The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-11-19


bv YOU 10 do SO Our immediate business 10 with the
compromise Of what is not Otherwise To be settled,
and argument and controversy far from assisting To
that end, have more generally tendency TO irrilate
and excite.
Referring then, to our more immediate subject Of
line by agreement deeply regret, on reading your
observations and proposals. that we are YET so lar
asunder always thought this pat Of our duty bet
Ter performed by conference n by correspondence
unless indeed, we had the misfortune not TO De aoe
ultimately to agree, in which case II W. uid cer,any
be necessary that two countries should see clearly
on paper how nearly we had approached 10 each
other and on whom the blame at last rested oil lea'-
ing unsettled question involving such serious con.
sequences. | would still recommend tins course oil
personal discussion and conference, but IN the mean
time proceed to notice the proposals and obser'a-
tions contained in your note.
1t is sufficiently explained in my plan Tor settle
ment why | anxious not TO divide IN two parts,
by any new line of boundary, the Madawaska settle
ments and ! am sorry to say that the information
have since received both as to local circumstances
and the anxiety Of the people themselves, tends
strongly to confirm my impressions. AT the same
time, you will have that was sensible that some
good should be assigned why should not be
satisfied with what you justly term the otherwise per-
feet boundary of the ST. Johns. In your reply yon
recognise the difficulties of the case and do Justice
TO our motives but you state distinctly, on the part
of your Government, that you can consent to no line
which should bring us over The ST. Johns without
some equivalent of territory to be found out of the
limits Of that part which in dispute and you refer
more particularly to certain narrow strip lying be-
tween the north line and the river This strip have
power to give up and beg TO add that the refu-
sal of my Government is founded simply their OBJ
lection to dispose brarily Of the persons and pro-
perry of her Majsstys subjects living by preference
under her authorlty-an objection which you SEN
sble applies with peculiar force the inhabitants of
this part of New Brunswick.
| had hoped that the other equivalents which had
offered, combined with the entertained by
the Government OF the United States of the press
ing importance Of the on the ground of humani-
ty, would have been sufficient for the purpose | so
anxousy desired but perceying, from your note, as
well as from personal conversation, that concession
on this point IS insisted upon, might be disposed to
consider whether my anxious desire TO arrive at
friendly settlement would not justify me in yielding,
however reluctantly if the latter part of your propo-
sal did not if finally persevered in forbid all hope Of
any settlement whatever.
The boundary you propose, supposng the British
territory not to come over the st. Johns, is to run
from the north side Of that river, three miles above
its junction with the Madawaska over an arbitrary
line, which my map does not exactly permit me to
follow, until it reaches somewhere the St Francis
need not xamne this line in IFS precise details be-
cause am obliged frankly state that il is inadms-
sibe. think might sir, fairly appeal to your cam
did judgment TO say whether this is proposition of
conciliation-whether, after all antecedent discus
sons on this subject it could be reasonably expected
that, whatever might be the anxiety of my Govern
mcnt for friendly settlement, could be found with
power TO accede to such terms. | need not observe
to you that this would give to Great Britain less than
the award of the arber, while at the same time she
would be called upon to give up what the arbiter
awarded to her, and, if / do not mistake YOU. the
floaage Of the lumber Of Maine down the ST Johns
is also expected 10 be sure ndered.
must beg to say that am quite at loss TO ac-
count for such proposal. Your own principle of
maintaining the great river the best boundary is
abandoned, an arbitrary line is drawn which nobody
ever suggested before, and can only suppose this
TO be dictated by that general assumption thai
all former admissions and decisions
TO The contrary, this territory said to be in dispute
in truth belongs to one party to be doled out as ia
vor to the other; an assumption which cannot for
moment be admitted and which YOU sir with the
records of your Office before you will hardly main
tain.
The position in which this negotiation now stands
seems to prove what have before ,entured to ad.
vance that il would have bet er chance of success
by conference than by correspondence; at all events,
that we should sooner arrive at ascertanng what we
can cannot do. Slow, unnecessarily slow our
progress has hitherto BEEN and the public seem
somehow or other, To have become informed that
there are differences. nope when come to dis
cuss them that they Will prove less serious than they
supposed to be; but very desirable that doubts
and distrusts should be set at rest and that public
credit and the TRANSACTIONS OF commerce shouId suf-
fer the least possible disturbance. For although
should this negotiation unfortunately fail, it will be
our duty Immediately TO place it in some new course
of further reference il is not to be disguised thai such
result must be productive of considerable public
anxiety and disappointment.
What have said with respect to the case of the
Madawaska settlements will, | trust, sufficiently
prove my disposition to approach such discussion
with the true spirit of Cancellation, and trust YOU
will permit me TO express hope that it will DE met
with a corresponding feeling.
Before concluding, wish TO add f w words re-
speeding the line of the st. Johns to one of its sour
ces, and the navigation for certain purposes of that
river. Ii may be true thai the district etwcen the
St Johns and the highlands west of the St Francis
may be OF some extent but your surveyors will
confirm 10 you that it is of very little value either
for cultivation or timber. Is it reasonable that in
the division OF an object in dispute its intrinsic value
should be holly dsregarded and its SIZE or extent
be alone considered
| would further suggest for your consideration
whether, supposIng the division by the King of the
Netherlands TO be admitted to satisfy fairly the
equity oil he case bet~ een the parties, what is pro-
posed to he added by Great Britain, viz the strip
the 45th parallel of latitude and the use of the
of the ST Johns, be not an amre COM |
pcnsaton for what We ask m return, viz: that bar
strip above the upper St Johns, which is want
cd for otherpurpase than boundary for which
purpose it is admitted on all sides to be most conye-
nient.
The right to use the ST. Johns for floating down
the lumber OF Maine the same terms as the river |
is used by the Queens subjects, is treat as a |
matter Of light Importance. Tins IS not uncommon
when a concession of any kind is about to be yielded
but beg to remind you that this not Formerly
so considered. IL has been repeatedly solicited and
refused, and no minister of Great Britain
has before been permitted to connect this concession
with the settlement of the boundary. 1t is consider
ed by my Government as very important conces-
sion | am that it must be considered by all |
persons in Maine connected with the lumber trade as
not only valuable but indispensable, and | am com
PEELED 10 add that | am empowered to allow this |
privilege only in the event of a settlement Of the |
boundary satisfactory terms 1t is said in the
m morandum of the Maine commissioners that this |
conceded navigation will be useful TO the town of
ST. John to the lumberers of Name, but il will not
escape YOU that if this be So ii is n concession
ol... LII. l..Il-