The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1840-12-31

and sinking IN places Tar DeioW amy part " "iS
condemned range while al other points II Is re-
presented as high We also find that instead OF
being the separating line between the valleys OF
great rivers they are in the valley OF the 81:
John. One would think the mind which could
be satisfied with such evidence would lind little
difficulty in being reconcied TO the range IN
question.
But the commissioners contend that tins range
of highlands does not unite with the range IN
which the Connecticut river rises, and hence Il
is impossible in following il from the Northwest
angle Of Nova Scotia, TO come 10 the North
westernmost head of Connecticut river, as the
range from that angle, instead OF taking It's d.
recton for the Northwesternmost head Of Con-
necticut river, passes fifty miles north OF il. In
other words the sources of the Connecticut are
not in the same range with the sources OF the
Metis Much reliance is placed on this argu-
ment and vet a little examination will prove,
that il is not even plausible. Ii cannot be de-
MED that there is dividing line between the
streams which flow into the 81. Lawrence ana
those which flow in an opposite drecuon ii
we trace this line from the Northwesternmost
head of Connecticut river towards the NORTH
west angle of Nova Scotia, we find first on the
south slope the waters Of that river, next the An
droscogpn next the kennebeck, and next the
Penobscot; and on the north slope the waters
of the ST. Francis and Chaudicre rivers. This
brings us TO the head waters OF the 81. John,
which are opposite to the Eastern branches OF
the Chaudiere. AT this point the commission.
ers contend that this range OF highlands instead
of continuing to be the dividing line between
the valley Of the st. Lawrence and those rivers
that flow into the Atlantic, passes down INTO the
valley of the st. John in an easterly direction
over the streams and along the Aroostook, as
has been represented TO their new Northwest
angle Of Nova Scotia, near the mouth OF that
river This is absurd on the face OF IL Tor there
must be dividing elevation between the val
lev Of the ST. Lawrence and the sources OF me
ST. Johns This elevation they abandon and
enter with their highlands the valley OF the great
stream which rises In II. But let US LOOK az tne
facts and we shall readily comprehend the ditfi-
cuties they encounter in maintaining their new
" discovered range as the highlands OF me
treaty. AT the point where they have chosen
10 depart from the exterior limit OF the valley q
the ST Lawrence that elevation turns much
more northerly, and so continues some iorly
miles, perhaps, till II comes to the sources OF lhe
Etchemin, another river OF Canada, east Of the
Chaudiere when the line resumes its general
Northeasterly course, and so continues to the
Northwest angle of Nova Scotia at the Metis-
This is, beyond all question, the highest general
unbroken range between the valleys Tor the |
sources of the great rivers, St Johns and 81.
Lawrence, arei it. The argument OF the com.
mssoners is this, that there are Two ranges OF
highlands. In tracing the other range from the
Northwest angle of Nova Scotia al the Nets |
river southwesterly, they raise no objection till
they come near the head waters OF the Etche-
min river Here, instead of turning to the i
south as the sources of the river indicate, and
passing along between the head waters OF the
Chaudiere and the ST Johns, they allege that
these highlands continue on westerly, and eros
sing the Chaudere and the river st. Francis,
as well as other streams, leave the head waters
nf fIaf " Y,atln
Thus they abolish the laws of nature by
breaking down and annihilatlng the natural
boundary of the valley of the st. Lawrence for
some fifty miles, and as they make the other
range pass along the valley of st. Johns, so they
make this range run along the valley Of the st.
Lawrence passing over the tributaries Of that
river. But where do they leave the sources Of
the Chaudiere and the st. Francis? Far south
Of this range and in the same elevation as the
sources Of the Connecticut and the St. Johns
while thelatter river and its far north Of
the new treaty range. Having thus annihlated
some forty or fifty miles of the natural boundary
of the valleys, the commissioners proceed TO re
buke the American topographers with scorn and
directly charge them with making spurious maps
and falsely placing highlands upon them from
the Chaudiere to the Etchemn and thence to
the Ouelle, a river in Canada, east Of the Etche
min. On their own map, having placed high
lands, as we have stated, they have made dot
ted line 10 show where the spurious highlands
were laid down, and ii is a little remarkable that
this line thus laid down to discredit our topogra-
pliers, and show where the commissioners have
annhilated fifty miles Of the natural boundary |
of the valleys, divide the sources of the rivers /
which are also laid down on each side of it, as
accurately as if it had been drawn for that pur-
pose, thus proving in the clearcst manner that
this is the true dividing range of highland and
along the most elevated points between the heads
and mouths of the streams The map of the |
commissioners therefore condemns their alleged |
facts as well as their reasoning and comes near |
subjectng them TO the imputations which they
have lavlshed upon the American topographers. |
We can have no hesitation in declaring our con
viction that the topographers were fully justified
in representing the land in which the sources of
great and long rivers are found as highlands, for
:hey are necessarily greatly above the level Of the
sea though they may not assume mountainous
character. They did no more, and we regret to
see public officer holding a high and important
trust, involving In some measure the peace OF
two powerful nations, so regardless of his own
station and the courttsies of life as wantonlv TO
insult gentlemen, who have had the confidence
of our government and have now no opportunity
to vlndicate their conduct. 1t is enough to show
their errors, II they have committed any, with
out scandallzng their names
This thought of finding highlands in the val
ley OF the ST. Lawrence lar below the heads OF
the rivers, and denying that the land in which
the rivers Use is highland, belongs to these
commissioners 1t comes near to proving if il
proves any thing, that the lowest is highest or
that the land over which rivers run is higher
than their sources.
We see, therefore, no weight or plauslbty in
this objection as il is wholly unimportant whether
there be or be not range Of highlands fifty miles
north of the sources Of the Connecticut rver or
one south of the st, Johns and along the course
of the Aroostook. since there is an elevation
which may most appropriately be called high
land which does divide the waters in the manner