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


John is not a river nasigable from the sea- IN the
binary acceptation of that expression There Is a
ledge running the mouth oil mat river oil suc
character that owing TO the very high udes IN the
Bay Of Fundy, there is fall Of about twenty ieet
out al low water, and fall of some four feet IN at
high water Ii is only about forty-fye minutes IN a
tide that you can pass IN or out oil the river OF an
and even during that short period The passage IS
difficult and dangerous so, again, there IS iali
Of about forty feet on the Aroosook before you reach
the American territory and fall also on the 81.
John itself of eighty feet before you reach the Slate
of Maine, you follow up the river. The boosted
free navigation Of the ST John and IFS tributaries
from the disputed territory, may well be ust ated
by the free navigation Of the Potomac 10 this city
from the valley of the Shenandoah. When, there
fore, commissioners OF Maine, we consent TO ae-
cept equivalent from Great Britain Tor the ter
rtory proposed be yielded 10 her for her convent
ence and accommodation the free navigation Of the
st. John for the floating down OF our lumber, we
did consider ourselves under all the circumstances OF
the case, having proposed all that ibeI al spirit oil
cancellation could require us to do. And VIII mol
be deemed improper by you II we here advert TO The
fact that regard the REIMBURSEMENT by the
British Government Of any claim, heretofore adj
yanced by 10 territory within the limits oil Maine,
asserted by her, as consideration or equivalent
for the yielding part, TO Great Britain OF any
other portion of the territory. On this point
the declarations OF the Legislature Of Maine are ex
plict and we are bound 10 respect them.
by his lordshps note of the llth instant, we learn
that he withdraws that part OF his proposition which
relates cession Of territory the south side OF
the st. John. Even with this restriction OF his pro-
position, the adoption Of the St John boundary
from the line drawn due north from the source OF the
St. Croix, al its intersection with the St John, 10
OF that River IN the vicinity OF the sources OF
the Penobsco and Metjarmette, would yield 10 Great
Britain nearly four millions Of acres and more than
half of the whole territory to which she has
| pretended to set up claim. Nor is this all. His
| lordshp further proposes to abide by the exploring
| i'm 81 cotlP run M in trou he
nument at the Of the St. Croix-a line which
ntereres WITH and cuts off portion Of the grants
made long teiore by Massachusetts, This line is well
known not TO be the true ne-neyer such.
nor pretended TO be. II takes, however, from
| Maine a strip of territory which is nearly mile wide
where IT crosses the ST. John, and which dimnishes
in width till it reaches the monument His lordship's
proposition conempates the adoption and establish
ment Of that exploring line the true boundary. 1t
does not fall within province TO consider the val
ne Of those shreds and patches which his lordshlp
proposes to yield to the United States as equiya-
| lent In New Hampshire, he Consents 10 take the
true northwest source OF Connecticut river, instead
of the northeast source, being the source intended
in the treaty of 1888. In Vermont, he will abide by
| the old line, which was run, Marked and solemnly
established nearly seventy years ago. In New York,
he will abide by the same old line, the effect of recti-
! Tying II being merely TO give to New York small
angular strip on the west and Great Britain small
angular strip on the east. These small tracts and
pairing shaved from the States just ed, and the
right of floating down the st. John the products of
the forest, already explained, constitute alone the
sum and magnitude of the equivalent offered by his
| lordship for the whole territory of Maine on the
north side Of the st. John. Whether such a propo-
| sition has pre-eminent claims over the one have
made, TO be regarded proposition of concilia-
ton leave 10 that public to which his ordshlp
pleased so often to refer.
Lord Ashbnuton has been led into an error, unin-
territorial doubt his part, if he supposes that
| in submitting TO you, what we apprehend 10 be the
hy nd
in the treaty of 1888 respecting the Invest angie
of Nova Scotia, was adapted by the distinguished
men who framed il, our object was, to revive and
enter upon controversy, which for the present at
least, should be permitted to rest in peace His lord
ship, in his letter TO you Of the 2lst ut had assumed
IT as fact and as the ground upon which the nego-
tation for an amicable settlement: was TO f""eeed,
OF 1883 was such, that the treaty itself was not
eAecutable according to It's strict expression ~
we, on our part, could make such q admission y
nor acqulesce IN any such presumption" by our
silence even be supposed, for a moment to proceed
In the negotiation any such ground or hypothesis
nor could we suffer to pass without observation the
declaration of settled conviction the part of the
minister OF Great Britain, made under such circum-
stances and with such bearings that was the in
tenton Of the parties the treaty of 1888 to leave
to Great Britain the whole waters of the St John
If his ordship would have avoided the Introduction
of any remarks bearing on these points on our part
il seems 10 Us, that he himself should have avoided
giving occLaion for them 1t is not little remarka
ble tlatthe very dispute which the sagacious men
who framed the treaty endeayored, by their studied
and select phraseology and terms to guard against
should nave arisen, Notwithstanding all their care
and precaution.
We have already shown in our letter TO Won of tbe
29th ult that the members OF the Continental Congress
and the trainers OF the treaty Of 1888 well knew of
the existence and prescriptions of the proclamation
oil lio3, and The provisions of the Quebec act of
LIZA They also well knew, that the northwest an
gle oil Nova Scotia and the northeast angle of Mas
sachusetts (Naine), were adjacent angles
They knew that the jurisdiction of Massachusetts
and Nova Scotia extend back from the Atlantic
ocean TO the southern boundary of the province oil
Quebec and they well knew that the southern boui
dairy OF the province Of Quebec, both by the rroc A.
nation OF 1903 and the Quebec act of IVA was the
norm SIDE OF The bay des Chaleurs and the line of the
highlands, lying on the south side of the St Law
renee in which the rivers that empty themselves in
TO the river st. Lawrence, that side take their
rise. When, however, they came to inquire where
abouts was the line that separated Massachusetts
IRON Nova Scotia, they were at a loss. Accordinp
y both in the instructions drawn up and sanctioned
IN ltI9, and IN the report and dongs of the Congress
In August, 1852, IT was proposed that the eastern
boundary should be'''a line TO be settled and adust
ed between that part of the State Of Massacbueeus
Bay formerly called the province of Maine. and The
colony of Nova Scotia according to their resneotve
rights The Committee Of Congress in their re-
port OF 10Th August 1882 after suggesting several
vague and unsatisfactory reasons for considern the
ST. John as the true boundary add awe are OBLIGED
TO urge probabilities ~ " but we wish that the north
eastern boundary Of Massachusetts, NAV be left TO
future discussion when oher erid1ces NAV be obtain
ed, winch the war has remored from usn MIR Adams
IN ms answer TO an inerrogatory propounded TO him
18th August, 1884, says, speaking of The necotatiols
at Pars documents from the public offices in Enc
land were brought over and laid before usn Agan I
= The ultimate agreement was TO adhere TO the char
ter OF Massachusetts Bay and ST Croix river mon
toned IN IT, which was supposed TO be delinea,ed ON
Mitchell's' map" The charter of Massachusetts
Bay, here referred TO, originally embraced Nova SEQ
TIA alsoi but Nova Scotia having been erected into a