The Sun.
London, England, 1842-10-04 00:00:00

THE' SUN. 'I,OICDON, IM ES DAY EVENTNn OCTOI3FR 4 4.

SPECIAL COMMISSION.
STAFFORD, MONDAY EVENING. The Special Com-
mission appointed to try the prisoners committed for
offences in Staffordshire during the late disturbances,
Was opened in Stafford on Saturday evening, and
Pesterday the Judges, Chief Justice Tindal, Baron
arke, and. Baron Rolfe, attended Divine service at
Christ Church, when a most excellent and appropriate
sermon was preached by the Rev. W. E. Coldwell,
from the following text, Titus, iii. 1,2, " Put them
in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to
obey Magistrates, to be ready to every good work, to
speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle,
showing all meekness unto all men."
At ten o'clock this morning the Judges entered the
court. Sir. N. Tindal, Chief Justice of the Common
Pleas, presided, and was assisted by Mr. Baron Parke
and Mr. Baron Rolfe. The proceedings appeared to
excite but little interest in the town, and the bringing
up Of the prisoners in batches, escorted by a party of
the 3d Dragoons, did not attract fifty spectators. The
court, which is a large and convenient structure, was
crowded, but by no means inconveniently. There
was a large number of ladies in the galleries, and
these, with the Grand Jurors, of whom there was a
very numerous and respectable attendance, composed
the great bulk of the auditory. On the bench we
observed the Earl Talbot, Lord Lieutenant of the
comity; the Earl of Dartmouth, the High Sheriff,
E. Piercy, Esq.; the Mayor of Stafford, J. Rogers,
.E 40., and several f the influential Magistrates of the
county.
The usual proclamations having been made,' the
following noblemen and gentlemen were sworn upon
the Grand Jury :—Viscount Ingestrie, foreman ;
Viscount Sandon ; the Hon. E. R. Littleton ;,Edward
Monekton, Esq. ; W. F. Chetwynd, Esq.; Henry
Chetwynd; Esq. ; Francis Eld, Esq.; Thomas Hale
Parker, Esq. ; Edward Grove, Esq. ; H. H. Wil-
liamson, Esq. • G. T. Whitgreave, Esq. ; Charles Ad-
derley, Esq., 'M.P.; H. J. Pyne, Esq. ; William
'Leigh, Esq. ; Henry Hordern, Esq. ; Thomas Salt,
J. Cartwright, Esq. ; J. 0. Oldham, Esq. ;
Charles Coyne, Esq. ; Captain Thomas Powys,
Samuel S. Briscoe, Esq. ; Charles S. Forster, Esq. ;
Thomas Hartshorne, Esq.
Her Majesty's most gracious proelamation having
been. read, •
Chief Justice TINDAL delivered to the Grand
Jury the following -charge :—Gentlemen of this
,yr.and Inquest—lt is with unfeigned regret that
'nose who have been appointed under her Majesty's
Special Commission to inquire into, and adjudicate
upon, the numerous offences, committed within this
County since the last assizes, are called upon to meet
You, the Grand Jurors of the county, on the present
°ecasion. It is at all times a painful and distressing
:secupation for the mind of the Judge to pursue the
11Ivestigation of charges of guilt, and to apportion the
Just measure of punishment to be awarded against
thecomparatively few instances which occur in the
ordinary administration of criminal justice at the as-
:;s, much more is it so upon the present occasion,
when the number of offenders is so large, the nature
of the alleged offences so injurious to the welfare of
lety, and the offences have been committed, not by
,Single individuals, or even small numbers of persons, but
by large masses of the community impelled by one com-
mon motive, and labouring to effect one common ob-
Ject. Gentlemen, it is not our design, nor indeed have
We sufficient information on the subject, if we pro-
Posed to do so, to trace, with any particularity, the
°flgin or exact progress of those violations of the law
which have taken place within this county, and which
Will shortly be brought under your consideration. It
is fully sufficient for our present purpose to give a
eneral outline of those transactions, drawn from the
depositions taken before the Magistrates, the only le-
gitimate source of information to which we have had
access. It appears that about the middle of the month
of August last the workmen employed in many of the
collieries, and also in many of the various manufac-
tories established in this county, had become dissatis-
fied as well with the amount of wages allowed by
their, employers as in some instances with certain regu-
lations, under which they were placed in the course of
their .employment ; and that for the purpose of compel-
ling their masters to allow them greater wages, and to
alter the regulations by schich they thought them-
selves,
aggrieved, they refused to continue to work at
the
various employments in which they had been en-
gaged ; that in a short time, not contented with
ainIPIY refusing to work, .they proceeded, by threats,
intimidation and violence, to compel other workmen,
'ho :were willing to continue to work, to join the
number of those who were discontented. It appears
further, that whilst large bodies of-the workmen, per-
petually increasing in number, were thus collected
together in a state of ' idleness, and of consequence
destitution, certain strangers, persons altogether un-
connected with them in interest, appeared amongst
them, and by addresses made to them against the
religion, the law, and the Government, excited them
to a state of dissatisfaction with all the established
institutions of the country, and laboured to persuade
b to persist in their refusal to return to their
employment,ineaniofredreass the sure, and effectual, and only
of obtaining
evils by which they were op-
Pressed, and theit just rights, called
Dy the speakers theniln‘g
ap-
pears People's Charter." It
that after such addresses had been aP"
solne%places tumult and disorderforth' made,
in
with ensued
sMiongSt the assembled multitudes, to the great terror
and alarm of the quiet and peaceable part fr
inunity. In other places large bodies
o softCe com-
Men, so collected together, proceeded to acts of
open
violence and breaches of the law, in some instances
against the persons of the ,subjects of the Queen, by
s
beating some, cutting and maiming and robbing others,
and sometimes against their property by acts of theft
and
and plunder, by forcibly breaking into the t
dwelling-
houses
of individuals by day and by night, by the de-
struction of dwelling-houses by actual demolition or
by' fire, beginning with the houses of Magistrates
and other public functionaries, and soon carrying
the.- work of ruin to the 'dwellings of private persons ;
and it is impossible to foresee to what extent the ra-
pine and devastation of a lawless and misguided mob
would have proceeded in the land if it had not
been met and countervailed by the zeal, activity, and
firmness of the Magistracy of the county, aided by the
unwearied exertions and courage of the military 'and
yeomanry, who lent their eftectual assistance, when
-Called upon for that purpose, in repressing violence
And disorder, and in giving security to the lives and
. property of their fellow-subjects, by whose combined
,efforts the work of further destruction was suspended,
the fearful and ominous results which seemed to im-
Pend were averted from the county, and the law was
restored to its just supremacy. Gentlemen, it has
already been intimated that we conceive it to be no
part of our province on this occasion to discuss the
JUstice of the complaints made by the workmen
against their employers, or to decide upon the merits
of the dispute existing between them. Neither is it
part of our duty to show by argument that the course
pursued by the parties who thought themselves ag-
grieved was of all others the least calculated to ac-
complish—on the contrary; perhaps, the most likely
to defeat—the very object which they wished to
attain. , Nor, again, are we called upon to suggest
or to discuss any remedies which may be provided
by law for the prevention of similar mischiefs, if, unfor-
tunately, at any future time the same ground of dis-
pute should arise between masters and workmen—a
discussion which is better fitted for a legislative as-
sembly than for the members of this tribunal, to whom
the only duty allotted is that of declaring the law as it
stands at present. Our direct and more useful course
will, therefore, be to endeavour to expound the law as
it applies itself to the several cases arising out of these
• unhappy transactions, upon which you will he re-
quired to exercise your sl ju-gmz.nts, in order that you
may arrive at a just conclusion whether sufficient ap-
pears in each individual case to call upon the parties
accused to appear before a Jury of the country.
And the first observation that arises is; that if the
Workmen of the several collieries and manufactories,
Who complained that the wages which they received
were inadequate to the value of their services, had as-
sembled themselves peaceably together for the purpose
of consulting upon and determining the rate of wages
or prices which the persons present at the meeting
should require for their work, and had entered into an
agreement amongst 'themselves for the purpose of fixing
such rate, they would have done no more than the law
allowed. A combination for that purpose, and to that.
extent (if indeed it is to be called by that name), is
510 more than is recognised as legal by the statute
fl George IV. ; by which statute also exactly the same
tight of combination, to the same extent, and no fur'

is. given to the masters when met together,
they are of opinion the rate of wages is too high.

the supposed—that is, a dispute between the mat
ters and, the workmen as to the proper amount of
rag,. Wl* given—it was probably thought by the
"egislatitie, that if the workmen on the one part re-
fused to work, or the masters, on the other, refused
to employ, es such a state of things could not conti-
nue long, it 'might fairly to expected that the party
lust ultimate:y give way whose pretensions were not
founded, in rea son and Justice—the masters if they
Offered too little, the workmen if they demanded too
1/1.1•101. But, um brtunately for themselves and others,
"uose who were discontented did not rest here. Not
satisfied with the exernise of their own right to with-
rl their own labour ir they were discontented with
of(' Price they received for it, they assumed the power
seunterfering with ti 9 right which others pos-
poi—n,' of exercising their discretion upon the same
laid —l4 and accordingly you will have numerous cases
wnpy"efore you in which large bodies of dissatisfied
th;fllen ..grfered, by personal violence and by
'eats and in timidation, to compel others, who were
Perfectly Willie 'g to continue to labour in their . call-
111gs at the rate :of wages then paid, to desist from
their work, to I eave the mine or manufactory, and
fkgainst their own.. wilt to add themselves to the num-
bers of the discontentesi party; than which a more
glaring act of tyranny and despotism by one set of
men over the fellows can'pot be conceived. If there

is one right which, beyond all others, the labourer
ought to, be able to call his own, it is the right of the
exertion of his own personal strength and skill„in the
full enjoyment of his own free will, altogether un-
shackled by the control or dictates of his fellow-work-
men ; yet, strange to say, this very right, which the
discontented workmen claims for himself to its fullest
extent, he does, by a blind perversity and unac-
countable selfishness, entirely refuse to his fellows
who differ in opinion from himself. It is unneces-
sary to say, that a course of proceeding so utterly
unreasonable in itself, so injurious to society, so de-.,
trimental to the interests of trade, and so oppressive
against the rights of the poor man, must be a
gross and flagrant, violation of the law, and must
be put down, when the guilt is established, by a
propey measure of punishment. But, even without
any evidence that combination is the object or pur-
pose of the meeting, if a large body of the people
assemble themselves together for the purpose of ob-
taining any particular end, and conduct themselves
in a turbulent manner, either accompanied with acts
of violence, or with threats and intimidation calcu-
lated to excite the terror and alarm of the Queen's
subjects, this is in itself a riot, whether the end and
object proposed be a just and legitimate one or not.
If, therefore, bills should be brought before you
charging individuals with riot, for the purpose of
raising the rate of wages, and the evidence should
show the conduct of the parties to have been of the
description just adverted to, the offence of riot is com-
plete in point of law. Gentlemen, there is another
description of offence which will probably be sub-
mitted to your consideration—namely, the exciting
and encouraging large masses of the people, by means
of seditious and inflammatory speeches, to commit acts
of violence and to break the peace. If such charges are
brought forward it must be left to your own good sense
to distinguish between an honest declaration of the
speaker's opinion upon the political subjects on which he
treats—a free discussion on matters that concern the
public, as to which full allowance should be made for
the zeal of the speaker, though he may somewhat ex-
ceed the just bounds of moderdtion ; and, on the other
hand, a wicked design by inflammatory statement and
crafty and subtle arguments, to poison the minds of
the hearers and render them the instruments of mis-
chief. He that addresses himself to a crowded auditory
of the poorer class, without employment or occupa-
tion, and brooding .at the time over their wrongs,
whether real or imaginary, will not want hearers
ready to believe and apt followers of mischievous ad-
vice. You will consider, therefore, the language that
is employed on such an occasion; if it consist of
broad and bold assertion, unfounded in fact : if, in
discussing religious topics, you find the speaker endea-
vouring to be sprightly and facetious on those subjects
which make wise and good men serious ; if, instead of
argument, he deals only in sneers and sarcasm, it will
be for yourselves to say whether, under such circum-
stances, the party charged with the offence is an honest,
but mistaken man, or whether he is wickedly intending
to bring the religion, laws, and Goverment of the country
into contempt, and to teach the hearers to despise all
those institutions which it is their duty to hold in re-
spect and veneration. Gentlemen, it has been al-
ready stated, that in the multiplicity of charges which
spring out of the transactions above adverted to, some
will appear for assaults ; some for the felonious offence
of cutting and maiming with intent to do grievous
bodily harm; some for robbery by violence and force;
some for, theft; some for breaking into dwelling-
houses by night or by day; some for riotous assem-
bling, and beginning to demolish, or actually demo-
lishing, the dwelling-houses of Magistrates and
Clergymen, the offices connected with the police
establishments, and the private houses of individuals ;
some charges also for effecting similar works of de-
struction by means of fire. But it would be tedious,
and, at the same time, altogether unnecessary, to en-
large upon the law by which those offences are regu-
lated, more especially togentlemen so well experienced
as yourselves in the ordinary business of the assizes.
One observation only can be made, which relates to
every species of offence committed by several acting
in concert and company together—namely, that if
many are present at the time when the breach
of the law takes place, having one common
design in view, and acting with common
consent, although they do not all take share in the
performance of the very act which is the Subject of the
indictment, yet by affording countenance, encourage-
ment, and protection to the persons who actually per-
petrate the crime, they are all equally guilty in the
eye of the law. But there is one case in the calendar
to which, for the purpose of avoiding any interruption
in the general view of the transactions which have
taken place in this country, I have riot yet adverted--
I mean the case of one William Ellis, who has been
committed by the Magistrates on a chaige of high
treason ; and as we are not aware whether bills of in-
dictment may not possibly be presented against that
person, and perhaps others also who appear upon the
depositions to stand in the same predicament for the
offence of high treason, it becomes necessary that the
principles of the law, so far as it relates to the species
of treason upon which the charge, if preferred, will
probably be founded, should be laid before you with
sufficient precision to enable you to determine whe-
ther the accusation is so far established that the parties
accused ought to be put upon their trial for that
offence. Crentlemen, the precise species of high
treason upon which the charge, if made, must rest,
is either that of levying war against her Majesty in
her realm, .under the statute of Edward 111., or that
for which. Ellis was committed,—viz. "compass-
ing and intending to levy war against the Queen
within her realm, in order by force or constraint to
compel her to change her measures or counsels ;"
which latter offence was first made substantive treason
by the more recent statute 36th George 111., c. 7,
made perpetual by a subsequent Act. Gentlemen,
you are well aware, that at least as early as the statute
25th Edward 111.,.and thence down to the present
time, the bare compassing or imagining the death of
the Sovereign, when proved by any open or overt act,
has amounted to high treason. For, where the life or
personal safety of the Sovereign is concerned, so pre-
cious has it always been held in the eye of the law,
that the bare intention or imagination of the heart to
put it in jeopardy, although no injurious consequences
follow from such intention, when proved by an overt
act, has of itself, and alone, constituted the treason.
By that statute also the levying of war within the
realm, when proved by an overt act, is made a dis-
tinct and substantive species of treason. But the
mere " compassing" or " intending to levy war,"
that is, the mere purpose or design of the mind or
will to commit that crime, was never made a specific
treason until the statute 36th George 111., c. 7, and
then only " where such compassing or intention is
expressed, uttered, or declared, by publishing any
printing or writing, or by any overt act or deed."
Now, the only or principal evidence of treason stated
in the depositions is the uttering of violent and in-
flammatory speeches to the assembled multitude. But
it is to be observed, that the mere speaking and utter-
ing of words, considered by itself, and abstractedly,
and without reference or connexion with any act or
design, however wicked and atrocious those words
may be, is not an act of treason. The Judges, on a
reference made to them in the 4th year of Charles 1.,
upon the subject of words spoken by one Pyne, certi-
fied unanimously, " that though the words were as
wicked as might be, yet they were no treason, for
unless it be by some particular-statute no words will
be treason." On the others hand, however, where
words are uttered and spoken with reference to any
treasonable plan or design already laid, and in the
contemplation of the speaker, if they are words of ex-
hortation or encouragement to carry into effect such
plan or design, such speaking or uttering of words is
strictly and properly an overt act of treason, being
the means made use of to effect the treasonable pur-
pose; although, even in that case, the more precise and
accurate mode of expression would seem to be that
the plan or design is the treason, and the words of en-
couragementexsteueeoft and.lt incitementvv,
iwill
he for
you,are
therefore,evid e nce
to
of
say,tl se
supposing no further evidence is given than that o
words uttered, supposing there is n? proof laid before
you of any existing plan to subvertof the authority of the
lilvueseonf, thethe establishedethoredr,erfrem government,
mere
L
do r h e
and uttering ryionug oefauthefewelorydesubryseltvhees party charged
inferwith
that at the time the words were utterehdesestheerkeerdid
exist a deliberate design in the mind.of t
effect any of those wicked purposes, anclpthaat theto
speech was made by him to induce the hearers to take
up arms, or to use force and violence, for the purpose
of carrying such design into effect; you must deter-
mine for yourselves whether such is the safe conclu-
sion at which you can arrive upon such evidence
alone, or whether the words are not rather to be con-
sidered as the production of a heated and distempered
mind, thrown out at the moment rashly and hastily_
words, indeed, " as wicked as might be," as was said
in Pyne's case, but words spoken without refer-
ence to any formed design or settled purpose in the
heart of the speaker. In the latter mode of viewing
them they would not constitute an act of treason, but
be punishable as a high misdemeanour only. Gentle-
men, I cannot close the observations which I have
thought it right to submit to you without expressing
the earnest hope of my brethren and myself, that the
administration of criminal justice under the Commis-
sions which have been specially issued into this
county, and into others where similar enormities have
taken place, may have the wholesome effect of teach-
ing all who need such warning, first, that in this
cour.try the punishment of 'crime will follow the
commission of it with a pace so sure, so steady, and so
speedy, that the guilty can have no chance of escaping;
and secondly, the more important lesson, that what-
ever attempts may be made by discontented persons to
subvert the Government, the laws, or the religion of
their country, and to establish a new order of things in
their stead, they will find the law of the land too strong
for them, and that the honest Fart V the community,
' the lovers of peace and order, will at all times unite
themselves with the established authorities of the Go-

vernment to render their attempts futile and abortive, 1
and to put down such evil-doers with a strong hand;
and I would, in conclusion, further suggest that the
effectual, and only effectual, method of counteracting
the attempts of wicked and designing men to undermine
the principles of the lower classes, and to render them
discontented with the established institutions
of their country, is the diffusion of sound religious
knowledge (in which there can be no excess)
amongst those classes -who are the most ex-
posed to their attempts, and the educating
their children in the fear of God, so that all may be
taught that. obedience to the law of the land and to
the Government of the country is due, not as a matter
of compulsion, but of principle and confidence. Gen-
tlemen, her Majesty's Judges will be happy to render
you any assistance in the performance of your duty,
if any difficulty should arise.
The Counsel retained for the Crown are Sir W.
Follett (Solicitor-General), Mr. Sergeant Ludlow,
Mr. Sergeant Talfourd, Mr. Godson, Mr. Waddington,
and Mr. Talbot.
At the time of writing there are eight bills before
the Grand Jury, but not. any as vet brought into
Court. The bill for treason against 'Ellis has not yet
been presented. The first case to be tried will he
that against the men charged with setting fire to Dr.
Vale's house at Hanley. It is expected to come on
this afternoon, and, next to the charge against Ellis,
is considered the most important of the special assizes.
It will occupy several hours.
Although there are large bodies of troops, both
cavalry and infantry, in the vicinity, there appears to
be little likelihood of their services being called into
requisition, the town and adjoining district being
perfectly tranquil, and the only bustle observable in
the town is occasioned by the holding of the cattle
fair, which has brought a larger number of the
peasantry than ordinary into the borough.

THE BOUNDARY LINE.
(Continued from The Snn of yesterday.)
LORD ASHBURTON TO MR. WEBSTER.
• Washington, July 11, 1842.
SIR-I lose no time in acknowledging the receipt
of the note you did me the honour of addressing me
on the Bth instant, and I beg, in the first place, to say
that I am duly sensible of the assurance you give me
that the President has been pleased to appreciate the
motive which induced my present mission, and much
flattered by your recognition of the candour and frank-
ness which have hitherto marked our intercourse.

I had hoped that we had escaped by mutual consent
from a return to the endless and fruitless argument on
the general question of the rights of our respective
Governments in the matter of the north-eastern
boundary.
It seemed to me to have been decided by so many
high and competent authorities, that the precise geo-
graphical point so long looked for was not to be found,
that it necessarily followed that any hope of settle-
ment must rest upon an amicable compromise.
The arrival here of the Commissioners from Maine
and Massachusets, and the admitted disposition of thel
two Governments, have given the public a very general
expectation that this compromise might at last be
effected ; and I hope you will excuse my expressing
my regret that the note now before me, and the paper
from the gentlemen from Maine, addressed to you;
which accompanied it, should have contained so much
of as renewal of the old controversy, and should no'
have been confined to the simple question whether we
could or could not agree to terms of settlement. It
the observations contained in my note of the 13th
ult. have given rise to these consequences, I much
regret it, and I would now pass over all these mon
than useless discussions, and proceed at once to notice
the proposal you make, if I were not apprehensive
that my so doing might be construed into some want
of respect for the parties from whom these observa-
tions have proceeded.
I will, however, endeavour to bring within a nar-
row compass what I have to say on the subject, and
the more so, because, with all deference to you, Sir,
I may add, that there is little in these arguments that
is new, or that has not been often advanced and re-
futed during the many past years of controversy.
I should except from this want of novelty the posi-
tion, one entirely new, advanced by the Commis-
sioners from Maine, that the north-west angle of
Nova Scotia, which is, as you express it, " the thing
to be sought for and found," was at the head of the
Madawaska rivet', which river, it is maintained by a
long argument, supported by authorities and maps,
was always considered as the real St. John, and this
is stated to justify the opinion expressed by the old
Congress, in 1799, that this north-west angle was at
the source of the St. John.

Giving all possible consideration to this apparently
neiv- discovery, I cannot say that it appears well
founded. Looking at Mitchell s map, the use of which,
by the negotiators of the peace of 1783, has been al-
ways so much relied upon on the part of America,
there is nothing more clearly marked than the great
distinct channel of the upper St. John, and it seems
hardly possible that the negotiators or the Congress
should have made the supposed- mistake.
But supposing this hypothesis were well founded,
the Temiscouata Lake is, then, to be now this long
lost angle of Nova Scotia. What becomes, then, of
the point so long contended for by Maine, between
the Metis and one of the tributaries of the Resti-
gouche ? These points must be about fifty miles
apart. Both cannot be true ; and if it be maintained,
as I rather collect it to be, from the paper of the
Maine Commissioners, that the point at the Metis is
the true boundary, as being the point stricken by the
north line, though the other be the true north-west
angle of Nova Scotia, there is at least an end of the
whole argument, resting upon this north-west angle,
being, as stated by.you, " the thing to be sought for
and found."
If this new discovery leads us to no other inference,
we can hardly fail to derive from it the conviction
that all the ingenuity applied to unravel this mystery
leaves us equally in the dark ; and that it is not with-
out reason that it has been decided by so many per-
sons, after careful examination, that this boundary is
not susceptible of settlement according to the precise
words of the treaty.
This decision has been come to by Mr. Madison in
1802, by Mr. Jefferson in 1803, by Judge Sullivan
about the same time, by the arbiter in 1831, and it
has been acted on by nearly every Secretary of State of
the United States during the controversy from that
time to this ; for although in a case of dispute each
party during the dispute endeavours to hold his own,
I am not aware that any Secretary of State, or an?'
President of the United States, has ever treated this
_ _

subject otherwise than as one attended by that degre,
of uncertainty that it could only be solved by an ar
biter, or by a compromise. I would appeal to your
candour, Sir, to say whether, at this time, and under
these circumstances, it is fair to speak of this disputed
territory as belonging indisputably to one party, and
to be yielded by way of concession, and for equiva-
lents, to the other. Any convention I may sign must
be for a division of that which is in doubt or dispute :
with any arrangement between the State of Maine
and the general Government I have nothing to do ;
and if, which God forbid, our endeavours at an ami
cable compromise should at last fail, I must hold that
Great Britain retains her right, at least equal to the
United States, to every part of the territory in dis-
pute, until by a renewed reference, or by the skill of
some more fortunate negotiator, this difference may be
brought to a close. ,
I have now only to add a few observations upon the
arguments contained in your own note.
Some stress is laid upon the fact that the joint
Commissioners of the two Governments, in 1817,
directed the surveyors to run the north line from the
St. Croix, until it _met water running into the St.
Lawrence. The lines to be run were to ascertain the
geographical facts of the case. No proc,eeding could
be more proper. The claims of the two parties varied,
and it was natural that, in the first instance, a line
should be run north to the extent claimed by either
party ; where that line would reach, or what high-
lands or streams it might strike, was unknown ; so
much to, that Mr. Gallatin, in his letter from Ghent,
mentioned in my note of the 13th ult., expressed his
doubts on this subject. His prediction turned out to
be true. The point where the line strikes the Metis
was a point not fulfilling the words of the treaty. It
did not divide the waters as desired, unless the Bay of
Chaleurs and the Gulf of St. Lawrence are considered
to answer to the description of the Atlantic Ocean.
Mr. Gallatin was sensible of this, and intimates that
if this fact created doubt, the lands about the Resti-
gouche might be given up ; but he forgets, that in
giving up this territory, he gives up his argument;
for he maintains, in opposition to the British line of
boundary, that it does not continuously, and in all its
parts, divide the waters, as required by the treaty.
The American line was in this equally deficient, and
it is useless, therefore, nos to consider whether it
would have been preferable to the British line, if it
had divided the waters of the St. Lawrence from those
of the St. John.
To make even a plausible case for the American
line, both the St. John's and the Restigouche must be
held to be rivers emptying into the Atlantic ocean.
The Royal arbiter says it would be hazardous so to
class them. I believe that whatever argument might
be made in the case of the St. John's, connected with
the distinctions with which it was mentioned, in the
treaty, to consider the Restigouche as flowing into
the Atlantic ocean would be more than hazardous--
it would be most absurd. At all events, I would
submit to you that no inference could be drawn from
the Commissioners in 1817 having ordered a north
line to be run ; the same Commissioners, after drawing
the line, having disagreed as to any conclusions from it.
I am rather surprised that an inspection of the
map should lead us to such different views of the
course of the rivers and of the coast as stated by you.
I find that the upper St. John's and the Restigouche,
so far from cutting at right angles the parallel lines
of the coast and the St. Lawrence, as you say, run in
their main course nearly parallel with them. lam

not aware that the last is important,although it seems
connected with your argument.
My inspection of these maps, and my examination
of the documents, lead me to a very strong conviction
that the highlands contemplated by the negotiators of
the treaty, were the only highlands then known to
them, at the head of the Penobscot, Kennebec, and
the rivers west of the St. Croix ; and that they did
not precisely know how the north line from the St.
Croix would strike them ; and if it were not my wish
to shorten the discussion, I believe a very good argu-
ment might be drawn from the words of the treaty in
proof of this. In the negotiations with Mr. Living-
ston, and afterwards with Mr. M`Lane, this view
seemed to prevail ; and, as you are aware, there were
proposals to search for these highlands to the west,
where alone I believe they will be fcund to answer
perfectly the description of the treaty. If this ques-
tion should unfortunately go to a farther reference, I
should by no means despair of finding some confirma-
tion of this view of the case.
I shall now, Sir, close what I have to say on the
controversial part of this question. I should not have
treated of it at all but from respect to the gentlemen
from Maine, whose arguments you conveyed to me;
and I shall certainly not renew it unless called upon
by you to do so. Our immediate business is with
the compromise of what is not otherwise to be set-
t!el • and argument and controversy, far from assist-
ing ;hat end, have ever generally a tendency to irri-
tate and excite.
Referring, then, to our more immediate subject of
a line by agreement, I deeply regret, on reading your
observations and proposals, that we are yet so far
asunder. I always thought this part of our duty
better performed by conference than by correspond-
ence, unless, indeed, we had the misfortune not to be
able ultimately to agree, in which case it would cer-
tainly be necessary that our two countries should see
clearly ifn paper how nearly we bad approached to
each other ; and on whom the blame at last rested .of
leaving unsettled a question involving such serious
consequences. I would still recommend this course
of personal discussion and conference, but, in the
meantime, I proceed to consider the proposals and ob-
servations contained in your note.
It is sufficiently explained in
my plan for a settle-
ment, why I was anxious not to divide in two parts,
by any new line of boundary, the Madawaska settle-
ments ; and I am sorry to say that the information I
have since received, both as to local circumstances and
the anxiety of the people themselves, tends strongly to
confirm my impressions. At the same time, you will
have seen that I was sensible that some good reason
should be assigned why we should not be satisfied with
what you justly term the otherwise perfect boundary
of the St. John's. .
In your reply you recognise the difficulties of the
case, and do justice to our motives, but you state dis-
tinctly, on the part of your Government, that you
can consent to no line which should bring us over the
St. John without some equivalent of territory to be
found out of the limits of that part which is in dis-
pute ; and you refer more particularly to a certain
narrow strip lying between the north line and the
river. This strip I have no power to give up; and I
beg to add, that the refusal of my Government is
founded simply on their objection to dispose arbitra-
rily of the persons and property. of her Majesty's sub-
jects, living by preference under her authority ; an
objection which, you are aware, applies with peculiar
force to the inhabitants of this part of New Brunswick,
I had hoped that the other equivalents which I had
offered, combined with the sense entertained by the
Government of the United States of the pressing im-
portance of the case on the ground of humanity,
would have been sufficient for the purpose I so anxi-
ously desired; but perceiving, from your note, as
well as from personal conversation, that concession
upon this point is insisted upon, I might be disposed
to consider whether my anxious desire to arrive at a
friendly settlement would not justify me in yielding,
however reluctantly, if the latter part of your propo-
sal did not, if finally persevered in, forbid all hope of
any settlement whatever.
The boundary you propose, supposing the British
territory not to come over the St. John, is to run from
the north side of that river, three miles above its
junction with the Madawaska; over an arbitrary line,
which my map does not exactly permit me to follow,
until it reaches, somewhere, the St. Francis. I need
not examine this line in its precise details, because I
am obliged frankly to state that it is inadmissible. I
think I might, Sir, appeal to your candid judgment
to say whether this is a proposition of conciliation—
whether, after all the antecedent discussions on this
subject, it could be reasonably expected that, whatever
might be the anxiety of my Government for a friendly
settlement, I could be found with power to accede to
such terms. I need not observe to you that this would
give to great Britain less than the award of the arbi-
ter, while at the same time she would be called upon
to give up what that arbiter awarded her, and if I
do not mistake you, the floatage of the lumber of Maine
sown the St. John is also expected to be surrendered.
I must beg to say that I am quite at a loss to ac-
count for such a proposal. Your own principle of
maintaining the great river as the best boundary, is
tbandoned—an arbitrary line is drawn which nobody
ever suspected before, and I can only suppose this
course to be,dietated by that general assumption that,
notwithstanding all, former admissions and decisions
to the contrary, this territory said to be in dispute, in
truth belongs to One party to be doled but as a favour
to the other
;' 'ini assumption that cannot for a moment
tie admitted, and which you,
Sir, with the records of
your office before you, will hardly maintain.
The position in which this negotiation now stands
seems to prove what I have before ventured to ad-
vance, that it would have a better chance of success
by conference than by correspondence ; at all events,
that we should soon arrive at ascertaining what we
can or cannot do. Slow,
unnecessarily slow, our pro-
gress has hitherto been, and the public seems some-
how or other to have become informed that there are
differences. I hope that when we come to discuss
them, they will prove less serious than they are sup-
posed to be, but it is very desirable that doubts and
tistrusts should be set at rest, and that public credit
and the transactions of commerce should suffer the
:east possible disturbance. For although, should this
negotiation unfortunately fail, it will be our duty im-
mediately to place it in some new course of further
reference, it is not to be disguised that such a result
,nust be productive of considerable public anxiety and
lisappointment.
What I have said in relation to the Madawaska
settlements will, I trust, sufficiently prove my disposi-
tion to approach such a discussion with the true spirit
of conciliation, and I trust that you will permit me
to express a hope that it will be met with a correspond-
ing feeling.
Before concluding, I wish to add a few words re-
specting the line of the St. John's to one of its sources,
and the navigation for certain purposes of that river.
It may be true that the district between the St. John's
and the highlands west of the St. Francis, may be of
some extent, but your own surveyors will confirm to
you that it is of very little value either for cultivation
or for timber. Is it reasonable that in the division of
an object in dispute, its intrinsic value should be only
lisregarded, and its extent alone considered ?
I would farther suggest for your consideration
whether, supposing the division of the King of the
Yetherlands to be admitted to supply fairly the
3quitv of the case between the parties, what is pro-
'osed to be added to Great Britain, viz., the strip on
the 45th parallel of latitude, and the use of the navi-
gation of the St. John, be not an ample compensation
for what we ask in return, viz., that barren strip
above the upper St. John, which is wanted for no
)then purpose than as a boundary, for which purpose
it is admitted on all sides to be most convenient.
The right to use the St. John for floating down the
!umber of Maine on the same terms as the river is
used by the Queen's subjects, is now treated as a
matter of light importance. This is not uncommon
when a concession of any kind is about to be yielded,
but I beg to remind you that this was not formerly
so considered. It has been repeatedly solicited and
invariably refused, and no Minister of Great Britain
has before been permitted to connect this concession
with the settlement of the boundary.
It is considered by my Government as a very im-
portant concession. lam sure that it must be con-
sidered by all persons in Maine connected with the
lumber trade as not only valuable, but indispensable,
and I am compelled to add, that I am empowered to
allow this privilege only in the event of a settlement
of the boundary on satisfactory terms. It is sake. in
the memorandum of the Maine Commissioners, that
this conceded navigation will be as useful to the town
of St. John's as to the lumberers of Maine, but it
will not escape you that, even if this be so, it is a
concession necessary to give any value whatever to
so bulky an article as lumber, which being not
otherwise disposable, would bear any reasonable toll
' el at
which the Provincial authorities of New Brunswick
might think it expedient to levy upon it. •Fartsl er,
it should not be forgotten that the. timber! OTic
the mouth of the St. John's, will have the
reaching the British as, well as other nap
lastly, that it is a very different thing
I skets and
to). dap v
iPerirrileg,rei oif.
pleasure.
h:etseord byedetails
ils mereiin
lege of this important description hr,troir.i.ti
sfuorredbof myb unfeigee.d-
-1 sufferance, to be granted or withheld .at
Ay
solisßeruvaßtiTonosNm..
trelathinagveotfotahpeogrlogeaistegfuoresetniotneriwnigoir:
i which we are oe-
cupliebde,gb, ustir7thyeoyuse:mill cablele:
the paper you sent me.
and distinguished consider ation.
Hon. Daniel Webster, &c., &c., Sic.
we have
e aed
some the
LORD ASMUJIVr_oIi TO NIR. WEUSTER.
north-westconference s ; boundary,a nd I. aboutnow proceedih
Washington, July 16, 1842.
N
'c
SlR—There is a further question of disputed
hadll
boundary between Great Britain and the United
to state the terms which I am ready to agree to for
the settlement of this difference.
As the principal object in dispute ' is to be given up
by Great Britaml I trust, Sir, that • you will here

l ~~f ~.

again recognise the spirit of friendly conciliatkal
which has guided my Government in disposing of
these questions.
I have already sufficiently discussed with you the
boundaries between her Majesty's provinces and the
United States, from the monument at the head of the
river of St. Croix, to the monument on the river St.
Lawrence, near the village of St. Regis.
The Commissioners under the sixth article of the
treaty of Ghentsucceeded in continuing this boundary
from St. Regis, through the St. Lawrence and the
great northern lakes, up to a point in the chai nel be-
tween-Lake Huron and Lake Superior.
A further continuation of this boundary, fi orn this
point through Lake Superior to the Lake of the
Woods, was confided to the same Commission, under
the seventh article of the treaty of Ghent, but they
were unfortunately unable to agree, and hive con-
sequently left this portion of the boundary undeter-
mined. Its final settlement has been much desired
by both Governments, and urgently pressed by com-
munications from Mr. Secretary Forsyth to Mr. Fox,
in 1939 and 1840.

What I have now to propose cannot, I feel assured,
be otherwise than satisfactory for this purpose.
The Commissioners who failed in their endeavours
to make this settlement differed on two points:—
First, as to the appropriation of an island called
St. George's Island, lying in the water communication
between Lake Huron and Lake Superior. And,

Secondly, as to the boundary ihrough the water
communications from Lake Superior to the Lake of
the Woods.

The first point I am ready to give up to you, and
you are no doubt aware that it is the only object of
any real value in this controversy. The Island of
St. George is reputed to contain 25,920 acres of
very fertile land ; but the other things connected with
these boundaries being satisfactorily arranged, a line
shall be drawn so as to throw this island within the
limits of the United States.

In considering the second point, it really appears
of little importance to either party how the line be
determined through the wild country between Lake
Superior and the Lake of the Woods, but it is im-
portant that some line should be fixed and known.
The American Commissioner asked for the line
from Lake Superior up the River Kamarastaquid to
the lake called Dog Lake, which he supposed to be
the same as that called Long Lake in the treaties,
thence through Sturgeon Lake to the Lac la Pluie,
to that point where the two lines assumed by the
Commissioners again met.
The British Commissioner, on the other hand, con-
tended for a line from the south-western extremity,
at a point called Le Fond du Lac to the middle of the
mouth of the estuary or Lake of St. Louis River,
thence up that river, through Vermilion River, to
Lac la Pluie.
Attempts were made to compromise these diffe-
rences, but they failed; apparently more from neither
party being willing to give up the Island of St.
George, than from much importance being attached
to any other part of the case. Upon the line from
Lake Superior to the Lake of the Woods, both Com-
missioners agree to abandon their respective claims,
and to adopt a middle course, for which the American
Commissioner admitted that there was some ground
of preference.
This was from Pigeon River, a point between Ka-
marastaquid and the Fond du Lac ; and although
there were differences as to the precise point near the
mouth of Pigeon River where the line should begin,
neither party seem to have attached much importance
to this part of the subject.
I would propose that the line be taken from a point
about six miles south of Pigeon River, where the
Grand Portage commences on the lake, and continued
along the line of the said Portage alternately by land
and water• to Lac la Pluie—the existing route by land
and water remaining common to both parties. This
line has the advantage of being known and attended
with no doubt or uncertainty in running it.
In making the important concession on this boun-
dary, of the Isle of St. George, I must attach a con-
dition to it of accommodation, which experience has
proved to be necessary in the navigation of the great
waters which bound the two countries—an accommo-
dation which can, I apprehend, be no possible incon-
venience to either.
This was asked by the British Commissioner, in
the course of the attempts at compromise above
alluded to ; but nothing was done because he was not
then prepared, as I am now, to yield the property and
sovereignty of St. George's Island.
The first of these two cases is at the head of Lake
St. Clair, where the river of that name empties into it
from Lake Huron.
It is represented that the channel bordering the
United States' coast in this part is not only the best
for navigation, but, with some winds, is the only ser-
viceable passage.
I do not know that under such circumstances the
passage of a British vessel would be refused; but on
a final settlement of boundaries it is desirable to sti-
pulate for what the Commissioners would probably
have settled had the facts been known to them.
The other case, of nearly the same description,
occurs on the St. Lawrence, some miles above the
boundary at St. Regis.
In distributing the islands of the river by the Com-
missioners, Barnhart's Island and the Long Sault
Islands were assigned to America. Thii part of the
river has very formidable rapids, and the only safe
passage is on the southern or American side, between
those islands and the main land. We want a clause
in our present treaty to say that for a short distance,
viz. from the upper end of Upper Long Sault Island
to the lower end of Barnhart's Island, the several
channels of the river shall be used in common by the
boatmen of the two countries.
I am not aware that these very reasonable demands
are likely to meet with any objection, especially when
the United States will have surrendered to them all
that is essential in the boUndary I have now to pro-
pose to you.
I beg you will be assured, Sir, of my unfeigned and
distinguished consideration. ASHBURTON.
Hon. Daniel Webster, &c. &c.
(To be continued.)