divides the rivers that fall into the Atlantic Ocean from those which empty themselves into the River St. Lawrence, in the same manner as the Rhine divides France from Poland, and as the Hudson River divides New-York from Pennsylvania.

As a subsidiary argument, whilst it was contended, in opposition to the American line, that the negotiators were entirely unacquainted with the topography of the country, it was asserted that they did, by the terms of the treaty, intend to describe the north-western angle of Nova Scotia and the boundary line claimed on the part of Great Britain. Now, you see, that the course of the main River St. John from the due north line to its western source and the position of that river in relation to the sources of the River St. Croix, of the Penobscot, and of the tributary streams of the River St. Lawrence, between the Temiscouata Portage and heads of Connecticut River, are laid down with remarkable correctness on Mitchell's map; and, I may add, on all the subsequent English maps published before the year 1782.

It is manifest by Mitchell's map and those of a subsequent date, and it was therefore perfectly well known to the negotiators, that no point of the due north line, south of the River St. John, did or could divide, from each other, any rivers whatever but some branches of the said River St. John;-that the source of the River Chaudiere was about 120 miles distant, and in a westwardly course from any such point of the due north line; that no line whatever, drawn from any such point of the said due north line south of the River St. John, and keeping south of that river, could, between that point and the source of the River Chaudiere, (or of any other tributary of the River St. Lawrence,) divide from any river whatever, any of the rivers emptying them

E

selves into the River St. Lawrence; and that such line, through its whole length of 120 miles, could divide no other rivers whatever but the southern branches of the River St. John, from the branches of the Rivers St. Croix, Penobscot, and Kennebec.

With those facts before them, if the negotiators of the treaty had intended that the north-west angle of Nova Scotia should be placed on highlands situated south of the River St. John, or on any point of the due north line lying between and dividing only tributary streams of the River St. John, it is impossible that they should have described that angle as being on highlands dividing the waters of the River St. Lawrence from rivers falling into the Atlantic Ocean.

It is equally impossible that, if the negotiators intended that the boundary, from the due north line to the sources of the Chaudiere, should, for one hundred and twenty miles, either divide the sources of the Penobscot and of the Kennebec from those of the St. John, or should, without dividing any rivers, only intersect branches of the St. John, they should have described such a boundary, as being on highlands dividing the waters of the River St. Lawrence from the rivers falling into the Atlantic Ocean.

What renders the supposition, that those ministers expressed themselves in terms so contradictory of the intentions gratuitously ascribed to them, still more untenable, is, that there would not have been the slightest difficulty, with Mitchell's map before them, in defining with the utmost precision, if so intended, the boundary line as now contended for by Great Britain.

Had the intention been, as was affirmed, to assign to Great Britain the whole of the basin of the River St. John, there would not have been any occasion, either to refer to the north-west angle of Nova Scotia, or that any part of the boundary should have been a line drawn due north from the source of the River St. Croix. In that case, the boundary would, by an ordinary conveyancer in possession of Mitchell's map, and of the intentions of the parties, have been described in the following words, or in others as explicit, and of the same import, viz:

" From the source of the River St. Croix, along the high" lands which divide the rivers that empty themselves either " into the River St. John, or into the River St. Lawrence, " from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean, west of the "mouth of the River St. Croix, to the northwesternmost " head of Connecticut River..... East by a line "drawn along the middle of the River St. Croix, from its " mouth in the Bay of Fundy to its source."

Had it been intended, though for what object, with the intentions ascribed to the negotiators, is altogether unintelligible, that a due north line drawn from the source of the River St. Croix, should form a part of the boundary, a slight alteration in the phraseology, would, with equal facility, have effected that purpose.

It is well known that this extraordinary pretension was suggested by the British Agent, under the Joint Commission of 1818, who, having also been the Agent before the Joint Commission of 1798, had then expressly declared that the north line must of necessity cross the River St. John, but that, if it was drawn from the source of the western branch of the Schoodiac, it would cross that river in a part of it almost at the foot of the highlands. 'That Agent, one of the first settlers of the Province of New Brunswick, thoroughly acquainted with the subject, was, as late as the year 1798, of opinion that the highlands of the treaty lay north of the River St. John, and that the north line, in order to meet them, must cross that river. Sir ROBERT LISTON, then his Britannic Majesty's Minister to the United States, construed the treaty in the same manner.

The proceedings of the Joint Commission of 1818 were not published, and excited but little sensation at the time. It was only generally known that the Commissioners had not agreed, and that the reference to a foreign power, provided by the treaty of Ghent, had become necessary. I was, for the first time, made acquainted with the claim set up by Great Britain in the spring of the year 1826, when appointed Minister to the British Court.

Wherever this pretension was known, it excited a general surprise and indignation. It was no longer an attempted construction of the articles of the treaty. It was viewed generally in America as being, not an interpretation, but a direct and obvious violation of the express terms of the treaty.

You will find, by the official documents deposited in your library, with what pertinacity the claim was sustained by the British Agents: and you know that the extraordinary arguments to the same effect, contained in the Report of Messrs. FEATHERSTONHAUGH and MUDGE, were laid officially before Parliament. Subsequently a better spirit was evinced; and this was followed by the conciliatory mission of Lord ASHBURTON. That the Government of Great Britain should ever have countenanced this pretended interpretation, has ever been, and is to this day, altogether incomprehensible to me. In the discussion of this pretension, the only difficulty on the part of the United States was that which was experienced in an attempt to demonstrate a self-evident axiom, or to refute such an assertion as that "two and two make five."

But this attempt was a fatal mistake, which shook the confidence justly due to the British Government for its fidelity in fulfilling its engagements, and which, by the excitement it produced and the incidents following from it, produced dangerous collisions, and prevented during a period of twelve years any approximation towards a conciliatory compromise. And now that such a compromise has happily been effected, the attempts lately made to renew the discussion on that particular subject can have, and have had, no other effect but to irritate.

It appears that Count DE VERGENNES did, on the 5th of December, 1782, send some one map to Dr. FRANKLIN, with a request that he would delineate on it the limits of the United States, as settled in the preliminaries between the British and American Plenipotentiaries; and that the map was returned the ensuing day by Dr. FRANKLIN, with a note, stating that he had marked with a strong red line the limits aforesaid. It further appears, that in the geographical department of the French Archives of Foreign Affairs, which contains 60,000 maps, there is one of North America by Danville, dated 1746, in size about eighteen inches square, on which is drawn a strong red line throughout the entire boundary of the United States; which line runs wholly south of the St. John, and between the head waters of that river and those of the Penobscot and Kennebec: it is the line