Full Text Archive logoFull Text Archive — Books, poems, drama…

A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents by James D. Richardson

Part 4 out of 11

Adobe PDF icon
Download this document as a .pdf
File size: 1.2 MB
What's this? light bulb idea Many people prefer to read off-line or to print out text and read from the real printed page. Others want to carry documents around with them on their mobile phones and read while they are on the move. We have created .pdf files of all out documents to accommodate all these groups of people. We recommend that you download .pdfs onto your mobile phone when it is connected to a WiFi connection for reading off-line.

be the earnest endeavor of the two Governments to avoid doing anything
which can have a tendency to lead to such mischievous consequences?

It is under this view of the subject that the undersigned has been
instructed again to remonstrate against these proceedings of the
authorities of New Brunswick, as a violation of the rights of Maine
in the person of her agent, and to protest in the most solemn manner
against the future exercise of all such acts of jurisdiction and
sovereignty over the disputed territory or the citizens of the United
States residing within its limits until a final adjustment of the
controversy takes place.

The undersigned, therefore, can not and ought not to close this note
without again invoking the early and earnest attention of Lord
Palmerston and that of Her Majesty's Government to this painful subject.

It is one of deep and mutual interest to the parties concerned, and the
delicacy and embarrassments which surround it are justly appreciated by
the Government of the United States. Deeply regretting, as that
Government does, the collisions of authority to which both countries
have been so repeatedly exposed by the delay that has taken place in the
final settlement of the main question, it is sincerely desirous, as the
undersigned has taken occasion repeatedly to assure Lord Palmerston, to
have it brought to a speedy and amicable termination. This can only be
done by measures of mutual forbearance and moderation on the part of
both Governments. To this end the efforts of the American Government
have been earnest, persevering, and constant. It has done, as it will
continue to do, everything in its power to induce the State of Maine to
pursue a course best calculated to avoid all excitement and collision
between the citizens of that State and the inhabitants of New Brunswick,
or which would tend in any manner to embarrass the mediatorial action of
their two Governments on the subject; but it can not be expected, if the
authorities of New Brunswick still persevere in attempting to exercise
jurisdiction over the disputed territory by the arrest and imprisonment
in foreign jails of citizens of Maine for performing their duty under
the laws of their own State, and within what is believed to be her
territorial limits, that measures of retaliation will not be resorted
to by Maine, and great mischief ensue.

Indeed, under existing circumstances and in the nature of human
connections, it is not possible, should such a course of violence be
continued, to avoid collisions of the most painful character, for which
the Government of the United States can not be responsible, but which
both Governments would equally deplore.

It was doubtless with a view of guarding against these consequences that
the understanding took place that each Government should abstain from
exercising jurisdiction within the limits of the disputed territory
pending the settlement of the main question.

The undersigned therefore persuades himself that these proceedings
of the colonial government may have taken place without a careful
examination of the important questions involved in them or the
consequences to which they might lead, rather than under instructions
from Her Majesty's Government or with a deliberate view of asserting
and enforcing territorial and jurisdictional rights over the contested
territory.

In looking back, as he does with satisfaction, to the conciliatory
spirit in which the negotiation has heretofore been conducted and the
moderation which both Governments have observed, the undersigned can not
permit himself to doubt but that upon a careful review of the whole
subject Her Majesty's Government will see fit not only to mark with its
disapprobation this last proceeding of her colonial government, and
direct the immediate liberation of Mr. Greely from imprisonment, with
ample indemnity for the wrongs he may have sustained, but that it will
see the propriety of giving suitable instructions to the authorities of
New Brunswick to abstain for the future from all acts of that character,
which can have no other tendency than to increase the excitement and
jealousies which already prevail and retard the final and amicable
adjustment of this painful controversy.

The undersigned requests Lord Palmerston to accept assurances of his
distinguished consideration.

A. STEVENSON.

_Mr. Clay to Mr. Vaughan_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, January 9, 1829_.

Right Hon. CHARGES R. VAUGHAN, etc.

SIR: I have this day received a letter from the governor of the State of
Massachusetts, transmitting an extract from a letter addressed by George
W. Coffin, esq., land agent of Massachusetts, to his excellency, a copy
of which is herewith communicated, and to which I request your immediate
and particular attention.

It appears from this document that "mills are now erecting on the grant
formerly made to General Baton, on the Aroostook River, for the avowed
purpose of getting their supply of timber from our forests;" that the
proprietor of these mills "says he has assurances from the authorities
of New Brunswick that he may cut timber without hindrance from them,
provided he will engage to pay them for it if they succeed in obtaining
their right to the territory;" "that mills are also erected at Fish
River, and to supply them the growth in that section is fast
diminishing, and that the inhabitants of St. John River obtain from the
Province of New Brunswick permits to cut on the Crown lands. But it is
evident that many having such permits do not confine themselves to Crown
lands, for in my travels across the interior country logging roads and
the chips where timber had been hewn were seen in every direction,
also many stumps of trees newly cut." I need scarcely remark that the
proceedings thus described are in opposition to the understanding which
has existed between the Governments of the United States and Great
Britain that during the pendency of the arbitration which is to settle
the question of boundary neither party should exercise any jurisdiction
or perform any act on the disputed territory to strengthen his own
claims or to affect the state of the property in issue. The governor of
Massachusetts observes in his letter to me that, "in relation to the
lands on Fish River, it must be recollected that the survey of a road
by the joint commissioners of Massachusetts and Maine a short time
since was made matter of complaint by the British minister resident at
Washington on the express ground that the territory was within the scope
of the dispute. From courtesy to his Government and a respectful regard
to a suggestion from the Department of State, the making of the road
was suspended." The governor justly concludes: "But it will be an ill
requital for this voluntary forbearance on our part if the land is to
be plundered of its timber and the value of the property destroyed
before it shall be determined that it does not belong to us."

If the government of New Brunswick will authorize or countenance such
trespasses as have been stated by Mr. Coffin on the disputed territory,
it can not be expected that the State of Maine will abstain from the
adoption of preventive measures or from the performance of similar or
other acts of jurisdiction and proprietorship. The consequence would be
immediate and disagreeable collision. To prevent this state of things,
I am directed by the President again to demand through you the effectual
interposition of the British Government. Without that the friendly, if
not the peaceful, relations between the two countries may be interrupted
or endangered. I request your acceptance on this occasion of assurances
of my distinguished consideration.

H. CLAY

_Mr. Vaughan to Mr. Clay_.

WASHINGTON, _January 13, 1829_.

Hon. HENRY CLAY, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, has the honor to acknowledge the receipt of
Mr. Clay's note containing a representation which has been made by his
excellency the governor of the State of Massachusetts respecting the
cutting down of timber upon the disputed territory in the Province of
New Brunswick.

The undersigned will immediately transmit a copy of Mr. Clay's note to
His Majesty's lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, in order to obtain
an explanation of the transaction which has given rise to the
remonstrance made by the governor of Massachusetts.

The undersigned takes this opportunity of renewing to the Secretary of
State the assurances of his highest consideration.

CHS. R. VAUGHAN

_Mr. Vaughan to Mr. Hamilton_.

WASHINGTON, _March 7, 1879_.

JAMES A. HAMILTON, Esq., etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, had the honor to receive from the Secretary
of State of the United States a note, dated the 9th January last,
containing a representation made by his excellency the governor of
Massachusetts respecting some trespasses committed on the disputed
territory in the Province of New Brunswick.

A copy of the note of the Secretary of State having been transmitted to
Sir Howard Douglas, His Majesty's lieutenant-governor of that Province,
the undersigned has lately received an answer, which he has the honor
to communicate to Mr. Hamilton by inclosing an extract[13] of his
excellency's letter, which shews in the most satisfactory manner
that, so far from the proceedings complained of by the governor of
Massachusetts having been authorized or countenanced in any shape by the
government of New Brunswick, every precaution has been taken to prevent
and restrain depredations in the disputed territory.

Mr. Hamilton will see by the inclosed letter that Sir Howard Douglas has
sent a magistrate to report upon the mills which have been established
without license or authority, to inspect minutely the stations of the
cutters of lumber, and to seize any timber brought into the acknowledged
boundaries of New Brunswick from the disputed territory, and to hold the
proceeds of the sale of it for the benefit of the party to whom that
territory may be ultimately awarded.

As the time is approaching when Sir Howard Douglas will be absent from
his government, he will leave injunctions strictly to observe the
understanding between the two governments during his absence. The
undersigned has great satisfaction in being able to offer to the
Government of the United States the unequivocal testimony contained in
the inclosed letter from Sir Howard Douglas of the conciliatory spirit
in which the government of New Brunswick is administered, and trusting
that a similar spirit will animate the government of the American States
which border on that Province, he confidently anticipates a cessation of
that excitement which has unfortunately prevailed in the neighborhood of
the disputed territory.

The undersigned takes this occasion to offer to Mr. Hamilton the
assurances of his high consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN.

[Footnote 13: Omitted.]

_Mr. Hamilton to Mr. Vaughan_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, March 11, 1829_.

Right Hon. CHARLES RICHARD VAUGHAN,

_Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary from Great Britain_.

SIR: I have received and laid before the President of the United States
the note, with its inclosures, which you did me the honor to write to me
on the 7th of this month in answer to a representation which was made
to you by Mr. Clay on the 9th of January last, at the instance of the
governor of Massachusetts, concerning depredations complained of by him
against inhabitants of the Province of New Brunswick in cutting timber,
preparing lumber for market, and erecting mills upon the soil of the
territory in dispute between the United States and Great Britain,
and I am directed by the President to state in reply, as I have
much pleasure in doing, that he derives great satisfaction from the
information contained in your communication, as he especially perceives
in the prompt and energetic measures adopted by Sir Howard Douglas,
lieutenant-governor of the Province in question, and detailed in the
inclosure referred to, a pledge of the same disposition on the part
of the authorities of that Province which animates this Government--to
enforce a strict observance of the understanding between the two
Governments that the citizens or subjects of neither shall exercise
any acts of ownership in the disputed territory whilst the title to it
remains unsettled. I will lose no time in making known to the governors
of Massachusetts and Maine the measures which have been thus adopted
by the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick to guard against all
depredations upon the disputed territory, and will at the same time
inform their excellencies of the just and confident expectation
entertained by the President that the conciliatory understanding or
arrangement between the two Governments of the United States and Great
Britain already referred to should not be disturbed by the citizens of
these two States.

I am directed likewise by the President expressly to use this first
occasion of an official communication with you under his orders to
request the favor of you to make known to your Government the sincere
regret he feels at the existence of any difference or misunderstanding
between the United States and Great Britain upon the subject-matter of
this letter, or any other whatever, and that in all the measures which
may be adopted on his part toward their adjustment he will be entirely
actuated and governed by a sincere desire to promote the kindest and
best feelings on both sides and secure the mutual and lasting interests
of the parties.

I pray you, sir, to accept the renewed assurances of the high and
distinguished consideration with which I have the honor to be, your
obedient, humble servant,

JAMES A. HAMILTON.

_Mr. Vaughan to Mr. Hamilton_.

WASHINGTON, _March 12, 1839_.

Mr. J.A. HAMILTON, etc.:

It is with great satisfaction that the undersigned, His Britannic
Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary, acknowledges
the receipt of Mr. Hamilton's note of the 11th instant, containing
a prompt acknowledgment of the efficacious measures adopted by the
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick to investigate and to restrain the
proceedings complained of in the disputed territory; and he begs leave
to assure the President that he derives great satisfaction from being
requested to communicate to His Majesty's Government that in the
adjustment of differences between Great Britain and the United States
the President will be entirely actuated and governed by a sincere desire
to promote the kindest and best feelings on both sides and secure the
mutual and lasting interests of the parties.

The undersigned begs Mr. Hamilton to accept the assurances of his
highest consideration.

CHS. R. VAUGHAN.

_Mr. Vaughan to Mr. Van Buren_.

WASHINGTON, _April 10, 1829_.

Hon. MARTIN VAN BUREN, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, has the honor to inform the Secretary of
State of the United States that he has received an intimation from His
Majesty's lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick that, apparently, it is
the intention of the Government of the United States to carry the road
now making through the State of Maine to Mars Hill over the point, and
to occupy it as a military station.

The undersigned begs leave to remind Mr. Van Buren that Mars Hill is
situated upon the northeastern line of boundary which is in dispute
between the two Governments; and he is called upon to protest against
the occupation of it by American troops upon the ground that the line
drawn by the commissioners of boundary under the treaty of Ghent due
north from the monument which marks the sources of the river St. Croix
was not considered by them as correctly laid down, and it yet remains
to be determined whether Mars Hill lies eastward or westward of a line
drawn upon scientific principles. For a better explanation of the
motives for this protest the undersigned has the honor to refer the
Secretary of State to a copy of a letter, which is inclosed,[14] from
Sir Howard Douglas.

A joint resolution of both Houses of Congress passed during the last
session tends to confirm the intentions of the Government of the United
States as inferred by Sir Howard Douglas from the information which he
has received. That resolution authorized the making of a road from and
beyond Mars Hill to the mouth of the Madawaska River; but as the
carrying into effect that resolution was left entirely to the discretion
of the President, the undersigned can not entertain any apprehension of
a forcible seizure of a large portion of the disputed territory, which
a compliance with the resolution of Congress would imply.

The undersigned acknowledges with great satisfaction the assurances
which he has received of the kind feelings which will actuate the
President of the United States in the adjustment of any differences
which may exist with Great Britain. He submits, therefore, the
representation of the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick respecting
the occupation of Mars Hill, relying confidently on the manifest
propriety of restraining the aggression which it is supposed is
meditated from the frontier of the State of Maine, and of both parties
mutually abstaining from any acts which can affect the disputed
territory, as the question of possession is now in the course of
arbitration.

The undersigned reiterates to the Secretary of State the assurances of
his highest consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN.

[Footnote 14: Omitted.]

_Mr. Van Buren to Mr. Vaughan_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, May 11, 1829_.

Right Hon. CHARGES R. VAUGHAN, etc.:

The undersigned, Secretary of State of the United States, has the honor
to acknowledge the receipt of the note which Mr. Vaughan, His Britannic
Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary, addressed to
him on the 10th of April, stating upon the authority of a letter from
the governor of New Brunswick, whereof a copy came inclosed in Mr.
Vaughan's note, that it was apparently the intention of the Government
of the United States to carry the road now making through the State
of Maine to Mars Hill over that point, and to occupy Mars Hill as a
military station; and protesting against such occupation upon the ground
that the line drawn by the commissioners of boundary under the treaty of
Ghent due north from the monument which marks the source of the river
St. Croix was not considered by them as correctly laid down, and that it
yet remains to be determined whether Mars Hill is eastward or westward
of the true line.

The undersigned deems it unnecessary upon the present occasion to enter
into an elaborate discussion of the point stated by Sir Howard Douglas,
the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, concerning the line referred
to by him, inasmuch as the relative position of Mars Hill to that line
is already designated upon map A, and the line itself mutually agreed
to and sufficiently understood for all present purposes, though not
definitively settled by the convention of Condon of the 29th September,
1827.

The undersigned will therefore merely state that he finds nothing
in the record of the proceedings of the commissioners under the fifth
article of the treaty of Ghent to warrant the doubt suggested by the
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick whether Mars Hill lies to the
westward of the line to be drawn due north from the monument at the
source of the St. Croix to the highlands which divide the waters that
empty into the river St. Lawrence from those which empty into the
Atlantic Ocean; that the joint surveys and explorations made under that
commission place the hill about a mile due west of that line; and that
the agent of His Britannic Majesty before the commissioners, so far from
intimating any doubt on the point, made it one ground of argument that
the true line, when correctly laid down, would necessarily, on account
of the ascertained progressive westerly variation of the needle, fall
still farther westward.

The undersigned can not acquiesce in the supposition that, because the
agent of His Britannic Majesty thought proper in the proceedings before
the commissioners to lay claim to all that portion of the State of
Maine which lies north of a line running westerly from Mars Hill, and
designated as the limit or boundary of the British claim, thereby the
United States or the State of Maine ceased to have jurisdiction in the
territory thus claimed. In the view of this Government His Britannic
Majesty's agent might with equal justice have extended his claim to any
other undisputed part of the State as to claim the portion of it which
he has drawn in question, and in such case the lieutenant-governor of
New Brunswick could surely not have considered a continuance on the
part of the United States and of the State of Maine to exercise their
accustomed jurisdiction and authority to be an encroachment. If so,
in what light are we to regard the continued acts of jurisdiction now
exercised by him in the Madawaska settlement? More than twenty years ago
large tracts of land lying westward of Mars Hill, and northward on the
river Restook, were granted by the State of Massachusetts, which tracts
are held and possessed under those grants to this day, and the United
States and the States of Massachusetts and Maine, in succession, have
never ceased to exercise that jurisdiction which the unsettled condition
of the country in that region and other circumstances admitted and
required.

The undersigned, therefore, can not discover in the facts and
circumstances of the case any just principles upon which Sir Howard
Douglas could predicate his protest. He has, however, submitted the note
which he had the honor to receive from Mr. Vaughan to the President of
the United States, and is by him directed to say in reply that although
this Government could feel no difficulty in the exercise of what it
deems an unquestionable right, and could not allow itself to be
restrained by the protest of the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick,
yet, as a further proof of the spirit of amity, forbearance, and
conciliation which the President is desirous of cultivating between the
two Governments, he has decided to postpone for the present the exercise
of the authority vested in him by the Congress of the United States to
cause to be surveyed and laid out a military road to be continued from
Mars Hill, or such other point on the military road laid out in the
State of Maine as he may think proper, to the mouth of the river
Madawaska, and to add that the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick is
under a misapprehension as to the design of this Government to occupy
Mars Hill as a military station, no such intention being entertained by
the President, nor have any measures been taken by this Government with
an ulterior view to that object.

The undersigned indulges the hope that Mr. Vaughan will perceive in the
manner in which the President, discriminating between the rights of this
Government and their present exercise, has used the discretion conferred
upon him an additional evidence of the desire which he sincerely
entertains, and which he has heretofore caused to be communicated to
Mr. Vaughan, that both Governments should, as far as practicable,
abstain from all acts of authority over the territory in dispute which
are not of immediate and indispensable necessity, and which would serve
to create or increase excitement whilst the matter is in course of
arbitration; and he feels well persuaded that Mr. Vaughan will not fail
to inculcate the same spirit and to recommend in the strongest terms the
observance of the same course on the part of the provincial government
of New Brunswick.

The undersigned offers to Mr. Vaughan the renewed assurances of his high
consideration.

M. VAN BUREN.

_Mr. Vaughan to Mr. Van Buren_.

WASHINGTON, _May 14, 1829_.

Hon. MARTIN VAN BUREN, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, has the honor to acknowledge the receipt
of Mr. Van Buren's note dated the 11th instant, and he derives great
satisfaction from being able to communicate to His Majesty's Government
the assurances which it contains that the Government of the United
States has never entertained the design of occupying Mars Hill, and that
the President, in the spirit of amity, forbearance, and conciliation
which he is desirous of cultivating between the two Governments, has
decided to postpone for the present the exercise of the authority vested
in him by the Congress of the United States to cause to be surveyed and
laid out a military road to be continued from Mars Hill to the river
Madawaska.

The undersigned will transmit immediately a copy of Mr. Van Buren's note
to His Majesty's Government, and he forbears, therefore, from taking
notice of the observations which it contains relative to the exact
position of Mars Hill and to the exercise of jurisdiction in the
district on the northwest of it.

The undersigned begs leave to renew to Mr. Van Buren the assurances of
his highest consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN.

_Mr. Vaughan to Mr. Van Buren_.

WASHINGTON, _June 8, 1829_.

Hon. MARTIN VAN BUREN, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, had the honor on the 7th March last to lay
before the Government of the United States a letter from Sir Howard
Douglas, His Majesty's lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, in
explanation of trespasses alleged by the governor of the State of
Massachusetts to have been committed by British subjects in the disputed
territory within that Province. The lieutenant-governor announced his
intention in that letter of sending a magistrate into the district where
the proceedings complained of had taken place to ascertain the nature
and extent of the alleged trespasses and afterwards to make a report
to his excellency.

The report of the magistrate having been received by Mr. Black, who has
been commissioned by His Majesty to administer the government of New
Brunswick during the temporary absence of Sir Howard Douglas, a copy of
it has been transmitted to the undersigned, and he begs leave to submit
it[15] to the consideration of the Secretary of State of the United
States, together with an extract[15] of the letter of Mr. Black which
accompanied it. As it appears by the report of Mr. Maclauchlan, the
magistrate, that some American citizens settled in the disputed
territory are implicated in the trespasses which have been committed,
Mr. Black, the president and commissioner in chief of the government of
New Brunswick, suggests the propriety of an officer being appointed by
the Government of the United States to act in concert with the British
magistrate in preventing further depredations.

The undersigned has received from Mr. Black the most satisfactory
assurances that it will be his earnest study to adhere scrupulously to
the good feeling and conciliatory conduct toward the United States which
has been observed by Sir Howard Douglas.

The undersigned seizes this opportunity to renew to Mr. Van Buren the
assurances of his distinguished consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN.

_Mr. Bankhead to Mr. Livingston_.

WASHINGTON, _October 1, 1831_.

Hon. EDWARD LIVINGSTON, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's charge d'affaires, has the
honor to acquaint Mr. Livingston, Secretary of State of the United
States, that he has received a communication from His Majesty's
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, stating that the authorities
of Maine have endeavored to exercise a jurisdiction over part of the
territory at present in dispute between His Majesty and the United
States, and, further, that an order has been issued by a justice of the
peace for the county of Penobscot to the inhabitants of the town of
Madawaska to assemble for the purpose of choosing municipal officers.

The undersigned regrets sincerely that these irregular proceedings
should have been had recourse to during a period when the question of
boundary is in a course of settlement, and in opposition to the desire
expressed by the President that pending the discussion of that question
the State of Maine should refrain from committing any act which could
be construed into a violation of the neighboring territory.

The undersigned begs leave to submit to the Secretary of State several
documents[15] which he has received from Sir Archibald Campbell in
support of his complaint of a violation of territory; and the
undersigned entertains a confident hope that such measures will be
adopted as shall prevent a recurrence of acts on the part of the
authorities of the State of Maine which are productive of so much
inconvenience and which tend to disturb that harmony and good will
so necessary to be preserved between the two countries.

The undersigned has the honor to renew to Mr. Livingston the assurances
of his distinguished consideration.

CHARLES BANKHEAD.

[Footnote 15: Omitted.]

_Mr. Livingston to Mr. Bankhead_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, October 17, 1831_.

CHARLES BANKHEAD, Esq., etc.

SIR: Immediately after receiving your note of the 1st instant I wrote to
the governor of the State of Maine for information on the subject of it.
I have just received his answer, of which I have the honor to inclose
two extracts.[16] By the first you will perceive that the election of
town officers in the settlement of Madawaska, of which complaint was
made in the papers inclosed in your letter, was made under color of
a general law, which was not intended by either the executive or
legislative authority of that State to be executed in that settlement,
and that the whole was the work of inconsiderate individuals.

By the second extract it will appear that the individuals said to have
been most prominent in setting up the authority of the State have been
arrested by order of the lieutenant-governor of the Province of New
Brunswick, and were on their way to be imprisoned at Frederickton.

The innovation on the existing state of things in the disputed
territory being distinctly disavowed by the executive authority of the
State, no act of authority or exercise of jurisdiction having followed
the election, I would respectfully suggest the propriety of your
recommending to the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick the release of
the prisoners who were arrested for exercising this act of authority
in the territory mutually claimed by the two nations, contrary to the
understanding between their Governments. It is their avowed object to
avoid any collision until the intention of both parties in relation
to the award shall be fully known. All subjects calculated to produce
irritation, therefore, ought evidently to be avoided. The arrest of the
persons concerned in the election must produce that feeling in a high
degree. A conviction can not take place without eliciting a decision
from the bench declaratory of and enforcing the jurisdiction over the
territory in dispute, which it is the present policy of both powers to
avoid, at least for the short time that must elapse before the question
can be finally settled. If punishment should follow conviction, the
passions that would be excited must inevitably be hostile to that spirit
of conciliation so necessary where sacrifices of national feeling and
individual interest are required for the common good. It would be absurd
here to enter into the question of title. Both parties claim it. No act
that either can do is necessary to assist its right while there is hope
of an amicable arrangement; and it was with this view of the subject
that a mutual understanding has been had to leave things in the state
in which they are until the question of the award is settled.

On the part of the Americans some individuals, in contravention of this
understanding, have proceeded to do acts which if followed out would
change the political state of part of the disputed land. But it has
not been so followed out; it is disavowed by the power whose assent
is necessary to carry it into execution. It is therefore of no avail,
and can have no more effect than if the same number of men had met at
Madawaska and declared themselves duly elected members of the British
Parliament. The act interferes with no right; it comes in actual
collision with no established power. Not so the punishment of the
individuals concerned. This is at once a practical decision of the
question, and may lead to retaliating legal measures; for if the
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick feels himself obliged, as he says
he does, to impose the authority of the law within which he thinks
the boundaries of his Province, will not the same feeling incite the
governor of Maine, under the same sense of duty, to pursue the like
measures? And thus the fruits of moderation and mutual forbearance
during so long a period will be lost for the want of perseverance in
them for the short time that is now wanting to bring the controversy
to an amicable close. It is therefore, sir, that I invite your
interposition with his excellency the lieutenant-governor of New
Brunswick to induce him to set at liberty the persons arrested, on their
engagement to make no change in the state of things until the business
shall be finally decided between the two Governments.

On our part, the desire of the General Government to avoid any measures
tending to a change in the existing state of things on our northeast
boundary has been fully and, it is believed, efficaciously expressed to
the executive of the State of Maine, so that the actual relation of the
State with the neighboring Province will not in future suffer any
change.

I have great pleasure, sir, in renewing on this occasion the assurance
of my high consideration.

EDWD. LIVINGSTON.

[Footnote 16: Omitted.]

_Mr. Bankhead to Mr. Livingston_.

WASHINGTON, _October 20, 1831_.

Hon. EDWARD LIVINGSTON, Esq., etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's charge d'affaires, has the
honor to acknowledge the receipt of Mr. Livingston's note of the 17th
instant, in answer to a representation which the undersigned thought
it his duty to make to the Government of the United States upon a
violation committed upon the territory at present in dispute between
the two countries.

The friendly tone assumed by the Secretary of State in this
communication, the discountenance on the part of the General
Government of the proceedings which were complained of, and the
determination of the President to cause the strictest forbearance to be
maintained until the question of boundary shall be settled have been
received by the undersigned with great satisfaction, and it is in the
same spirit of harmony that he has addressed a letter to His Majesty's
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, inclosing a copy of Mr.
Livingston's note, for his excellency's serious consideration.

The undersigned has the honor to renew to Mr. Livingston the assurance
of his distinguished consideration.

CHARLES BANKHEAD.

_Mr. Bankhead to Mr. Livingston_.

WASHINGTON, _October 22, 1831_.

Hon. EDWARD LIVINGSTON, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's charge d'affaires, has the
honor to transmit to the Secretary of State of the United States the
copy of a letter[17] from His Majesty's lieutenant-governor of New
Brunswick, inclosing a deposition[17] made before a justice of the peace
of that Province in support of a charge against certain inhabitants of
Houlton, in the State of Maine, for having made a forcible inroad on
the territory of His Majesty in search of an Irishman (an inhabitant of
Woodstock, New Brunswick) who committed a most violent outrage against
the constituted authorities at Houlton.

The lieutenant-governor deprecates in the strongest manner the infamous
conduct of the individual in question, and is perfectly ready to exert
the utmost rigor of the laws against him; but his excellency at the
same time protests against the conduct of those persons who have thus
attempted to interfere with the jurisdiction of the laws in His
Majesty's possessions.

Under these circumstances the undersigned has to request that Mr.
Livingston will be good enough to cause the necessary inquiries to be
instituted into this transaction, and upon the charges being clearly
proved that he will make such a representation to the authorities of the
State of Maine as shall prevent the recurrence of a similar irregularity
in future.

The undersigned has the honor to renew to Mr. Livingston the assurances
of his distinguished consideration.

CHARLES BANKHEAD.

[Footnote 17: Omitted.]

_Mr. Bankhead to Mr. Livingston_.

WASHINGTON, _November 25, 1831_.

Hon. EDWARD LIVINGSTON, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's charge d'affaires, has the
honor to refer the Secretary of State of the United States to the
correspondence which took place in the month of October upon the subject
of violations which had been committed upon the territory at present in
dispute between Great Britain and the United States, and the measures
which His Majesty's lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick deemed it
expedient to adopt thereupon.

The trial of these persons took place at Frederickton, and they were
sentenced by the supreme court of the Province to fine and imprisonment.

At the time the undersigned communicated to the Government of the United
States the decision which the authorities of New Brunswick had felt it
necessary to adopt upon this occasion he expressed the deep regret of
the governor of that Province that the conduct of these individuals was
such as to compel his excellency to pursue a course so uncongenial to
his own feelings and at variance with the harmony which subsists between
the Governments of Great Britain and the United States.

The Secretary of State upon receiving this communication expressed to
the undersigned the earnest desire of the President, upon a total
disavowal on the part of the General Government of the proceedings of
the persons implicated in this transaction, that His Majesty's
lieutenant-governor might consider himself authorized to exercise a
prerogative in their favor and to remit the sentence which had been
pronounced against them.

No time was lost in submitting Mr. Livingston's note to the
consideration of Sir Archibald Campbell, and the undersigned has the
greatest satisfaction in acquainting him that his excellency fully
acquiesced in the desire manifested by the President of the United
States. The undersigned can not better fulfill the wishes of Sir
Archibald Campbell, which are so much in accordance with that spirit of
good will which happily subsists between the two countries and which
characterizes their relations with each other, than by transmitting
to the Secretary of State a copy of the dispatch which he yesterday
received from that officer, and which he feels assured will be received
by the President as an earnest of his uninterrupted good feeling toward
the Government and people of the United States.

The undersigned has the honor to renew to Mr. Livingston the assurance
of his highest consideration,

CHARLES BANKHEAD.

_Sir Archibald Campbell to Mr. Bankhead_.

GOVERNMENT HOUSE,

_Frederickton, November 8, 1831_.

SIR: I had this morning the honor to receive your letter of the
20th ultimo, which, with its inclosures, are in every respect so
satisfactory that I did not lose a moment in giving effect to the wishes
therein expressed by exercising that prerogative so congenial to my own
feelings, whether viewed in the extension of mercy or in the gratifying
anticipation of such a measure being received as an earnest of my most
anxious desire, as far as rests with me (consistent with my public
duties), to preserve inviolate the harmony and good understanding so
happily existing between the two Governments. The prisoners, Barnabas
Hunnewell, Jesse Wheelock, and Daniel Savage, are released; and I
have taken it upon myself, knowing that such a measure will be fully
sanctioned by my Government, to remit the fines imposed by the
supreme court of this Province, as already communicated to you by
Lieutenant-Colonel Snodgrass--an act that I trust will not fail in being
duly appreciated _when it is known_ that the above-mentioned individuals
did, with several others, follow up their first proceedings by acts of
much more serious aggression, for which they stood charged under another
(untried) indictment. However, everything connected therewith is now
corrected.

You will see with what readiness and satisfaction I have received and
adopted your kind advice, for which accept of my sincere thanks, and
believe me to remain, sir, etc.,

ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL,

_Lieutenant-Governor_.

_Mr. Livingston to Mr. Bankhead_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, November 28, 1831_.

CHARLES BANKHEAD, Esq., etc.:

The undersigned, Secretary of State, etc., has the honor to acknowledge
the receipt of a note from Mr. Bankhead, His Britannic Majesty's charge
d'affaires, under date of the 25th instant, accompanied by a copy of a
letter from Sir A. Campbell, the lieutenant-governor of the Province
of New Brunswick, by both of which the Secretary of State is informed
that the citizens of the United States lately under prosecution at
Frederickton for acts done in the territory now possessed by Great
Britain within the country claimed both by that power and the United
States, have been set at liberty, in accordance with the suggestions
made in the former correspondence between Mr. Bankhead and the Secretary
of State.

Mr. Bankhead's note, with its inclosure, has been laid before
the President, who has instructed the undersigned to express his
satisfaction at the prompt manner in which his suggestions have been
complied with, and to say that he considers it as a proof of the
disposition of His Britannic Majesty's officers to preserve the harmony
that so happily subsists between the two Governments.

The undersigned renews to Mr. Bankhead the assurance of his high
consideration.

EDWARD LIVINGSTON.

_Sir Charles R. Vaughan to Mr. McLane_.

WASHINGTON, _October 20, 1833_.

Hon. LOUIS McLANE, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, has the honor to lay before the Secretary
of State of the United States a copy of a letter[18] which he has
received from His Excellency Sir Archibald Campbell, His Majesty's
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, and to call his attention to the
conduct of certain land agents of the States of Maine and Massachusetts
in the territory in dispute between Great Britain and the United States.

It appears by the report contained in Sir Archibald Campbell's letter
that land agents of Maine and Massachusetts have been holding out
inducements to persons of both countries to cut pine timber on the
disputed territory on condition of paying to them 2 shillings and
6 pence the ton, and that they have entered into contracts for opening
two roads which will intersect the Roostook River.

As it is the declared will and mutual interest of the Governments of
Great Britain and of the United States to preserve the disputed
territory in its present state and to avoid all collision pending the
settlement of the boundary question, the undersigned is convinced that
it is sufficient to insure the prompt interference of the Government of
the United States to put a stop to the proceedings of these land agents
to state the conduct complained of.

The undersigned has the honor to renew to Mr. McLane the assurance of
his most distinguished consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN

[Footnote 18: Omitted.]

_Mr. McLane to Sir Charles R. Vaughan_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, October 23, 1833_.

Right Hon. SIR CHARGES R. VAUGHAN, G.C.H.,

_Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Britannic
Majesty_:

The undersigned, Secretary of State of the United States, has the
honor to acknowledge the receipt of the note of Sir Charles R. Vaughan,
envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of His Britannic
Majesty, of the 20th instant, accompanied by a copy of a letter from
Sir Archibald Campbell, lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, to Sir
Charles R. Vaughan, and also a letter from J.A. Maclauchlan to the
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, complaining of the "conduct of
certain land agents of the States of Maine and Massachusetts in the
territory in dispute between the United States and Great Britain."

The undersigned is instructed to state that it would be a source
of regret to the President should this complaint prove to be well
founded, and that he has caused a copy of Sir Charles's note and of the
accompanying papers promptly to be communicated to the governors of
Maine and Massachusetts, in order that the necessary steps may be taken
to enforce a due observance of the terms of the existing arrangement
between the Government of the United States and that of Great Britain
in regard to the disputed territory.

The undersigned avails himself of the occasion to renew to Sir Charles
R. Vaughan the assurance of his distinguished consideration.

LOUIS McLANE

_Sir Charles R. Vaughan to Mr. McLane_.

WASHINGTON, _December 17, 1833_.

Hon. LOUIS McLANE, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, regrets that a letter received from His
Majesty's lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick should again require him
to ask the intervention of the General Government of the United States
to put a stop to certain proceedings of the State of Maine in the
territory still in dispute between Great Britain and the United States.
The inclosed letter, with the report which accompanies it,[19] shows
that the State of Maine has opened a road beyond the conventional
frontier, with the avowed intention of carrying it to the bank of the
river St. John.

The undersigned is convinced that the Secretary of State of the United
States will agree with him that the State of Maine must not be allowed
to take upon herself the right to define the meaning of the treaty of
1783, and, by aggressions such as those against which the undersigned is
called upon to remonstrate, to take possession, without reference to the
General Government of the United States, of territory which has been so
long in abeyance between the two Governments. Such conduct is calculated
to lead to collisions of a distressing nature between the subjects of
His Britannic Majesty and the citizens of the United States employed to
assert a futile and hazardous possession which so entirely depends upon
the arrangements in progress between the two Governments.

The undersigned trusts that the representation made in this note will
be received by the Secretary of State in the same spirit of good will
and conciliation which has hitherto characterized the conduct of the
Government of the United States in all occurrences of a similar nature.

The undersigned has the honor to renew to Mr. McLane the assurance of
his most distinguished consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN

[Footnote 19: Omitted.]

_Mr. McLane to Sir Charles R. Vaughan_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, December 21, 1833_.

Right Hon. SIR CHARLES R. VAUGHAN, G.C.H.,

_Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Britannic
Majesty_:

The undersigned, Secretary of State, has the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of the note addressed to him on the 17th instant by Sir Charles
R. Vaughan, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister
plenipotentiary, requesting the intervention of the Government of the
United States to put a stop to certain proceedings of the State of Maine
in the territory still in dispute between Great Britain and the United
States.

The proceedings referred to appear, by the letter of the
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick and the report of the officer
acting on the part of Great Britain as warden of the disputed territory
(copies of which accompanied Sir Charles R. Vaughan's note), to be the
construction of a road to the Restook River, passing, as is alleged,
through 15 miles of the disputed territory, and supposed by the warden
to be intended to intersect the St. John River in the Madawaska
settlement.

The undersigned is happy to have it in his power to afford at once
such explanations upon this subject as he trusts may be satisfactory.
By a communication received from the governor of Maine, in answer to a
representation recently made by Sir Charles R. Vaughan concerning other
alleged encroachments on the disputed territory, it will be seen that
no part of the road now constructing by that State is believed to be
within the territory of which the British Government has ever been in the
actual possession since the treaty of 1783, and that it is not designed
to extend the road beyond the Aroostook. The apprehensions entertained
of its being extended to the St. John River in the Madawaska settlement
appear, therefore, to be groundless, and, if the views of the governor
of Maine as to the locality of the road be correct, it would seem that
its construction can afford no just cause of complaint, as it is not
supposed that such improvements made by either party within that part
of the territory which has been in its possession, or so considered,
since the treaty of 1783 are contrary to the spirit of the existing
understanding between the two Governments. It will be seen, moreover,
as well by the communication from the governor of Maine as by one
received from the governor of Massachusetts on the same occasion, that
a conciliatory and forbearing disposition prevails on their part, and
that no measures will be taken or any acts authorized by them which may
justly be considered as a violation of the understanding in regard to
the disputed territory.

The undersigned has nevertheless been directed by the President to
transmit copies of Sir Charles R. Vaughan's note and its inclosures
to the governors of Maine and Massachusetts, and to repeat to their
excellencies his earnest desire that as far as depends on them no
departure from the understanding between the two Governments may be
permitted.

In regard to the complaint heretofore made by Sir Charles R. Vaughan,
upon the representations of the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick
and the warden of the disputed territory, as to the cutting and sale
of timber under the authority of the land agents of Maine and
Massachusetts, the undersigned begs leave to refer to the communications
from the governors of those States already mentioned, copies of which
are now transmitted, by which it appears that the conduct of those
agents has furnished no just cause of dissatisfaction, but that, on the
contrary, it is alleged that His Britannic Majesty's officers of the
Province of New Brunswick, by the seizure and sale of timber cut by
trespassers on the Aroostook, and afterwards in the rightful custody of
the agent of the State of Massachusetts, have been the first to violate
the existing understanding upon this subject.

These complaints on both sides, arising, as the undersigned believes,
from acts which do not on either side indicate an intention to disregard
the existing understanding, but are attributable to the unsettled state
of the boundary question, and which should therefore be viewed with
mutual forbearance, furnish increased reason for a speedy adjustment of
that interesting matter; and the President looks with great solicitude
for the answer, which is daily expected, from the British Government to
the proposition submitted on the part of the United States, in the hope
that it may soon set all those difficulties at rest.

The undersigned has the honor to renew to Sir Charles R. Vaughan the
assurance of his distinguished consideration.

LOUIS McLANE.

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF MASSACHUSETTS,

_November 1, 1833_.

Hon. LOUIS McLANE,

_Secretary of State of the United States_.

SIR: I have to acknowledge the honor of the receipt of your letter of
the 23d of October, covering a copy of a note addressed to you by Sir
Charles R. Vaughan, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of
His Britannic Majesty, accompanied also by copies of certain documents
conveying complaints on the part of the authorities of His Majesty's
Province of New Brunswick "of the conduct of certain land agents of the
States of Maine and Massachusetts on the territory in dispute between
the United States and Great Britain."

Permit me to assure you that I shall lose no time in making inquiry of
the land agent of this Commonwealth into the supposed occasion of the
complaints of His Majesty's provincial officers, and in transmitting to
the Department of State such information as I may receive in reply.

Prejudicial as the delay in the settlement of this long-vexed subject
of boundary is to the rights of property which Massachusetts claims
in the disputed territory, and impatient as both the government and
the people have become at the unreasonableness and pertinacity of the
adversary pretensions and with the present state of the question, yet
the executive of this Commonwealth will not cease to respect the
understanding which has been had between the Governments of the two
countries, _that no act of wrong to the property of either_ shall be
committed during the pending of measures to produce an amicable
adjustment of the controversy.

In the meantime, I can not but earnestly protest against the authority
of any appointment on the behalf of His Majesty's Government which may
be regarded as a claim to the executive protection of this property
or be deemed an acquiescence on the part of the United States in an
interference, _under color_ of a "wardenship of the disputed territory,"
with the direction to its improvement which the governments of
Massachusetts and Maine, respectively, may see fit to give to their
agents. The rights of soil and jurisdiction over it are in the States,
and forbearance to the exercise of these rights for a season, from mere
prudential considerations, a respectful regard to the wishes of the
General Government, or amity toward a foreign nation is not to be
construed into a readiness to surrender them upon the issue of any
proposed negotiation.

I have the honor to be, sir, with sentiments of the highest respect,
your obedient servant,

LEVI LINCOLN.

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF MAINE,

_Augusta, November 23, 1833_.

Hon. LOUIS McLANE,

_Secretary of State of the United States, Washington_.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the
23d of October last, communicating a copy of a note from Sir Charles
R. Vaughan, accompanied with a copy of a letter from Sir Archibald
Campbell, lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick, to Sir Charles R.
Vaughan, and also of a letter from Lieutenant J.A. Maclauchlan to Sir
Archibald Campbell, complaining of the conduct of the land agents of the
States of Maine and Massachusetts in the territory in dispute between
the United States and Great Britain.

In compliance with your request to be furnished with information in
relation to this subject, I reply that by a resolve of the legislature
of this State passed March 30, 1831, "the land agent of this State, in
conjunction with the land agent of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, is
authorized and empowered to survey, lay out, and make a suitable winter
road, or cause the same to be done, from the mouth of the Matawamkeag, a
branch of the Penobscot River, in a northerly direction, so as to strike
the Aroostook River on or near the line dividing the sixth and seventh
ranges of townships." The same resolve authorizes the land agents to lay
out and make, or cause to be made, a winter road from the village of
Houlton, in a westerly direction, to intersect the road to the Aroostook
River at some point most convenient for traveling and most for the
interest of the State. By a subsequent resolve, passed March 8, 1832,
the authority given to the land agents was enlarged so as to authorize
them "to locate and survey the Aroostook road so that it may strike the
Aroostook River at any place between the west line of the third range
and the east line of the sixth range of townships west of the east line
of the State." The first of these roads has been surveyed and located,
and much the greater part of it lies within the undisputed limits of
this State south of the sources of the Penobscot River, and it is
believed that no part of it lies within territory of which the British
Government has ever been in the actual possession since the treaty of
1783. A portion of this road only has yet been opened, and I have no
information that any part of it has been opened over territory _claimed_
by the British, although it is contemplated to extend it to the
Aroostook when it can be done consistently with the public interest. The
second road described in the resolve of March 30, 1831, is wholly within
the undisputed limits of this State.

A report of the recent proceedings of the land agent in making these
roads and disposing of the timber on the lands of the State has not been
received, and his late sickness and death have rendered it impossible at
this time to obtain a detailed statement of all that has been done in
his official capacity. But it can not be presumed that he has in any
particular exceeded his instructions (copies of which are herewith
transmitted[20]), or, in the discharge of his official duties, taken
any measures or authorized any acts to be done which could justly be
considered as a violation of any known provision of the existing
arrangement between the Governments of the United States and Great
Britain in regard to the disputed territory.

With high consideration, I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient
servant,

SAML. E. SMITH.

[Footnote 20: Omitted.]

_Sir Charles R. Vaughan to Mr. McLane_.

WASHINGTON, _December 23, 1833_.

Hon. LOUIS McLANE, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, has the honor to acknowledge the receipt of
the note of the Secretary of State of the United States, in answer
to the representation which he was called upon to make respecting
proceedings of the States of Massachusetts and Maine in the disputed
territory.

To understand correctly the bearings of the roads which those States
have resolved to construct requires a more accurate knowledge of the
topography of the country through which they are to pass than the
undersigned possesses, but he will not fail to transmit a copy of
Mr. McLane's note, together with its inclosures, to His Majesty's
lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick. In the meantime the undersigned
begs leave to observe that the letter from the executive of Maine states
that one of the roads surveyed and located lies, for the greater part
of it, within the undisputed limits of that State, although it is
contemplated to extend it to the Aroostook River. The land agent of
Massachusetts is aware that the road from the river Matawamkeag to the
Aroostook is the one that has given rise to complaint, and which, he
observes, "is now nearly completed." As the Aroostook River, from its
source till it falls into the St. John, flows exclusively through the
disputed territory, to reach it by a road from the State of Maine must
cause an encroachment and be considered an attempt to assume a right
of possession in territory which has never yet been set apart from the
original possession of Great Britain, on account of the difficulties
of ascertaining the boundary according to the treaty of 1783.

With regard to the cutting down and sale of timber, the justification of
the land agent at Boston will be submitted to Sir Archibald Campbell,
and the undersigned is sure that the grievance complained of (taking
away timber which had been seized by the agent from Massachusetts) will
be attended to.

The undersigned receives with great satisfaction the assurances of Mr.
McLane that "a conciliatory and forbearing disposition prevails on the
part of Massachusetts and Maine, and that no measure will be taken
or any acts authorized by them which may justly be considered as a
violation of the understanding in regard to the disputed territory;" and
he can not conclude without begging leave to acknowledge the readiness
with which the President directed inquiries to be made and the desire
which he has shewn on this and every similar occasion to prevent any
encroachment on the disputed territory pending the settlement of the
boundary now in progress between the two Governments.

The undersigned has the honor to assure Mr. McLane of his most
distinguished consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN.

_Sir Charles R. Vaughan to Mr. McLane_.

WASHINGTON, _February 28, 1834_.

Hon. LOUIS McLANE, etc.:

The undersigned, His Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, has the honor to communicate to the Secretary
of State of the United States the explanation which he has received from
the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick of a transaction complained of
by the land agent of Massachusetts in a report communicated to the
undersigned in a note from Mr. McLane dated 21st December last.

The complaint arose out of the seizure of timber cut down without
authority upon the disputed territory, and which, after having been
seized in the first instance by the land agent of Massachusetts, was
taken possession of and sold by the British agent intrusted with the
preservation of the disputed territory on the northeastern frontier of
the United States.

The explanation of this transaction is contained in an extract of a
letter to the undersigned from the lieutenant-governor of New Brunswick
and the report of Mr. Beckwith, the surveyor-general of that Province,
which the undersigned has the honor to inclose in this note.[21]

The seizure of the timber in the first instance by Mr. Coffin, the land
agent of Maine [Massachusetts], was the exercise of authority within the
conventional frontier of the Province of New Brunswick, which could not
be admitted so long as the northeastern boundary of the United States
remains a subject of negotiation; and it appears that the proceeds of
the sale of timber unlawfully cut down are carried to account, and
the possession of them will be appropriated to the party to which the
territory may be adjudged by the settlement of the boundary question.

The undersigned trusts that the explanation which he is now able to give
of this transaction will prove satisfactory to the Government of the
United States.

The undersigned has the honor to renew to Mr. McLane the assurance of
his most distinguished consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN

[Footnote 21: Omitted.]

_Mr. McLane to Sir Charles R. Vaughan_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, March 4, 1834_.

Right Hon. SIR CHARLES R. VAUGHAN, G.C.H.,

_Envoy Extraordinary, etc_.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the
28th ultimo, furnishing the explanation of the lieutenant-governor
of New Brunswick of a transaction referred to by the land agent of
Massachusetts in a letter addressed to his excellency the governor
of that Commonwealth, and subsequently communicated to you by this
Department in a note dated 21st December last, and to inform you
that copies of your communication, together with the documents which
accompanied it, will, by direction of the President, be transmitted
without unnecessary delay to the executive of the State of
Massachusetts.

I pray you to accept the assurance of my distinguished consideration.

LOUIS McLANE.

WASHINGTON, _January 27, 1838_.

Hon. R.M. JOHNSON,

_President of the Senate_.

SIR: I transmit herewith, in compliance with the requirements of the
second section of the act of March 3, 1837, making appropriations
for the Indian Department, a communication from the War Department,
accompanied by a copy of the report of the agents appointed to inquire
what depredations had been committed by the Seminole and Creek Indians
on the property of citizens of Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.

M. VAN BUREN.

[The same message was addressed to the Speaker of the House of
Representatives.]

WASHINGTON CITY, _February 5, 1838_.

Hon. JAMES K. POLK,

_Speaker of the House of Representatives_.

SIR: I have the honor to transmit to you a report from the Secretary
of the Navy, prepared in obedience to a resolution of the House of
Representatives of the 7th December last, requiring information as to
the causes which have delayed the outfit and preparation of the South
Sea surveying and exploring expedition.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, _February, 1838_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives of
the 20th instant, I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, which
is accompanied by a copy and translation of the pamphlet[22] requested in
that resolution.

M. VAN BUREN.

[Footnote 22: Issued by Manuel E. de Gorostiza, formerly minister from
Mexico, before his departure from the United States, containing the
correspondence between the Department of State and the Mexican legation
relative to the passage of the Sabine River by troops under the command
of General Gaines.]

WASHINGTON, _February 17, 1838_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit for your constitutional action articles of a treaty concluded
on the 23d ultimo with the Chippewas of Saganaw, accompanied by a
communication from the Secretary of War.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, _February 17, 1838_.

_To the Senate_:

I transmit for your consideration a communication from the Secretary of
War, respecting a treaty now before you with the Stockbridge and Munsee
Indians.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, _March, 1838_.

Hon. J.K. POLK,

_Speaker of the House of Representatives_.

SIR: The inclosed report and accompanying papers from the Secretary of
War contain all the information required by the resolution of the House
of Representatives of the 5th instant, respecting the present state of
the campaign in Florida and the disposition of the Indians to treat for
peace.

Very respectfully, your most obedient servant,

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, _March 12, 1838_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit for the consideration of Congress a report from the Secretary
of State, with the accompanying documents, relative to an application
made by the minister of France in behalf of Captain Beziers for
remuneration for services in saving the captain and crew of an American
vessel wrecked in the bay of Cadiz in the year 1825.

I am happy to evince my high sense of the humane and intrepid conduct of
Captain Beziers by presenting his case to Congress, to whom alone it
belongs to determine upon the expediency of granting his request.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, _March 13, 1838_.

The SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the
17th of February, I transmit a report[23] of the Secretary of State, with
the accompanying documents, which contain the information requested.

M. VAN BUREN.

[Footnote 23: Relating to a ship canal across the Isthmus of Darien.]

WASHINGTON, _March 14, 1838_.

The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE:

I transmit to the Senate a treaty of commerce and navigation between
the United States and His Majesty the King of Greece, concluded at
London on the 22d day of December last, together with a copy of the
documents relating to the negotiation of the same, for the constitutional
consideration of the Senate in reference to its ratification.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, _March 15, 1838_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives of
the 5th instant, I transmit a report[24] from the Secretary of State, to
whom the resolution was referred, with the documents by which the said
report was accompanied.

M. VAN BUREN.

[Footnote 24: Relating to the prosecution of the claim of the United
States to the bequest made by James Smithson.]

WASHINGTON, _March, 1838_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit a copy and translation of a letter from Mr. Pontois, the
minister plenipotentiary from France to this Government, addressed to
the Secretary of State, and communicating a memorial to me from the
trustees of the former house of Lafitte & Co., of Paris, complaining of
the rejection of a claim preferred in behalf of that house before the
commissioners under the convention with France of the 4th of July, 1831,
and asking redress.

The commission created by the act for carrying that convention into
effect has expired. The fund provided by it has been distributed among
those whose claims were admitted. The Executive has no power over the
subject. If the memorialists are entitled to relief, it can be granted
by Congress alone, to whom, in compliance with the request of the
trustees, that question is now submitted for decision.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, _March 19, 1838_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit a report[25] from the Secretary of State, to whom the
resolution of the House of Representatives of the 5th instant was
referred, with the documents by which the said report was accompanied.

M. VAN BUREN.

[Footnote 25: Relating to high duties and restrictions on tobacco
imported into foreign countries from the United States, etc.]

WASHINGTON, _March 20, 1838_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith transmit to the Senate of the United States a report from the
Secretary of State, accompanied by a copy of the correspondence
requested by their resolution of the 5th ultimo.

M. VAN BUREN.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, March 7, 1838_.

The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

The Secretary of State, to whom has been referred the resolution of the
Senate of the 5th of February, requesting the President of the United
States to communicate to that body, in such manner as he shall deem
proper, all the correspondence recently received and had between this
and the Governments of Great Britain and the State of Maine on the
subject of the northeastern boundary, has the honor to report to the
President the accompanying copy of letters, which comprise all the
correspondence in the Department asked for by the resolution.

Respectfully submitted,

JOHN FORSYTH.

_Mr. Fox to Mr. Forsyth_.

WASHINGTON, _January 10, 1838_.

Hon. JOHN FORSYTH, etc.:

The undersigned, Her Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, is directed by his Government to make the
following observations to Mr. Forsyth, Secretary of State of the United
States, with reference to certain points connected with the question of
the northeastern boundary, which question forms the subject of the
accompanying note, which the undersigned has the honor this day to
address to Mr. Forsyth:

The British Government, with a view to prevail upon that of the United
States to come to an understanding with Great Britain upon the river
question, had stated that the King of the Netherlands in his award had
decided that question according to the British interpretation of it and
had expressed his opinion that the rivers which fall into the Bay of
Fundy are not to be considered as Atlantic rivers for the purposes of
the treaty.

Mr. Forsyth, however, in his note to Sir Charles Vaughan of the 28th of
April, 1835, controverts this assertion and maintains that the King of
the Netherlands did not in his award express such an opinion, and Mr.
Forsyth quotes a passage from the award in support of this proposition.

But it appears to Her Majesty's Government that Mr. Forsyth has not
correctly perceived the meaning of the passage which he quotes, for in
the passage in question Mr. Forsyth apprehends that the word "_alone_"
is governed by the verb "_include_" whereas an attentive examination of
the context will show that the word "_alone_" is governed by the verb
"_divide"_ and that the real meaning of the passage is this: That the
rivers flowing north and south from the highlands claimed by the United
States may be arranged in two genera, the first genus comprehending the
rivers which fall into the St. Lawrence, the second genus comprehending
those whose waters in some manner or other find their way into the
Atlantic; but that even if, according to this general classification
and in contradistinction from rivers flowing into the St. Lawrence, the
rivers which fall into the bays of Chaleurs and Fundy might be comprised
in the same genus with the rivers which fall directly into the Atlantic,
still the St. John and the Restigouche form a distinct species by
themselves and do not belong to the species of rivers which fall
_directly_ into the Atlantic, for the St. John and Restigouche are not
divided in company with any such last-mentioned rivers. And the award
goes on to say that, moreover, if this distinction between the two
species were confounded an erroneous interpretation would be applied
to a treaty in which every separate word must be supposed to have a
meaning, and a generic distinction would be given to cases which are
purely specific.

The above appears to be the true meaning of the passage quoted by
Mr. Forsyth; but if that passage had not been in itself sufficiently
explicit, which Her Majesty's Government think it is, the passage which
immediately follows it would remove all doubt as to what the opinion
of the King of the Netherlands was upon the river question, for that
passage, setting forth reasons against the line of boundary claimed by
the United States, goes on to say that such line would not even separate
the St. Lawrence rivers immediately from the St. John and Restigouche,
and that thus the rivers which this line would separate from the St.
Lawrence rivers would need, _in order to reach the Atlantic_, the aid
of _two intermediaries_--first, the rivers St. John and Restigouche,
and, _secondly, the bays of Chaleurs and Fundy_.

Now it is evident from this passage that the King of the Netherlands
deemed the bays of Fundy and Chaleurs to be, for the purposes of the
treaty, as distinct and separate from the Atlantic Ocean as are the
rivers St. John and Restigouche, for he specifically mentions those
rivers and those bays as the channels through which certain rivers would
have to pass in their way from the northern range of dividing highlands
down to the Atlantic Ocean; and it is clear that he considers that the
waters of those highland rivers would not reach the Atlantic Ocean
until after they had traveled through the whole extent either of the
Restigouche and the Bay of Chaleurs or of the St. John and the Bay of
Fundy, as the case might be; and for this reason, among others, the King
of the Netherlands declared it to be his opinion that the line north of
the St. John claimed by the United States is not the line intended by
the treaty.

The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to renew to Mr. Forsyth
the assurances of his high respect and consideration.

H.S. FOX.

_Mr. Fox to Mr. Forsyth_.

WASHINGTON, _January 19, 1838_.

Hon. JOHN FORSYTH, etc.:

The undersigned, Her Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and
minister plenipotentiary, has received the orders of his Government
to make the following communication to the Secretary of State of the
United States with reference to the question pending between the two
Governments upon the subject of the northeastern boundary:

The undersigned is, in the first instance, directed to express to
Mr. Forsyth the sincere regret of Her Majesty's Government that the
long-continued endeavors of both parties to come to a settlement of this
important matter have hitherto been unavailing. Her Majesty's Government
feel an undiminished desire to cooperate with the Cabinet of Washington
for the attainment of an object of so much mutual interest, and they
learn with satisfaction that their sentiments upon this point are fully
shared by the actual President of the United States.

The communications which during the last few years have taken place
between the two Governments with reference to the present subject, if
they have not led to the solution of the questions at issue, have at
least narrowed the field of future discussion.

Both Governments have agreed to consider the award of the King of the
Netherlands as binding upon neither party, and the two Governments,
therefore, are as free in this respect as they were before the reference
to that Sovereign was made. The British Government, despairing of the
possibility of drawing a line that shall be in literal conformity with
the words of the treaty of 1783, has suggested that a conventional
boundary should be substituted for the line described by the treaty, and
has proposed that in accordance with the principles of equity and in
pursuance of the general practice of mankind in similar cases the object
of difference should be equally divided between the two differing
parties, each of whom is alike convinced of the justice of its own
claim.

The United States Government has replied that to such an arrangement it
has no power to agree; that until the line of the treaty shall have been
otherwise determined the State of Maine will continue to assume that the
line which it claims is the true line of 1783, and will assert that all
the land up to that line is territory of Maine; that consequently such a
division of the disputed territory as is proposed by Great Britain would
be considered by Maine as tantamount to a cession of what that State
regards as a part of its own territory, and that the Federal Government
has no power to agree to such an arrangement without the consent of the
State concerned.

Her Majesty's Government exceedingly regrets that such an obstacle
should exist to prevent that settlement which under all the
circumstances of the case appears to be the simplest, the readiest,
the most satisfactory, and the most just. Nor can Her Majesty's
Government admit that the objection of the State of Maine is well
founded, for the principle on which that objection rests is as good
for Great Britain as it is for Maine. If Maine thinks itself entitled to
contend that until the true line described in the treaty is determined
the boundary claimed by Maine must be regarded as the right one,
Great Britain is surely still more entitled to insist upon a similar
pretension, and to assert that until the line of the treaty shall be
established to the satisfaction of both parties the whole of the
disputed territory ought to be considered as belonging to the British
Crown, because Great Britain is the original possessor, and all the
territory which has not been proved to have been by treaty ceded by her
must be looked upon as belonging to her still. But the very existence
of such conflicting pretensions seems to point out the expediency of a
compromise, and what compromise can be more fair than that which would
give to each party one-half of the subject-matter of dispute?

A conventional line different from that described in the treaty was
agreed to, as stated by Mr. Forsyth in his note of the 28th of April,
1835, with respect to the boundary westward from the Lake of the Woods.
Why should such a line not be agreed to likewise for the boundary
eastward from the river Connecticut?

Her Majesty's Government can not refrain from again pressing this
proposition upon the serious consideration of the Government of the
United States as the arrangement which would be best calculated to
effect a prompt and satisfactory settlement between the two powers.

The Government of the United States, indeed, while it expressed a doubt
of its being able to obtain the assent of Maine to the above-mentioned
proposal, did, nevertheless, express its readiness to apply to the State
of Maine for the assent of that State to the adoption of another
conventional line, which should make the river St. John from its source
to its mouth the boundary between the two countries. But it is difficult
to understand upon what grounds any expectation could have been formed
that such a proposal could be entertained by the British Government,
for such an arrangement would give to the United States even greater
advantages than they would obtain by an unconditional acquiescence in
their claim to the whole of the disputed territory, because such an
arrangement would, in the first place, give to Maine all that part of
the disputed territory which lies to the south of the St. John, and
would, in the next place, in exchange for the remaining part of the
disputed territory which lies to the north of the St. John, add to
the State of Maine a large district of New Brunswick lying between
the United States boundary and the southern part of the course of
the St. John--a district smaller, indeed, in extent, but much more
considerable in value, than the portion of the disputed territory which
lies to the north of the St. John.

But with respect to a conventional line generally, the Government
of Washington has stated that it has not at present the powers
constitutionally requisite for treating for such a line and has no hopes
of obtaining such powers until the impossibility of establishing the
line described by the treaty shall have been completely demonstrated by
the failure of another attempt to trace that line by a local survey.

Under these circumstances it appears that a conventional line can not
at present be agreed upon, and that such a mode of settlement is in the
existing state of the negotiation impossible.

Thus, then, the award of the King of the Netherlands has been abandoned
by both parties in consequence of its rejection by the American Senate,
and a negotiation between the two Governments for a conventional line
suited to the interests and convenience of the two parties has for the
present been rendered impossible by difficulties arising on the part
of the United States; and both Governments are alike averse to a new
arbitration. In this state of things the Government of the United States
has proposed to the British cabinet that another attempt should be made
to trace out a boundary according to the letter of the treaty, and that
a commission of exploration and survey should be appointed for that
purpose.

Her Majesty's Government have little expectation that such a commission
could lead to any useful result, and on that account would be disposed
to object to the measure; but at the same time they are so unwilling to
reject the only plan now left which seems to afford a chance of making
any further advance in this long-pending matter that they will not
withhold their consent to such a commission if the principle upon which
it is to be formed and the manner in which it is to proceed can be
satisfactorily settled.

The United States Government have proposed two modes in which such
a commission might be constituted: First, that it might consist of
commissioners named in equal numbers by each of the two Governments,
with an umpire to be selected by some friendly European power; secondly,
that it might be entirely composed of scientific Europeans, to be
selected by a friendly sovereign, and might be accompanied in its
operations by agents of the two different parties, in order that such
agents might give to the commissioners assistance and information.

If such a commission were to be appointed, Her Majesty's Government
think that the first of these two modes of constructing it would be
the best, and that it should consist of members chosen in equal numbers
by each of the two Governments. It might, however, be better that the
umpire should be selected by the members of the commission themselves
rather than that the two Governments should apply to a third power to
make such a choice.

The object of this commission, as understood by Her Majesty's
Government, would be to explore the disputed territory in order to find
within its limits dividing highlands which may answer the description
of the treaty, the search being first to be made in the due north line
from the monument at the head of the St. Croix, and if no such highlands
should be found in that meridian the search to be then continued to the
westward thereof; and Her Majesty's Government have stated their opinion
that in order to avoid all fruitless disputes as to the character of
such highlands the commissioners should be instructed to look for
highlands which both parties might acknowledge as fulfilling the
conditions of the treaty.

The United States Secretary of State, in his note of the 5th of March,
1836, expresses a wish to know how the report of the commissioners
would, according to the views of Her Majesty's Government, be likely
when rendered to lead to an ultimate settlement of the question of
boundary between the two Governments.

In reply to this inquiry Her Majesty's Government would beg to observe
that the proposal to appoint a commission originated not with them, but
with the Government of the United States, and that it is therefore
rather for the Government of the United States than for that of Great
Britain to answer this question.

Her Majesty's Government have themselves already stated that they have
little expectation that such a commission could lead to any useful
result, and that they would on that account be disposed to object to
it; and if Her Majesty's Government were now to agree to appoint such
a commission it would be only in compliance with the desire so strongly
expressed by the Government of the United States, and in spite of doubts
(which Her Majesty's Government still continue to entertain) of the
efficacy of the measure.

But with respect to the way in which the report of the commission
might be likely to lead to an ultimate settlement of the question,
Her Majesty's Government, in the first place, conceive that it was
meant by the Government of the United States, that if the commission
should discover highlands answering to the description of the treaty a
connecting line drawn from these highlands to the head of the St. Croix
should be deemed to be a portion of the boundary line between the two
countries. But Her Majesty's Government would further beg to refer the
United States Secretary of State to the notes of Mr. McLane of the 5th
of June, 1833, and of the 11th and 28th of March, 1834, on this subject,
in which it will be seen that the Government of the United States
appears to have contemplated as one of the possible results of the
proposed commission of exploration that such additional information
might possibly be obtained respecting the features of the country in the
district to which the treaty relates as might remove all doubt as to the
impracticability of laying down a boundary in accordance with the letter
of the treaty.

And if the investigations of the proposed commission should show that
there is no reasonable prospect of finding a line strictly conformable
with the description contained in the treaty of 1783, the constitutional
difficulties which now prevent the United States from agreeing to a
conventional line may possibly be removed, and the way may thus be
prepared for the satisfactory settlement of the difference by an
equitable division of the disputed territory.

But if the two Governments should agree to the appointment of such a
commission it would be necessary that their agreement should be first
recorded in a convention, and it would obviously be indispensable that
the State of Maine should be an assenting party to the arrangement.

The undersigned, in making the above communication by order of
Her Majesty's Government to the United States Secretary of State,
Mr. Forsyth, has the honor to renew to him the assurance of his high
respect and consideration.

H.S. FOX.

_Mr. Forsyth to Mr. Fox_.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, February 6, 1838_.

HENRY S. FOX, Esq., etc.:

The undersigned, Secretary of State of the United States, has the honor
to acknowledge the receipt of the note of Mr. Fox, envoy extraordinary
and minister plenipotentiary of Her Britannic Majesty, of the 10th
ultimo, in which he presents, by direction of his Government, certain
observations in respect to the construction to be given to that
part of the award of the arbiter on the question of the northeastern
boundary which relates to the character in which the rivers St. John
and Restigouche are to be regarded in reference to that question.
Sir Charles Vaughan, in his note to Mr. McLane of February 10, 1834,
alleged that although the arbiter had not decided the first of the three
main questions proposed to him, yet that he had determined certain
subordinate points connected with that question upon which the parties
had entertained different views, and among others that the rivers St.
John and Restigouche could not be considered, according to the meaning
of the treaty, as "rivers flowing into the Atlantic." The undersigned,
in his note to Sir Charles R. Vaughan of the 28th of April, 1835,
questioned the correctness of the interpretation which had been given by
Sir Charles to the award of the arbiter in this particular, and after
quoting that part of the award to which Sir Charles was supposed to
refer as containing the determination by the arbiter of the point just
mentioned observed that it could not but appear from further reflection
to Sir Charles that the declaration that the rivers St. John and
Restigouche could not be _alone_ taken into view without hazard in
determining the disputed boundary was not the expression of an opinion
that they should be altogether excluded in determining that question;
or, in other words, that they could not be looked upon as rivers
emptying into the Atlantic. The remarks presented by Mr. Fox in the note
to which this is a reply are designed to shew a misconception on the
part of the undersigned of the true meaning of the passage cited by him
from the award and to support the construction which was given to it by
Sir Charles Vaughan. Whether the apprehension entertained by the one
party or the other of the opinion of the arbiter upon this minor point
be correct is regarded by the undersigned as a matter of no consequence
in the settlement of the main question. The Government of the United
States, never having acquiesced in the decision of the arbiter that "the
nature of the difference and the vague and not sufficiently determinate
stipulations of the treaty of 1783 do not permit the adjudication of
either of the two lines respectively claimed by the interested parties
to one of the said parties without wounding the principles of law and
equity with regard to the other," can not consent to be governed in the
prosecution of the existing negotiation by the opinion of the arbiter
upon any of the preliminary points about which there was a previous
difference between the parties, and the adverse decision of which
has led to so unsatisfactory and, in the view of this Government, so
erroneous a conclusion. This determination on the part of the United
States not to adopt the premises of the arbiter while rejecting his
conclusion has been heretofore made known to Her Majesty's Government,
and while it remains must necessarily render the discussion of the
question what those premises were unavailing, if not irrelevant. The few
observations which the undersigned was led to make in the course of his
note to Sir Charles Vaughan upon one of the points alleged to have been
thus determined were prompted only by a respect for the arbiter and a
consequent anxiety to remove a misinterpretation of his meaning, which
alone, it was believed, could induce the supposition that the arbiter,
in searching for the rivers referred to in the treaty as designating the
boundary, could have come to the opinion that the two great rivers whose
waters pervaded the whole district in which the search was made and
constituted the most striking objects of the country had been entirely
unnoticed by the negotiators of the treaty and were to be passed over
unheeded in determining the line, while others were to be sought for
which he himself asserts could not be found. That the imputation of
such an opinion to the respected arbiter could only be the result
of misinterpretation seemed the more evident, as he had himself
declared that "it could not be sufficiently explained how, if the
high contracting parties intended in 1783 to establish the boundary
at the south of the river St. John, that river, to which the territory
in dispute was in a great measure indebted for its distinctive
character, had been neutralized and set aside." It is under the
influence of the same motives that the undersigned now proceeds to
make a brief comment upon the observations contained in Mr. Fox's note
of the 10th ultimo, and thus to close a discussion which it can answer
no purpose to prolong.

The passage from the award of the arbiter quoted by the undersigned
in his note of the 28th April, 1835, to Sir Charles Vaughan, and the
true meaning of which Mr. Fox supposes to have been misconceived, is
the following: "If in contradistinction to the rivers that empty
themselves into the river St. Lawrence it had been proper, agreeably
to the language ordinarily used in geography, to comprehend the rivers
falling into the bays Fundy and Des Chaleurs with those emptying
themselves directly into the Atlantic Ocean in the generical
denomination of rivers falling into the Atlantic Ocean it would be
hazardous to include into the species belonging to that class the rivers
St. John and Restigouche, which the line claimed at the north of the
river St. John divides _immediately_ from rivers emptying themselves
into the river St. Lawrence, not with other rivers falling into the
Atlantic Ocean, but _alone_, and thus to apply in interpreting the
delimitation established by a treaty, where each word must have a
meaning, to two exclusively special cases, and where no mention is made
of the genus (_genre_), a generical expression which would ascribe to
them a broader meaning," etc.

It was observed by the undersigned that this passage did not appear to
contain an expression of opinion by the arbiter that the rivers St. John
and Restigouche should be altogether excluded in determining the
question of disputed boundary, or, in other words, that they could not
be looked upon as "rivers emptying into the Atlantic." Mr. Fox alleges
this to be a misconception of the meaning of the arbiter, and supposes
it to have arisen from an erroneous apprehension by the undersigned that
the word "_alone_" is governed by the verb "_include_," whereas he
thinks that an attentive examination of the context will shew that the
word "_alone_" is governed by the verb "_divide,_" and that the real
meaning of the passage is this: "That the rivers flowing north and south
from the highlands claimed by the United States may be arranged in two
genera, the first genus comprehending the rivers which fall into the
St. Lawrence, the second genus comprehending those whose waters in some
manner or other find their way into the Atlantic; but that even if,
according to the general classification and in contradistinction from
rivers flowing into the St. Lawrence, the rivers which fall into the
bays of Chaleurs and Fundy might be comprised in the same genus with the
rivers which fall directly into the Atlantic, still the St. John and the
Restigouche form a distinct species by themselves and do not belong to
the species of rivers which fall _directly_ into the Atlantic, for the
St. John and Restigouche are not divided in company with any _such
last-mentioned rivers_." The undersigned considers it unnecessary
to enter into the question whether according to the context the
circumstance expressed by the adverb "alone" has reference to the verb
"divide" or to the verb "include," because even allowing it to refer to
the former it does not appear to the undersigned that his interpretation
of the passage is thereby impaired or that of Mr. Fox sustained. The
undersigned conceives that the arbiter contemplated two different
_species_ of rivers as admissible into _genus_ of those which "fall into
the Atlantic," to wit, those which fall _directly_ into the Atlantic and

Book of the day: