The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-04-10

These extracts, as he had before said in his opin-
ion fairly represented public sentiment in Maine.
And he was right, IN this particular, the senator
rom Massachusetts, was deeply in error, when he
SAID mat not nifty candid and intelligent persons
could be found who dissatisfied with this treaty
unless he should say, which he (Mr. r knew he
would not, that the great body of he people OF,
Maine were not candid and intelligent But there
was another point 10 which he wished TO say a
word, and that was in regard to the equivalents re-
ceiVed by Maine for her sacrificed territory IL APP
Peared to him that they were greatly oyef-estnated
by the senator from Massachusetts. For instance,
he would refer 10 the amount paid by the general
government to Maine, for the expenses Of the mill
tary and eipt posse forces called out upon the ocea.
sion of the 'Aroostosk war; These expenses were
incurred in defending the country from invasion,
and upon every principle Of constitutional obligation,
should have been paid by the United States,
whether the question had been settled by treaty or
not. IL would seem, therefore, to be hardly fair,
although these expenses were provided for in the
treaty, TO regard them part OF the consideration
received by Maine for the lands surrendered to the
British government. The payment Of just debt
by the general government to Maine could not con-
stitute an obligation on her part, to surrender any
portion OF her property either 10 the English gov
eminent or TO that of the United States. Again, il
is respectfully submitted whether the advantages
resulting from what is called the free navigation OF
the river 81. John are not greatly exaggerated.
IL Is admitted that there are many umber-lands
lying upon the ST. Johns, and the streams
emptylng into II, whose value would be greatly en-
HANGED by the privilege Of having their products
transported down. and from, the river free Of tax or
duty. tmay be recollected however, that upon
former day, and another occasion, he had shown
how the design Of the treaty Of Washington had
been frustrated and the privilege rendered of no
value. That this privilege, the free navigation OF
Tho 81 John, the right TO transport American lum'
Der and produce through il TO the sea, free of any
and all tax or duty and that privilege only, re.
garded as OF any value, will appear by reference TO
the correspondence which Immediately preceded the
treaty, between the British minister and the Secre
larry Of State, Mr.. WEBSTER and between the lat.
Ter and the Maine commissioners. In the second
letter OF Lord Ashburton to Mr.. WEBSTER, he says:
81 would engage that the final settlement diff
erenees all lumber and produce Of the forest Of the rbu
ary Wasrs OF the st. John shall be received freely without
duty and dealt with IN every respect like the articles
Of New Brunswick"
Mr.. WEBSTER, in his reply under date OF July
8, 1912, says
must not be denied that to secure this privilege and
to have right to enjoy IT, free from tar toll other
bHy or inability Is an object Of considerable importance
to the people Of Maine"
Lord Ashburton, in his next letter, dated July IL,
1912, IN abiding to this matter, says
1t considered by my government as very important
concession. SURF It must be considered by all per.
in Maine connected with the lumber trade as not only
valuable but Indispensable and am compelled to add that
empow cred to allow this privilege only the event Of
settlement Of the boundary on satisfactory terms II is
this eded will be useful TO the town Of st
Johns to the lumberen Of Name but it will not escape
you that even this be 30, Is concession necessary to
give any value whatever to bulky article lumber
which being not otherwise dsposable would bear any
Brunswick might think expedient to levy upon IT, Fur.
Their should not be forgotten that the timber
mouth OF the st John will have the privilege OF reaching
the British well other markets. and lastly that II is
very different thing to hold privilege Of th. important
description by right by sunerance be granted
or withheld at pleasure"
Mr.. WEBSTER, in communicating this PROPOSE
ton to the Maine commissioners, says:
III this line should be agreed the part the United
equivalent stPulss first for the OF the river ST. John
Tor the conveyance OF the timber growing any of its
impo.tons or disabilities Of snv kind The timSsr
all the privileges Of British colonial timber All opinions
that hi. py leg Of navigation must greatly
Maine.p
The Maine commissioners, in their reply to the
proposition of the Secretary of State say:
"L upon consideration the Senate Of the United
States shall advise and consent to the ratification of treaty
corresponding in its terms with proposal and nth the
marked A. and identified by signatures they by vir.
tue Of the power vested in them BY the resolves Of the
line win the terms Conditions, and sauvs
Tents, herein mentioned"
The memorandum, marked A, contained the fol.
lowing.
I'd That the right of free navigation Of the St. John n.
the United States shall extend to- and include
Of the soil in the the products ofthe forest
and that TOLL duty be levied upon timber coming
from The territory Of Maine"
Then follows the 81 article Of the treaty. which
says that:
An the produce Of the forest in logs lumber timber
&C. grown in any ri those parts Of the State Maine
watered by the John by its tributaries shall
have free access into and through the said and its
tributaries having their within the State of Maine
10 the seaport at the mouth OF the John and TO
and round the falls of the said river either by boats RATS
Nph with hin
New Brunswick the said produce shall be dealt with as
were the produce Of the said provinces that like man
the Inhabitants Of the territory of upper St John
y shall have free to- and through river Tor their
produce in thoye parts where the said runs wholly
through the State OF Maine"
Here, then, under this article of the treaty. sc-
companled by the correspondence and qualified as
sent OF the Maine commissioners, rests the right of
that State to what she bought and dearly paid for,
thetree navigation Of the st. John Is it sufficient
for the purpose, or is it no' lift be, then the
course of the British government in imposing tax
on the timber cut from the forests of Maine, and
passed down the St. john is in violation of the trea-
ty, and this government should insist on an imne.
date repeal OF the law, and full and ample remu-
neraton to the citizens Of Maine, from whom these
illegal exacons have been made. If the treaty is
not sufficient for the purpose then the citizens of
Maine must lament, that unfortunate form of ex-
preston has deprived them Of advantages which |
they had supposed fully secured to them; and in
also Of the Maine COMMISSIONER and the Secretary
Of State. The language Of the correspondence, is,
that the lumber, &c, referred to in the treaty. shall
be subject to no toll tax orduty cor other liabi-
ty or inability" The language Of the treaty is in
conformity with that of the correspondence as con-
s,rued by Maine; Hence it would seem that
the tax is in violation of the treaty, and should
be repealed and atoned for. But by com
muncation from Lord Aberdeen to Mr.. Ever
EFT, minister of the United States at London, |
under date of December 9, 1874, it would seem
that the British government seek justification for
this act in these words of the treaty-to wit: that
the lumber, produce, &c, Of Maine, "shall, when
within the province Of New Brunswick, be dealt
with as if it were the produce of the said province
These words, it is conended, justify tax or toll on
lumber, &c, on passing down the river, il it be
general, and apply to the lumber of the province |
as well as to the lumber Of Maine. The lumber. |
men OF Maine reply to this, and with great force,
that these words were not intended to restrict
and limit the right previously given of free
exemption from toll, tax, or duty, but were
intended, on the contrary 10 enlarpe and ex