E398 
 .IV139 
 
 H lUfif KHrilH!) UaiHl 111 KI U t/1 ) .7W lin 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 DDDDS03Dfi33 
 

 ' -^.^^ ' 
 
 \.,^^^ *- 
 
 
 
 y 0°--. >. 
 
 
 
 
 '5^-.* <.<^^ ' 
 
 
 0^' 
 
 
 A 
 
 
 '^bv 
 
 

STATE OF NEW- YORK, r/ : »^^ 
 
 No. 215. 
 
 IN ASSEMBLY, 
 
 March 20, 1841. 
 
 COMMUNICATION 
 
 From the Governor, transmitting resolutions of the 
 General Assembly of the State of Maryland in re- 
 lation to the North-Eastern Boundary. 
 
 [Referred to the committee on the judiciary.] 
 
 EXECUTIVE CHAMBER, 
 Albany, March 20, 1841. 
 
 TO THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 I lay before the Legislature resolutions of the General Assembly of 
 the State of Maryland, in relation to the North-Eastern Boundary, to- 
 gether with a report of a select committee of that body on the subject. 
 
 WILLIAM H. SEWARD. 
 
 [Assembly, No. 215.] 
 

LETTER 
 
 From the Governor of Maryland, transmiting a re- 
 port and resolutions of the General Assembly of 
 that State, in relation to resolutions of Maine, 
 Indiana and Ohio, relative to the North-Eastern 
 Boundary. 
 
 Annapolis, March Ibth, 1841. 
 
 SIR— 
 
 In compliance with the request of the General Assembly of Ma- 
 ryland, I transmit to you a copy of their report and resolutions in rela- 
 tion to the North-Eastern Boundary. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 WM. GRASON. 
 To his Excellency the 
 
 Governor of Neio-York. 
 
 [Mr. Howard, of Baltimore city, from a select committee, made the 
 following report :] 
 
 The select committee to which was referred the communication from 
 the Governor, enclosing resolutions of the States of Maine, Ohio and 
 Indiana, have had the same under consideration, and respectfully offer 
 the following 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 The reolutions of the State of Maine are as follows : 
 " Resolved, That the patriotic enthusiasm with which several of our 
 sister States the past year tendered us their aid to repel a threa- 
 tened foreign invasion, demand our grateful recollection, and whilst this 
 spirit of self-sacrifice and self-devotion to the national honor pervades 
 the Union, we can not doubt, that the integrity of our territory will be 
 preserved. 
 
 " Resolved, That the promptness and unanimity with which the last 
 Congress, at the call of this State, placed at the disposal of the Presi- 
 dent, the arms and treasures of the nation, for our defence, the firmness 
 
4 [Assembly 
 
 of the Executive in sustaining the action of this State and repelUng the 
 charge of an infraction of the arrangement made with the British Lieu- 
 tenant Ciovcrnor in March last, and charging back upon the British go- 
 vernment the violation of that agreement — their decision in demanding 
 the removal of the British troops now quartered upon the disputed ter- 
 ritory as the only guaranty that they sincerely desire an amicable adjust- 
 ment of the boundary question, aflbrd us confident assurance that this 
 ►Slate will not be compelled single handed to take up arms m defence of 
 our territory and the national honor, and that the crisis is near, when this 
 question will be settled by the national government, cither by negotiation 
 or by the ultimate resort. 
 
 " Resolved, That unless the British government, during the present 
 session of Congress, make, or accept a distinct and satisfactory propo- 
 sition for the immediate adjustment of the boundary question, it will be 
 the duty of the general government to take military possession of the 
 disputed territory ; and in the name of a sovereign State, we call upon 
 the national government to fulfil its constitutional obligations to esta- 
 blish the line, which they have solemnly declared to be the true bounda- 
 ry, and to protect this State in extending her jurisdiction to the utmost 
 limits of our territory. 
 
 " Resolved, That we have a right to expect the general government 
 will extend to this member of the Union, by negotiation or by arms, the 
 protection of her territorial rights, guaranteed by the federal compact, 
 and thus save her from the necessity of falling back upon her natural 
 and reseiTcd rights of self-defence and self-protection — rights which 
 constitutions can neither give nor take away ; but, should this confi- 
 dence of a speedy crisis be disappointed, it will become the imperative 
 duty of Maine to assume the defence of our State and national honor, 
 and expel from our limits the British troops now quartered upon our ter- 
 ritory. 
 
 " Resolved, That the Governor be requested to forward copies of 
 these resolutions to the President and Heads of Departments, and to 
 the Senators and Representalivcs in Congress from this State, with a 
 request to the latter to lay thcni before the respective bodies of which 
 they arc members, also to the (governors of the several States with a 
 request to lay them before their several Legislatures." 
 
 The Legislatures of Ohio and Lidiana have passed resolutions respon- 
 sive to the above ; expressing hopes that the dispute between the United 
 iStates and Great Britain will be amicably setled, but tendering "the 
 whole means and resources of the respective States to the authorities 
 of the Union in sustaining our rights and honor." 
 
 Invited by the State of Maine to express an opinion upon a subject 
 deeply interesting to that State and also to the United States, the Legis- 
 lature of Maryland can not do this with propriety unless after a careful 
 examination into the merits of the case. The question is one which 
 can not be clearly understood, without a reference to numerous State 
 pa]jers, but which, when disembarrassed of the refinements which di- 
 plomatic subtlety has thrown around it, is easily intelligible. It is tlie 
 intention of the committee to give a succinct statement of the different 
 views entertained by the governments of the United States and Great 
 
No. 215.] 5 
 
 Britain, without entering into the details of the arguments by which 
 they are respectively sustained, for which a volume would be requisite 
 instead of the ordinary limits of a report. Nothimr, however, which 
 is deemed material to a fair exposition of the case, will be inlcniionally 
 omitted. Three maps arc annexed to the report, without which the 
 committee could not make themselves understood. 
 
 The second article of the Provisional Treaty of Peace, executed on 
 the 30lh of November, 1782, and the second article of the Definitive 
 Treaty of Peace between the United States and Great Britain, executed 
 on the 3d day of September, 1783, use the same language in describing 
 the boundaries of the United States, viz : " From the northwest angle 
 of Nova Scotia, viz : that angle which is formed by a line drawn due 
 north from the source of the St. Croix river to the highlands ; along 
 the said highlands which divide those rivers that empty themselves in- 
 to the River St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic ocean, 
 to the norlhwesternmost head of the Connecticut river, &c. &c. ; and 
 after tracing the boundary round to the north and west, the description 
 conludes with the eastern line as follows : " East by a line to be drawn 
 along the middle of the River St. Croix, from its mouth in the Bay of 
 Fundy to its source, and from its source directly north to the aforesaid 
 highlands which divide the rivers that fall into the Atlantic ocean from 
 those which fall into the River St. Lawrence." 
 
 These lines have never yet been traced and marked upon the surface 
 of the earth. The northeastern corner of the United States, and north- 
 western part of Nova Scotia offered few inducements to settlers, on ac- 
 count of the comparative unproductiveness of the soil. The people of 
 Massachusetts and Maine moved to the fertile regions of the west, and 
 those who desired to settle in the British dominions, passed on to Lower 
 or Upper Canada. No practical inconvenience was therefore felt by 
 the want of precise knowledge as to the actual position of the boundary 
 line, except on the seaboard where the population was more dense. To 
 remove this difficulty, the fifth article of the treaty of 1794 recites 
 " that doubts had arisen what river was really intended under the name 
 of the River St. Croix, mentioned in the treaty of peace, and forming 
 a part of the boundary therein described," and provides for the appoint- 
 ment of three commissioners who should " be sworn impartially to ex- 
 amine and decide the said question." Both nations agreed to " consi- 
 der such decision as final and conclusive, so as that the same should ne- 
 ver thereafter be called into question, or made the subject of dispute or 
 difference between them." 
 
 In execution of this article a Board of Commissioners was appoint- 
 ed, who not only decided which was the true head of the St. Croix, but 
 placed a monument there, which has iwitil the last few months been ad- 
 mitted on all sides to be the place of departure in running the eastern 
 boundary line of the United States. The report of Messrs. Feather- 
 .«?tonhaugh and Mudge proposes to the British Government to rescind all 
 its action under that treaty, alleging that the commissioners erred in 
 their decision. Of that report it will be necessary to speak more par- 
 ticularly hereafter, and it is alluded to here only to express the surprise 
 which is felt that any public functionaries of the government of Great 
 
6 [Assembly 
 
 Britain should deliberately make to iliat government such a reckless 
 proposal. It is now more than forty years since that monument was 
 erected under a guarantee from Great Britain that the decision should 
 never thereafter be called into question or made the subject of dispute 
 or dilVetence between the two nations. If the theory of Messrs. Feather- 
 slonhaugh and Mudgc will not stand, consistently with the continuance 
 of the monument, it is the theory and not the monument which must be 
 removed. 
 
 The Treaty of Ghent, signed on the 24th of December, 1814, in its 
 fifth article, after reciting that " neither that point of the highlands, ly- 
 ing due noilh from the source of the River St. Croix, and designated in 
 the former treaty of peace between the two powers as the northwest 
 angle of Nova Scotia, nor the northwesternmost head of Connecticut 
 river, had yet been ascertained, nor that part of the boundary line be- 
 tween the dominions of the two powers which extends from tlie source 
 of the River St. Croix, directly north, to the above mentioned northwest 
 angle of IS ova Scotia, thence along the said highlands which divide those 
 rivers that empty themselves into the River St. Lawrence, from those 
 which fall into the Atlantic ocean," had been surveyed, provided for the 
 appointment of commissioners to ascertain and determine the points 
 above mentioned, and cause the boundary to be surveyed and marked. 
 If they differed in opinion, a reference of the disputed points was to be 
 made "to some friendly Sovereign or State, who should be requested to 
 decide on the differences which might be staled in the reports of the 
 commissioners. 
 
 In the execiUion of this duty, the joint commissioners started from 
 the monument which they found at the head of the St. Croix river, and 
 proceeded to run the line due north, as called for by the treaty of 1783. 
 It is remarkable, that in the performance of this important service, nei- 
 ther set of commissioners was furnished with the instruments necessary 
 to run the line with astronomical precision. They used only a surveyor's 
 compass, coixecting it by such indecisive observations of the stars as 
 they were able to make w'iihout the a})pliances of accurate philosophi- 
 cal instruments ; and the line which they ran has been since proved to 
 be entirely wrong. A Tier proceeding in what ihcy thought to be a due 
 north course for about forty miles, they came to an insulated hill, called 
 Mars Hill, where the British connnissioners insisted u])on stopping ; al- 
 leging, that they had found the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, and 
 also the highlands which divided those rivers that empty themselves into 
 the River St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic ocean. 
 They then turned w^cstwardly, and traced a very crooked line around 
 the heads of these streams which flow into the Aroostook river, which 
 discharges itself into the St. John's, and those which fall into the Atlan- 
 tic rivers. This line, they said, was the northern boundary of the 
 I'nited States ; and separate reports being made by the commissioners 
 to the two governments, it was agreed, on the 29th day of September, 
 1 827, to refer the matter to some friendly Sovereign or State, and various 
 stipulations were entered into for the purpose of facilitating the decision 
 of the arbiter. Mitchell's map, which is annexed to this report, is ad- 
 mitted, upon both sides, to be " the map by which the framers of the 
 
No. 215.] 7 
 
 treaty of 1783 are acknowledged to have regulated their joint and ofli- 
 cial proceedings," and another nmap, also annexed to this report, was 
 " agreed upon by the contracting parties as a dclincaliun uf tlic water 
 courses and of the bounchiry lines in reference to the said waler courses, 
 as contended for by each parly respectively." 
 
 The King of the Netherlands, the selected arbiter, decided on the 
 10th of January, 1831, "that he could not adjudge either of the lines 
 ** to one of the said parties, without wounding the principles of law and 
 " equity with regard to the other," and proposed a new boundary line, 
 running from the monument due north to the middle of the !St. John's 
 river, up that river to the St. Francis, one of its branches, thence to its 
 southwestcrnmost source, and thence due west to the line claimed by 
 the United States. This proposition was, in June 1832, declined by 
 the American Government. Great Britain was willing to accept it, 
 but, after sometime, yielded to the wish of the United States, that the 
 question should be again open for negotiation. Since that time nume- 
 rous diplomatic notes have been exchanged between the two govern- 
 ments, a miiuite examination of which would lead the committee too 
 far from the purpose which they have in view. Great Britain first as- 
 sumed the ground that an attempt to find the treaty line, was declared 
 by the arbiter to be hopeless ; but afterwards agi-eed to the proposition 
 of the American Government to institute a new survey, coupled how- 
 ever with a condition that the commissioners should be instructed to 
 consider the St. John's river, as not being one which emptied itself into 
 the Atlantic ocean. It was in vain that the American Government re- 
 monstrated against this, as requiring a preliminary abandonment of its 
 whole argument ; the condition was insisted upon, until the disturbances 
 upon the frontier in February, 1839, placed the peace of both nations in 
 great peril. The latest exhibition of the state of the negotiation which 
 the committee can find in the papers within their reach, is a note from 
 Mr. Fox to Mr. Forsyth, containing the following extract : 
 
 {Mr. Fox to Mr. Forsyth.) 
 
 June 22, 1840. 
 [Senate Doc. Vol. 8, 26th Congress, 1 session, No. 580.] 
 
 " The undersigned is accordingly instructed to state officially, to Mr. 
 Forsyth, that her Majesty's Government consent to the two princi- 
 ples which form the main foundation of the American counter-draught, 
 namely : first, that the commission to be appointed, shall be so con- 
 stituted as necessarily to lead to a final settlement of the question of 
 boundary at issue between the two countries ; and secondly, that in 
 order to secure such a result, the convention by which the commis- 
 sion is to be created, shall contain a provision for arbitration upon 
 points, as to which the British and American commissioners may not 
 be able to agree." 
 
 " The undersigned is however instructed to add that there are many 
 matters of detail in the American counter-draught which her Majes- 
 ty's Government cannot adopt," &c. &c. 
 
 This prospect of a final settlement is far from being satisfactory. 
 
8 [Assembly 
 
 The " matters of detail" which " her Majesty's Government cannot 
 adopt," may be spun out by diplomatic finesse to an inextinguishable 
 length. All the practical good which Great Britain could derive from 
 the ownership of the soil, she draws from its possession under the ex- 
 isting temporary arrangement between the two governments. The 
 road from the capital of New-Brunswick to Quebec, passes through 
 the corner of the disputed territory, and the right of transit constitutes 
 its chief value. As long, therefore, as Great Britain enjoys, under a 
 temporary understanding, all the benefit which an ultimate settlement 
 in her favor could bestow, it is her policy to protract the negotiation. 
 She has all the advantages of success, without the hazard of loss. It 
 is to be apprehended that " matters of detail," will be discussed until 
 they become matters of substance. In the mean time, the population 
 of the State of Maine is spreading over a portion of the " disputed ter- 
 ritory." The geological investigations of that State have shown that the 
 Aroostook river waters some of the finest lands in the State. Roads are 
 constructed from the seaboard northwardly into these fertile regions, 
 and settlements are extending. The danger of border conflicts is annu- 
 ally increasing ; armed bodies of men aie near each other, with mutu- 
 ally exasperated feelings. Men who live in the woods, enduring the 
 severity of a northern winter, and follow a pursuit, pregnant with dan- 
 ger to life, are apt to be constitutionally brave. This is the case with 
 the lumbermen of Maine. They transport upon the snow to the banks 
 of the frozen streams, the lumber which they have prepared in the fo- 
 rest, and wait until those same snows, by their melting, swell the 
 rivers sufficiently to float down their hardly acquired property to a mar- 
 ket. This sort of life invigorates men's bodies and courage ; but en- 
 dangers the peace of a disputed frontier. A chance affray which may 
 happen at any time, would be likely to result in loss of life ; and if 
 blood once be shed, it will be difficult if not impossible to assuage the 
 popular feeling. With a strong desire to preserve peace on the part of 
 the governments and people of the United States and Great Briain, still 
 they are in too much danger of accidental collisions between the inhabi- 
 tants of this border, which they may find themselves unable to restrain. 
 A war between the United States and Great Britain is an evil greatly 
 to be deprecated. It would be an arduous, bloody and long struggle. 
 The eastern States, instead of holding back, would upon this boundary 
 question, be the foremost in the fight. The whole northern frontier of 
 tne United States, is in an inflammable condition and would cheerfully 
 respond to a call of their government ; whilst upon the seaboard, the 
 modern improvements in war vessels and gunnery, would spread the 
 horrors of war over our extensive Atlantic coast. The peculiar situation 
 of Maryland must cause its Legislature to look with great anxiety upon 
 any question which is calculated to jeopard the peace of the country. 
 In a question of national honor there is no room for choice or hesitation. 
 Neither in the course which Great Britain has pursued in her negotia- 
 tion with the U. States, nor in the multitude of disciplined troops which 
 she has spread over our northern frontier, nor in the establisliment of 
 a speedy communication by steam between England and the Provinces ; 
 a communication which the good people of Boston have hailed with 
 
No. 215.] d 
 
 such pleasure, uiiobscivanl ot the niulives wIulIi liave led to lis inlro- 
 duction, can the commiltcc see any purpose but llial of resolutely main- 
 taining the supremacy of Great Britain over her Norlli American Pro- 
 vinces and the enjoyment of the military road between Halifax and 
 Quebec. In this attitude of things, the J iCgislaturc of Maryland look upon 
 the prospect before us with deep interest. The geographical position 
 of our State makes it more than commonly vulnerable. We have a 
 right, therefore, to express our opinions frankly to the State of Maine, 
 and to the Federal Government. To do this with propriety, it becomes 
 necessary to re-examine the boundary question carefully, and see 
 whether national prejudices ma}^ not have influenced the opinion of the 
 State of Maine as to her rights. 
 
 The first mention of our northern boundary is foiuid in the 2d vo- 
 lume of the Secret Journal of Congress, page 133, under date of Fe- 
 bruary 23, 1779, in a report of a committee, of which Mr. G. Morris 
 Was chairman. 
 
 " Your committee arc of opinion that the following articles are abso- 
 lutely necessary for the safety and independence of the United Slates, 
 and therefore ought to be insisted on as the ultimatum of these Slates. 
 1. That the bounds of the United States be acknowledged and ratified 
 as follows : Northerly by the ancient limits of Canada, as contended 
 for by Great Britain, running from IN ova Scola southwesterly, west, 
 and northwesterly to Lake Nessessing, thence a west line to the ^lis- 
 sissippi ; easterly by the boundary settled between Massachusetts and 
 Nova Scotia ; southerly, &c. &c." 
 
 After discussing the report of this committee, Congress adopted 
 (March 19, page 138,) a more precise description of the northern 
 boundary, in which the northwest angle of Nova Scotia first makes its 
 appearance, with even more perspicuity than is found in the treaty it- 
 self. 
 
 *' Congress took into consideration the report of the committee of the 
 whole, and agreed to the following ultimata: — 1. That the thirteen 
 United States are bounded, north by a line to be drawn from the north- 
 west angle of Nova Scota, along the highlands which divide those rivers 
 which empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence, from those which 
 fall into the Atlantic ocean to the nortluvesternmost head of Connecti- 
 cut river, thence, &c. &;c. and east by a line to be drawn along the mid- 
 dle of St. John's, from its source to its mouth in the Bay of Fundy, or 
 by a line to be settled and adjusted between that part of the State of 
 Massachusetts bay, formerly called the province of Maine, and the 
 colony of Nova Scotia, agreeably to their respective rights, &c. &c. 
 
 The offer here made of varying the boundary so as to make the St. 
 John's river the line from its source to its mouth, has been recently re- 
 peated to the British government, but then, as formerl}', declined. The 
 alternative proposition was carried into effect, and Massachusetts and 
 Nova Scotia left, by the treaty, where their previously existing rights 
 placed them. The northwest angle of Nova Scotia is assumed in this 
 instruction as the starling point, and this was exactly conformed to by 
 the Commissioners who negotiated the treaty, except that they under- 
 
 [ Assembly, No. 215.) 2 
 
IQ [Assembly 
 
 Jook to define wlial tlial angJe was, and where it could be found. Their 
 descriplion of it was accurate, and co-incident with the old boundaries 
 of llie two Provinces of Massachusetts and Nova JScotia ; and both 
 conform lo the present claim of the United States. 
 
 It IS perfectly clear that there must then have been, and must now 
 be a northwest angle of Nova Scotia somewhere. If Nova Scotia 
 reached to the North Pole on one side, and the Pacific ocean on the 
 other, it would be dilHcult to get to the northwest angle, although there 
 would still be one. But with an extent more limited than this, it is only- 
 necessary to pursue the northern and western boundaries until they 
 ineet, in order to find the angle. Tlic specification therefore in the in- 
 struction of Congress, would, of itself, have been sufficient, without the 
 super-added descriplion in the treaty ; and this will appear from a re- 
 ference lo the limits of Nova Scotia as they existed at the commence- 
 ment of the revolutionary war. But it so happens that the addition 
 made by the commissioners corresponds even in language with the then 
 existing public documents and grants, and shows that they were entire- 
 ly familiar with all those papers which have been drawn into the dis- 
 cussion at a more recent period. It may not be amiss to take a cur- 
 sory glance at the characters and qualifications of the commissioners. 
 
 Dr. Franklin is too well known in the United States to make it ne- 
 cessary or expedient to speak of him. His Life is a text book in our 
 schools ; and his name, given as it is lo steamboats and stages, and inns 
 and banks, and libraries and societies, has made his history universally 
 and thoroughly known. 
 
 Mr. Jay was his associate for some time before they were both joined 
 by Mr. Adams. The high honor must be given lo him of refusing to 
 negotiate with the envoy of Great Britain until the independence of the 
 United Stales was acknowledged, and the commission of the British 
 Minister changed accordingly. During the lime when the question of 
 peace or war remained suspended upon the determination of Great 
 Britain to continue or change the credentials which she had issued, his 
 responsibility was of the heaviest character, because in this, he differed 
 from his usually sagacious and trusted colleague. Dr. Franklin. And 
 the reputation of Mr. Jay for firmness and sagacity cannot be fully ap- 
 preciated, initil we remember thai the course which he then pursued, 
 furnished the basis of the argument by which the Honorable John 
 Quincy Adams afterwards vindicated and preserved the American right 
 to the fisheries of Newfoundland. In the present dispute respecting 
 the boundary, we are met with a repetition of the same idea on the 
 part of Great Britain, that the [ndependence of the United States was 
 granted in tlie ireaty of 1783 ; and, in both cases, we are indebted lo 
 the inflexible sjjjrit of Mr. Jay, for affording us the same ground of in- 
 dignant denial which he made amid responsibilities which would have 
 shaken a less stoui lieart. 
 
 When Mr. Adams arrived in Paris, it must be mentioned to his ho- 
 nor, that I)e look sides promptly with Mr. Jay. But Mr. Adams brought 
 also lo the negotiation, an intimate acquaintance with the boundaries 
 and history of Massachusetts, derived from his active jjarticipation in 
 the aflfairs of the Provmce. He has left a record of this in his corres- 
 
No. 215.] 11 
 
 pondence. Immediately after his arrival in Paris, (October 31, 1782,) 
 he wrote thus to Robert R. J^ivingsion — Spark's Diplomatic Corres- 
 pondence, vol. 6, page 437. 
 
 "Yesterday we met Mr. Oswald, at hi.s lodgings; Mr. Jay, J)r. Frank 
 lin and myself on one side, and Mr. Oswald, assisted by Mr. .Stvachey, 
 a gentleman whom I had the honor to meet in company with Lord 
 Howe, upon Staten-Island, in the year 1776, and assisted also by a 
 Mr. Roberts, a clerk in some of the public oilices, with books, maps 
 and papers, relative to the boundaries. 
 
 " I arrived in a lucky moment for the boundary of Massachusetts, be- 
 cause I brought with me all the essential documents relative to that 
 object, which are this day to be laid before my colleagues in conference 
 at my house, and afterwards before Mr. Oswald." 
 
 And again, page 452: " Tiie Count, (Count de Vergennes) then 
 asked me some questions respecting Sagadehock, (now Maine) which I 
 answered by showing him llic lecords, which J had in my pocket, par- 
 ticularly that of Governor Pownal's solemn act of possession in 1750; 
 the grants and settlements of Mount Desert, Machias, and all the other 
 townships east of Penobscot river ; the original grant of James the 
 First, to Sir William Alexander, of Nova Scotia, in which it is bound- 
 ed on St. Croix river; (this grant I had in Latin, French and English ;) 
 the dissertations of Governor Shirley and Governor Hutchinson, and 
 the authority of Governor Bernard, all showing the right of Massa- 
 chusetts to this tract to be incontestable. I added that I did not think 
 any British Minister would ever put his hand to a written claim of that 
 tract of land, their own national acts were so numerous and so clear 
 against them." 
 
 It is impossible that these men should not have known where the 
 northwest angle of Nova Scotia was. Where they thought it was, the 
 United Slates say it is now. Great Britain has sometimes said that it 
 was not to be found any where ; and at other times has placed it at a 
 point, beyond which the Province of New-Brunswick (carved out of 
 Nova Scotia) has always exercised jurisdiction, which continues, ac- 
 cording to the report of Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, to the present 
 day ; for they say that the jurisdiction of New-Brunswick reaches to 
 the Ristigouche liver, an hundred miles north of where the northwest 
 angle is said to be. The practice of Great Britain, therefore, always 
 has contradicted her own argument. It is not possible to discard from 
 the treaty the plain reference to the then existing boundary of Nova 
 Scotia. Wherever its northern and western lines intersected each other, 
 there the boundary of the United States commenced ; and yet we find 
 eminent British statesmen asserting that the treaty had no regard to 
 previously existing lines, but that it adopted a new description altogether. 
 Even as late as 1 838, this idea is again repeated in a letter, from 
 which the following is an extract : 
 
 Lord Palmer ston to Mr. Stevenson. 
 
 Foreign Office, April 16, 1838. 
 
 [Senate Doc. 1st session 25th Congress — No. 107, page 3.] 
 " In answer to the argument which is employed by Mr. Stevenson, 
 with respect to the boundaries between the British Possessions and the 
 
12 [Assembly 
 
 United Slates, the undersigned begs leave to observe, that the treaty 
 of 1783, laid down the boundary between the United States and the 
 Biitish Possessions, not by rel'erence to the then existing, or to the pre- 
 viously existing boundaries of the British Provinces, wiiose independ- 
 ence was tlien acknowledged, Init with reference to a geographical de- 
 Bcription contained in the treaty itself, &c. &;c." 
 
 Massachusetts and Nova Scotia were contiguous to each other, for 
 there was nothing between them. Of course, the northwest angle of 
 Nova Scotia, and the northeast angle of Massachusetts were the same 
 malhcmatical point ; and the ancient charters clearly demonstrated 
 where that point was to be found. 
 
 The charter of Nova Scotia, granted by .Tames the First, to Sir Wil- 
 liam Alexander, 1621, with which Mr, Adams was so familiar as to 
 carry in his pocket a copy of it in Latin, French and English, ruiis 
 thus : 
 
 " Beginning at Cape Sable, &c. &c. to the river, commonly called 
 St. CroFx, and to the most remote spring or source, which, from the 
 western pari thereof, first mingles with the river aforesaid ; from thence, 
 b)' an imaginary direct line which may be conceived to stretch through 
 the land, or to run towards the norlh to the nearest road, river or spring, 
 emptying itself into the great river of Canada, &c." 
 
 tlpon a comparison of this line with that, Avhich in the treaty is de- 
 clared to be the eastern boundary of the United States, it will be found 
 to differ only in the following three points : 
 
 1 . It adopts the " western source " of the St. Croix, whereas the 
 treaty merely says " the source," as the point from which to run the 
 northern line. 
 
 2. It runs the line towards tlie north, and the treaty uses two expres- 
 sions, " due north " and " directly north." 
 
 3. It extends the line to the St. Lawrence, and the treaty slops it at 
 the intermediate highlands. 
 
 The two first of these differences are of little consequence. In fact, 
 they may moro properly be considered as different descriptions of the 
 same line, the later in date correcting, by subsequent geographical 
 knowledge, the error of the former, than as the adoption of different 
 lines. The third difference followed as a necessary consequence, from 
 the excision of the northern portion of the line by the annexation of 
 that part of the country to Canada, in 17G3, after its conquest. 
 
 The report of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, advances the 
 extravagant proposition, that the original grant of Nova Scotia was 
 from the source of the St. Croix to the river Chaudiere, thus running a 
 northwesterly direction, instead of "towards the north." It may be 
 proper to bestow a passing notice upon this pretension. 
 
 The idea is not original with these commissions. It was alluded to 
 in the British argument before the King of the Netherlands, as a posi- 
 tion which nnght be taken, but they did not assume it. Availing them- 
 selves of this hint, and desirous of destroying the identity of the pre- 
 sent American claim with the original chartered boinidary of Nova 
 Scotia, the commissioners boldly advance ihe doctrine for the three fol- 
 lowing reasons ; 
 
No. 215.] 13 
 
 1. Tlial the Iranslalion of tlie Latin grant justifies the ground. 
 
 2. That the grant calls lo run " ad proximam iiaviun stationcrn," 
 which must mean Quebec. 
 
 3. That an ancient map so places the line. 
 
 It is alleged by these commissioners that the words " versus Septen- 
 Irionem," in the original Latin grant are not to be strictly construed 
 "towards tiie north," because in a preceding passage of the grant, the 
 same words arc found as applying to the line from Cape Sable to St 
 Mary's Bay, which line, it is admitted, is in a course nearly west; and 
 the argument is, that if these words describe a line nearly west in one 
 part of the grant, they may do so in another. To furnish a basis for 
 this argument, the same liberties are taken with the nilcs of the Latin 
 Grammar, that are brought to bear upon ranges of mountains ; both 
 are unceremoniously moved out of their established position, in order 
 that the theory of the commissioners may have room to stand. It may 
 possibly be the case that the translation which they give, was consistent 
 with the rules of the Latin tongue, when the "abraded mountains," 
 which they ])ut upon their line stood erect ; but it finds no sanction in 
 the genius of that language as it was understood by Horace, and Virgil 
 and Cicero. 
 
 The following is the extract which they give from the grant. 
 
 " Omncs et singular terras Continentis ac insulas situatas et jaccnles 
 in America intra caput sen promontorium communiter Cap de Sable 
 appellat. Jacen prope latitudinem quadraginta Irium graduum ant eo 
 circa ab equinoctiali linea versus Septentrionem, a quo promontoris 
 versus liltus maris tenden ad occidentem ad stationem Sanctae mariae 
 navium vulgo Sanctmareis Bay." 
 
 Their literal translation : " All and each of the lands of the conti- 
 nent, and the islands situated and lying in America within the head 
 land or promontory, commonly called Cape Sable, lying near the for- 
 ty-third degree of latitude from the equinoctial line or thereabouts. 
 From which promontory stretching westwardly towards the north, by 
 the sea shore, to the Naval Station of St. Mary, commonly called St. 
 Mary's Bay." — Report, pages 24 and25. 
 
 To separate the words, "versus septentrionem" from " ab equinoc- 
 tiali linea" to which they properly belong, and thrust them into the mid- 
 dle of the succeeding paragraph is to do violence to all the rules of 
 grammar. The plain meaning of the phrase is, " from the equinoctia] 
 line towards the north," that is, " northern latitude." 
 
 2. The second reason is that the termination of the line from the 
 source of the St. Croix, must be, by the grant of 1621, at some " na- 
 vium statio," which the commissioners translate "naval station," or a 
 place where ships are accustomed to ride. Quebec, they say, was the 
 only naval station on the St. Lawrence, and therefore to Quebec the 
 line must go. But they omit to state that these same words are twice 
 used in the preceding part of the grant and applied successively to St. 
 Mary's Bay" and the Bay of Fundy. To neither of these places can 
 or could ever be applied the epithet of " naval station" in the sense of 
 the commissioners. Quebec was not then in a situation to be called a 
 naval station in the modern acceptance of the term. Selected as a site 
 
14 [Assembly 
 
 about 1G03, it was iiol begun until 1G08, and then some " rude cottages 
 were framed, a lew fields cleared and one or Iwo gardens planted." — 
 1 Bancroft, page 23. 
 
 "In 1»320 Champlain began a fort, and in a few years (1624) the 
 castle of St. Louis, so long the place of council against the Iroquois 
 and against New-England, was durably founded on a commanding 
 clilV." — 1 Bancroft, page 29. 
 
 It belonged to France ; and whatever inducement tiiere misht have 
 been to make a boundry line terminate at a " naval station" of the same 
 country, there could have been no possible motive for its striking the 
 St. Lawrence opposite to a post occupied as such by another nation. 
 
 3. Tiie third reason is the existence of an old map made in 1689 by 
 Coronelh, a Venetian, which places the boundary hnc of Nova Scotia 
 from the St. Croix to the mouth of the Chaudiere opposite to Quebec. 
 Where this map was found, does not appear. It was not used in the 
 argument before the arbiter; but it is manifesll}' entitled to no confi- 
 dence, because it places Nova Scotia on the south instead of the north 
 side of the line. 
 
 The reasons against this position of the boundary line of Nova Sco- 
 tia are as follows : 
 
 1. In 1663, Charles the Second granted to his brother James, Duke 
 of York, the following land, viz : Beginning at a certain place called 
 or known by the name of St. Croix adjoining lo New-Scotland in Ame- 
 rica ; lo the river of Kennebec and so up, by the shortest course, to the 
 river of Canada, northwards. This grant would divide Nova Scotia 
 into two separate parts, according to the location of the latter by the 
 commissioners ; but if the American line be adopted, the two grants 
 are in harmony with each other, lying on opposite sides of a line run- 
 ning from the source of the St. Croix, north. 
 
 2. The line is contradictory to all the official acts of the British go- 
 vernment, anterior lo the American Revolution and to the maps which 
 were recognized as authority. Mitchell's map, for example, made in 
 1755 was held in such high esteem thai ihc negotiators of the treaty of 
 
 ■'83 were governed entirely by it. Il has been already staled that "Mr. 
 Roberts, a clerk in some of ihe public offices" in London, crossed the 
 •channel with " books, maps, and papers relative lo the boundaries," 
 which were used by the ministers. If then, Mitchell's map was se- 
 lected from all these as the most orthodox, and ihe boundarj^ line of 
 Nova Scotia was represented upon that map as running due north, it is 
 inconceivable thai the true line should liavc gone lo the Chaudiere. 
 
 Mr. Gallatin, after giving a list of 19 dilTerent maps published in 
 England between 1763 and 1783, "being all the maps ihal could be 
 found after a diligent search both in England and America" sa^^s " in 
 every instance the course of the line from the source of the River St. 
 Croix is northward ; in every instance that line crosses the River St. 
 John and terminates at the highlands in which the rivers tiiat fall into 
 the St, Lawrence have their sources ; in every instance, the northwest 
 angle of Nova Scotia is laid down on those liighlands and where the 
 nortii line terminates ; in every instance, the highlands, from that point 
 to the Connecticut river, divide the rivers that fall into the River St, 
 
No. 215.] 15 
 
 Lawrence iVoni llic Iribulary streams of ihc Iviver Si. .luhii and from 
 the other rivers that fall into the Athmtic ocean. 
 
 Mr. Galhilin, also, enumerates four maps published in England be- 
 tween the preliminary and dehnitive treaties, (November 17S2and Sep- 
 tember 1783,) in all of which " the boundaries of the United States are 
 laid down as now claimed by the United States, and are the same with 
 those delineated in the preceding maps, as the boundaries of the Pro- 
 vinces of Quebec and Nova Scotia." 
 
 Assuming then that the boundary line of Nova Scotia by its original 
 charter ran due north as it is laid down in Mitchell's map, we have 
 reached one very important state of the investigation ; because this ori- 
 ginal line was never changed by the British government, and we are 
 thus enabled to see very clearly what is the western boundary of Nova 
 Scotia. To find the northwest angle, where the American boundary is 
 made to begin by the Treaty of 1783, we have only to ascertain where 
 the northern boundary is ; and the solution of the problem must be as- 
 certained. If Nova Scotia had a circular boundary like the northern 
 part of the State of Delaware, it might have no angle. But as its boun- 
 daries are straight lines, its northwest angle can be found with as much 
 certainty as one of the corners of a square chamber. Where then is 
 or was the northern limit of Nova Scotia? 
 
 By the original charter the Province was bounded on the north by the 
 River St. Lawrence, and the northwest angle was, of course, at the 
 point where the boundary line from the St. Croix intersected the St. 
 Lawrence. It so remained until the termination of the war of 1756. 
 Canada having been wrested from France, the king of England in 1763 
 chose to remodel his American dominions. In doing this there was 
 much political sagacity exhibited. Natural boundaries are the best be- 
 tween separate jurisdictions. Where the laws of trade lead men to go^ 
 it is best that civil regulations should encourage them to go. From an 
 inspection of Mitchell's map it will be seen that the basin of the St. 
 Lawrence is not extensive on the southern side. The streams which 
 flow into it are short in their course, and must be rapid, because long 
 rivers, flowing in an opposite direction, take their rise near their heads ; 
 these short and rapid streams were even then occupied by saw mills, 
 the lumber from which found its market at Quebec. It was therefore 
 highly expedient that the country which traded with Quebec, should be 
 placed under the jurisdiction of Canada, and a royal proclamation of 
 October, 1 763, wisely enlarged Canada, by describing its southern boun- 
 dary as follows, viz : 
 
 "Passing along the highlands which divide the rivers that empty them- 
 selves into the said River St. Lawrence, from those which fall into the 
 sea and also along the North coast of the Bay Chaleurs and the coast 
 of the Gulf of St. Lawrence to Cape Rosiers." 
 
 In the ensuing month, the boundary of Nova Scotia was for the first 
 time changed ; for in November, 1763, Montague Wilmot was appoint- 
 ed governor of Nova Scotia, whose boundaries were altered, to con-es- 
 pond with the proclamation, viz : 
 
 "To the mouth of the River St. Croix, by the said river to its source,, 
 and by a line drawn north from thence to the southern boundary of our 
 colony of Quebec." 
 
16 [Assembly 
 
 Aiui 111 ihe commissions issued in 1767, lo William Campbell, and 
 111 17(31, lo Francis Leggpe, Nova Scotia is described as above. 
 
 In 1774, an act uf Parliament, (14tli (Jeorge 3d,) was passed, de- 
 scnbnig the boundary of the Province vi Quebec, as follows : 
 
 " Bounded on the south by a line from the Bay of Chaleurs, along 
 the higlilands which divide the rivers, which empty themselves into the 
 St Lawrence from those which fall into the sea." 
 
 The American claim is now, that the boundary is precisely where 
 the original charter of Nova Scotia, and the above mentioned proclama- 
 tion and act of Parliament put it. If the southern boundary of Canada 
 is not to be fovuid in those documents, where is it to be found ? No 
 subsequent legislation of Great Britain has designated it, and it must, 
 of necessity, exist tiiere only. If the presient American and Britisii 
 claims be tested by these papers, the following will be the result. 
 
 The American line runs from the north coast of the Bay of Chaleurs, 
 along highlands which divide rivers which empty themselves into the 
 St. Lawrence from those which unite with the St. John's river and then 
 fall into tlie sea through the Bay of Fundy. 
 
 The British line requires to be noticed as it was claimed before the 
 arbiter and by Featherstonhaugh and Mudge. These lines vary consi- 
 derably as an inspection of the maps annexed hereto, will show. 
 
 As it was claimed before the king of the Netherlands, it winds around 
 the heads of the streams which How upon one hand into the Aroostook 
 and the AUegash (tributaries to the St. John's) and the St. John's, and 
 upon the other into the Kennebec and the Penobscot. But from the 
 eastern termination of the line to the Bay of Chaleurs there is no at- 
 tempt to trace it on the map, or reconcile it with the description of it 
 in the proclamation of 1763. That this cannot be the line meant by 
 the proclamation and subsequent act of Parliament is manifest from the 
 following reasons : 
 
 That the proclamation calls for a range of highlands from the Bay of 
 Chaleurs, whereas in the argument before the king of the Netherlands, 
 it was not pretended that any such range existed from the Bay of Cha- 
 leurs to Mars Hill, the alleged termination of the eastern boundary line 
 of the United Stales. 
 
 That such a line would be contradictory to the undevialing practice 
 of the British government in maintaining jurisdiction over its own pro- 
 vinces, because if that line be correct, all lo the north of it would be- 
 long to Canada, and Featherstonhaugh and Mudge say that the juris- 
 diction of New-Brunswick extends northward to the bank of the Res- 
 tigouche. 
 
 That such a line divides waters which fall into the St. John's from 
 others which fall into the sea, and does not approach within from 50 to 
 100 miles, those waters which fall into the St. Lawrence. 
 
 The line as proposed to be run by Fealherslonhaugh and Mudge, 
 runs along llie southern bank of the Aroostook, and leaves I\^ars Hill, 
 for which the British government has so stoutly contended, about 20 
 miles within the territory of the United States. Of course, these com- 
 missioners disapprove of the former pretensions of Great Britain. It 
 remains to be seen whether that government will adiiere lo ils former 
 
No. 215.] 17 
 
 claim and condemn its commissioners, or adopt their report and con- 
 demn the hne which, for so many years and at so much trouble, it has 
 hitherto maintained. 
 
 The objections to this line arc, that when extended it strikes the 
 South instead of the North coast of the Bay of Chaleurs, which tiie 
 proclamation requires, and that it passes along no Highlands at all. 
 The geologist has discovered from sundry stones found there, that a 
 range of highlands once existed, which arc now abraded. Some of the 
 objections to the other line arc also common to this. The map shows 
 on the cast of the St. John's the range of Highlands, as projected, is 
 co-incident with the bed of the Tobique river. That a river should 
 flow along a ridge of the highlands, or even cross it, is not surprising ; 
 but that it should abrade a range of hills for no other purpose than to 
 put its bed there, is a geological phcnomonon worthy of all admiration. 
 The Aroostook, too, has taken the superfluous trouble of crossing and 
 recrossing the same range of highlands, for no other cause, apparently, 
 than to gratify the guilty and unnatural ambition of flowing along the 
 " axis of maximum elevation." 
 
 " If either of these lines be taken to be the true one, the consequence 
 is, that the northwest angle of Nova Scotia must be at the intersection 
 of it with the north line from the source of the St. Croix. What right 
 has the Governor of New-Brunswick then to interfere with the territory 
 watered by the Aroostook ? The British argument shows that if this 
 land belongs to Great Britain at all, it is because it is within the limits 
 of Canada, and utterly beyond the jurisdiction of New-Brunswick, and 
 yet with a strange inconsistency between theory and practice, it is 
 shown by the former to belong to one Province and by the latter to 
 another. Those statesmen who drew up the proclamation of 1763, no 
 doubt had Mitchell's map before them, because in a corner of that map 
 it is written : 
 
 " This map was undertaken with the approbation and at the request 
 of the Lord's Commissioners for trade and plantations, and is chiefly 
 composed from draughts, charts and actual surveys of diff'erent parts 
 of His Majesty's colonies and plantations in America, great part of 
 which have been lately taken by their Lodsliips' orders, and transmit- 
 ted to this office bv the Governors of the said colonies and others. 
 
 JOHN POWNALL, Secretary. 
 Plantation Office, Feh'ij 13, 1755." 
 
 A map published only eight years previously, " chiefly composed 
 from draughts, charts and actual surveys, taken by their Lordships' or- 
 ders," and the map itself, " undertaken with the approbation and at the 
 request of the Lord's Commissioners," must have been used when the 
 new boundary line of Canada was to be designated. As the whole 
 country was under the Crown, there was no inducement to enlarge or 
 diminish either Province, except for the convenience of irade before 
 spoken of, or the establishment of a good natural boundary. If the 
 reader will examine the map, beginning at the north coast of the Bay 
 of Chaleurs, the eye will without any difiiculty trace a line to the west- 
 ward, around the heads of the streams which flow to the northward and 
 southward, into the St. Lawrence and the Bay of Fundy or sea. Let 
 
 [Assembly, No. 215.] 3 
 
18 [Assembly 
 
 him th«n endeavor to follow ihe line according to the claim of the Bri- 
 tish governniciit ; and although, beginning at the western side of the 
 map, it is possible to find it lor some distance eastwardly around the 
 heads of streams which How to the north and south, yet there must be 
 a fidl slop at the St. John's river, at which the attempted line is wholly 
 lost. A line which is described as running round the heads of streams, 
 has no authority for crossing a large and navigable river. 
 
 As a furthei- experiment let the reader carry his view across the St. 
 John's and see if he can find any highlands between it and the south 
 coast of the Bay of Chalcurs, where Featherslonhaugh and Mudge 
 place the line. So far from it there is not a single hill marked there, 
 but on the contrary the paths of those rivers running transversely across 
 the imaginary range of highlands. It is inconceivable, therefore, that 
 the proclamation of 1763, and act of Parliament of 1774, should have 
 fixed the southern boundary of Canada where the British government 
 now claims it to be. The King would not have adopted an impracti- 
 cable line. Upon Mitchell's map, it may be said to be impossible to 
 trace any other one than that contended for by the American Govern- 
 ment, easily followed by the eye and fulfilling every requirement, ex- 
 cept that the rivers flowing to the south empty themselves inlo an arm 
 of the sea instead of the body of the sea, and upon this distinction hangs 
 the whole British argument. The choice is between the King and 
 Parliament's, having considered the Bay of Fundy as a part of the sea, 
 or as having very formally adopted a boundary, which an inspection of 
 the map must have shewn, could not by any possibility be traced on the 
 surface of the earth. 
 
 The northwest angle of Nova Scotia in 1783 was, therefore, suffi- 
 ciently apparent. If the Treaty had stopped there, and merely said 
 that the boundary of the United Slates should begin at that northwest 
 angle, the description would have been precise enough. But in order 
 to illustrate their meaning more clearly, the Commissioners proceed to 
 a repetition of the language used (except that they say "Atlantic 
 ocean" instead of " sea") in the proclamation and ret of Parliament. 
 One leg of the angle is in a line drawn " due north" from the source of 
 the St. Croix " river," the same originally called for in the grant of 
 Nova Scotia, in 1621 ; the other leg is a line drawn " along the high- 
 lands which divide those rivers that empty themselves inlo the river St. 
 Lawrence from those which fall inlo the Atlanlic ocean," using the 
 phraseology (with the exception of a single word) of the proclamation 
 of 1763. "Of the intention to make these official acts of the British 
 Government the basis of their treaty, there seems to be be no fair ground 
 to doubt. 
 
 Applying this description to the claims of the two governments, the 
 result will be more apparent if ihe form of an interrogatory be assumed. 
 And first of the British. 
 
 From one side of your line do the waters empty themselves into the 
 St. Lawrence ? 
 
 No ; nor do they come, in some parts of the line, within one hun- 
 dred miles of the Si. Lawrence. 
 
 From the other side do they flow mlo the Atlantic ocean ? 
 
No. 215.] 19 
 
 Yes ; if llie bays of Sagadahock and Penobscot, be the Atlantic 
 ocean. 
 
 If the American government be asked the same questions, the answer 
 to the first will be unqualifiedly in the affirmative. 
 
 Yes. 
 
 To the second question, the answer would be 
 
 Yes ; if the Bay of Fundy be the Atlantic ocean. 
 
 Of the two requirements, then, the British claim wholly repudiates 
 one, and the American claim satisfies that one. If the British claim 
 gratifies the other, the American does also ; and the argument on the 
 British side cannot show that the American government fails to gratify 
 both calls, without showing at the same time that its own claim gratifies 
 neither. 
 
 Much more might be written upon a subject which has drawn to its 
 discussion a large contribution from the skilful Statesmen of Great 
 Britain and the United States. But it has been the object of the com- 
 mittee to give a clear statement of the question, rather than a full argu- 
 ment upon its merits. They have consulted a large mass of materials; 
 the correspondence between the Secretary of Slate and the British 
 Minister; the succinct, but lucid report of Senator Buchanan; speeches 
 of members of Congress ; reports of committees of the Legislatures 
 of Maine and Massachusetts ; sundry essays written by the honorable 
 Caleb Cushing, and some published arguments, the authors of which 
 have not openly acknowledged them, although they are known ; the 
 report of Messrs Feathers tonhaugh and Mudge ; and lastly, the mas- 
 terly review and analysis of that report, written by the venerable diplo- 
 matist and stateman Albert Gallatin, whose knowledge upon this subject 
 is probably more profound and extensive than that of any man living. 
 
 With regard to the course which ought to be pursued in obtaining a 
 settlement of this controversy, the committee do not feel themselves 
 qualified to express an opinion. The Constitution of our country has 
 wisely placed our foreign relations in the exclusive guardianship of the 
 federal government, whose dignity and power are commensurate to the 
 duty which it has to perform. It is clear that all reasonable efforts 
 should be exhausted to accomplish a pacific and speedy adjustment of 
 the difficulty ; and it is also clear that if they should unfortunately fail, 
 it will become the duty of the States of the Union to rally around the 
 federal government and carry it successfully through the struggle that 
 must then come. 
 
 The following resolutions are submitted to the consideration of the 
 Senate : 
 
 Resolved, That the Legislature of Maryland entertains a perfect con- 
 viction of the justice and validity of the title of the United States, and 
 State of Maine, to the full extent of all the territory in dispute between 
 Great Britain and the United States. 
 
 Resolved, That the Legislature of Maryland looks to the federal 
 government with an entire reliance upon its disposition to bring the con- 
 troversy to an amicable and speedy settlement; but if these cfibrts should 
 fail, the State of Maryland will cheerfull}'' place herself in the support 
 of the federal government, in what will then become its duty to itself 
 and the State of Maine. 
 
20 [Assembly 
 
 Resolved, That after expressing the above opinions, the St ate of 
 Maryland feels that it has a right to request the Slate "of Maine to con- 
 tribute, by all the means in its power, towards an amicable settlement 
 of the dispute upon honorable terms. 
 
 Resolved, That if the British government would acknowledge the 
 title of the State of Maine to the territory in dispute, and offer a fair 
 equivalent for the passage through it of a military road, it would be a 
 reasonable mode of adjusting the dispute, and ought to be satisfactory 
 to the State of Maine. 
 
 Resolved, That the Governor be and is hereby requested to transmit 
 a copy of this report and these resolutions, to each of the Governors 
 of the several States, and to each of the Senators and Representatives 
 in Congress from the State of Maryland. 
 
 «46 
 

 ^^^'' ' .^ 
 
 < * s • • 
 
 , %,«* .•:^\ %/ ,^% %,.* -1 
 
 
 -^^ 
 
 
 ^°-', 
 
 ^* ... 
 
 ^ *"' ^' 'C' K^ .- "X- '■ V^ 
 
 O .0 , » • O, ^^ \/ 4» V 'x. C' <0 »'•« 
 
 
 
 
 
 > <^ ■A . , . "^ A V . - - <*> 
 
 -^^/ 
 
 x*?-' 
 
 v- V 
 
 -. .,v^ »C 
 
 
 ,\^ . V < * 
 
 -^^0^ 
 
 ,> 
 
 ^"^^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 v-^^- 
 
 c'^'^/.. 
 
 «, 
 
 
 ,0 
 
 
 •^.>v A-i-' »■ 
 
 %\ --.^..^-^ .5« 
 

 • <« 
 
 
 ■r O -i^ • 
 
 
 
 %^^^ ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 '*' A^- 
 
 
 
 ^.* <.^" 
 
 
 ?> > . 1 • 
 
 %<f -