The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-11-18

4 fixing the northwest angle OF Nova Scotia, arises
from reference 10 the treaty Of 1888, to highlands
which il is now found have no definite existence
And he suggests the appointment oil eo"nisson' 70
he Jointly Amounted ssto determine on point most
proper to be substituted for the description IN article
in of the treaty of 1883" Again, Mr. President
Jefferson, in a message to congress, on inc i'ui
tober 1893 stated that "a further knowledge oil e
ground in the northeastern and northwestern s"s ,
of the United States has eynced that The boundaries
established by the treaty of Paris, between The Brit
ish territories and ours those points, were 100 I'M
perfectly described to be susceptible OF execution
These opinions of two most distinguished Ameri-
can statesmen gave rise to convention OF boundary
made in London by MIR. Rufus King and Lord
Hawkesbury, which, from other circumstances
which is not necessary to refer to, was not ratied
by the Senate.
might further refer you this subject to the re-
port of Judge Sullivan, who acted as commissioner OF
the United States for settling the controversy win
Great Britain, respecting the true river ST Croix,
who says, " the boundary between Nova Scotia and
Canada described by the Kings proclamation IN
the mode of expression that used IN the treaty
of peace. Commissioners who were appointed 10
settle that line have traversed the country In VAIN
to find the highlands designated the boundary"
With these known facts, how can IT possibly be
maintained that doubts about the boundary arose for
the first time in the year 1914.
need not pursue this subject further. Indeed, 1T
would have been useless treat OF it at all with any
matte history Of the two countries for the last hall
century My object in advertng to it is, to correct
error arising ready to believe, not from any
intention TO misrepresent, but from want OF niorma-
ton, and which seemed to be sufficiently circulated
TO make some refutaon useful toward promoting the
desired friendly and equitable settlement OF this ques-
ton.
We believe the position maintained by us on the
subject Of this boundary TO be founded In justice and
equity and deny that we have been determined
in our professions by policy and experience.
might, perhaps fairly admit that those aforementioned
considerations have prompted, in some measure our
perseverance in maintaining them. The territory in
controversy is for that portion OF it at least which IS
likely to come to Great Britain by any amcabe set
ement) worthless for any purposes Of habitation
or cultivation probably any tract of equal size
the habtable globe, and if it not for the obvious
circumstance OF its connecting the British North
American provinces, believe might venture to say
that whatever might have been the merit of case,
we should long since have given up the controversy,
and willingly have made The sacrifice to the wishes
OF couAtry with which 4 is much our interest,"
1t Is our desire, TO maintain the most perfect harmony
and goodwill.
trust that tins sentiment must be manifest In my
uGreserved communication with you on TIN, and all
other subjects connected with my mission II have
failed in this respect, shall have i'll obeyed the in
sirGctions of my Government and the earnest dc
tates Of my personal inclination Permit me, sir, to
avail myself of this, my first opportunity of formally
addressing you, to you uniegnedly of my most
distinguished consideration.
ASHBURTON.