T

CHAPTER XVI.

BOTH SIDES MARKING TIME.

HUS matters stood at the close of 1840. In his message to Congress, December 5th, President Van Buren thus described existing conditions with reference to boundary concerns at that time: "The excitement which grew out of the territorial controversy between the United States and Great Britain having in a great measure subsided, it is hoped that a favorable period is approaching for its final settlement. Both governments must now be convinced of the dangers with which the question is fraught, and it must be their desire, as it is their interest, that this perpetual cause of irritation should be removed as soon as practicable. In my last annual message you were informed that the proposition for a commission of exploration and survey, promised by Great Britain, had been received; and that a counter-project, including also a provision for the certain and final adjustment of the limits in dispute was then before the British government for its consideration. The answer of that government, accompanied by additional propositions of its own, was received through its minister here since your separation. These were promptly considered; such as were deemed correct in principle and consistent with a due regard to the just rights of the United States and of the State of Maine concurred in; and the reasons for dissenting from the residue, with an additional suggestion on our part, communicated by the secretary of state to Mr. Fox. That minister, not feeling himself sufficiently instructed upon some of the points raised in the discussion, felt it to be his duty to refer the matter to his own government for its further decision.'

1

1Messages and Papers of the Presidents, III, 603, 604.

In a later period of the controversy, with considerable contempt for such international shortcomings, Mr. Webster remarked: "A very promising condition of things to exist fifty-seven years after the conclusion of the treaty!" Evidently there was need of some such expression of strong, dissatisfied feeling. Even the points most recently raised in connection with the projects and counterprojects of the preceding chapter had now been under consideration for some time; yet the president had no other word as to the outlook for the country than an expression of hope as to a 'prompt and satisfactory termination of the negotiation." The fact was, however, that the American proposals were received in England as Mr. Fox had foreseen. Lord Palmerston would not notice them in any way, and gave up the negotiation in apparent despair. There was no hope of doing anything with the Van Buren government, he said. Until another administration should come into power, nothing could be accomplished. That day, however, was not far away, General Harrison having already been elected president of the United States. But Lord Palmerston, as well as President Van Buren, was about to retire from office, yet only four days before the British premier's retirement, he presented new proposals to the government of the United States. Sir Robert Peel, in the House of Commons, referring to these proposals, said they were to this effect: that commissioners should be nominated on both sides; that they should attempt to settle this long disputed question; and then, if that attempt should fail, the king of Prussia, the king of Sweden and the king of Saxony were to be called in, not to act as umpires, but each to name an expert in science, the three to form a commission of scientists for action as arbitrators. "Was there ever a proposition like this," asked Sir Robert, "for the arrangement of a question on which two countries had differed for fifty-eight years?" And this, he said, was proposed after the failure of the king of Holland as an arbitrator, and after the failure of their commission of exploration. The three kings were to appoint three scientists, foreign professors, one from Prussia, one from Sardinia and one from Saxony!

To do what?

Where were they to meet? How were they to come to a satisfactory agreement? Any such proposal, Sir Robert considered unworthy of consideration.

Mr. Webster, also, had his amusement over Lord Palmerston's proposal. "It was asked in the House of Commons, not inaptly," he said, "What would the people of Maine think, when they should read that they were to be visited by three learned foreigners, one from Prussia, one from Saxony and one from Sardinia? To be sure, what would they think, when they should see three learned foreign professors, each speaking a different language, and none of them the English or American tongue, among the swamps and morasses of Maine in summer, or wading through the snows of winter-on the Allegash, the Magaguadavic, or among the moose and deer, on the precipitous and lofty shores of Pohenagamook, and for what? To find where the division was between Maine and New Brunswick, instructing themselves by these labors, that they might repair to Frankfort-on-the-Main, and there hold solemn and scientific arbitration on the question of a boundary line in one of the deepest wildernesses of North America!''1

Edward Kent again became governor of Maine at the opening of 1841.2 In his reference to boundary matters in his annual message to the Legislature, he was not as hopeful of a speedy and satisfactory settlement as was President Van Buren. He said: "The arrangement assented to on the part of Maine in 1839, by which, on condition that Maine should remain in undisputed possession of part of the territory, it was stipulated that we should not attempt to disturb by arms the Province of New Brunswick in the possession of the Madawaska settlements,' was acquiesced in by the people only on the ground and the belief that immediate and determined efforts were to be, in good faith, adopted by both general governments, to bring the matter to a speedy, just and final determination. Indulging such hopes, Maine has certainly

1The Works of Daniel Webster. Boston, Little & Brown, V, 95, 96.

2 The vote was a very close one. Edward Kent, Whig, received 45,574 votes, and John Fairfield, Democrat, 45,507.

yielded much in the matter of temporary arrangements influenced by the wish to preserve the peace of the country and to remove all obstacles to the progress of negotiation. But she has a right to ask, when she yields so much, that her motives should be appreciated and her cause become the cause of the whole country and pressed with vigor and energy to a final settlement. In the meantime it is our duty to keep our eyes and our thoughts upon the starting point of the treaty-the northwest angle of Nova Scotia and the highlands from thence so plainly specified in the treaty, and not suffer ourselves to be drawn away into discussions, whether the monument at the source of the St. Croix, which was located by both governments more than forty years since and is fully established, is at the true point; or whether it is not possible that antediluvian mountains existed, which, by some geological process have become abraded and worn down, and have now become the beds of large rivers. The face of the earth, as it existed in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three, is to determine the location of the highlands of the treaty; and the mere speculations of self-styled geologists concerning imaginary or theoretical highlands, which probably never had existed except in the fancies of speculative theorists, cannot fairly and legitimately have the slightest influence upon the pending question, more especially when, if it could be demonstrated that the assumed line now exists, it would not answer any of the requirements of the treaty."

In these words addressed to the Legislature, there was certainly no indication that Maine was prepared to withdraw from the position she had hitherto found a veritable stronghold, namely, the boundary description in the treaty of 1783. Nor was it easy for Governor Kent to indulge the hope of a speedy and satisfactory settlement of the differences between the United States and Great Britain, as expressed by the president in his message. Past delays and lessons of experience learned in connection with the assertion of the growing claims of Great Britain, and which had become increasingly irritating, could have no other effect than to moderate

such hopes very considerably. But, as the governor knew, the president was in a position from which he had an opportunity for obtaining larger information, and he added: "If, however, the president has cause to say that there is an undoubted disposition of both parties, to bring the matter to an early conclusion, we may, without the charge of being too sanguine in our anticipations, confidently trust that a fair, equal and honorable proposition for a commission, with final power to end the dispute, will be readily and fully assented to by the English government, unless there is a fixed determination on its part to bring the matter to the last resort of nations. The time cannot be far distant, when the question must assume a more definite shape, either peaceable or warlike; and much as we may deprecate the awful evils and miseries of war, we ought to be prepared to meet the issue (if such, after all, is the determination of our opponents) with the firmness of men, who feel that they have the right, and who will not yield, to threats or force, the inheritance of our fathers and the rightful territory of our State."1

So much of Governor Kent's message as referred to the boundary controversy, also the message of the late governor communicating his recent correspondence with the lieutenant governor of New Brunswick and the president of the United States, together with the resolution of the Legislatures of Indiana, Alabama and Maryland, relating to the boundary controversy, were referred by the Legislature of Maine to a joint select committee, which on March 30th presented an extended report, prepared by its chairman, Mr. Charles S. Daveis, of Portland. Mr. Daveis had been familiar with the progress of the controversy from the time when Maine assumed her place in the Federal Union, and had made a very careful study of the history of the controversy from the beginning. His report was largely a vindication of the justice of Maine's contention, having regard both to rights and principles, also to the course which the state authorities had pursued and the position which they still maintained, solicitous only that Maine 1Resolves of Maine, IV, 667, 668.