The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1840-10-16

demned range while at other points il is represented
as high We also find that instead of being the Sc
parating line between the valleys Of great rivers they
are in the valley of the ST. John. One would think
the mind which could be satisfied with such evidence
would find little difficulty in being reconciled to the
range in question
But the commissioners contend that this range of
highlands does not unite with the range in which the
Connecticut river rises and hence is impossible in
following il from the Northwest angle of Nova Scotia,
TO come TO the Northwesernmost head of Connecticut
river the range from that angle but instead ofak
ing its direction for the Northwesternmost head Of
Connecticut river passes fifty miles north oft In
other words the of the Connecticut are not in
the same range with the sources of the Mets. Much
reliance is placed on this argument, and yet little
examination will prove that il is even plausible,
II cannot be denied that there is dividing line be-
tween the streams which flow into the St. Lawrence
and those which flow in opposite direction. If we
trace this line from the Northwesternmost head ofCon-
neccut river towards the Northwest angle Of Nova
Scotia, find first the south slope the waters of
that river next the Androscoggn, next the Kenne-
beck, and next the Penobscot and the north slope
the waters OF the st. Francis and Chaudiere rivers.
This brings US to the head waters of the ST. John,
which opposite to the Eastern branches of the
Chaudure. AT this point the commissioners contend
that this range of highlands instead of continuing
be the dividing line between the valley of the ST Law
renee and those rivers that flow into the Atlantic
passes down into the valley of the ST. Johns in an cas-
terly direction the streams and along the ARGOS
took, has been represented, to their Northwest
angle OF Nova Scotia, the mouth of that river.
This is absurd the face of it, for there must be
dividing elevation between the valley Of the ST. Law
renee and the Of the St Johns. This eleva-
ton they abandon and enter with their highlands the
valley of the great which rises in it, But let
look the facts and we shall readily comprehend
the difficulties they encounter in maintaining their
newly discovered range the highlands of the treaty
AT the point where they have chosen to depart the
terror limit Of the valley Of the ST. Lawrence, that ce-
walton turns. AT this point it turns much north
erly and so continues some forty miles perhaps till
IL to tho of the Etchemn another river
of Canada, cast Of the Chaudere, when the line re-
its general Norheastery course and so CONT
nues TO the Northwest angle of Nova Scotia at the
Metis This is beyond all question the highest gene
raj unbroken range between the valleys for the
ces OF the great rivers, St Johns and St Lawrence
are init The argument of the commissioners is this,
that there oranges of highlands In tracing the
other range from the Northwest angle of Nova Scotia
at the Metls river souhwcstey they raise no objec-
ton till they the head waters of the Etche-
min river Here instead of turning to the south the
sources of the rivers indicate and passing along between
the head waters of the Chaudure and the st. Johns
they allege that these highlands continue on westerly
and crossing the Chaudere and the river St Francis
as well as other streams leave the head of the
Connecticut some fifty miles south
| Thus they abolish the laws OF nature by breaking
down and annihilating 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 along the valley of
the st Lawrence passing the tributaries of that
river But where do they leave the sources Of the
Chaudure and the St Francis Far south of this
range and in the elevation as the sources of the
Connecticut and the St. Johnswhile the latter river
and its far north of the treaty range
Having thus annihilated some forty or fifty miles of
the natural boundary of the valleys the commissioners
proceed to rebuke the American topographers with
and directly charge them with making spurious
maps and falsely placing highlands upon them from
the Chaudicre to the Etchemin and thence to the
Ouele, a river of Canada east of the Etchemin On
their map, having placed highlands, as we have
stated they have made dotted line to show where
the spurious highlands laid down. and it is lit
tie remarkable that this line thus laid down to dscre-
dit our topographers, and show where the commits
soncrs have annihilated fifty miles Of the natural
boundary OF the valleys, divides the of the
rivers which are also laid down each side of it,
curaely if it had been drawn for that purpose thus
proving the cearest manner that this the true di-
vidng 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 well as their reasoning and comes
near subjecting them to the imputatons which they
have lavished upon the American opographers We
can have hesitation in declaring our conviction
that the topographers fully justified in represent
ing the land in which the sources of great and long
rivers found as highlands for they are necessarily
greatly above the level of the though they may
assume mountainous character. They did no more,
and we regret to public officer holding high
and important trust, involving in the
peace of two powerful nations so regardless of his
station ndcourtcsies oflife wantonly insult
| gentlemen, who have had the confidence of our 90
vernmcnt and have now no opportunity TO vindcae
their conduct 1t is enough to show their errors if
they have committed any without scandalizing their
names
This thought of finding highlands in the valley of
the ST. Lawrence far below the heads of the rivers
and denying that the land in which the rivers rise is
highland, belongs to these commissioners. II comes
near to proving if proves any thing that the lowest
is highest that the land over which rivers run is
higher than their sources.
We see therefore, no weight plausibility in this
objection as IL is wholly unimportnnt whetbcr tbere ho