the American war, 
 crosses the highlands ; and here is established, 
 by the concurrence of testimony of inhabitants 
 on the JMadawaska river with marks that still 
 remain upon the earth, the southern boundary 
 of Canada. This has been considered as fixed, 
 between thirty and forty years. No process 
 can be executed on this side of the pass from 
 
 * North- American Review, Vol. XXVI. pp. 337—340. 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 43 
 
 Canada. Several posts still appear, though lat- 
 terly ill a decaying state, which are known to 
 have been placed there for the purpose of de- 
 signating the boundary ; and it is fixed as a 
 fact, that Mount St. Francis, which divides the 
 waters at the Temiscoiiatu Portage, has long 
 been holden as being the southern boundary of 
 Canada at that place. Practically, this would 
 seem to put an end to all dispute. 
 
 Thv^ proper boundary of the United States, 
 according to the description of the treaty of 
 1783, which is now somehow obliterated in the 
 opinion of the King of the Netherlands, was 
 recognised without a shadow of doubt till the 
 close of the war in 1814. This last period it- 
 self is so pregnant with proof, at once of the 
 continued conviction which existed on this sub- 
 ject, and of a policy, if possible, to reform it 
 to meet an object of which war had disclosed 
 the importance, and furnished the opportunity, 
 that a production of text passages from British 
 publications in the interests of our powerful an- 
 tagonist, may here be not without some profit 
 and instruction at this season. The most fertile 
 repository of tracts and details on this topic, 
 mixed up with spicy observations of its own, is 
 the Anti-Jacobin Review and True Church- 
 man's Magazine. One of the leading topics 
 in the volumes of that periodical, for the year 
 1814, is the necessity ibr settling a new boun- 
 dary between the British colonies and the Uni- 
 
44 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 ted States. This was the burden of both parts 
 of the work ; and it was urged with all the en- 
 ergy that was imparted to the British military 
 movements in tliis country, upon the successful 
 termination of their contest with Bonaparte. 
 The season for speaking was supposed to be 
 peculiarly favorable, ' as,' it was said, ' a nego- 
 tiation is about to open at Gottenburgh, and as 
 a powerful British army is about to enforce our 
 rights in America. All former treaties between 
 the two countries are abrogated and annulled 
 by the existing war, and the American Govern- 
 ment has lost every claim upon the favor, affec- 
 tion, and forbearance of Great Britain, by her 
 base and perfidious conduct, in attacking us at 
 a time when we were fighting for the freedom 
 and independence of Europe. Our ministers, 
 therefore, must be disposed to derive every le- 
 gitimate advantage from the success of our 
 arms, &ic.' Tiie first subject to which those 
 reviewers allude, in this immediate connection, 
 as of primary importance, is, 'an exclusive privi- 
 lege to be secured to our own colonies in North 
 America, to supply our West India Islands with 
 all those necessary articles, which they, here- 
 tofore, chiefly derived from the United States ;' 
 and secondly, they state 'the moat iujportant 
 object to be secured by a treaty of peace, is 
 the settlement of a new bounddnj between the 
 two countries.' Afterwards, on another occa- 
 sion, they recommend the advantage of retain- 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 45 
 
 ing possession of the islands in Passamaquoddy 
 Bay for the benefit of the trade, navigation, and 
 fisheries of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick ; 
 and express the hope ' that whilst we have such 
 a naval force on that station, and such an army 
 to co-operate with it, Penobscot will he taken 
 possession of. and a new boundary line estab- 
 lished between JYeiv Brunswick and the United 
 States.^ 
 
 For detailed inforjnation on this topic, ref- 
 erence is made to Knoxh Extra Official Pa- 
 pers^ published by Debret. But the most per- 
 tinent and expressive text for these useful re- 
 marks is contained in a production entitled, ' A 
 compressed view of the points to be discussed 
 in treating with the United States of America,' 
 with two maps, by J. M. Richardson, published 
 the same year ; from which we borrow the fol- 
 lowing extracts, as we find them making a con- 
 spicuous figure in the foreground, in the work 
 from which we have quoted. 
 
 ' In concluding a treaty of peace with the 
 United States, not only ought the main feature 
 of the war, the inviolate maintenance of our 
 maritime rights, to be kept in view, but the 
 scarcely less important object, the preservation 
 of the British North American colonies, ought 
 not to be overlooked. To secure this last, it is 
 requisite to advert to one grand point, the neces- 
 sity of the establishment of a nein line of boun- 
 dary^ between the British and the American 
 
46 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 possessions/ &lc. Tri regard to the boundary 
 line, as supposed to be fixed in 1783, that writer 
 remarked, that 'the franiers of that treaty ou the 
 part of Great Britain, instead of insisting, ac- 
 cording to their instructions, on the river Penob- 
 scot being the boundary between New Bruns- 
 wick and the United States, abandoned that 
 point, aud allowed the line to be carried as far 
 as the river St. Croix, giving up an extent of 
 sea-coast of nearly fifty leagues, though the Pe- 
 nobscot 2oas the utmost northern point to ichich 
 the limits of the New England States were before 
 supposed to extend. Another special result is 
 then pointed out as proceeding from the treaty 
 determination of boundary, viz. ' that tliere is 
 actually no readily practicable communication 
 between Lower Canada and New Brunswick, 
 ivithoiit crossing a part of the American territo- 
 ry^ now called the Province of Maine.' 
 
 Indeed this strong and well informed pro- 
 duction so distinctly marks out and emphatic- 
 ally dwells upon all the subjects, that were after- 
 wards assumed on the pait of the firilish nego- 
 tiators at Ghenti that it can be seen by a sum- 
 mary of the points which the writer undertakes 
 to deliver in charge to the British plenipotentia- 
 ries to be insisted upon, how well prepared they 
 were to take high ground for their demands. 
 We omit those which 2;o to exclude us from 
 trading with their East India possessions, and 
 to extinguish our ' pretended right' to the north- 
 west coast of America ; and pass over a prohi- 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 47 
 
 bition to include the Floridas in the Union, and 
 a requirement to be made of the cession of 
 JVew Orleans, to ensure a due share of the 
 navigation of the Mississippi ; these, with the 
 refusal of any commercial treaty with this coun- 
 try, having less immediate bearing upon the 
 policy of the negotiation in respect to this fron- 
 tier. The summary of leading propositions, is 
 as follows. 
 
 First, a boundary line throughout the whole 
 extent of North America, where the British 
 possessions and those of the United States come 
 into contact, keeping in view that JYova Scotia 
 and A^ew Brunswick be restored to their ancient 
 limits, and a free communication with Canada 
 be ohtained, without passing through the United 
 States. ' If we cannot get to the Penobscot, at 
 least let some route or line be drawn, by which 
 we may be enabled to have a free communication 
 between Canada, and, JVova Scotia. 
 
 Secondly, a new boundary line for the Indian 
 tei-ritory ; the integrity of this boundary and the 
 independence of the Indians to be guarantied 
 by Great Britain ; the Americans to he exclud- 
 ed from the navigation of the St. Lawrence, 
 and of all its tributary lakes and waters ; and 
 no forts or military posts to be erected by the 
 Americans in the Indian territory, or on the 
 boundaries or jurisdiction within these limits ; 
 and a navigable part of the Mississippi to be 
 brought within the Canadian territories. 
 
48 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 Farther, the Americans to be excluded from 
 the fisheries on the coast of British North 
 America ; especially those of Labrador, New- 
 foundland, and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. 
 * The third article of the treaty of 1783, which 
 admits them to take and dry fish on the shores 
 of these colonies, ought to be utterly abrogated, 
 and every vestige of its existence taken away. 
 Improvident and impolitic in the outset, experi- 
 ence has shown that it is much more injurious 
 than might, on a superficial view, be supposed. 
 ' That the Americans were enabled thereby to 
 carry our own fish to the West Indies, and de- 
 rive great part of the advantages of a trade 
 ^hich nature points out as belonging to us, is 
 too well known.' In addition to this, ' the 
 Americans to be excluded from all intercourse 
 with the British West India Islands.' A barrier 
 had existed, which obstructed the advantages 
 to be derived from a true line of policy. This 
 barrier consisted in allowing the Americans to 
 supply the West India Islands with timber, staves, 
 fish and provisions. The war had put an end 
 to this imj)olilic system. Earnestly was it to 
 be hoped, thai experience would open their 
 eyes and induce them to revive, in all its vigor, 
 the navigation and colonial systems of England, 
 to give every species of encouragement to the 
 colonies, and to prohibit in future all intercourse 
 between the United States, and the British 
 West India Islands. 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 49 
 
 Of these objects, forming the bulk of what 
 ought to come under discussion, it was the aim 
 to produce a conviction of the essential nature, 
 to the prosperity and existence of the British 
 colonial possessions in North America. The 
 persons to be employed as British negotiators 
 should go prepared with an advantageous line, 
 distinctly marked out, the adoption of which 
 should be a sine qua non in the negotiation. 
 ' The tone of firmness, of decision, of dicta- 
 tion, on our part, (we quote the language then 
 used) is the only one suitable to our own dig- 
 nity, and to the relative circumstances and situ- 
 tion of the two countries.' 
 
 Qui Mare teneat, eum necesse reruni potiri ! 
 
 These last passages open a fruitful and not 
 entirely pleasant source of recollection and re- 
 flection. They cast a long retrospect upon the 
 far receding period of our colonial condition. 
 They carry us back to the season of 1763, — 
 when, after the joint exertion in arms, between 
 the strength of the mother country and her chil- 
 dren on this .side, the French empire gave way 
 upon this continent, and when our fathers saw 
 the great materials of that conquered empire 
 re-combined upon our back in a new form, 
 making a new frontier from south to north, by 
 the sources of the streams flowing to the Atlan- 
 tic. They rehearse to us the preface of the 
 royal proclamation of tliat year, reciting the 
 5 
 
60 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 extensive and valuable acquisition in America, 
 lately secured to the crown, by the definitive 
 treaty of Paris, and the advice of the privy 
 council thereupon, ' being desirous that all our 
 loving subjects, as well of our kingdoms, as of 
 our colonies in America, may avail themselves 
 with all convenient speed, of ihe great benefits 
 and advantages, which must accrue therefrom 
 to their commerce, manufactures, and naviga- 
 tion.^ It remembereth us even further back, of 
 the days of Sir Josiah Child, and the close sys- 
 tems of our mother country, devised originally 
 against the free and virtuous republic of Hol- 
 land, and finally transformed and fitted to us, 
 as finely as though they had been cut out for 
 us. It gives us a lively aud rather racy relish 
 of those venerable principles of colonial monop- 
 oly, by which our industry was trained in pru- 
 dent directions to promote the prosperity ol' the 
 mother country, and our native fonrhicbs for the 
 arts was encouraged to confine itself to the hon- 
 est and peaceful pursuits of husbandry, leaving 
 our workshops to be kept in Europe. It re- 
 minds us of a certain act entitled an act, 
 
 * To restrain the trade and commerce of the 
 Province of Massachnsetts Bay, and New Hamp- 
 shire, and colonies of Connecticut, and Rhode 
 Island, and Providence Plantations, in Nortii 
 America, to Great J3ritain, Irelai.vl, and the 
 British islands in the West Indies; and to pro- 
 hibit such provinces and colonies from carrying 
 on any fishing on the banks of Newfoundland, 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 51 
 
 or Other places therein mentioned, under certain 
 conditions and limitations.' 
 
 This was the same act,, it may be observed, 
 by which it was established, 
 
 * That the river ichich emptieth itself into Pas- 
 samacadie or Passamaquodda Bay, on the west- 
 ern side, and is commonly called or known by 
 the name of >S'^ Croix river, be held and deemed 
 for all the purposes in this act contained, to be 
 the boundary line between the provinces of Mas- 
 sachusetts Bay and Nova Scotia.' 
 
 If the monopoly of this continent was played 
 for as a stake, between England and France, 
 and the provinces had to pay the price of the 
 contest, and to see their own frontier the forfeit, 
 not of defeat, but victory, still they were not 
 deprived of the freedom of commerce in this 
 hemisphere, and had the same prescriptive lib- 
 erty of carrying; their products to the West 
 Indies, that they had of a partnership in the 
 fur-trade or the fisheries. We were the deni- 
 zens of all the English empire upon our coast, 
 from the equator to Labrador. In the natural 
 connexion of this important subject, we cannot 
 forbear to quote the doctrine of the venerable 
 John Adams, to whom New England is so 
 much indebted for the preservation of her most 
 valuable interests. We considered the treaty 
 of 1783, he said, as a division of the empire. 
 
62 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 Our independence^ our rights to territory and 
 to the fisheries^ as practised before the Revolu- 
 tion, were no more a grant from Britain to ns, 
 than the treaty was a grant from us of Canada, 
 JVova Scotia, &fc. The treaty was nothing 
 more than mutual acknowledgments oj antece- 
 dent rights. In defence of a portion of those 
 rights, particularly the fisheries, New England, 
 and especially Massachusetts, had done more 
 than all the rest of the British empire. In the 
 various projected expeditions to Canada, not 
 defeated through their negligence, in the con- 
 quest of Louisburgh in 1745, in the final con- 
 quest of Nova Scotia, New England had ex- 
 pended more blood and treasure, than all the 
 rest of the British empire. In regard to that 
 portion of these rights, most intimately connect- 
 ed with our limits, namely, the fisheries, we 
 urged upon the British ministers, he continued, 
 that it was the interest of England herself, that 
 we should hold fiist all those rights, because all 
 the profits which we make of them, went regu- 
 larly to Great Britain, in gold and silver, to 
 purchase and pay for their manufactures ; and 
 that if it was in their power, which it was not, 
 to exclude us from, or abridge those rights, 
 they would themselves experience the conse- 
 quences of their own unwise policy. This was 
 a strain worthy at th(; lime of him, who has been 
 well slylcd ' the noblest Roman of them all;' 
 and although some things have already taken a 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. oS 
 
 different turn, and other things have acquired a 
 steady and determined direction in fulfilment of 
 these patriotic and prophetic suggestions, we 
 have no occasion to lose sight of them, in re- 
 marking the policy that has been pursued by 
 Great Britain toward the United States. A 
 most remarkable development of this policy 
 took place in the negotiations at Ghent, — of 
 which the question now pending is a legacy. 
 
 The negotiations which it was the intention 
 to open at Gollenburgh, being removed to Ghent, 
 the American envoys were surprised by a set 
 of demands, as the conditions of peace, which 
 went very far to carry the United States back 
 to the era before the Revolution. These de- 
 mands were, first, — for a general revision of the 
 boundary line between Great Britain and the 
 United States ; tiie establishment of the Indian 
 possessions, as a permanent barrier between the 
 British dominions and the territories of.4he 
 Union ; the lakes from Lake Ontario to Lake 
 Superior to be the proper frontier between the 
 two countries; from Lake Superior, the line to 
 be pursued to the Mississippi ; and on the north- 
 east, a ' variation of the line of frontier, by a 
 cession of that portion of the District of Maine ^ 
 in the State of Massachusetts, which intervenes 
 between JVew Brunswick and Quebec, and pre- 
 vents their direct communication.^ The United 
 States were further required to relinquish their 
 right to the Lakes, and to disarm their force on 
 *5 
 
54 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 the waters and dismantle their fortifications on 
 the shores of those lakes, wiihin a limited dis- 
 tancOy while the British were to retain the right 
 to a military possession on their side of hoth. 
 In addition to these demands, besides die islands 
 of Passamaqnoddy, which we were to give up, 
 we were also to be deprived of the ris^ht to the 
 fisheries, and of drvins; our fish upon the shores 
 wiihin the limits of British sovereignty. These 
 positions seem to have been assumed upon the 
 ground, — which on some points was positively 
 taken, — that the treaty of 1783 was repealed 
 by the declaration of war ; leaving us only to 
 negotiate upon the footing of our oiiginal dec- 
 laration of independence, so far as the success- 
 ful lesidt of the f( rmer war had not been im- 
 paired by the military'vicissitudes attending the 
 latter. Finally, the British plenipotentiaries 
 proposed the vti possidetis. This new preten- 
 sion was brought forward, as the American en- 
 voys wrote home, ' immediately after the ac- 
 counts had been received, that a British force 
 had taken possession of all that part of the 
 State of Massachusetts^ situated east of Pe- 
 nobscot river.^ The British negotiators were in 
 a constant state of communication with their 
 own Government, refei'ring to its consideration 
 every note from our envoys, and waiting a re- 
 turn before lh?y transmitted their answer. By 
 the time when the negotiations, on the princi- 
 ple of uti possidetis^ should be brought to a 
 
NOUTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 55 
 
 close, the success of tlie expedition destined to 
 Louisiana, mi§ht have been determined ; and 
 in possession of Penobscot upon one side, and 
 New Orleans upon the other, the British Gov- 
 ernment might have gone far to execute the 
 original project of 1763. 
 
 This proposal of the itti possidetis was strip- 
 ped at oiice^ by the American Ministers, of its 
 diplomatic circumlocution ; and they met it by 
 a direct denial, that they iiad any power to 
 cede the territory of the United States. To be 
 more distinct, they referred to their former note 
 in reply to the broad demand of a new bounda- 
 ry, in which they say, they ' perceive, that un- 
 der the alleged purpose of openin'g a direct 
 communication between two of the British Pro- 
 vinces in America, the British Government ?'e~ 
 quire a cession of territory forming a part of 
 one of the States of the American Union^ — 
 and that they propose, without purpose specifi- 
 cally alleged, to draw the boundar}'- line west- 
 ward,' he. ' They have no authority,' they 
 answer, ' to cede any part of the territory of the 
 United States ; and to no stipulations to that 
 effect will they subscribe.' 
 
 It was to this great object, namely, to obtain 
 a new demarkation o( the territorial limits of 
 the United States, and a curtailment of their 
 rights on this continent and the adjacent ele- 
 ment, that the great efforts of the British nego- 
 tiators were directed. Thfs was the purpose 
 
56 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 which they a])proached, under the affectation of 
 affording protection to the Indians against our 
 resentment; the accusation, of our design to 
 conquer Canada, and of the immorahty of our 
 acquisition of Florida ; and the assertion, of 
 the flaming proof of our insatiable appetite, aris- 
 ing from the purchase of Louisiana. Hence, 
 also, the allusion to equivalents and offers in 
 other quarters, and all the diplomatic expedi- 
 ents made use of to compass this purpose. 
 Why, at least, his Majesty should be ' precluded 
 from availing himself of his means to retain 
 these points, which the valor of British arms 
 might have placed in his power, because they 
 happened to he situated within the territories 
 allotted under former treaties to the Govern- 
 ment of the United States,^ his JNIajesty's plen- 
 ipotentiaries professed themselves entirely una- 
 ble to conceive. These records of the negoci- 
 ations at Ghent are not revived, however, to 
 show the similarity to the project of an Indian 
 barrier, presented by France, and repelled by 
 Mr. Pitt, in the negotiations at the termination 
 of the war of 17 56, nor the broad and glaring 
 analogy which they exhibit to the policy of the 
 proclamation of 1763. It is for the distinct ad- 
 mission they contain, of the proper construction 
 of the limits of our territories, and particularly 
 of Massachusetts then, now Mctine, according 
 to the allotment of former treaties. 
 
 With respect to that part of the boundary of 
 
NOKTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 67 
 
 the District of Maine which had been brought 
 into view, the American envoys had never un- 
 derstood that the British plenipotentiaries, who 
 signed the treaty of 1783, had contempUited a 
 boundary different from that (ixed by the treaty, 
 and which required ' nothing more in order to 
 he definitively ascertained, than to be survey- 
 ed in conformity 2vith its provisions.^ This 
 subject not having been a matter of uncertainty 
 or dispute, they said they were not instructed 
 upon it, and had ' no authority to cede any part 
 of the State of Massachusetts, even for what 
 the British Government might consider a fair 
 equivalent.' 
 
 The treaty of Glient neither raised nor re- 
 cognized any doubt about the geography of tlie 
 highlands. It gave no new description of them ; 
 but adopted the definition that had been in 
 known and constant use for fifty years, and al- 
 ways understood and applied in one and the 
 same manner. It left no more uncertainty 
 about the proper existence and character of 
 these highlands, than it did respecting Connec- 
 ticut river, or the astronomical north. The 
 lines had never been surveyed by any mutual 
 proceeding between the two countries. Two 
 points only had not been ascertained ; — where 
 was the north-westernmost source of Connecti- 
 cut river ; and where was the point at which a 
 line drawn thence along tlie highlands, would 
 be intersected by a line drawn due north from 
 
58 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARV. 
 
 the St. Croix ? The north-westernmost source 
 of Connecticut river was to be detained in the 
 same manner, that the due north direction from 
 the St. Croix was. Both depended upon the 
 direct application of scientific principles. The 
 point in the highlands, which should be met or 
 made by a meridian from the monument, had 
 not been ascertained. A survey could then be 
 made, by which the limits of each country 
 would be marked out. It is mentioned by the 
 King of the Netherlands, that Great Britain 
 had once refused a proposition of this kind. 
 She did not refuse it now ; and nothing remain- 
 ed to be done, but to carry the provisions into 
 honest and faithful effect. The import of it is 
 correctly exhibited in the following paragraph, 
 from the Report of the Committee of Public 
 Lands, in the Legislature of Massachusetts. 
 
 * It results from the terms of these articles, 
 and leaving out of vievv that part of the fifth relat- 
 ing to the north-westernmost head of Connecticut 
 river, and the boundary thence to the Iroquois, 
 wliich is not material to the present purpose, that 
 the duty which devolved upon the Commission- 
 ers, a))p()inted under tlie fifth article, was to as- 
 certain and define that point of tiic highlands 
 lying due north of the source of the river St. 
 Croix, which was designated, in the former treaty, 
 as the north-west au'de of Nova Scotia, and to 
 cause tiiat part of the boundary line, between 
 the dominions of the two powers, which extends 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 50 
 
 from the source of the river St. Croix, due north 
 to the above mentioned north-west angle of No- 
 va Scotia, thence along the said highlands, which 
 divide those rivers which empty themselves into 
 the river St. Lawrence, from those which fall 
 into the Atlantic ocean, to the north-western- 
 most head of Connecticut river, to be surveyed 
 and marked according to the provisions of the 
 treaty. No authority is given to the Commis- 
 sioners, to ascertain and determine the respec- 
 tive positions of the highlands, or of the source 
 of the river St. Croix. Both these are supposed 
 to be known. The position of the source of the 
 river St. Croix, had in fact been determined by 
 a special convention, and no question had ever 
 been raised as to that of the highlands, which 
 was laid down in all the maps, and described in 
 a variety of official documents, emanating from 
 the British Government, as stretching from the 
 western extremity of the Bay des Chaleurs, along 
 the south side of the river St. Lawrence, at a 
 distance from it of twenty or thirty miles. The 
 duty of the Commissioners was, therefore, as has 
 been already said, to ascertain and determine 
 the point where a line, drawn due north from 
 the source of the St. Croix, strikes the highlands, 
 and to cause the boandary line, which, accord- 
 ing to the treaty, was to run westerly from that 
 point along the highlands, to be surveyed. 
 Should the Commissioners differ upon any of 
 the matters referred to them, they were to make 
 report to their respective Governments of the 
 points on which they differed, and an arbiter 
 was to be appointed, who was to decide on view 
 
60 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 of these reports, the points of difference therein 
 stated.' 
 
 The existence of these highlands forming the 
 northern boundary of Maine, is assumed in the 
 Report as a matter of fact, of pubhc notoriety, 
 estabHshed by the uniform evidence of maps, 
 and by the practice and authority of the British 
 Government. A graphic description of the 
 character of these highlands, from the best 
 knowledge that exists of them at the present 
 period, is given in the following passage from a 
 letter of IMr. Preble, one of the agents of the 
 United States, and late Minister at the Hague, 
 to Mr. McLane, then Minister at London, pub- 
 lished in an Appendix to the pamplilet, prefix- 
 ed as. a title to this article. 
 
 ' On the southern border of the river St. Law- 
 rence, and at the average distance from it of less 
 than thirty miles, there is an elevated range or 
 continuation of broken highland, extending from 
 Cape Rosieres southwesterly, to the sources of 
 Connecticut river, forming the southern border 
 of the basin of the Lawrence and the ligne des 
 versants of the rivers emptying into it. The 
 same highlands form also the lis>ne des versants 
 of tlie river Restigouche, and its northerly 
 branches emptying into the Bay des Chaleurs, 
 the river St. .John, with its nortlierly and west- 
 erly brauchos emptying into the Bay of Fundy, 
 the river Penobscot, with its northwesterly 
 branches emptying into the Bay of Penobscot, 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 61 
 
 the rivers Kennebec and Androscoggin, whose 
 united waters, absorbed in the river Sagadaiiock, 
 empty through it into Sagadahock Bay, and the 
 river Connecticut emptying into the Bay, usually 
 called Long Island Sound. These Bays are all 
 open arms of the sea or Atlantic ocean, are de- 
 signated by their names on MitchelFs map, and 
 with the single excej)tion of Sagadahock, are all 
 equally well known, and usually designated by 
 their appropriate names. The river St. John, 
 several branches of which take' their rise in 
 these highlands, from thirty to one hundred and 
 twenty English miles west of the line drawn due 
 north from the source of the St. Croix, pursuing 
 a south-easterly course, crosses said line, then 
 suddenly turning, runs nearly parallel to it, when, 
 resuming its former direction, it winds its way 
 through more than three hundred miles from its 
 source to the ocean ; and in its course, besides 
 its own rapids and those of its tributaries, pre- 
 cipitates itself over one fall of eighty feet in 
 height. The vva-ters of the St. Lawrence are 
 tide waters, and of course on a level with those 
 at the mouth of the St John. As therefore the 
 highlands, or point de portage, where the tribu- 
 taries of the St, John take their rise, approach 
 the St. Lawrence within thirty English miles, 
 it necessarily^ results from the nature of things, 
 that the country on tlie Atlantic side must con- 
 tinue to rise till it reaches the dividing ridge or 
 highlands, and then suddenly fall off toward the 
 river St. Lawrence. But we are not here left to 
 inference. It is proved by actual observation 
 and computation, that the average absolute 
 6 
 
63 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 height of this " ligne des versants" approximates 
 nearly to two thousand feet.' 
 
 The highlands where the line passes, at the 
 Temiscouatu Portasie, is thirteen hundred feet 
 above the level of the sea. That at which the 
 noi'th-west angle of Nova Scotia is found, is 
 a table of considerable elevation, and there the 
 waters find a descent from the south into the 
 river St. Lawrence, from tlie west into the Bay 
 of Chaleurs, and from the north and north-west 
 into the Atlantic. In this part of the country, 
 where the pi-oper angle is found, are springs of 
 the St. John, and Restigouche, and the j\Jetis. 
 From similar highlands in Scotland, more like 
 table-land than mountains, take their rise the 
 sources of the Tweed, and the Clyde, and the 
 Annan ; and a more natural or appropriate po- 
 sition for the north-west an2;le of Nova Scotia, 
 — divided by the Bay of Chaleurs from Can- 
 ada, — could hardly be supposed. Thereabouts 
 it was found and considered to be in 1798; 
 and there was not even a question of I'act ex- 
 isting since that period, but only a treaty .pro- 
 cess instituted to ascertain the point. 
 
 This elevation of the land at the source of 
 the river IMetis, is e;reater than that of Mount 
 St. Francis ; and viewed from tiie St. Law- 
 rence, tlie ridge of highlands probably presents 
 a conspicuous and continuous appearance. The 
 term hauteur dc tcrre, is one used in Canada, 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 63 
 
 and applied to this ridge, as the term highlands 
 is used in Scotland. Tliis equivalent expression 
 was first employed to mark off the Can^idian 
 boundary, from New-England first, and finally 
 from J\'ova Scotia, where the apphcation of it 
 would have an equal felicity ; and it may be 
 asserted as a fact, wiih entire confidence in its 
 integrity, that no person in America ever doubt- 
 ed that this boundary of highlands, distinguished 
 and established by the treaty of 1783, ran north 
 of the river St. John, — which is the only ques- 
 tion, — till since the treaty of Ghent. We may 
 safely challenge a contradiction. 
 
 Nevertheless, it appears that the situation of 
 these highlands was the principal point, upon 
 which the British and American Commission- 
 ers happened to differ. Upon this subject the 
 Committee of the Massachusetts Legislature 
 remark, ' that it certainly was not the intention 
 of the parties to the treaty of Ghent, that any 
 question should be made. When the British 
 commissioners advanced the extravagant and 
 preposterous pretension, that the highlands 
 were situated in a widely different region in the 
 State of Maine, the Committee say, the Amer- 
 ican Commissioners might perhaps with propri- 
 ety have declined to negotiate upon this point. 
 
 * Instead of this, however, they undertook to 
 refute the British argument, and finally consent- 
 ed to refer it to the arbiter. The Kipg being 
 
64 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 authorized to decide upon all the questions spe- 
 cified in the statement, was of course justified 
 in consideriiiiT the situaiion of the hifrhlands as 
 one of the points referred to hiai ; and had he 
 giueii a dcchion in fiivoc of the British prdcn- 
 sions^ the Government of the United States 
 would have been hound to acquiesce in it, except 
 so far as it might hoDe been considered vrigin- 
 allij null and void, for ivant of any constitutional 
 power in the Government of the United States, 
 to authorize the submission to a foreign arbiter 
 of the question so decided. 
 
 ' The King, however, gave no decision upon 
 this or any other question relating to the north- 
 eastern boundary. After stating the question to 
 be, as above represented ; — what is the north- 
 west antrle of Nova Scotia, and what arfrthe 
 hig'.ilands which divide the waters that empty 
 themselves into the river St. Lawrence, from 
 those that fall into the Atlantic ocean ? — his 
 Majesty proceeds to recapitulate at considerable 
 length, the arguments which have been urged by 
 the two parties, in Hivor of their respective pre- 
 tensions, compares their forces, and finally con- 
 cludes, that there is not sufficient evidence on 
 cither side, to justify a decision.' 
 
 It may be fitting to fiwuisb some further ac- 
 count than we have yet seen, of the sini*;ular 
 operations by which the mind of the arbiter 
 has been guided to this strnngcly negative re- 
 sidt. We might be spared the perplexity of 
 following out a immber of passages, literally 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 6o 
 
 leading to nothing, if it were not rather inter- 
 esting and curious to see by what expedients it 
 was practicable to avoid a decision. Besides 
 being abundant and diversified in its details, the 
 opinion is somewhat curious and complicated in 
 its application of principles. It employs a 
 scrupulous and subtle species of analysis. It 
 cairies with it an aspect of novelty in its pre- 
 vailing ideas, that miglit be rather refreshing on 
 such an antiquated topic ; and it contains, there 
 can be no sound reason for not saying it, a very 
 singular mixture of mystifications and sophisti- 
 cations. Altogether, it is one of the most re- 
 markable pieces of metaphysics that have been 
 produced, in matter of law or fact, in modern 
 times. Although the method made use of may 
 be understood by those who are acquainted 
 with the subject and familiar with the case, it 
 can hardly be mastered without considerable 
 study, and also requires the aid of the artificial 
 map A. DifKculiies present themselves in the 
 official translations, which are not immediately 
 removed by recurrence to the original; and on 
 the whole it is a document of a rather unique, 
 and anomalous description. But it will assume 
 its place in the Annual Register of 1831, and 
 find its way to the public understanding. 
 
 The first step in the process, adopted by the 
 arbiter, — and which, properly improved and 
 pursued, it is easy to perceive, goes far to ac- 
 complish the whole result, is to dispense with 
 *6 
 
66 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 the quality of altitvde, as constituting a char- 
 acteristic of the highlands, established by the 
 treaty. It is assumed that ' the character more 
 or less hilly and elevated of the country,' 
 through which the line may be drawn, affords 
 no criterion : 
 
 Again, that the treaty of Ghent institutes a 
 proceeding to ascertain the limit by direct ex- 
 amination upon the spot, w^iich is incompatible 
 with the idea of a definite or historical boun- 
 dary : 
 
 That the descriptive north-west angle of 
 Nova Scotia, being itself the desideratum, has 
 no proper existence : 
 
 That the nature of the s^roiind east of the 
 north-west angle of Nova Scotia, had not been 
 indicated in the treaty, — nor the number of 
 degrees to form that angle given : 
 
 That, furthermore, there is nothing to be de- 
 rived from the delim/itation of the ancient Brit- 
 ish Provinces on this point, as the boundary 
 line, west of the St. Lawrence, through the 
 lakes, did not comport with the ancient Pi'ov- 
 ince chartei's : 
 
 And that, stripping the question of these in- 
 coriclusive circiuTistances, namely, the nature 
 more or less hilly of the ground, and the an- 
 cient delimitation of the Provinces, &ic., it re- 
 solves itself into this, — that is to say, what is ' 
 the ground, no matter (n^iniporte) whether hilly 
 and elevated, or not, whicii, westwardly from 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 67 
 
 the line of the St. Croix, divides the rivers, 
 which empty themselves into the St. Lawrence, 
 from those which fall into the Atlantic ocean. 
 
 Putting the lands, whether high or low, on 
 both sides of the St. John, to the north and 
 south, upon the same level, so long as waters 
 flow from them in different directions, and di- 
 vesting them of every circumstance, to distin- 
 guish the one or the other by any prescriptive 
 discrimination, the next step is to dispose of the 
 rivers, that are found to flow from the reputed 
 highlands. 
 
 The rivers St. John and Restigouche, in the 
 first place, are cashiered by the arbiter, on the 
 ground, that it would not be safe to include 
 them in the description of rivers, falling into the 
 Adantic ocean ; — these rivers filling into the 
 Bays of Fundy and Chaleurs ; — that these 
 alone are the rivers falling into the Atlantic 
 ocean at all, which the boundary line flaimed 
 by the United States divides immediately from 
 rivers, emptying themselves into the St. Law- 
 rence ; — and that this boundary line does not 
 even immediately divide the rivers that empty 
 themselves into the river St. Lawrence, from 
 the St. John and Restigouche, but only from 
 rivers that empty themselves into the St. John 
 and Restigouche ; so that, to reach the Atlantic 
 ocean at last, each set of streams, separated 
 from the St. Lrwrence, requires two interme- 
 diate communications, viz. the one the river St. 
 
6S NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 John and the Bay of Fundy, the other the 
 river Resligouche and Bay of Chaleurs. 
 
 But there is a still more effective ingredient 
 employed, in prder to produce a proper soluiion 
 of this' problem ; and that seems to be, that the 
 highlands which divide the rivers flowing into 
 the St. Lawrence from those falling into the 
 ocean, may as well divide them mediately as 
 immediately ; so that, in this sense, it becomes 
 entirely indifferent on which side of the St. 
 John the supposed highlands are situated, and 
 that one set w'ill answ er the purpose of the trea- 
 ty just as well as the other. The river St. 
 John is thus substantially extracted for all pur- 
 poses from the field of inquiry. This river is 
 put, in fact, upon the same footing with the 
 highlands. It is considered immaterial, whether 
 those highlands have any extraordinary eleva- 
 tion. It is immaterial, whether the St. John 
 flows Of\ one flank of them or the other ; and 
 to avoid the existence of the north-west angle 
 of Nova Scotia, both the elements in the treaty 
 description, namely, the height of lands, and 
 the circumstance of their dividing rivers, seem 
 to be rendered nugatory. 
 
 Striking the St. John from the scene, reduc- 
 ing the highlands to a level, and expunging the 
 southern boundary of Quebec, the north-west 
 angle of Nova Scotia sinks into a shapeless ruin, 
 — ^ Baron and BaiUie, and Saunders Saun- 
 dersouy — a' dead and gane ." It leaves the 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 69 
 
 description of the treaty of 1783, a mere rasa 
 tabula. It converts the whole space of conntry, 
 — from tlie Chandiere to the river, IMetis, em- 
 bracing the Quelle, Kamouraska, Da Loup, 
 Verte, Trois Pistoles and Ria.ousky, falling 
 hito the St. Lawi-ence on one side, that is, be- 
 tween those streams to the north, and the Pe- 
 nobscot, Kennebec and Androscoggin, the 
 whole breadth of Maine, to the South, for all 
 purposes of the treaty, — into table land. The 
 face of the country is, in fact, discharged from 
 all features of a sensible character ; it is all in- 
 definite. The original description is neutral- 
 ized ; there is no firm or distinct tract of ground 
 remaining ; the chemical process has been suc- 
 cessful. The treaty description of the territory 
 is cancelled, and becomes a mere blank. 
 
 In thus exercising this sovereign faculty of 
 going into a thoroughly new and artificial view 
 of the subject, — as though there were no pre- 
 existing rules or principles of determination in 
 regard to it, — the arbiter carefully discards all 
 that is historical. In this respect, therefore, the 
 description in the proclamation of 1763, the 
 Quebec Act of 1774, and the successive com- 
 missions to the governors of Canada, — go for 
 nothing. It is not that the negotiators of 1783 
 adopted so much any ancient delimitation of the 
 Provinces in that quarter, as that they employed 
 a set of terms, which, by their being made use 
 of to define the principal provincial boundary 
 
70 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 in that direction, had acquired a knoiun, deter- 
 minate, and practic(d signifiration. If there 
 had been ntj evidence on this subject before the 
 arbiter, and he had been left entirely to the 
 lijihts of his own mind, he might liave been jus- 
 tified in viewing it more as an open question. 
 But he was not thus at liberty. In the first 
 commission that was issued to Sii- Guy Carleton 
 as governor of Quebec, in 1786, the identical 
 description of ' highlands, which divide the 
 rivers that empty themselves into the river St. 
 Lawrence from those which fall into the At- 
 lantic ocean,'' was used, which was employed 
 in the treaty of 1 783. It could not be said, 
 that the treaty paid no regard to the ancient 
 delimitation of the British Provinces, since 
 Nova Scotia was expressly named, and the 
 western boundary of that Province, terminating 
 at its north-w-esternmost point in those high- 
 lands, was adopted as the eastern boundary of 
 the United States. 
 
 With resj)ect to the inference of the arbiter, 
 that the northern boundary of Maine is not to 
 be regulated by the southern boniuhiry of Que- 
 bec, on the ground that the limits of the colo- 
 nies were not adopted as the limits of the United 
 States, if it were of any importance, we should 
 be glad if his INIajesty would inform us, what 
 the limits of the colonies were at the declaration 
 of their independence? Should we go by their 
 charters to the Pacific, or be governed by the 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 71 
 
 acts of 1763 and 1774, intended to bear mainly 
 upon what are now the Middle and Southern 
 States of the Union ? Does it follow, in his es- 
 timation, that because the operation of those 
 provisions was not acquiesced in according to 
 all their extent, that therefore their expressions 
 are to be without effect, when they are literally 
 recited and exactly applied ? Because the lakes 
 were made the boundary from the Iroquois to 
 their farthest extremity in the wilderness, does 
 it necessarily vitiate and destroy that portion of 
 the description in these acts, which applies 
 with perfect precision from the Connecticut 
 and Chaudiere to the Bay of Chaleurs? The 
 logic of the arbiter implies an acquaintance 
 with historical circumstances, while all his 
 deductions are made against the authority 
 of historical documents. Every thing is made 
 to tell one way in his philosophy. What 
 he has been able to do in the actual manner in 
 which he has gone to work, is not in itself so 
 wonderful, — because he has absolutely been 
 able to do nothing, — as the dexterity with 
 which he has attempted to divest the subject of 
 all its real merits, arising from the character of 
 the country, the demarkation of Canada, and 
 the whole class of facts, geographical and his- 
 torical, combined, which come to us as tradi- 
 tionary truths, and are established under the 
 most authentic sanctitms. Supposing, if it 
 were possible, the highlands to have been hy- 
 
72 NOJRTH-EASTERN BOUNDAKY. 
 
 pothetical, still they had an unquestionably ad- 
 mitted existence, the intention was capable of 
 being perfectly ascertained, and the deJimiialion 
 which was designed could have been conclu- 
 sively demonstrated. The phrase ' Atlantic 
 ocean' was genus generaVissimura. It embrac- 
 ed all but the river St. Lawrence to the south 
 and east. A verbal criticism was raised in the 
 British statements, on the word ' seas^ having 
 been used in the proclamation of 1763, as be- 
 ing the more comprehensive term, but the ar- 
 biter does not notice this slender distinction. 
 If any of the original traces were obliteratedj 
 or the monuments referred to not to be found, 
 it does not follow that the direction of the treaty 
 was to be disregarded and abandoned as en- 
 tirely ineffectual, so as to substitute a totally 
 arbitrary definition, or rather a merely arbitrary 
 division. 
 
 The arbiter, looking into historical docu- 
 ments for a very limited purpose, finds that the 
 norih-icest angle of JSfuva IScotin was at one 
 lime (1755) on the bank of the St. l^awrence ; 
 and at another (1779) at the source of the St. 
 John. Now it is quite cert:iin, that there never 
 was any such thing as the north-west angle of 
 Nova Scotia in existence until J 703. When 
 the northern boundary of that Province was 
 considered as resting on the Si. Lawrence, the 
 arrival of the north line from ihe St. Croix never 
 gave it the deno>ninaiion of an angle. The 
 north-west angle of Nova Scotia was never 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 73 
 
 fomied, till the Province of Quebec was set 
 off. To look on Mitcheli's iiinp for the latitude 
 of that angle, as coinciding wiili the St. Law- 
 rence, is not merely an anachronisnn, but an 
 absurdity. Mitchell's map was laid before the 
 arbiter, because it was known to have been 
 before the British and American negotiators, 
 in forming the treaty of 1783. But to infer 
 from that map, that there was any assignable 
 north-west angle of Nova Scotia upon the lati- 
 tude of the river St. Lawrence, different from 
 that designated by the treaty, is preposterous. 
 The identical Mitchell's map, which was used 
 at Paris in making the treaty, is still preserved, 
 and exhibits traces with a pencil, since that pe- 
 riod apparently passed over with a pen, showing 
 where the angle in question was understood at 
 that time to be found, and intended to be fixed. 
 But as there was no question when that map 
 was made use of under the treaty of 1794, 
 except as to the St. Croix, it was not deemed 
 of any importance to obtain attestation to the 
 truth of these marks, and was deferred, until 
 by the decease of Mr. Adams, and the infirm- 
 ity of Mr. Jay, it became impossible. 
 
 In the conferences of our negotiators at Paris 
 in 1783, it appears from the testimony after- 
 wards taken, that the easterly boundaries of the 
 Province of Massachusetts, it was considered, 
 ought to constitute those of the United States ! 
 It seems that Mr. Jay supposed the St. John 
 7 
 
74 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 to be the eastern limit, and that it was so con- 
 sidered by respectable opinions in America. 
 But it was replied, that the St. Croix was the 
 river mentioned in the charter of IMassachusetts, 
 and dierefore it was adopted. This was a 
 mistake. The St. Croix was not mentioned 
 in the charter. It is evident, that the Conti- 
 nental Congress in 1779, considered the char- 
 tered boundaries of Massachusetts Bay as ex- 
 tending to the St. John. That river, the St. 
 John, had, as a committee of Congress say in 
 1782, before been called the St. Croix. The 
 territory called Sagadahock had been consid- 
 ered as extending to the St. John, as the limit 
 of the place called ' St. Croix, next adjoining 
 to JVew Scotland.^ While the dispute about 
 Acadia was pending, Nova Scoiia was placed 
 on tho east of the St. John, and that river was 
 called also, as has been mentioned, the Clyde. 
 The error of the old Congress, therefore, on 
 this subject, was not entirely without occasion. 
 The circumstance is adverted to, because 
 ideas are still understood to exist to the same 
 purpose, and because the King of the Nether- 
 lands has availed himself of it to find a north- 
 west angle of Nova Scoiia at the furthest source, 
 he probably means, of the St. John. This is 
 a perversion of the fact, if not of the o|)inion, 
 upon any other prin(i|)le than that the St. John 
 was properly regarded as the St. Cioix. But 
 the opinion that prevailed in Congress is best 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 75 
 
 explained by the report of the committee In 
 1782, which refers to Bowen's map for author- 
 ity or ilhisiration, and that map places the north- 
 west angle of Nova Scotia on the highlands, at 
 the source of tliat branch of the river St. John, 
 which is called the Madawaska. Five difFer- 
 eni maps, published in London, in 1765, 1771, 
 1774, 1775, as is mentioned in the first pro- 
 duction al the head of this article, place the 
 angle on the highlands, at the head of the same 
 branch. But this is now immaterial. Dr. 
 Franklin and Mr. Jay assented to the opinion 
 of Mr. Adams, that the St. Croix was the river 
 in the charier; and the St. Croix on Mitcheirs 
 map was selected. Mr. Adams and Mr. Jay 
 agree that the boundary lines of the United 
 States were marked out on that map — and who 
 can doubt, where the line in dispute along the 
 liighlands was drawn? 
 
 The little differences elicited between the 
 authorities of New Brunswick and Canada, 
 alluded to by tlie arbiter, resulted in fixing the 
 southern limit of Quebec at the place mention- 
 ed on Mount Francis, near the lake Temiscou- 
 ntu. This was before the treaty of 1794 ; after 
 this, and the determination of 1798, we hear 
 no more of them. 
 
 Tlie claim of the American Congress to the 
 river St. John inspired the arbiter with an idea 
 of equitable compensation, which he was not 
 |ble, however, to work out quite to our advan- 
 
76 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 tage, or his own contentment. The committee 
 of Congress, it seems, considered the space be- 
 tween the Pnssamaquoddy and St. John as 
 ' the place called or known by the name of St. 
 Croix,* in the Dulce of York's Grant, — and so 
 part of Sagadahock. By the surrender of 
 ioth banks of the vSt. John for a considerable 
 way from its mouth, and the intervening tract 
 between the St. John and St. Croix bordering 
 on the sea, the arbiter is of o[)inion that Great 
 Britain did not obtain a territory of less value, 
 than if she had accepted the St. John as her 
 frontier, — granting to the United States, on that 
 ground, the territory claimed by them to the 
 north of the St. John. Still, he considers that 
 the value of concession to Great Britain would 
 be so much impaired by this compensation to 
 the United States, that he cannot conceive what 
 could have induced Great Britain to consent to 
 it. He therefore comes to the conclusion, ihcit 
 he cannot confirm this equation to the United 
 States, without viol.uing the principles of law 
 and equity ; on the other hand, he comes also 
 to tl)e conclusion, that he cannot well refuse to 
 establish it without pressing on the same prin- 
 plcs, yet, — although it n.ust be confessed, not 
 without obvious reliictnnce and regret, — he 
 does come to the conclusion by the aid of other 
 circumstances, that ' to him that hath shall he 
 given, and from him that !i;ilh not shall be 
 taken away even that which he hath.' Tlie 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 77 
 
 ofF-set, thus allowed in his view by the treaty, is 
 resumed by this result. His mind has been 
 too much familiarized with the affairs of Eu- 
 rope, however, for the last forty years, to dis- 
 regard the idea of some indemnity. He had 
 received one himself at the hands of Bona- 
 parte. He had a large one from the Congress 
 of Vienna, which he has now lost, and he is 
 now disputing the arrangements about Lim- 
 bourg and Luxemburgh, upon the same prin- 
 ciple. It was natural for him to cast about for 
 something of this kind, to relieve the wounded 
 principles of right and equity, by providing 
 somewhat in the shape of an equivalent in 
 some other quarter; and, at the same time, fur- 
 nish a speciiiien of his proposed method of 
 adjudication. 
 
 In preparing this, he was not without an in- 
 timation of what was practicable and accepta- 
 ble in the estimation of the British Govern- 
 ment, from the negotiations at Ghent; in which 
 it was said, that the demand of a cession of 
 the portion of the District of Maine in question, 
 left it ' open for the American plenipotentia- 
 ries to demand an equivalent for such cession, 
 either in frontier or otherwise.' The British 
 statements and evidence indirectly afforded the 
 arbiter information, that tlie United Slates had 
 begun to build a fort at Rouse's Point on Lake 
 Champlain, which, on a true survey of the 
 
 forty-fifth parallel of latitude, would be exclud- 
 
 *7 
 
/8 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 ed from their territory ; and insinuated, that 
 this was all the interest the United States had 
 in that survey. Neither the statements, docu- 
 ments, or evidence exhibited on the part of the 
 United States, contained the slightest notice of 
 this circumstance ; and it was not touched in 
 the convention. By adjudicating this place,. — 
 to which we did not pretend to set up a shadow 
 of title, unless it was found south of the true 
 line, — to the United States, he proposed a 
 mode of decision, which, if not objected to, 
 would seive equally well in both cases. 
 
 We will look at this matter a moment. Ad- 
 mitting, that territory is the most proper meas- 
 ure of compensation for territory, if the arbiter 
 could go so far out of his way as to award us 
 Rouse's Point, to save an outlay, which may 
 be considered as lost to us at any rate, — if he 
 could depart from so fixed a rule as a ])arallel 
 of latitude, where there was no room for any 
 perplexity about the courses of rivers, — if he 
 could thus travel entirely out of the field of ter- 
 ritory allotted to us by the treaty of 1783, — 
 why could he not as well have applied the rem- 
 edy to that quarter of the country, upon which 
 he was obliged, in his own expression, to inflict 
 the wound ? Why, if the negotiation and ex- 
 change supposed by him to have been made in 
 the treaty of 1783 were to be revised, so as to 
 take back the tract to the north of the St. John, 
 should there not have been a proportionctle reS' 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 79 
 
 toraiion of that which Great Britain had obtain- 
 ed, to the west of that river ? We put it simply 
 upon the principles of right and equity, which 
 the arbiter is afraid to wound by liis opinion. 
 We do not say, that we did not receive a })er- 
 fect equivalent for the portion which we parted 
 will), upon l:is notion, at the j)eace of 1783 ; 
 but iliat depends upon our being oble to hold 
 it; and it is proved, thnt the St. Croix, which 
 was marked out for us upon the rule which the 
 arbiter adopts, namely, Mitchell's map, would 
 have given us all the river St. John, from the 
 mouth of Eel river, at the bend above Frede- 
 ricton. Supposing that he could not have given 
 us back to the Magaguadavie, he might have 
 restored to us the territory to that part of the 
 St. John, where it would have been touched by 
 the meridian from Mitchell's St. Croix. Nay, 
 he could not possibly have wandered farther 
 out of his sphere, than he did in carving us out 
 a portion of Canada, if he had assigned to us 
 the islands of Grand Menan, and Campo Bello. 
 The latter is properly a part of the promontory 
 on which the town of Lubec is situated, and 
 the other the largest of a group of islands im- 
 mediately abreast. Not that we believe that 
 any operations of this kind would have been 
 within his competency ; they would not have 
 been less so than what he has done ; and if the 
 illustrious arbiter could exercise the utmost 
 power, not of a judge, but of a Chancellor, in 
 
80 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 reforming the terms of the contract between the 
 parlies upon its original principles, there would 
 have been no injustice in giving us the benefit 
 of the same retrospection. If it were out of 
 his power to conceive what could have influ- 
 enced the Court of London to concede the full 
 value for an equivalent, which Great Britain is 
 admitted to have received, is it right, upon 
 principles of mere equity, that she should retain 
 the consideration, and still be allowed to recov- 
 er back the territory she has parted with for it? 
 
 These considerations, however, we are sen- 
 sible, have no relevancy in regard to the proper 
 question of the authority of the arbiter; they 
 only serve to shadow out the excessive irregu- 
 larity of his proceeding. We may go farther, 
 and acknowledge that there is no sort of foun- 
 dation for this fancy of ihe arbiter, dignified into 
 some consideration by being adopted by him, 
 of there having been any balancing of equiva- 
 lents on this quarter at the treaty of 1783, in 
 the manner wliich it has been his pleasure to 
 suppose. The proceeding was a simple and 
 direct one on the pait oi the Ameiican negotia- 
 tors, and there was no objection made to the 
 extent of it on this quarter by the British. 
 There is yet living and most j'espectable evi- 
 dence on this point. 
 
 We might decently apologize to our readers 
 for drawing our remarks to such a length, but 
 the subject assumes a practical importance, as 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 81 
 
 it now awaits the action of the constituted au- 
 thorities of the United Stntes, upon the opinion, 
 which lias heen duly communicated to them, of 
 the King of the NetheHands. The learned Dr. 
 Rutlierfordi has employed some part of a chap- 
 ter, which Dr. Paley thouglit might as well 
 have been spared, to prove that acts, which did 
 not import obligation, were not binding as laws. 
 Great as may be the respect and deference due 
 to the character of a crowned sovereign, who 
 has undertaken to perform such an amicable 
 office, and omitting to ask, whether he continu- 
 ed to be precisely the same political person, or 
 to sustain the same independent relation, at tlie 
 time of pronouncing his opinion as that of ac- 
 cepting the authority, it can be no discourtesy 
 to ask, whether that authority has been executed. 
 And again, while we are cautious of making a 
 free use of phrases, signifying sovereignty, in 
 application to the proper powers of any of the 
 members of this Union separately, and should 
 be very carefid not to intrude upon the sacred 
 precincts of constituiional power, we are at the 
 same time sensible, that there are rights of a 
 most important chardcter, not merely reserved 
 and secured to those meiribers by the great in- 
 strument of our prosperity, but whicli are inhe- 
 rent in the soil which is the basis of them, and 
 cannot so much as be touched without their en- 
 tire consent. 
 
 We decline going into any further argument 
 
82 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 of our own upon this subject. The magnitude 
 of the interest involved in the issue, in a pubHc 
 and terrilorial point of view, is one that com- 
 mands a just and serious consideration. The 
 executive and legishuive authorities of Maine 
 and Massachusetts, the two States most imme- 
 diately interested, have united in the most dis- 
 tinct expressions of ttieir opinions, disaffirming 
 the validity of the formal act cotnmunicated by 
 tlie King of the Netherlands ; and the language 
 of the latter State, although less excited and 
 anim.ated than that of the former, appears to us 
 to be neither less clear, nor forcible and deter- 
 mined. The Legislative Committee of Massa- 
 chusetts go a good way in giving a large and 
 liberal construction of the power of the arbiter, 
 to determine the points of difference, as appears 
 from the extract of the Report which we have 
 already quoted. If the evidence before the ar- 
 biter was insufficient, he was authorized to re- 
 quire more and cause further inquiries, but of 
 this Aiculty he declined to avail himself, not 
 considering the qnestion to be capable of any 
 fiu'ther elucidation. Upon this the Committee 
 say ; 
 
 * The arbiter, having thus declared that the 
 case was not susceptible of a decision upon the 
 evidence, with which he had bocui tarnished, and 
 also that it was not suscoptihlo of any further 
 elucidation by means of additional evidence, 
 fioems to have had no alternative left, but to close 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARy. 
 
 83 
 
 the^proceedings, and resign his functions, with- 
 out giving any opinion. Instead of this, howev- 
 er, after alleging his inability to pronounce a 
 decision in favor of the line claimed by either 
 party, he attempts to settle the difference in an- 
 other way, and recommends the adoption of an 
 entirely new boundary, not previously contem- 
 plated, or claimed on either side, and having no 
 pretence of foundation or support in the terms of 
 any of the treaties. 
 
 ' This recommendation,' says the report, 'ter- 
 minates the King's proceedings in regard to the 
 question of the north-eastern boundary. Ac- 
 cording to the terms of the treaty of Ghent, as 
 above quoted, the two parties engage to consider 
 the decision of the arbiter as final and conclu- 
 sive on all matters reiorred to him ; and it is 
 stipulated, in the convention of I8'27, that the 
 decision of the arbiter, when given, shall be tak- 
 en as final and conclusive, and shall be carried, 
 without reserve, into immediate effect, by Com- 
 missioners appointed for that purpose by the 
 contracting parties. But, as this recommenda- 
 tion of an entirely new boundary is not a deci- 
 sion of any of the points referred to the arbiter, 
 and is declared by himself not to be so, it is of 
 course not binding, as a decision under the stip- 
 ulations of the treaties. It is hardly necessary 
 to add, that, as the mere recommendation of a 
 friendly Sovereign, given without authority upon 
 a point not submitted to him, it can have no ob- 
 ligatory character, however justly it may be en- 
 titled to the most respectful consideration. As 
 the Committee cannot supj)ose that this will be 
 
84 NORTH-EASTERN BOUxNJDARY. 
 
 considered by any one as a doubtful principle, 
 they deem it unnecessary to multiply arguments 
 in support of it. They will merely rel'cr, in il- 
 lustration of the abuses that would result from 
 the adoption of a contrary principle, to the cele- 
 brated case of Bruce and Baliol, rival pretenders 
 to the crown of Scotland, who submitted the de- 
 cision of their respective claims to Edward I., 
 then Kincr of Eno:land, sometimes called the 
 English Justinian. In this case, as in the one 
 submitted to the King of the Netherlands by 
 Great Britain and the United States, the argu- 
 ments and evidence furnished by the parties 
 were not cojisidered sufficient, to authorize a 
 decision in favor of either ; and, in order that 
 the difference miorht not remain unsettled, the 
 English Justinian adjudijed the crown of Scot- 
 land to himself. It will hardly be pretended, 
 that this proceeding was conformable to the 
 rules of national law ; but it would have been 
 fully justified, by any principle which would give 
 to the recommendation of a new boundary by 
 the King of the Netherlands an obligatory power 
 over the Governments of Great Britain and the 
 United States. If an arbiter have a right to 
 travel out of the record of the submission, and 
 give opinions having the force of law, upon 
 questions not referred to him, it is obvious, that 
 there are no limits to !iis authority, and that the 
 reference, by two Governments, of any question, 
 however unimportant, to the arbitration of a 
 third, amounts to a completJi and unconditional 
 surrender of the national rights and independ- 
 ence of both. 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 85 
 
 ' The recommendation of the King of the 
 Netherlands is therefore not binding upon either 
 Government. It is nevertheless entitled to very 
 respectful consideration. It is the suggestion of 
 a friendly Sovereign, made with the best inten- 
 tions, and under an impression, that the adop- 
 tion of it would be mutually and equally advan- 
 tageous to both the parties. Although it can 
 have no obligatory character, it may be proper 
 to inquire, whether it is right and expedient that 
 the Government of the United States should vol- 
 untarily accede to it, and give it effect. 
 
 * Supposing the question of expediency to be 
 entirely open, the Committee are unable to per- 
 ceive any very strong reasons for deciding it in 
 the affirmative. They are not aware, that any 
 material inconvenience can result from a further 
 delay in the survey of the north-eastern bounda- 
 ry, as determined by the treaty of 1783; while 
 the adoption of the recommendation of the King 
 of the Netherlands would involve the sacrifice of 
 a considerable tract of territory, and an acquies- 
 cence, to a certain extent at least, in pretensions 
 on the part of the British agents, which are too 
 extravagant to be regarded for a moment as en- 
 titled to serious attention. But the Committee 
 will not enlarge upon the considerations belong- 
 ing to the question of expediency, because they 
 conceive that this question is precluded by the 
 preliminary one of Constitutional right. The 
 Government of the United States have no con- 
 stitutional authority to cede to a foreign State 
 any portion of the territory belonging to any one 
 of the States composing the Union, without the 
 8 
 
8G NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 consent of such State. They can, without a vi- 
 olation of this rule, settle such questions relating 
 to the boundaries of the Union as were left 
 doubtful by the treaty of 17S3, because it is only 
 by the settlement of these questions, that the ex- 
 tent of the territory of the border States can be 
 ascertained. But the situation of the highlands, 
 which, according to the treaties, form the north- 
 ern boundary in this quarter, is not represented, 
 either in the treaty of 17S3, or in that of Ghent, 
 as a doubtful point. The latter treaty provides 
 for ascertaining the point where a certain line 
 strikes the highlands, and for surveying another 
 line, which is described as runnincr jn a westerly 
 direction along the highlands. No provision is 
 made for ascertaining the situation of the high- 
 lands, which is spoken of as known. The Gov- 
 ernment of the United States had therefore no 
 Constitutional rijiht to allou' it to be dr;iwn in 
 question by England, still less to submit it to ar- 
 bitration ; and had the King of the Netherlands 
 decided against us on this question, the Com- 
 mittee believe, as they have already remarked, 
 that the act would have been wholly null and 
 void, from a defect of authority in the Govern- 
 ment of the United States to make the yubmis- 
 sion. The only uncertainty which exists in re- 
 gard to this part of the boundary, results from 
 the want of an accurate survey of a line, the 
 general course of which is well defined. The 
 Government of the United States had a right to 
 cause this line to be surveyed, without regard to 
 the effect which the survey miglit have upon the 
 extent of the .sup})osed territory of Maine in that 
 
NORTH-EASTFRN BOUNDARY. 87 
 
 quarter. Farther than this, it had no authority 
 to go, without the consent of Massachusetts and 
 Maine.' 
 
 The pamphlets on ' the decision of the King 
 of the Netherlands, considered in reference to 
 the rights of the United States and State of 
 Maine,' assumes it as a principle, not to be con- 
 tested, 
 
 * That, as the United States and Great Britain 
 stood in relation to each other and to the King 
 of the Netherlands, as independent nations, the 
 King of the Netherlands had no power whatever 
 over any question of diflference between the 
 United States and Great Britain, beyond what 
 those two Governments expressly and by mutual 
 agreement delegated to him. It was not for 
 him to extend his powers by remote inferences, 
 of which he was to constitute himself the sole 
 judge, nor to enlarge and aid his jurisdiction by 
 indefinite and latitudinarian construction. It was 
 not for him to assume the office and attributes of 
 a friendly compoun.der, governed by no rule or 
 principle but his own discretion, unless such an 
 office and such powers were solemnly and ex- 
 pressly conferred upon him by the high parties 
 interested. There is in such cases, from the 
 very nature of the transaction, no implied power. 
 Every man feels within him, as the dictate of 
 common sense, that a consciousness of the deli- 
 cacy of the office, and a proper respect for the 
 high parties interested, impose it as a rule, that 
 
88 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 the arbitrating Sovereign should never take upon 
 himself to extend the limited special powers del- 
 egated to him, beyond the most plain, obvious 
 nTeaning of the solemn, express stipulations of 
 the parties. It is not only indelicate, — it savors 
 of assumption in such cases, to resort to infer- 
 ence and construction in order to enlarge his 
 authority. To maintain that the arbiter is the 
 sole judge of the powers delegated to him and of 
 the measure of his discretion, is to confer upon 
 him the power to make treaties for the parties, 
 as well as to execute them.' 
 
 We have an impression on this subject, of 
 which we cannot quite divest ourselves ; and 
 that is, that the King of the Netherlands, wheth- 
 er from respect to the difficulties thrown in the 
 way of his decision, or from an opinion that a 
 friendly suggestion from him might answer all 
 the purpose of a decision, actually meant no 
 more than to throw this proposition into a form, 
 for the consideration of the two Governments, 
 to be rendered efiectunl by their agreement to 
 adopt it. This idea is strengthened, without 
 adverting to his own circumstances at the time, 
 by observing the appropriate Innguage of adju- 
 dication, il doit etre consiJere, in detelmining the 
 proper bend of Connecticut river, in comparison 
 with the loose pl:r;ise il conriendra, applied to 
 the other points of this opinion. This is per- 
 haps to be ratber regarded as bis intention ; and 
 the supposition is entirely respectful to him. 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 89 
 
 We have little inclination or room to pursue 
 a further inquiry into the question of expedi- 
 ency. Our views on this subject are open to 
 Ehe influence of information and reflection. 
 Resolutions are not in all cases a substitute for 
 reasoning; but they sometimes serve to em- 
 body its results with great good sense, and to 
 sound purpose. A strong concurrence of opin- 
 ion, upon a point of public importance, where 
 the subject has been under consideration for a 
 sufficient period, is entitled to much respect. 
 By the award or appointment of the umjjire, he 
 has assigned to Great Britain the precise terri- 
 tory — or perhaps rather more, — which her plen- 
 ipotentaries required, and ours refused to cede 
 at Ghent. On the other hand, he has given to 
 us a kUiometre of land or water upon a point of 
 Lake Champlnin, which is of no importance to 
 us. Since the successive disasters of General 
 Burgoyne and Sir Gc-orge Prevost, we venture 
 to predict, that there will never be a third at- 
 tempt to girdle the United States in that direc- 
 tion ; and we consider Rouse's Point to be of 
 as little value in a military point of view, as old 
 Crown Point. We have no occasion to be on 
 our guard at that avenue, and if we had, that 
 would be no protection. We have mentioned 
 the f;ict, that the existence of this abandoned 
 affair was no where alluded to in any manner on 
 behalf of the United States, in laying their case, 
 before the arbiter. The fact has been stated 
 *8 
 
90 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 and not contradicied, that a British exploring 
 party, in the autumn of 1330, reconnoitred the 
 line of the St. Francis, which has been marked 
 out by the arbiter for our new boundary, and 
 found iiboaiable to its source. This'knovvledge 
 may at least serve to exj^lain the readiness of 
 the British Govei-nment to accept that limit, 
 vviien it is assigned to them in 1831. The 
 terms of the British demand for a cession of 
 territory at Ghent, would have been satisfied by 
 an extension of their boundary to the river 
 Madawaska. This was the outside of the orig- 
 inal Acadian settlement, and no provincial grant, 
 either by Governor Thomas Carleton, or since 
 his day, has been made west of the mouth of 
 that river. This too was the source of the St. 
 John, intended by the old Congress. This 
 river, with the Temiscouatu lake and portage, 
 had always afforded the ordinary line of com- 
 munication to the St. Lawrence. It was made 
 a military route during the last war with Great 
 Britain. Its military advantage was demon- 
 strated ; and the expediency of enlarging the 
 British frontier to the left, that is to say, on tlie 
 line of march toward Canada, was directly rec- 
 ommended. The St. Lawrence being shut up 
 a great part of the year, and the outlet from St. 
 John's and Halifax to the Atlantic being always 
 open, the importnnce of these places as depots 
 has been established, and experience has deter- 
 mined the utility of widening the communica- 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 91 
 
 tlonfrom this quarter to Quebec. This is a 
 utility, however, which is foreign to us. For 
 civil purposes and the proper intercourse of 
 peace, the question of a cession of a portion of 
 our territory might be one thing. The argu- 
 ment respecting the transmission of the. British 
 mail, has been made use of; but that mail, we 
 apprehend, is as regularly delivered to Montreal 
 from New York, as it is at Quebec from Hali- 
 fax. In a time of peace, there can be no ob- 
 struction. Would to heaven, there could nev- 
 er be any danger of its interruption. Experi- 
 ence, however, does not recommend to a peace- 
 ful nation the policy of disarming itself; and a 
 cession of this frontier augments the British 
 power for all purposes, that enable her to make 
 an impression upon us, in no measurable ratio. 
 It may be desirable, upon the soundest princi- 
 ples of philanthropy, to protect ourselves 
 against a repetition of the stale charge of weak 
 ambition to extend our own limits in that direc- 
 tion, by avoiding to give to a power, already 
 impregnable, an ascendancy and importance, 
 which might operate as excitements to future 
 enterprises on either part against the peace of 
 this continent. 
 
 We avow our belief, that the empire of the 
 United States is not to be extended by any hos- 
 tile encroachment upon the British Provinces. 
 Great Britain is not designed to be ejected 
 from this continent by our arms. Any change 
 
92 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 in the condition of her colonial dominions here 
 is to come, as we apprehend, from her own 
 consideration. Whether she shall turn her face 
 to the wall, and see the sun set on her domin- 
 ions upon this side of the Atlantic, depends upon 
 her own wiil. It is to her own wisdom, that the 
 prudence of pressing and persisting in this present 
 demand, which has been wearisome to the pa- 
 tience of all concerned, particularly addresses 
 itself. It is, in part, for the benefit of the mon- 
 itory reflections that may occur upon a review 
 of the policy, exposed by the proclamation of 
 1763, and the parliamentary act of 1774, re- 
 vived in the negotiations at Giient, and expend- 
 ing itself on this last point of dispute, — the re- 
 quirement to which this question owes its origin, 
 — that we have interwoven with the texture of 
 these remarks, references to those projects 
 which were cherished to cramp and fetter the 
 proper limits of the United States, to an extent 
 beyond what might otherwise appear to be in 
 perfectly good taste, or belong to a precise view 
 of the subject. We would record our fixed 
 persuasion, that the present positions are best 
 calculated to preserve the prosperity of the 
 British dominions. Tlie associations connected 
 with the occupation of Penobscot, and the en- 
 terprise against New Orleans, ought not to be 
 excited, except with a view to prevent a possi- 
 bility of their returning. If any opportunity 
 have been lost, the moral which American his- 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 93 
 
 tory presents to Great Britain is not to try to 
 recover it. A different sort of retrospection 
 recommends itself to the statesmen and bene- 
 factors of our mother country. We can wait 
 the peaceful progress of our own principles. It 
 is for us to maintain our ground, and leave the 
 rest to time and our Constitution. 
 
 If there be any question in the public mind, 
 in regard to the real magnitude of the present 
 interest to ourselves, although it may be com- 
 prised in the possession of a territory of mode- 
 rate compass, compared to the whole area of 
 our country, it might be resolved by adverting 
 to the eagerness with which Great Britain has 
 hitherto persisted in the pursuit, and the impor- 
 tance which her politicians have attached to the 
 object. It may be an exaggerated feeling, to 
 be sure, of this consequence, that inspires 
 Colonel Bouchette,^ in his recent work on the 
 British dominions in America, to state, that the 
 
 * The opinion of Colonel Bouchette is plainly express- 
 ed, that the arbiter has exceeded his authority. 'The 
 award of the umpire,' says he, 'dictated no doubt by a 
 sincere desire of doing impartial justice to the hio-h par- 
 ties concerned,— is in fact a compromise ; and vveappre- 
 hend, that the question of reference did not contemplate 
 a decision upon that principle ; but was confined to the 
 mere declaration of what was the boundary intended 
 and meant by the treaty of 1783. It was in the spirit of 
 that treaty alone, that the rule of decision was to be 
 sought for, and not in abstract theories of equity,' &c. 
 Deriving no validity from the authority of the arbiter, 
 therefore, by common consent, the proceeding can ac- 
 
94 NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 
 
 acceptance of this portion of their claim 
 awarded ibeni by the decision of the King of 
 the Netherlands, will be tlie first step to the 
 loss of their colonial empire. If Great Brit- 
 ain can scarcely preserve tliat empire witb this 
 concession, it would hardly be important to her 
 to make a point of it. There are two opinions, 
 however, prevailing upon this subject in Great 
 Britain ; and her colonial policy is probably at 
 this moment on a poise. The great importance 
 of these colonies to the mother country is main- 
 ly urged by those, who are there opposed to the 
 progress of political reform. The Quarterly 
 Review, Sir Howard Douglas, and that staunch 
 and respectable supporter of the tory interest, 
 Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, declare the 
 indispensableness of these appendages; and 
 the political articles in these journals announce 
 the loss of the colonies as one of the inevitable 
 consequences of reform. Whether, in such an 
 event, they shall constitute an independent Gov- 
 ernment under the protection of Great Britain, 
 or what ' variety of untried being' their condi- 
 tion is to assume, has even begun to be a spec- 
 ulation. But at present her colonial empire is 
 considered as a unit ; her Canadas, her fishe- 
 ries, her West-Indies are all considered parts of 
 
 quire an operation and effect only by its becoming tlie 
 act of the two Governments, by tlieir adoption and 
 ajrrecinent ; and such, we have no trreat doubt, was tho 
 intention of the Kinsr of the Netherlands. 
 
NORTH-EASTERN BOUNDARY. 95 
 
 the same great whole ; and we can receive no 
 equivalent for any valuable concession, except 
 sucli an one, as shall give us forever the free 
 trade of this Western hemisphere."^ 
 
 * While this article was going through the Press, the 
 Legislature of the irtate of Maine consented to treat 
 with the Government of the United States, for a cession 
 of its rights of soil and jurisdiction in the territory with- 
 out the line recommended by the King of the ^Nether- 
 lands, with an understanding that this line was to ha 
 accepted. Only three or four weeks before, the same 
 Legislature had adopted Resolves authorizing the ap- 
 pointment of agents at Washington and Boston, to 
 prevent, if possible, any such arrangement. The mo- 
 tives that led to tliis sudden change of policy are not 
 known. Tt was agreed to in a secret session of the Leg- 
 islature, in consequence of letters from the agent at 
 Washington, w^hich have not been published, ^and of 
 which a communication was refused to the Government 
 of Massachusetts, whose friendly co-operation in the 
 whole business had been so recently solicited and ob- 
 tained. The trarsaction wears very much the appear- 
 ance of a mere political or rather party manosuvre, and 
 that of a kind not particularly honorable to the persons 
 engaged in it We shall probably return to the subject 
 in a future number. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 To the citizens of the State of Maine, 
 
 And gentlemen who have ah'eady given me 
 the most candid evidence and assurance of their 
 patronage, to enable me to give an extensive cir- 
 culation of the documents and information, con- 
 tained in the preceding and annexed Map and 
 75th No. of the North American Review, in 
 reference to the North-eastern Boundary of 
 the United States of America, I tender my 
 most sincere acknowledgements and best efforts 
 to merit their approbation. To the Public 
 Characters in the State of Maine, and an adjoin- 
 ing: State also, as well as the Land Commissioner 
 and Librarian of the State of Massachusetts, 
 who have so obligingly permitted free access, to 
 the Public Documents, relative to this boundary 
 
 question. 
 
 9 
 
98 APPENDIX. 
 
 (The documents referred to above may be 
 found chiefly compiled in a large folio Book 
 of nearly 1,000 pages, in the archieves of a 
 state jointly interested, in this too long and 
 tedious controversy, (apparently so easy to be 
 understood,) as was originally intended by the 
 high contracting Parties in settling the Treaty 
 of Peace, 1783, which terminated the war for 
 Independence, of die Patriots of that day, in 
 addition to a large mass of Pamphlets, accu- 
 mulated in relation to this subject, (containing 
 it would seem,) incontrovertible facts and argu- 
 ments, of the Commissioners and Senators 
 assembled at Washington in 1832.) 
 
 In compliance with my orii;inal intention, 
 I could not better, I believe, serve the Public, 
 than laying before them in a concise and 
 clear manner, and in a cheap form, the 
 Map of Maine, and disputed Territory contig- 
 uous to the British Provinces of New Bruns- 
 wick and Nova Scotia, accompanied with this 
 little hook, which I have been politely permitted 
 to copy frotn the 75th No. of the North 
 American Review, in which I believe the 
 question is so ably, candidly and justly exam- 
 ined, as to bear testimony that the Author was 
 
APPENDIX. 99 
 
 fully competent to the task, and that he well 
 understood this " worse confounded" question, 
 and has presented it to the public in a faithful 
 manner. 
 
 And in further evidence of my assiduity and 
 desire to gratify and satisfy all who can and 
 may read if they please, I subjoin an extract 
 copied from an Official Document, viz. the 
 Netherlands King's designation, or interpretation 
 and recommendation for settling this question. 
 
 " Qu'il convenir a adopter pour limire des 
 deux Etats, une ligne tire droit au nord, depuis 
 la source de la riviere St. Croix, jusqu' au 
 point ou elle coupe le Milieu du Thalweg de la 
 riviere St. Johns, du Milieu du Thalweg de 
 cette riviere, le St. Francois se dechar2;e dans 
 la riviere St. Johns, de la le Milieu du Thalweg 
 de la riviere St. Francois, en la se sortent, jus- 
 qu' a la source de sa branche la plus sud ouest, 
 laquelle source nous indiquons sur la carte A. sur 
 la lettre X. authentiquie par la signature de 
 notre ministre des affaires etrangeres." 
 
 I confess as an apology, from my ignorance 
 of languages and literature generally, that 
 this may not be either good French or Dutch, 
 but have endeavored to present a fair copy of 
 
100 APPENDIX. 
 
 one item, ' as I understand it,' viz. the 
 King says, " my judgment is, you Jackson fel- 
 lows or strangers, if you choose, may bite off 
 your own nose," — if the Clay men will let you 
 do it. 
 
 That these Documents now presented to the 
 Public may have a tendency to extend the light 
 of truth, and aid in the cause of Patriotism, to 
 establish the just rights of the State of Maine, 
 and its citizens in finding a permanent Jand^ 
 mark as originally intended by ' Our Patriot 
 Fathers,' for their descendants. (Jf. E. angle 
 U. S.)^ Is the true, and paramount object in 
 view of the public's devoted and persevering 
 servant, 
 
 Peter Thacher Vose, 
 
 Geographer and Map Projector. 
 
 Now at Blue Hill Observatorij, near Ne- ' 
 povset, Oct. II), 1832, (or Amiiversanj ' 
 of Battle of Cornwallis, 1 78 1 . ^ 
 
 * Persons who are conversant witli maps will discovor 
 this (inirh to \n'. laid down in all tlio British maps, North 
 latitude, 48 dejrrecs, some minutes North. Sec Mr. 
 Spraguc'g speocii in the Senate U. S. 
 
GENERAL WINGATE'S CERTIFICATE. 
 
 A new map of N. America with the West 
 India Islands divided according to the Prelimi- 
 nary articles of Peace, signed at Versailles, 
 20th of January 1783, wherein are particularly 
 distinguished. The United States, and the 
 several provinces, governments, he. which 
 compose the British Dominions, laid down ac- 
 cording to the latest surveys, and corrected 
 from the ori,2;inal materials of Gov. Pownall, 
 Member of Parliament, 1783. 
 
 Taken from the original Map in my posses- 
 sion. Extreme point of U. S. by the above 
 Map comes up to the 48th degree of N. Lat. 
 
 J. F. WiNGATE. 
 
 This Map was published in London, called, A General 
 Atlas, describing the whole Universe, &c. by Thomas 
 Kitchin and others. Published for Robert Sawyer, 
 Fleet Street, No. 53. It may be seen at Gen. Wingate's, 
 Bath, Me. It was intended exclusively for the British 
 Government ships, and was purchased by Commodore 
 Tingey, then a midshipman in the British navy, for ten 
 guineas. 
 
Citizens of Maine ! 
 
 The alternative is now distinctly presented to 
 you. If you wish to see a part of your terri- 
 tory, with its inhabitants, (see British claims as 
 per Map annexed,) bargained, sold, and con- 
 veyed away to a foreign power for the benefit of 
 a few office-holders, you will go to the PoUs^ 
 and vote for the Jackson ticket ! 
 
 If you wish to preserve your territory entire, 
 and at the same time to recover the West-In- 
 dia trade, to secure a sound currency, a safe 
 and proper mode of exchange, to sustain the 
 Judiciary, to uphold the public faith, to preserve 
 the Federal Constitution, tire union of the 
 States, and the Freedom, Prosperity and hap- 
 piness of the People, you will go to the Polls 
 and give your votes to the illustrious statesman 
 and patriot, Henry Clay. 
 
3U77-5 
 
I