The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-06-02

parallel Of 40, and yet his authority is here intro.
duced In support Of the statement of its indefinite
extension on that parallel, and its continuance as
our boundary TO the Paciic.
His line runs from Lake MisgRsns or Mistassin
directly southwest TO the parallel of ago IL will be
found by reference TO the maps that this lake is in
! Latitude 500 80, (neary) and almost north OF Que
bee. A line run thence southwest would strike the
parallel OF 49o, nearly north of Corn wa in Lower
Canada, and about $50 miles from that place. The
lake is itself one Of the Of Rupert's river
| continent of Hudsons bay. And the country dvi-
ded by this line may be described in general terms
as lying between Hudson's bay and the Atlantic,
north OF the st. Lawrence Thus confirming the
reference made by Salmon and by Hutchins after
him TO the southern extension OF the region part.
toned between England and France.
Now, sir, how stands this natter Douglass said
this line started from promontory in $50 3V, and
run thence southwest to Lake Mssussin; thence
! southwest TO the 49th degree; thence indefinitely
west.
Salmon said the line started from promontory In
$50 30, and thence southwest To the Lake Mas
| cosink or Mistassn and thence southwest indeh-
nitely to the latitude Of 49o.
Jefreys said the line started in about the latitude
OF SEQ and drawing with II curve (Hirabiis dieiu)
through the Lake Abubis down 10 the 18th degrcs
thence to the Northwest ocean. 49,. .
Hutchins said the commissioners ascertained this
limit by an imaginary line from cape or promon-
tory in New Britain, on the Atlantic ocean, in 500
Mstassn; from thence further southwest TO latitude
49o.
Aiessrs. Monroe and Pnkney said the line began
in a cape or promontory IN $50 80, to run thence
southWesterly to 40 degrees, and thence indefinitely
| west
Here, sir, are no less than FIVE different bounda-
res referred IN as established under the treaty Of
| Utrecht We cannot believe they are all correct
And which TO choOse' Are we TO stop at
| 49,, with Salmon and Hutchnsi or are we to go
| - IL
the course to be direct or curvllinearS These
loose statements altogether too doubtful indeh
nlte and contradictory 10 be relied upon IN such an
investigation. They are practical illustrations Of
the wisdom of the principle which requires the best
evidence the nature Of the admits That best
evidence is at London and Paris. Let II be pro-
| duced.
The honorable senator Acknowledges the receipt,
| in letter from MIR. Kennedy, of an extract from
| the journal Of the English House Of Commons in
| TIA, showing that commlssaries were appointed
for settling the trade between England and France,
and he Geduces from that entry the conclusion that
| commissaries were probably appointed at the Same
time to carry effect the tenth article OF the treaty
| Of Utrecht which relates to limits. There 10 no
| necessity to make this matter Of deduction. We
have better evidence the subject TO which have
before referred and to which will refer again. IL
Is the statement of Father Chareyoix the celebrated
traveller and historian of the French settlements IN
| America, who was sent to this continent by the
French government to explore and describe their
possessions. He says:
boundaries ceased although commssaes had been sP-
pointed both sides since the year lIls And this
yoix needs confederation by De Moras who says that
there does exist any written record in
he boundaries under the treaty Of UtechD de
fntvey established And in l729 all proceedings on this
subject abandoned according to Father Charlie
yox the least preext might be given to violate
the good understanding which had been found so din
lafxu Iran
Engiand The archives OF the office Of foreign Affairs
tain chart memoir relating to the treaty Of Utrecht
these frontiers do those of the department o
srne and thus the assertion Of Chareyoix is fully sus
tanned"
There is no doubt of the appointment {,
| commissaries. There is no doubt they me-
J and commenced their diplomatic discussions
Projeis were probably received and interchanged
4 And perhaps the dscordance among the histo-
rians, to which | have already adverted, arises
from their reference to these papers, and counter pa
pers and not to any final act of the commissaries.
repeat, sir, what | said on former occasion, do
not presume to speak dogmaticaly on the subject.
IL is my opinion, from proofs before me, that no
line was finally settled under the treaty Of Utrecht.
| This opinion | am ready to change whenever the
present evidence is changed into evidence more sat
isfactory.
The honorable senator says that when the cele-
brated map of George Ill is produced red line
will be found it. about ga tenth of an inch WIDE y
marked "boundares between the British and French
possessions in America, fired by the treaty d
Utretcht" have only to say, sir, that have al
ready declared war against red-ined map.
Whether shall do so against another 1t will be
time enough to determine when see 1t, and exam
inc the circumstances connected with It.
So far, sir, this discussion respecting boundaries
under the treaty Of Utrecht has no practical bear
ing upon any question before us. But the senator
now carries the line west of the Rocky mountains,
position not before assumed, and which, if estab-
lishsd, will take from us almost one half of the Ore
gon territory. There is not of the authorities
to whom he referswho carries the line upon the par
allel of AGO the The senator says
indeed, that Jefreys does, but the quotation he in
PRODUCES from that author does not supper this view
He seems to attach much importance to this au'
thority so much so, indeed, that shall stop mo-
ment to examine 1t. .. ".-..
: sThomas Jeffries, esq.," as stated by the sena
tor was geographsr to his royal hghness the prince O
Wales" He was a professed map maker, and he
wrote work. published in l76O, entitled History
of the French Dominons in North and South
America" The senator says: "He takes credit to
himself for making il (the line of D'Anville) more
favorable to the French than the French had made
, it for themselves" What changes he made, o,
upon what principles, are not shown. The remark
is not calculated to increase our estimate Of his &C
curacy.
The senator says that "the latitude of 400 to the
Western ocean is his limit Of the British posses
sions." will not assert that there is any mistake
here, for cannot refer to the book quoted by thu
senator; but if the extract he gives contains all tina
Jeffreys says upon upon the subject, it certainly
does not Justify the construction thus given to ii
Jeffrcys, as quoted, says, speaking of the line:
Beginning Davs inlet the east coast of Labrador
or Britain the latitude of about rs degrees and draw
ing whit Certainly precise description cf
important boundary through the Lake Abbis, down Il
the 4oh degree Of north latituds from thence to be
tinued to the Northwest il settled by com
A missioners under the treaty of Utrecht"
D Here is no continuance upon the parallel Of 40
" but a continuance without describing the course
. after stating the parallel lf, however, Jeffrey
intended to assert that the line followed the parable
of ago, he is at with himself, and utterly un
J, worthy of confidence. In his work, publishes
p seven years afterwards, in 1860, to which hav
J. already referred, he says: Canada, according L
II the English accounts is bounded north by the high
lands which separate it from the country about Hud
# sons Bay, &c" ats limits towards the west ex
tend over countries and nations hitherto undis
. L. the nnrth Ircs