Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1839-03-22

line from the source of the ST, Croix 10
Tho treaty higblands1 must Of necessity
cross tho river st. John" Admitting this
fact. his leading purpose seemed TO have
been 10 remove this line as far west as he
could, so that it might cross the st. John
at as great distance from its mouth as
possible, and thus embrace az much of its
course as was attainable within British
territory. In prosecuting his argument he |
says, "but it north line is traced from the !
Chepu,natecook, las insisted on bv The u (
Slntcs,) it will not only cross the river ST. |
John about fifty miles from Fredericton,
the metropolis Of New Brunswick; but will
cut off The sources Of the rivers which fal
into the bay of Chaeurs, if not of many
others, probably the Mlrramchi among
them, which fall into The Gulf Of St. Law.
renee" Thus it appears that, in 1917, the
British government had never thought of
contcndIng tina the highlands of the treaty
were to be found south OF the St. John, or
even south Of the sources Of the streams
which empty into The Bay Of ChaIeurs.
Robert Liston, Esq, at the time of these
proceedings. was his Britannia maicstys
minister to the United States. He was
consulted by Mr. Chapman on the proprctv
of acceedlng to proposition made to hun
by The agent of the United States. This
proposition need not be stated. Mr. Lision
in lis reply, dated at Providence, on the
23d Of October 1893, advises Mr.. Chip
man TO accecd to The proposition, because
cit would give an addition Of territory to
the province o; New Brunswick, together
with greater extent Of navigation on ST.
Johns river" The British government,
now claim the whole river and q Il its trbu.
larles from II source to its mouth.
! The committee might here enumcra'e, if
they deemed it necessary, the hume, Gus
maps of this region which were published
IN Eng land, between the proclamation of
, 1868 and the treaty of 1888, and subse
quently until after the treaty Of Client il
1914, embracing a period Of more than hal
a century; 10 oil of which, without single
5 exception known 10 The committee, the
, western line of the province of Nova SEQ.
tia, afterwards New Brunswick, crosses
5 the river st. John, and the nor,hwes' ern
, angle of Nova Scotia is placed north OF
. that river.
b Previous to the treaty of Client, the
British government had become convinced
OF the great importance Of having a direct
f communication within their own territory
, pCt"tCu tbtli provinces VI NUNu Gthl III
n and New Brunswick, and the city Of Que.
h bee. 1t will he seen from at inspection o.
5 the map No. 9, that th, territory in the
e state Of Maine, now in dispute, intercept:
Y this communication. 1t was one object o
!. the British commissioners at Client to 90
d tain cession Of this territory. They die
: indeed make faint and feeble suggestion
@ that our title was doubtful but this wa
q rot seriously urged. As the occasion wa
n solemn, and the object ono Of great impor
q lance, can any person suppose that if the,
y had even entertained doubts, where eth,
y northwest angle Of Nova Scotia" was tc
n be found, they would not then have ear
" nesty insisted on the pretension which
!, they now so seriously maintain From tht
a date Of he treaty of 1893, unl, the con
ferencos at Client IN 1914, during pcrio,
o of more than thirty years, our title wa
unQueslioned, as 1t still remains unques
. tlonable.
# In protocol of August @. 1914, th
:, British commissioners sta ed the folowln!
;. as one among other subjects, upon which
- it appeared to them, that the discussion
NJ between themselves and the American
- commissioners would be likely to turn -
20 a revision Of the boundary line betwee
=, the British and American territories, wit
m view to prevent future uncertainty an
>. dispute"
>. In a note ofthe British to the America
20 commissioners of the same date, they spe
IF cify more particularly what they mean b
If this general proposition; aud in concu. or
10 state, "Ifthis can be adjusted, there wi
n then remain for discussion the arrangement
N of the northwestern boundary be,wee
~ Lake Superior and the MssIssippi; To
10 free navigation Of that river; and such
!, variation of the limo of frontier as NAV Sc
~ cure direct communication between Que
=, y bee and Halifax"
:, 1t will be perceived that they do nc
50 propose to ascertain and fix a line prev
III ously agreed upon by the treaty of 1888
N but to vary that line in such a manner a
n, to secure direct communication betwee
n, Quebec and Halifax. This was IN sui
o. stance proposition to obtain q cession c
m territory and was so considered by tn
a. American commissioners. Accordingly o
v the 25th of August 1914, they replied ,ho
1o "they had no authority to cede any part c
10 the United States and TO no stIpuatio
n, to hat effect will they subscribe"
IA Ga the 4th September 1914, the BIRTHS
-, commissioners observe that they are una
~ BILE to reconcile tins declaration with lib
10 statement previously made by the Amer
|, can commissioners, 'rhat they were il
,a structed 20 treat for the revision of the
of boundary lines" "although the propose
NJ left 1t open to them 1.-THE American CON
~ mssloners] TO demand an equivalent fl
such ccssion either 10 frontier or olhel
, WISE
No They then proceed to insinuate the fir.
+. doubt IN regard to our title. in the follow
. ing language; "The American pIenrporel
r. llarles must be aware hat The boundary
n the district of Name has never been CO.
y q n Il Int La, q