North American. [volume] (Swanton, Vt.) 1839-1841, 1840-07-25
THE BOUNDARY QUESTION.

EoFefnmes We hna lbe IolsoWIng remarks,
in that truly democratic paper, the Frank.
iin Gazette.
Il is what might have been expected.
1t amounts to nothing, and will probably
lead to nothing but an indefinite procrasii-
nation Of the controversy. Before the
correspondence appeared, and when it's
character could only be guessed at from
the vague surmises OF the press, The sage
glof6ers Of the President tnumphanty
proclaimed that the question was settled
and al once shouted hozannas to Mr.. Van
Buren, for this grand and matchless achieve
menl OF diplomacy. The publication of the
real state Of the negotiation, however, has
compelled even those who have been mos.
disting uished among the reckless and I'M
pfincipled par,zans OF the executive, for
their unsarying approval OF his measures,
To admit that no advance towards an actu-
al settlement has been made, and that what
has been done with that view is wrong.
II will be seen by the letter OF Mr.. Fox,
that upwards of two years ago The two
governments agreed TO have the territory
surveyed by joint commission. la April,
1899, the British government communica-
To the Executive statement OF the regu-
lations which il was proposed should gov
ern the commissioners in their proceedings.
In July following the President dissented
from the proposition OF Great Britain,
and asked for other and different stipula-
lions. Now, after the lapse Of year, the
British Government has announced its ac-
ceptance OF the Presidents plan, in part.
MIR. Fox informs Mr.. Forsyth, however
that there are "many matters OF detail" EN-
braced in il (which her Majesty's govern
ment cannot adopt" These, i, should be
observed, are not specified, but are TO be
made the subject oil future correspondence.
This is correc, and faithful exposition OF
the progress which has been made in this
vars. And in what has il resulted? All
is yet indefinite and uncertain and there
is no more immediate prospect OF final
adjustment Of the dispute than there was
twenty years ago. Ii is possible that in
two or three years more the two govern
ments will agree ubon the "matters OF de-
taiI'' OF the proposed joint commission,-
Well, where shall we he then! Just where
we were when joint commissioners were
sent out to survey the territory previously
To the submission of the question to the
King of the Netherlands. The treaty OF
Client provided for joint commission Of
exploration and survey, and Tor an arbi-
tration in case the commission should disa-
gree. The commission was instituted and
survey prosecuted. The British and
American commissioners formed contradic-
tory opinions as To the true boundary, and
the subject was referred 10 the King Of the
Netherlands. He made an award with
which neither party was satisfied, and il
was consequently rejected by both. This
left things IN statu quo, and 50 they still
remain. twenty-five years have already
been consumed in lruiIess negotiations
since the treaty of Client, and now il is pro-
posed 10 waste another quarter ola cenlu-
ny in second attempt 10 effect settle.
ment by the same process which SO signal
y failed when tried before. Is the coun-
Try doomed TO be humbugged upon this
question.
The correspondence reveals the impor-
tant and humiliating fact that the propo-
sition for another arbitration comes from
the American government. How can this
act of Mr.. Van Buren, be justified! Our
title TO The territory in dispute has been
solemniy asserted by the unanimous re-
solve OF both houses of Congress by the
same authority il has been declared that
the line described in the treaty of 1888
can be run without difficulty: and yet the
President, in disregard OF the opinions of
the representatives Of the states and OF the
people, and the known and decided wishes
of The state of Maine, proposes TO make
our rights dependent upon the caprice,
the prejudice, the interest, or the partial
iiy of some European sovreign.-What
is TO be gained by this! Certainly we
cannot get more than belongs TO Us, and
we may get less. Is it our policy tn
pu, our claim to the hazard of arbitration
II must be admitted 10 be concession on
our part, one that we should never make
TO Great Britain. We should decide upon
our rights for ourselves, aud firmly insist
upon them, and not by any means empow-
CT foreign monarch to award them TO
our antagonist. Even Great Britain had
given up the idea of another arbitration I'LL
it was suggested by Mr.. Van Buren,, but
it is now eagerly embraced by that govern
meni, as, whatever may be the result, she
will enjoy all of the territory she wants un-
til an award shall be made, which will be
many years hence.--She cares nothing a
bout the question of abstract right, so loug
as she is permitted ko keep up her line OF