Baton-Rouge gazette. [volume] (Baton-Rouge, La.) 1819-1856, 1843-06-03
Fer he Hafpn Rouge Gasffie,
EonTu.EAa1EnN BOUNDARY.

taTT OF EtaIe sF forslEH fstiaiEs aAa ttse
present Premier. and the more recent proaue'
ton Of the Jay map before The New York His.
~torieal soeiety. have elected evidence which
settles the question Of our North. Eastern
boundary according to The construction
Of the treaty Of 1859. by the United
States and. although their t~arritufy has
consideration. and their chivalry and honor
compromised, by The trucking subsefvieney
of Daniel Webster. the people. whilst they
acknowledged the obligation Of treaties
claim The right to demand and 10 bs informed
Of the circumstances and Influences under
which that in question was negotiated and
1t ii my purpose to lay before them, Ms briefly
as practicable. the evidence referred To.
Passing over all previous, Legislation and
negotiation. il will be reeelieeted that, on The
4ti of July. 1885, the committee on foreign
relations submitted TO the Senate Il report,
(unanimsusly adopted aud $4,000 copies sub.
ssgusntly ordered to he rrirted,3 citing The
proclamation Of George I'll. In 1863, the act oil
the British Parliament. OF 177A, the various
commissions Of thu Governors OF Quebec,
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick . the adj
missions Of the British Commissioner, and
Minister to this country, IN 1877, and the pro-
poshl Of The british Commissioners ut Client
by which our North Eastern boundary fdea
Heribed in the treaty Of 1883, as terminating
at 'the North. West angle of Nova Scotia. J
il clearly defined and established. This re-
port was accompanied by d resolution (also
unanimously adopted) az fallew#t
Resolred. That, after d careful examination
and deliberate consideration Of the whole con.
~troyersy between The United States and Great
Britain. relative 10 The North Eastern boiln4
dairy of the former, the Senate does not enter.
tain d doubt Of the entire praetiesbility Of
running and marking that boundary IN strict
conformity with the stipuIations Of The defini.
tive treaty Of peace Of 1897 and it entertaips
a perfect eonvi etion nf the justice and validity
of The title Of The United States 10 the full ek=
tent Of all The territory In dispute between the
Two powers"
It appears that Mr. Van Buren entered fully
into the spirit If this resolution. and refused
to yield to the opportunities or threats Of the
British government and that his Secretary
Of State, the thivHlrous and lamented For
syth, spurned The attempts Of my Lord Palm
ersto,,. then Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, In dictate to him The terms and prln.
eiples under which he should 20 into the pro-
posed new commission. and sent him, ne sub
stitntes Tor his two projects for a convention,
f,eo counter projects, which were go disebur-
aging and nnpalatable 10 his Lordship that he
wrote. under much apparent vexation, 10 Mr..
Fox, his Minister ut Washington, nearly one
year after The receipt Of Mr.. Torsyth's see
nld counter projects. "Her Majesty's 60.
vefnment received. with very great regret,
the second American tountef.dfnfft Of n
convention for determining The boundary be-
tween The United States and The British
| North American Provinces. which YOU trans
mitted to me last autumn in Your despatch of
18th August, 1910 beealIss that counter
draft contained so many inadtnissible pro-
positions that it plainly showed that her Ma
insty's government could entertain no hope
nj concluding any arrangements on this Sub
jett with The government Of Mr.. Van Buren, !,
and that there was no use in taking any fur
Their steps in the negotiation Til the new Pre-.
sident should come into power"
Now, unfortunately for his Lordship,-wlo.
j1dging from his advice to Sir Robert Peel
and his sneers at Lord Ashburton, Is a very
Caeilereagh, Ta|leyrand, or Mstterhith in
The wiles Of diplomaey.-as the thew Preei-
dent come into office. the old Secretary for
Foreign Affairs was compelled to 60 ont md
vet, through The shrewdness Of his successor
and the weakness or wickedpess Of Mr.. Web,
ster. the United States have lost 100000
acres Of land more than by The award of the
King Of Holland, accepted and sanctioned by
bis Lordship.
But TO the evidence, which, il appears, was
in the possession Of Lord palmerston ut the
very moment he had the effrontety 10 urge
upon us the pretended claim Of his govern
ment to our territory, and which would doubt
less, have remained Sin The library Of the late
King" but for the necessity imposed upon the
British premier, by tho envious attack Of Lord
PalInerston, of defending himself and his ne
g~otiator with all the means Mt his command.
Sir Robert Peel says "We made inquiries
in 1924 and 1897, into The maps In the Fo-
reign Office Mt Paris, for The purpose of throw
ing light upon the intentions Of tho negot u
tors of 1883. A strict search was made for
any documents bearing, in any way, upon the
disputed question but. Mt that time neither
letter nor map could be found. However,
these were afterwards discovered, by a gem
tieman Sparks engaged in writing a history
of America, n letter and a certain map, sup
posed by him to be the map referred to in the
letter, in answer TO our first inquiry, as ] have
already stated, no such map could be discov-
cred. The first which VIZ received from the
Foreign Office at Parhs,w as a map framed in
1883, by Mr. Faden, Geographer 10 the King Of
England. On that map is inscribed. "a map
of The boundary of The y. States, az agreed to
by the treaty Of 1883 by Mr.. Fadep, geog-
rapher to the King"
Now, Sir, that map placed the boundary ac-
cording to the American claim yet il was a
contemporary map, and it was published by the
geographer to the British King. There is a
work which / have here-a political pcriodi-
cal of the time Of 1853, called Berne's Jour-
nal. 1t gives a full repor, Of the debate in
Parliament upon the treaty then being con-
cluded and, in order to illustrate the report,
it also gives a map of the boundaries between
the countries as then agreed to. That map,
Sir, also adopts the line claimed by the Uni
ted States. On subsequent inquiry at Paris,
we found a map, which must be the map re-
ferred to by Mr.. Jared Sparks, There is
placed upon that map a broad red line, and
that line marks out the boundary as claimed
by the British. 1t is, probably, a map by Mr..
d'Anvillc, Of l746; and there can be no doubt
that is the map referred to by Jared Sparks !;
but we can trace no indication or connection
il and the despatch Of DR.. Franklin.
To say that they were connected is a mere
unfounded Inference. But, there is still an
other map. Herein this country-in the
library Of the late King, was deposited a map
by Mitchell, of the date 1853: that map was in
the possession of the late King, and it was al
so in the possession of the noble lord but he
lid not communicate its conten s to Mr.. Web
ster. 1t is marked by a broad red line, and
on that line 10 written, BOUNDARY, Az de-
by our negotiator, Mr.. Oswald
and that line follows the claim of the United
That map was Oh an extended scale.