Page images
PDF
EPUB

voted to insert the amended resolution as proposed by Mr. Mangum. When action was now taken upon the original resolution as amended, a division of the question having been demanded, the first resolution was rejected (14 yeas, 30 nays), and the second adopted (yeas 23, nays 22), the action of the Senate being in these words:

"Resolved, That the Senate advise the President to open a new negotiation with his Britannic Majesty's government, for the ascertainment of the boundary between the possessions of the United States and those of the King of Great Britain, on the northeastern frontier of the United States, according to the treaty of peace, of 1783."'1

Mr. Webster and Mr. Clay voted against both of the resolutions. Evidently the failure of the first resolution was the result of added reflection on the part of the members of the Senate. As it was proposed to advise the president to open a new negotiation with reference to the northeastern boundary, there was no need of taking any further notice of the award of the king of the Netherlands.

Although the action of the Senate was a victory for the president of the United States, the margin of success was very slight. Nothing further, however, was to be feared from the course pursued by the arbitrator; and on July 2nd the Maine commissioners in Washington were able to inform Governor Smith that already President Jackson had made known to them his purpose to proceed (as advised by the Senate) as soon as the present state of the boundary question and existing circumstances would admit." 1Congressional Debates, 1831-1832, VIII, Part I, 1394–1398.

Manuscript Correspondence, etc., Northeastern Boundary, State Library, III, 79-81.

2

CHAPTER X.

PREPARATIONS FOR NEGOTIATION.

MPORTANT conferences between the commissioners of the State of Maine in Washington and those appointed by President Jackson followed the action of the Senate in rejecting the boundary settlement recommended by the king of the Netherlands. In the earlier of these conferences the Maine commissioners drew up a provisional agreement for a settlement, which they submitted to their associates. On July 25, 1832, the latter returned an executed copy of this agreement with only a slight modification made necessary by the action of the Senate advising a new negotiation; and on August 21st, a counterpart agreement, executed by the Maine commissioners, was forwarded to the administration commissioners. This was the action to which Mr. Livingston, as secretary of state, referred July 21st, in a letter to Mr. Bankhead, the British chargé d'affaires in Washington, informing him of an arrangement for the boundary settlement then in progress between the United States and the State of Maine, by which the government of the United States would be clothed with ampler powers than it had heretofore possessed.'

But no such agreement could have any binding effect until it should be ratified and confirmed by the Legislature of Maine; and the provisional agreement remained in the possession of the commissioners without further action until the meeting of the Maine Legislature. In fact, the report of the commissioners had not reached Governor Smith when his annual message was delivered on January 4, 1833. It must have been in his hands shortly after, however, for the letter of the commissioners, in forwarding their

1Manuscript Correspondence, etc., Northeastern Boundary, State Library, III, 87-90.

2Document No. 414, 24th Congress, First Session, 4.

report and the agreement, was dated Portland, January 14, 1833.1 But still there was delay in communicating this information to the Legislature. At length, near the close of the session, a joint request was sent to the governor, asking him to communicate to the Legislature the report of the commissioners appointed by him March 3, 1832, with such other documents relating to the northeastern boundary as he had received and as soon as he could do so consistently with the public good. To this the governor replied on March 1, 1833. He had received the request, he said, but he had come to the conclusion that the publication of these communications at that time "could not fail to be prejudicial to the success of the negotiation instituted by the president with Great Britain, and adverse to the interests of both the State of Maine and of the United States;" but he assured the members of the Legislature, and through them the people of Maine, that no definite action on the part of the state in relation to the disputed territory could or would be taken until the whole subject had received the consideration of the Legislature, having in its possession the documents requested.2

At length, as the session drew to a close, the governor laid both the report and the agreement before the members of the Legislature. Evidently the pressure was so great that the governor deemed it wise to withhold no longer such information with reference to the new negotiation as was in his possession. The report dealt largely with the history of the boundary matter. After this review, and having asserted the constitutional rights of the state in the settlement of the controversy, the commissioners from Maine proceeded: "If, then, in the progress of the contemplated negotiation it should be found that what is demanded by Maine as her right is now utterly unattainable, and if the State, insisting upon its extreme right, denies to the United States all power under any circumstances to make even a beneficial compromise, it is well to inquire at this stage of the proceedings, where is the con

1 Manuscript Correspondence, etc., Northeastern Boundary, State Library, III, 91-107.

2 Resolves of Maine, II, 599, 600.

troversy and the well-known state of things, and the onward course of events within the State, to lead us?" As to their own views, the commissioners state in closing that with entire confidence in the good faith of the government of the United States, in its several branches of administration, "we have been induced after the most mature consideration we have been able to give to the subject, to accede on our part to the provisional agreement," and they now submitted it "to the wisdom of the Legislature."1

The agreement, as thus submitted, showed that Maine was to surrender provisionally to the United States all claim to jurisdiction and right of soil over the territory lying north of the river St. John and east of the river St. Francis. On the other hand the United States was to grant to the State of Maine an indemnity for the release of all right and claim to the above mentioned territory, the indemnity to consist of one million acres of land to be selected out of the unappropriated lands of the United States within the territory of Michigan, such land to be surveyed and sold by the United States under the same regulations which apply to the public lands, and the whole proceeds without deduction were to be paid to the State of Maine. If, however, in the result of any negotiation with Great Britain, the State of Maine ultimately should lose less of her territory than she would according to the line designated by the king of the Netherlands, the indemnity was to be proportionate to the actual loss. Also, if any new territory contiguous to the State of Maine, but not then within her limits, should be acquired from Great Britain by such negotiation, the same was to be annexed to the State of Maine and there was to be a further deduction from the indemnity mentioned.

In case, however, these attempts on the part of the president to negotiate should wholly fail, and the proper authority of the United States should determine to acquiesce in the line designated by the king of the Netherlands, the State of Maine was to receive the proceeds of the promised million of acres without any abate

1Manuscript Correspondence, etc., Northeastern Boundary, State Library, III, 91-98.

that until this agreement shall have been
accepted and ratified by the Legislature of
Maine, nothing herein shall in any
vany wise be
construeds, as derogating from the claims and
pretensions of the said State to the whole extent
of her territory as asserted by her Legislature .
Nor shall any thing hereins contained be
construeds so as to express or imply, on the
parts of the President, any opinion whatever
the questions of the validity of the decision
of the King of the Netherlands, or of the ob-
:ligation or expediency of carrying the same
into effect.

on

Eawtwingston

Lous Mr Lane

Sam Worting
With P. Preble

Reul Williams.

Nicholas Emery

THE LAST PAGE OF THE COMMISSIONER'S REPORT. Livingston, McLane and Woodbury were members of President Jackson's Cabinet. Preble, Williams and Emery were Commissioners from the State of Maine. From the original in the State Library at Augusta.

« PreviousContinue »