New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1843-04-17
Meeting of the Historical Society.

distinguished citizens than any other We nave
recently attended The chief purpose OF the
meeting was to listen to an Address from the
venerable President OF the Society, the don.
Albert GALLAT1s, upon the subject OF the North
Eastern Boundary, suggested chiefly by the recent
discovery among the papers OF the late Pe'er a.
Jay of a map used by bis father, Hon. JOIN JAY
/ IN negotiating the Treaty OF l783. His discourse
was long and very full IN its examination OF the
whole question. The feeble voice of tne ven
cradle speaker made it impossible for those at any
considerable distance from the desk to hear II ::
but those who were fortunate enough TO catch
+ It's import will bear witaess that il was a lucid,
cogent and finished argument, clearly and fully
s,staininr the claim OF the United States and
bearing testimony to the value Of the Washington
Treaty and the ability and patriotism OF lis en-
inent negotiator. He spoke of the complaints OF
the British press because Mr.. WEBSTER did not
Law before Lord !AsHBuRToH the Franklin map
which has excited so much discussion, as absurd
and puerile and sad that after dlgcnt lnvestlga-
ton through the files of the Department be had not
been able to discover single map or other evil
dence likely to affect either side OF the question:
which had not already been published TO the
world He mentioned, as a fact worthy OF notice,
that, while the United States had thus furnished
to the British government all the evidence upon
the subject in their possession. the English IN re-
turn had never published single authority or
placed within reach of the United States the
slightest matter which could tend to support their
claim. Mr. GALtAT1N spoke at length OF the dit
ferent maps which have been appealed to by the
parties in support Of their mutual claims and es-
pecially of that which he exhibited and which Is
identified almost to a certainty, as having been
/ before the Commissioners who negotiated the
Treaty at Paris in 1883. Upon this map there is
drawn red line corresponding closely with that
/ uniformly claimed by the United States, and
known as Oswald's Line, since Mr.. Oswald was
one OF the British Commissioners in concluding
the original treaty, and was probably consult
ed in the construction Of the map. The map
is one of those known as Mtchell's and is color
ed it bears upon ii memorandum IN the hand
+ Of Mr.. Jay.
Afcr Mr.. GALL,TN had closed his address. Mr.
w +. Lawrence made few remarks upon the
general subject, mainly for the purpose OF request
ing, in behalf of the Society, that Mr.. WEBSTER
would present to the audience his views upon the
question.
AR. WEBSTER then rose and made address
of half an hour in which he traced the history of
the dispute concerning the Boundary, hastily hut
clearly down to the present time. He thoughtlt
should always be borne in mind that the British
Government never granted to the United States
any thing, not single political right nor an inch
of territory. The Declaration of Independence
proclaimed and asserted all the rights we claim,
and valnr secured them: the British
Government merely acknowledged them and IN
recognizing the Colonies independent States
they acknowledged the boundary lines between
the British Provinces and the United States to be
tho lines which had divided the independent
Colonies from those which maintained their aegi.
ancc. The dispute, then, which had before existed
between the Provinces of Nova Scotia and NIassa-
chusctts. was transferred to the National Govern
ments--and became dispute concerning the
boundary between the British Provinces and the
United States In determining this, Mr.. WEB
srEn said, we must be guided by the opinion Of
England herself when she held the Province by
grant from France and here she must be guided
by the intention of the grantor: and MIR. WEBs
srER proceeded to show that France never regarded
the line as identical with that now claimed by
England
But Mr.. WEBSTER said these discussions were
now of little interest. The whole question had
been settled by the Treaty OF Washington and
he was ready 10 maintain any where that with re-
gard merely to compensation, the States of Mas
sacausetts and Maine had received more, In pc
cunlary value in the opening OF the navigation OF
the st. Johns, than had been granted in the ces-
sionto Great Britain OF a portion of the disputed
territory. Then If the opinion of military men
and OF all men OF intelligence was 10 be consd-
cred of any weight, the ccsslon to the United
States of Rousse's Point In Lake Champlain, and
the arrangement OF the boundary lines OF New
York. Vermont and New Hampshire, is an acqul-
sition of the highest Importance, and one we
should never have gained if our claim upon the
North boundary had been ngidly enforced
MIR. WEBSTER said he could not see that there
was any ground OF opposition TO the treaty. The
States of Name and Massachusetts had consent
ed to it; the British Parliament had ratified it;
and it had been confirmed II Congress by lar
ger majority than was ever given to any previous
treaty. These arc all the parties concerned; who,
then, has any right or disposition to complain
Mr.. WEBSTER said he believed the Treaty would
ultimately be regarded by the people as just in all
lis compensatlons, honorable in all its provisions,
and above all negotiated in manly spirit and with
proper regard to the rights and interests of both
the great contracting powers. The time had