"Resolved, That there shall be chosen, by ballot, in convention of both branches of the Legislature, four persons who are hereby constituted and appointed commissioners on the part of this State, to repair to the seat of government of the United States and to confer with the authorities of that government touching a conventional line, or line by agreement, between the State of Maine and the British provinces, having regard to the line designated by the treaty of 1783, as uniformly claimed by this State, and to the declarations and views expressed in the foregoing preamble, and to give the assent of this State to any such conventional line, with such terms, conditions, considerations and equivalents as they shall deem consistent with the honor and interests of the State; with the understanding that no such line be agreed upon without the unanimous consent of such commissioners.

"Resolved, That this State cannot regard the relinquishment by the British government of any claim heretofore advanced by it to territory included within the limits of the line of this State, as designated by the treaty of 1783 and uniformly claimed by Maine, as a consideration or equivalent within the meaning of these resolutions." 1

It was understood that the commissioners would be taken from the two political parties in the state. A ballot resulted in the choice of William Pitt Preble and Edward Kavanagh representing the Democrats of Maine, and Edward Kent and John Otis representing the Whigs. The governor of Massachusetts appointed three commissioners, Abbot Lawrence, John Mills and Charles Allen.

This action of the Legislature was commended with great unanimity by the Maine newspapers. The Daily Advertiser, Portland, June 1st, contained this editorial comment: "The appointment of commissioners, with full and unlimited powers to settle our boundary line in the exercise of a sound discretion only, was a matter which called for calm, dispassionate discussion, and necessarily required a little time. With the exception of one day, the debates on this subject were conducted with a spirit of candor and harmony seldom witnessed in our legislative halls; and it should be a matter of gratification to every good citizen to know that their representatives have nobly seconded their desires to have this vexed and irritating question of the boundary line

1 Three minor resolutions with reference to the commissioners followed. Resolves of Maine, 1842, 110, 111.

peaceably and honorably settled. The public press of our State (with a single exception), which is a true index of the public mind, were favorably disposed to the appointment of commissioners with ample powers to terminate a controversy of half a century's duration.) The Legislature have carried out the wishes of the people by the appointment of commissioners, and it is now for them to perform the responsible duties for which they have been selected." The Bangor Democrat had this expression of approval: "We did not anticipate such remarkable unanimity, and cannot but admire the patriotic feeling that was all powerful in allaying party spirit and uniting all interests in the common cause. The attitude the State has assumed has prepared the way, we hope, for a favorable disposition of the question; but if the parties cannot agree upon terms we shall have the proud satisfaction of knowing that we have not unreasonably interposed obstacles to prevent it. From the conciliatory course now taken we can hereafter appeal with the more confidence to the general government and the people of the Union to aid us in forcibly asserting our rights which could not be obtained by milder measures. But we hope for the settlement of difficulties, and shall rely on the good faith of the other party to the controversy until events show that our confidence has been misplaced.

1 Cited by The Daily Eastern Argus, Portland, June 1, 1842.

レ

T

CHAPTER XVIII.

THE ASHBURTON-WEBSTER NEGOTIATION.

HE Maine commissioners proceeded to Washington without delay, arriving at the capital on June 12th. Lord Ashburton had now been in the country about two months, but his formal official correspondence with Mr. Webster did not begin until after the arrival of the Maine commissioners. In his first letter, the British envoy expressed the opinion that no advantage was to be derived by again going over the general grounds on which hitherto the United States and Great Britain had rested their territorial claims. All arguments, he said, had been exhausted. Any new attempt must rest for its success on the presumption that previous efforts having failed, there remained the only alternative of a compromise unless the two countries would make a second trial of arbitration, with its delays, troubles and expense, and in defiance of probable ill success. In fact, he trusted that all parties interested would come to the conclusion that the case could be considered more fairly by the two governments than by any third party.

With this view of the case, Lord Ashburton called attention to what he regarded as some public misapprehensions concerning the controversy. It had been maintained, he remarked, that the whole trouble began in 1814; until that time, it was asserted, the line claimed by Maine was undisputed by Great Britain; that the British claim was founded on a desire to obtain the means of conveniently connecting the British provinces in North America. This last assertion, he said, was founded on the discussions that preceded the treaty of Ghent in 1814. Such a proposal was submitted by the British plenipotentiaries for a revision of the boundary line on the ground that Great Britain desired to secure favorable communications between Lower Canada and the mari