The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-11-22

jeet, and TO preserve to Maine the remainder Of her
territory. To accomplish this object, depafed
nom the nver To secure the unobsructed of the
accustomed way from Quebec to Haisx. We are
u aware that any objection has bee made from any
quarter TO this line, not giving up To Great Britain
All that she needed, could reasonably ask for the
above purpose. An6 although Lord Ashburon did
not deem II necessary 10 Z" examine the line (pro-
posed) in IFS precise details, to look al map
which II cap'd most readily be traced, and although
he has seen nj 10 say that he quite at a loss 10
account for such proposal" yet he has not minated
That the line suggested fails any respect to meet
| the object we had in view, and which we frankly
| and readily ayowed. Ii is well known To you, sir,
that we had determined upon such infexible ad-
| herence 10 that exact demarcaton would have
prevented US from changing II, upon any reasonable
evidence that 1t did not, in every respect, meet the
requirements OF the above-sated proposition, IN rea-
ton TO perfect line OF communication. But beliey-
ing then, do now, that il did thus meet all these
| requirements and although IT was, feel bound
10 say, The general and confident expectation Of the
| people of Maine that any REIMBURSEMENT
part OF jurisdiction and territory, would be- in part
al least compensated from that strip of contiguous
! territory on the west bank of the st. John yet,
when we were solemnly assured that no such cesslon
could be made under his lordships instructions, we
iorebore to press for tins reasonable and just ex-
change, and contented ourselves with accepting the
limited right Of navigation of the river, the only
equivalent from Great Britain for the territory and
jurisdiction we offered to surrender. And, as you
will remark, we offered not merely right of way
on land for similar easement on the water, but the
entire and absolute title TO the land and jurisdiction
of the large tract north and east of the line specified
1t cannot be denied, that it preserves frontier
IN forest almost impenetrable on the north, which
would defend itself by its own natural character;
and that, if any thing should be deducted from the
agricultural value OF that portion beyond the NADIA
waska settlements on account Of its ruggedness and
ITS want OF attraction to settlers much may justly be
added TO its value as boundary between the two
| nations.
The value of this tract to Great Britain both in a
| civil and military point of view, cannot be over
| looked. 1t gives her the much-coveted route
for the movement of troops in war; and her mails and
passengers In peace and is most particularly mpor
tant IN case OF renewed outbreaks in her North Anne
rcan colonies. The assumption of jurisdiction in
the Madawaska settlement, and the pertinacity with
which il has been maintained, are practical evidence
of the value attached to the tract by the Government
| OF Her Britannia Majesty.
We have alluded to these views Of the value and
Importance of this territory, not with any design of
expressing our regret that we thus offered it, but
show that we are fully aware OF all these views and
circumstances affecting the question, and that du-
y appreciate the iarseeng sagacity and prudence Of
those British statesmen who early attempted to
it cession by negotiation, and the suggestion
| of equivalents.
The answer of Lord Ashburton 10 your note Of the
9Th instant contained distinct lection of our offer,
|
ritory south of the river St john but not modifying
the claim for the REIMBURSEMENT, the part of
Maine and the United States, of all north of that
river Our views IN reference TO many of the topics
in his ordship's reply we have had the honor hereto
fore tc communicate to YOU in note of the 10th
| instant and to that answer would now refer, as
forming important part of this negotiation and as
containing refusal of the line Indicated. We are
| now called upon to consider the final proposition
| made by or through the Government of the United
| ps for iderat ion and rhe
line indicated may be shortly defined as the line re-
commended by the King Of the Netherlands and an
addition thereto OF strip of land, at the base Of the
highlands, running to the source of the southwest
branch of the St. John. The examination and con.
sderation OF all other lines, which might better meet
our views and objects, have been precluded by the
declaration, and other plenary evidence we have,
that the line specified IN your communication is TIE
most advantageous that be offered to us and
that no one OF less extent yielding in fact less
the other party, can be deemed admissible. We are
therefore, brought to the spgle and simple considera-
ton of the question, whether can, consistently
with our views of our duty to the State we repre-
sent, accept the proposition submitted by you.
So far any clam is nterposed based upon
supposed equity arising from the recommendation of
the King OF the Netherlands, we have only to refer
| our former note for our views that topic. We
have only to add, that we came to this confer
ence unrammeed and free, to if, in a spirit of
amty and equity could not find and agree upon some
new line, which whilst it yielded all that was needed
by party, might fairly be the motive and ground
work for equivalent territory rights granted TO the
| other and that we cannot make any admission or
consent TO any proposition which would not revive,
but put vitality and power into that which, up to this
time, has never possessed either. We base our whole
action on grounds entirely independent of that advice
| of the arber
1t may possibly be minated in this connection. as
il has than once been heretofore that the COM
| missoners of Maine, aud the people of that State
disposed to regard the whole territory as clearly
falling within their RICH full limits and are not will
ing to consider the question one in doubt and dis
pute, and therefore, one TO be settled as if each
party had nearly or quite equal claims. Certainly
| sir, the people and Government of Maine do not
deny that the question has been drawn into dis
pute They have had too many and too re-
cent painful evidences of that fact to allow such
a doubt, however much at loss they may be to per-
| ceye any Just or tenabc grounds on which the adj
versary claim is based For years they have borne
and forborne, and struggled to maintain their rights
in peaceablc and yet unlnchng spirit, against what
| appeared TO them injustice from abroad and neglect
at home. But they have yet to learn that the mere
fact that an adverse claim is made and persisted in,
and maintained by ingenuity and ability for series
of years, increasing in extent and varying its grounds
years roll on, is to be regarded as reason why
courtesy should require, in opposition TO the fact
REIMBURSEMENT of the plain explicit, and sincere Ian
guage of perfect convictson and unwavering conf
dence, or that continued, adverse, and resisted
claim, may yet, by mere lapse of time and reitera-
uon, flpen INTO a right but We desire 1t to be dis
tncly remembered that, in this attempt to negotiate
| for conventional line, Maine has not insisted, or
even requested, that any formal virtual admission
OF her title to the whole territory should be cond-
| ton preliminary to settlement We hold and we
claim, the ri ut to express, at all times and in all
suitable places, our opinion of the perfect right of
Maine to the whole territory; but we have yer as
sumed it, as point of honor, that our adversary
should acknowledge it. Indeed, we have endeavored
10 view the subject rather in reference to settle
ment, on even hard terms for us than to dwell on
the strong aspect of the case when we look at the
naked question Of cur right and title under the treaty
1t could hardly be expected, however, that we should
silently and thus virtually, acquiesce in any assump-
ton that our claim unsustained, and that "lbe
treaty line was not cxecutable," On This point we