The Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1809-1841, 1828-07-03
Do ESTIC.
MOTH EAs TERN BOUNDARY

MOTH EAS TERN BOUNDARY.
The National Journsi of Saturday con
Gains me correspondence on this subieo
between mr. Clay and mr.. Vaughan, which
took place in February and March of the
preseat year. 1t will not be unlnterestin.
to onr ,caders, it We state briefly the man
points of the discussion. In ms first not
'Inr Gay ienies the ground assumed ~
. former aote by Hr. Vaughan, that Gre
Bytaln had the actual occupation and pos
session Of the disputed territory, prior o.
the treaty of 1888 She could have ha -
only constructive possession, Az the coun
try was an unlnhabited waste; and tins
constructive possession passed by that trea-
ty 10 the United States. as the latter con
tend. The subsequent 80 ettloment made al
Madawasca, was therefore an unauthorized al
intrusion by individuals in che alleged ter
rtory of the United States and in the
census of 1920, these were enumerated a.
mong the population of the Union. The
settlement on the Aroostook is equally un
authorized and the issuing of process by
the government Of New Brunswick, is
viewed with dissatisfaction by the Presi-
dent, as irreconcileable, not only with the
prelenSIons of the American government
10 the territory IN dispute, but with the al
legged resolution OF the Governor of New.
Brunswick to maintain that territory IN the
state IN which hc received il. He there.
fore protests against any acts of exclusive
jurisdiction by the British authorities, and
demands the liberation of Baker Oh this
ground.
Mr.. Vaughan in his reply assumes that,
whatever may be the conviction OF the u
pited States as To their limits by the treaty
oil 1893, these limits being still underlined,
and referred to the arbitration OF friendly
sovereign, the jurisdiction and sovereignty
Of the disputed territory remain WITH Great
Britain until these limit 5 are defined: he en-.
ters into some argument on the subject OF
tho boundary; and reiterates as TO the
Aroosiook settlement, what he had said OF
the Modawasca, that all persons taking up
fheir residence on The disputed territory, are
iDiih,n Tie British jurisdiction till the line is
adjusted. lie adverts to the exercise Of
SOW 81 unity on the part Of Maine, by TAX
inc he census Of 1920 in Madawasca ; but
promises to transmit to the British govern.
mem tho demand Of the Liberation Of Ba-
ker
Mr. Clay. in his rejolnder, throws aside
any argument on the boundary, az the
question of right i, to be settled IN another
place and way but protests against the as
SUMPTION that till the limits are adjusted,
the lisputed territory remains under the
sovnrel In,ty and jurisdiction OF Britain.
The possession of either nationin this waste
territory has been merely constructive, be-
fore the treaty of 1888, and the right OF
possession being the very thing on which
the parties are"at issue, the exercise OF ju.
rlsichon BY either, Is inadmsslble. IL, as
mr.. Vaughan remarks, some civil govern.
men, 8 necessary for the disputed territory, |
il may as well be that Of Maine as of New
prnus@iet. lie reters 10 some trnnsac
tons with Sir Charles Bagot in 1918, IN
support of this view Of the case. In the
mean time, he contends. that the occupation
of the territory by Great Britain, ifitSdoes
not asnr. V. remarks, invalidate the rights
Of t1e United States. at least gives the
former all the advantages Of decision Of
the controversy in her favor. In conclu
sion. he says -" The President Of the y
nited States cannot consent 20 this unequal
condition Of the parties aud the under
signed, in conclusion, is charged again to
protest against the exercise Of all and ev.
cry act Of exclusive jurisdiction, on the
part Of the Government of the province Of
New Brunswick; and to announce 10 mr..
'Vaughan that Government will be respon
sibe for oil the consequences, whatever
they may BE-. to which any Of these acts of
jurisdiction may lead"
Mr.. Vsdghan's reply, which concludes
the correspondence, reurges his former
views and grounds but as it is his inten-
tion to submit the correspondence to his
government. he declares himself not dis
posed to prolong the discussion in regard
to the exercise jurisdiction in the terri.
tory disputed.
|, is very obvious from this corrcspon
dence that the Government of the United
States, while willing to abide the award to
which it has referred the right Of the dis
pu'ed territory, is firm in its determination
TO resist. in tho mean time. the exercise OF
any exclusive jurisdiction by the other par.
~ 70 The reference. In our humble opin-
ION. likewise, the argument of mr.. Clay is
not only decisive, but urged with the happy
clearness, ease and force which distin
guIsh every production Of that eminent
statesman.
The British government have not yet, il
is understood. acted on the demand for the |
immediate liberation of Baker. and full in.
demniiv for his injuries; and meanwhile |
the judicial proceedings against him. with
which our readers are acquainted, have Ia.
ken place under the authority of the Pro-
yincal Government.
Baltimore american.
From the Richmond Wing.
MR.. CLAY.
ry- ~