The Sun.
London, England, 1842-10-10 00:00:00

TILE BOUNDARY QUESTION.

At a meeting of the Cornwall Polytechnic Societ,) ,
held at Falmouth, on Tuesday last, the health of Mr.
Peatherstonhaugh, with whose name the public are
familiar, as having been one of the Commissioners to
report upon the disputed boundary, was_ pmposed by
the Chairman, Sir C. Lemon. Mr. Featherston-
hatigh't reply, which, as a most able exposition ofthe
principles on which the late treaty has been con-
cluded, merits attentive consideration, is thus reported
in the West Briton :
" Mr. PEATIIERSTONHAUGH ri)Se to reply to this
toast, and was received Nvith renewed applause. He
said,—Our worthy Chairman having coupled my
name with a public transaction just closed between
this country and the United States of America, per-
haps it would not be thought obtrusive or indiscreet
on my part to give you a brief explanation of the na-
ture of the territorial arrangement which has just
been concluded with the American Government by
Lord Ashburton ; and although my sphere haiTheen
a humble one in these boundary transactions, and
it would be justly deemed an act of presumption
in me to intrude any observations of mine upon
the conduct and opinions of my superiors,
her Majesty's Ministers, yet, having been ho-
noured with the confidence of two successive ad-
ministrations in this particular and important matter,
it may not be amiss for me upon this occasion to correct
some very crude misapprehensions entertained by-
many 'persons in relation to the treaty lately con-
cluded at Washington. No one is more sensible
than myself of the advantages we all derive from the
intelligence and energy of the public press, which,
however--and it is to be regretted—is sometimes led
by an excess of zeal into a discussion of subjects not
at all understood, whereby the public mind 'often be-
comes irritated and unsettled, and even disposed to be
unjust to those who have devoted themselves to the
best interests of the country. I have seen too much
of this of late. It is, therefore, with sincere pleasure
I make a declaration here, somewhat warranted by my
official opportunities, that in the conduct of the ne-
gotiations with the United States on the subject of
the boundary, on the part of the preceding, as well
as the present Administration, the Queen's Ministers
have uniformly acted with the most loyal regard to
the honour and interests of Great Britain,
and have never preferred a claim to any
territory conterminous with the United States
which was not founded on the clearest right.
Neither do I believe that any of them ever would
have countenanced a claim against the United States
which it would be necessary to maintain at the ex-
pense of good faith and strict justice. And this I say
in answer to many contradictory and unfounded
statements which have come under my notice.—
(Cheers.) Then, again, as to the imputed demerits
of the Washington treaty, which it has been urged
is derogatory to the honour and interests of Great
Britain, I shall ask your attention to a very brief
summary of facts that cannot be contradicted. The
treaty of 1783 proposed to establish the boundary be-
tween the two countries along certain highlands. The
Americans claimed these highlands to run in a north-
easterly direction from the heads of the Connecticut
River, in a course which would have brought the
boundary within the distance of twenty miles from
the river St. Lawrence, and which, besides cutting
off the post and military routes leading from the pro-
vince of New Brunswick to Quebec, would have given
them various military positions to command and over-
awe that river and the fortress of Quebec. It is
impossible to believe that the British negotiators in
1783 would have consented to such an unfriendly,
menacing, and impracticable frontier, which was
antagonist to the whole spirit of the treaty; neither
did any one out of America believe that such
an arrangement of the boundary was consistent
with the intentions of even the American negotiators.
But these able and intelligent men, as well as those
employed on the part of Great Britain, died before
the dispute between the two countries had reached
its height, and no one, in 1838, was left to control
and regulate the imperfect and varying opinions
which were authoritatively asserted, especially in
America, as to what their intentions had been. Passing
,over the award of the King of the Netherlands, who
could not, after much investigation, find in the Ame-
rican statements a justification for the American
claim, and whose final award was a compromise of
the question that the United States refused to abide
by, 1 come to the year 1838, when the public excite-
ment in the United States on this subject took an
angry and dangerous character, and when the pro-
vincial Legislatures there, and the Senate of that Re-
pUblic, united in legislative declarations that they.
would maintain their extreme claim. It was imme-
diately subsequent to this period, and in the early part
of 1839, that my colleague, Colonel Mudge, and my-
self were sent as Commissioners to North America,
to examine the physical character of the territory in
dispute, and bring home such information
as might enable her Majesty's Government to
understand clearly whether the boundary claimed by
America was, or was not, in accordance with the
language and intentions of the treaty of 1783. Im-
mediately upon our return home, possessed of the
required geographical information, we proceeded to
examine with great care the whole history of the
boundary case, and, under a deep sense of our respon-
sibility, reported to her Majesty's Government in
1840 that the line claimed by. America was entirely
inconsistent with both the physical geography of the
country and the intentions of the language of the
treaty of 1783, whilst we had discovered that a line
of highlands did exist to the south of the one claimed
by America, and to the south of the river St. John,
which was in accordance both with the language of
the treaty and the physical geography of the country.
This report was accepted by her Majesty's Govern-
ment, and was laid before Parliament in 1840.. The
disputed territory now became rssolved into an area
of country consisting of about 7,000,000 acres of
land, lying between two distinct lines claimed ad-
versely to be the highlands of the treaty, and through
the centre of which the western part of the course of
the river St. John flowed. Thus stood the matter
when her Majesty's present Ministers came into power.
They had to choose between three lines of conduct.
First, to adhere to the extreme night of Great Britain,
in which they firmly believed, at the certain risk of
endangering the peace between the two countries, and
the probable lighting up of another war in Europe
second, to pursue a second negotiation with the United
States for the purpose of reference to another arbitra-
tion, at the risk of political caprice and jealousy
placing us in a worse situation than we had ever been
before, and that after a delay, of eight or ten years,
and at an expense equal to the value of the who!e ter-
ritory-; or, lastly, to attempt to settle it by compro-
mise. And here, Gentlemen, permit me to say, that
perhaps no human being was so fully possessed with
the opinion of the exclusive right of Great Britain to
the whole of this territory as myself ; yet on my first
interview with the Earl of Aberdeen upon his taking
the seals of the Foreign-office, I ventured to recom-
mend a compromise as the most sensible course to be
pursued; a suggestion, however, which I have
reason to believe was quite unnecessary to that expe-
rienced statesman. Lord Ashburton was sent out,
and the treaty of Washington is the result of his
mission. Now, Gentlemen, if you will divert your
attention for a moment from the conflicting state-
ments you may have read in regard to the merits of
the compromise which has been made, I will explain
them to you in a few words. The merican claim,
instead of being maintained, has been altogether
withdrawn and abandoned ; the territory has been
divided into equal moieties as nearly as possible ;
we have retained that moiety which secures to
us every object that was essential to the welfare
of our colonies ; all our communications, military
and civil, are for ever placed . beyond hostile
reach, and all the military positions on the high-
lands claimed by America, are without exception se-
cured for ever to Great Britain. On the other hand,
as the price of peace and renewed friendship with our
kinsmen in the United States, our best commercial
customer, we have released to her that,rnoiety of the
territory south of the St. John, which was never of
importance to Great Britain, and we have accorded
to the Americans living on the part thus ceded, and
on the tributaries flowing into the St. John, a free
passage down the waters of that river, subject to the
provincial regulations of the province of New Bruns-
wick. But this is not what it has been represented to
be—the exclusive navigation of the St. John. The
treaty gives to American vessels no more right to be
with their flag on that river than they had before ; all
the pi ivilege that is given is a simple right to the Ameri-
can settlers on the ceded portion to take the forest stuffs
growing on their lands, free of duty, to a British mar-
ket. And, Gentlemen, is this too great a price to pay
for peace ? Cannot this powerful nation be generous
to her own descendants, to her best customers, with-
out reproach ? Are her Majesty's Ministers, who
have to sustain this great country in its lofty position
of conservator of the peace of the civilized world, to
be censured for securing to us the greatest of all bless-
ings, for carrying out a great measure that secures
all the interests of our own country, gratifies and com-
pletes the desires of the now friendly Americans, and,
to her
separating
Great B r Britain at ihne mfrefreoluto aasnseenrttaanlgllitnhgatalbleialonnegses,
rights and her power with h I
r neighbours in Europe
—(Cheers.) Gentlemen, perceive I need say no
more, and that you understand the real merits and
the great importance of this treaty, which will ere
long be acknowledged by all."

THE ELOQUENCE OF THE TEXAIN BAN:—May is
please the Court, the learned barrister reminds me of
an Andalusian bull, with nostrils distended, eyef
dilated, neck bowed, tail curled, roaring and leaping,
plunging, bellowing, and charging over the Alpine
heights and wide extended plains of jurisprudence ;
but, may it please the Court, the gentlemen has failed
in his demurrer.--New York Paper.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer left town on Sa.;
turday for. Ryde, Isle of Wight.