Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1846-02-26

designated, as being in conformity With the
agreement ut the Commissioners under the
treaty of Utrecht. The evidence sga,ns, the
fact, though IN some respects strong, Is pure
ly negative. The line, according 10 the
map, extended from certain point near the
source of the river Saguenay, IN a westerly
direction, to another designated poiut on
another river emptying either into the ST.
Lawrence or Jaunes's Bay and there were,
IN that way. four or five lines following each
other, all tending wcstwsrdly, but with diff
ferent incllna,ions norlhwardly or sou,hward
y, and all extending, from some apparently
known point on a designated river, to snoihcr
similar point on another river the rivers
themselves emp,ying themselves, some into
the river 81. Lawrence aud Others into Janes's
Bay or lIudson's Bny. until, from n certain
point lying north Of Lake Superior, the line
was declared 10 extend along the 49,h de
gree OF latitude, as sbove stated. II was
with that map before me iha, the following
paragraph was inserted in The American
staiement Of December, 1896:
The limits between the possessions OF
Great Britain in North America, and those
oi France in the same quarter, namely. Can
ata and Louisiana, were Determined by com
missloners appointed in pursuance Of the
treaty of Utrecht. From The coas, of Labra-
dor to q certain point north OF Lake Supe.Inr,
hose limits were fixed according TO certain
metes aud bounds, and from that point the
line OF dcmarco,lon WAS agreed TO extend in
dcRnitely due west, along the forty ninth
pufallel Of north latitude. Ii wac IN con
tormty with that arrangement that The u
ni,ed States did claim that parallel as the
northern boundary OF Louisiana. II has been
accordingly thus settled, as lar az HE Stony
Mountains. by the convention Of 1918, be
tween the United States and Great Britain,
and no adequate reason can be given why
the same boundary should not be continued
as far as The CLAIMS of the United States do
extend. that is to say, as far as the Pacific
Ocean"
II appears very extraordinary that any geo.
grapher or map maker should have invented
a dividing line, with such specific details,
without having sufficient grounds for b, liev-
my that II had heen thus determined by the
Commissioners under the treaty Of Utrecht
II is also believed that Douglass Summary
(not at this moment within my rench) adverls
to the portion of the line from the coast Of
Labrador to the Sanguenuy. Finally The
allusion to the 49h parallel, as boundary
/ fixed in consequence Of the treaty OF Utrecht.
had been repeatedly made in the course of
preceding negotiations, as we'll as IN the
conferences of thnt OF the year 1896; aud
there is no apparent motive, if the assertion
was known by the British ncgota,ors no, to
be founded IN fact; why they should not al
once have denied it. II mny be, however,
that, the question having ceased to be of any
interest to Great Britain since the acquisition
Of Canada, they had no, investigated the sub
jrct. II is Of some Importance, because. If
authenticated, the discussion would be con
verted from questions respecting underlined
claims into one concerning the construction
Of positive treaty or convention.
1t is sufficiently clear that, under all tho
circumstances Of the case, an amlcnble d
vision OF the territory, If at all practicable.
mus, be founded in grea, degree on expe
diency. This OF course musl be left to the
wisdom Of the two governments. The only
natural, equitable, aud practical line which
has occurred Ia me, ~ one which. running
through the middle OF Fuca's Straits, from it's
entrance To point on the main situated
south OF the mouth of Frazier's river, should
leave to the United States all The shores aud
harbors lying south and TO Gr"a, Britain all
those north of that line. including the whole
of Quadra and Vancouvcr's Island. II
would be through Fuca's Straits a nearly cas-.
terly line, along the parallel of about AZ | =
degrees, leaving to England the most vaIna-
bile and permanent portion Of the fur trade,
dividing the sen coast as nearly as possible
into two equal parts, and the ports in thu
most equitable manner. To leave Admiralty
Inlet and It's Sounds to Great Britain, would
give her possession IN the heat of the A
merican portion Of the territory. Whether
from the point where the line would strike the
main, it should be continued along the same
parallel or run along the 49,h, is u matter OF
secondary importance.
II such division should take place, the
right of tho inhabitants of the country si,na.
ted on the upper waters of the Columbia to
the navigation ol that river to its mouth. is
founded on natural law; and the principle
has almost been recognised as the public law
oi Europe. Limited to commcrcjal purposes,
II might be admitted, but on the express con-
ditIon TINT the citizens Of the Uniicd States
should in the same manner, and TO the same
extent, have the righ, to navigate the River
st. Lawrence.
Bu, | must say that. whatever may be the
ultimate destlnes of the Oregon territory,
would feel great regret in seeing il iE any
way divided. An ainicabe division appears
to me without comparison preferable 10 n
war for that obj"ct between the two coun.
tries. ln every other view Of the subject it
is highly exceplionnble. Without advertiug
for the present to considerations of q higher
nature, il may be sufficient here TO observe,
thnt the conversion Of the northern part of
the territory into British colony would in its
effects make the arrangement very unequal.
The United States are forbidden by their
Constitution To give preference tn the
ports Of one State over those Of another
The ports wi,hn the portion Of territory nl-
lottcd to the Unted States would Of course
remain open to British vessels; Wills, Amer.
ican vessels would be exrlnded from the
ports Of the British colony, unless occasion
ally admitted by special acts depending on
the will Of Great Britain.
ALBERT GALLATIN.