IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) ^<^ ^ .fi ^/ ^ 1.0 I.I 11.25 U|2£ Ijj 1^ |2.2 U 11.6 — A" Hiotographic Sciences Corporation n3 WIST MAIN STRUT WiBSTH.N.Y. 14SS0 (7i«) srs tS03 ,,1 L CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquas at bibliographiquas Tha Instituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha inagas in tha reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D □ D D D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur r~7| Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagda Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^ at/ou pelliculAe □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque r~71 Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiquas an couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.o. autre que bleue ou noire) □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planchak at/ou illustrations 9n couleur Bound with other material/ Raiid avac d'autres documents rri Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure sarr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ li se peut que certainas pages blanches ajoutias lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans la texte, mais, iorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6ti filmias. Additional comments:/ Commentairas suppiimentairas: L'Institut a microfilm^ la mailleur examplaire qu'il lui a 6tA possible de se procurer. Les ddtaiis da cat exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mAthoda normale de filmage sont indiqute ci-dassous. I I Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^as Pages restored and/oi Pages rastaur^es at/ou palliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages d6color6es, tachet^es ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages ditachdes Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quaiiti inigaia de I'impression Includes supplementary maturif Comprend du material suppl^mantaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible r~y\ Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ I n Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ r~^ Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary maturial/ I I Only edition available/ D Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partieliement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont i'i film6es A nouveau de faqon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi au taux de rMuction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X •y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thank* to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire film* f ut reproduit grAce k la g*n6rosit6 de: La bibiiothdque des Archives publiques du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering tiie condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustratbd impres- sion, or the back cover when appropr'tte. All other original copies are filmed beginiwng on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avee le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetA de I'exempiaire f ilm6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimte sont fiimAs en comm y^nt par le premier plat et en terminant soit par ia dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par ie second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmte en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derniAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symboi — ^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur ia derniire image de cheque microfiche, seion le cas: ie symbols — ^ signifie "A SUiVRE", ie symbols V signifie "FIN". IVIaps, pie :e8, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre fiimis d des taux de rMuction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atri reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film^ A pertir de i'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant ie nombre d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m^thode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 SxL ^. ^ ,«| ^ , *-.' w'i 'f:}\ 'vst \^ ml"! *. iPf^i|WW-*!^^N^<-^fP^ •V <•" •"?'' t . '-' I ♦ . • ■■hss: vrr^ '.»;■", The republication of the present series of works has been un- dertaken at the expense of some merchants of the City of Glas- gow, who are actuated by deep alarm for the national welfare, and desirous that documents and proofs, unfolding the sources of the disastrous system pursued in the management of the public interests of this country, should be placed within the reach of their fellow-countrymen. 5* %. X 'iitttJStp. ■■*LAa4»*/*:4.;a«i-'i5!aii, lAkMO)" Jt*>^ ■>«„^]&»tb .*;'-■ r \^ \- DIPLOMACY AND COMMERCE. No. I. EXPOSITION OP THE BOUNDARY DIFFERENCES GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES. 7 .. *.••■•■>-, ,-.!■ •• ^V •., if >•; [FROM THE MIRROR OF PARLIAMENT.] House of Commons, August 26, 1839. " Mr. D'Israeli, — I beg to present a petition, Sir, from cer- tain merchants and ship-owners of the city of London. It is most respectably signed ; and, among others, by gentlemen who are now, and several who have been, Members of this House ; by the Committee of the North American Association ; by the President of the South American Association; and other firms -of great respectability, stating — " * That the Minister for Foreign Affairs, to whose intelligence and integrity are intrusted the honour and interests of this coun- try has been publicly charged with criminality of the gravest character, in an «« EXPOSITION OF^THE BOUNDARY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES, ADDRESSED TO THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF SHEFFIELD. BY DAVID URQUHART, ESQ."' " The petitioners, therefore, pray this Honourable House to institute an inquiry into these allegations, demanded alike by the honour of the Minister, and the inter6sts of the nation." J' *'.v a* i-'^^ii"fa,im)',y|^jg^f^-^»^y)j^liljH'^-,^if ~0 ^'^{i f"^'f;:^^jLfi. \ . -^4tt_ ' ^ 1^> ■ I Lidio^Fsplied bv ^heliirc i- MarHtmwli , SI 60 EX POSITION "^ t or THE BOUNDARY DIFFERENCES GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES, SUBBE<|CBNTLV TO THEIR ADJUSTMENT BY ARBITRATION. " The tranquillity of the people, the safety of states, the happinese of the human race, do not allow that the rights, frontiers, sovereignty, and other possessions of nations, should remain uncertain, subject to dispute, and ever ready to occasion bloody wara."— FtUtel't Law of Nationt. " May we give them as little cause as possible to recollect that they are not British subjects. "—Toumfemi— 1783. DRAWN UP \T THE REQUEST OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AT SHEFFIELD. By DAVID URQUHART, Esq. GLASGOW:— JOHN SMITH & SON. EDINBURGH:— WILLIAM BLACKWOOD & SONS. LONDON:— JAMES ERASER. MDCCCXL. )('*■ ./'i ** I Bell and Bain, Printe. j, Royal Exchange Court, Glasgow. { /*> ...%W PREFACE TO THE FIRST PUBLISHED EDITION. " It i8 a fearful position for a country, when Parliament is acquainted with the posi- tion of the nation, oniy_ by vague rumours that reach it from abroad.''— Z-ord Falmeriton's Speech while in oppotition. ^^^^^0t0*^^^^^v* Diplomatic transactions are, for the most part, clothed in language ofa peculiar kind, enveloped, whenevermismanaged, in mystery, and never exposed to the public eye until all immediace interest in them has passed away. However, therefore, individuals may feel the desire or duty of becom- ing acquainted with the position occupied by their country amid the powers of the world, they are repelled by technical difficulties, or confused by falsified and partial statements ; they know not where to begin, how to obtain information : their desires remain unsatisfied, and their efforts produce no results. The subject to which the following pages are devoted, is, however, one of which any mercantile man may make himself master with the greatest ease. It is, indeed, one which he is more likely to appreciate at once, and accurately, than those who, more accustomed to what is called public or political life, have lost, in some degree, the faculty of perceiving what is plain, and comprehending what is simple. The question here treated of, is one of the gravest im- portance ; involving peace or war in Europe and America, and placing in hazard the existence of every nation and crown in Europe. It must, therefore, be a satisfaction of no ordinary character, to those who are beginning to feel anxious respecting the safety of the state, to find the details of such a negociation placed within their reach, and ap- pearing in a form (that of arbitration) with the character of which almost every individual is familiar. An insight into this transaction affords the means of judging of the diplomatic system under which this country is placed ; as also of the value of the constitutional checks which the British nation possesses, to screen itself from the effects of ignorance, error, corruption, or treason^ in the exercise of its highest executive functions — those of the Foreign Minister. ■'V""f>W"">|W"ii""7- ■^Bi,IJ''.*?'.^lfT."J"'> "'."".-:",*«. V?'-VW(WWWW?N».' J :?V!I^M*.>WVIJ!PV vni rilEFACE. It was in the year 1837 that I first turaed my attention particularly to the North-East Boundary question, and I did so not from any special interest in that subject, but be- cause I felt that a knowledge of it was necessary for the comprehension of the policy of Russia and France. Con- vinced of the secret understanding of these powers,* and of their common ambition to dispossess Great Britain of her possessions in the East and in the West, (possessions which have been, in part, both in Asia and America, ex- torted from France — possessions, towards which Russia is extending herself in Asia at once, and in America,) — I felt that the relations of England and of the United States must be the subject of anxious deliberation to the Govern- ments of France and Russia. In the pursuit of this settled policy of aggression, Russia and France must have directed their eflPorts to the gradual disturbance of the British possessions. They must have aimed at leading other states into similar projects of aggres- sion; and at depriving England of strength by the violation of international and maritime law and right, through the observance of which, harmony and good will can alone be preserved between nations. Had the United States entertained no aggressive views, that State must have been interested in the triumphs of industry, and the extension of commerce; and, in the event of collision between Great Britain and France and Russia, must have thrown its weight into the scale of jus- tice, and have taken its stand by the side of England. It, therefore, became necessary that the United States should be led to indulge in ambitious projects, should be aroused to enmity towards this country, and, finally, to aggressions against our North American possessions. To prevent the settlement of the North-East Boundary differences between Great Britain and the United States^ — afforded the means to this end. A long investigation of our foreign relations had forced on me the conviction, that the Foreign Minister of Great Britain had been brought into the dependence of Russia, and that he (not ignorantly and unadvisedly,) as Minister of England, carried into effect the objects of Russia^ This conviction was based, not on the acts of that Minister upon one field, or in regard to any individual question, but was derived from and borne out bj his acts in every country * It will, of course, be understood, that in speaking of France, I speak of a power, not a people. To understand its actions or its objects, it is necessary to know, not the thoughts of the nation, but the intentions of two or three leading men. TREFACE. IX with which I was acquainted, and with regard to every question which I had had an opportunity of examining. 1 turned, therefore, to the examination of the North-East Boundary question, as one calculated to throw additional light on the conduct of the Foreign Secretary. When my attention was first turned to this question, little or no interest existed in this country with regard to it ; no steps had been taken with reference to it in Parlia- ment, and none of the transactions connected with it had been made public. But the mere knowledge that the award had been rendered in 1831, and had not been carried into execution, seemed to justify my worst suspicions, further confirmed by the silence and the secrecy in which these negociations were involved. The papers connected with it were then demanded in Parliament, and two sets of documents were laid on the tables of both Houses in the course of the year 1838: they, however, gave rise to no motion, — no discussion, — to no observation in the House, extraordinary and startling as were their contents. The following pages are devoted to the exposition of the contents of these documents, and present official evidence of the design of the Foreign Secretary to set aside the award of the King of Holland, and thereby to carry out, on this field also, the policy of .Russia. That which is perhaps the most remarkable feature of this transaction — tne earliest in date, and almost the first in magnitude, of the crimes of the Foreign Secretary, is the preparation for subsequent misrepresentation, which is ob- servable from the very outset. When a public servant has committed himself through ignorance or inability, you can suppose him labouring to falsify past facts, to mislead present opinion. Criminality of a very different order is revealed when you peceive pre- paration made for misrepresentation. Has the award of the King of Holland been set aside by the art of the American diplomatists? and has Lord Pal- merston subsequently endeavoured to prevent the detection of their superiority and of his inferiority ? or has Lord Pal- merston led the United States to join with him in setting aside the award ? If so, has he done so as the representa- tive of a policy adopted by his colleagues, or has he done so for a special purpose of his own ? These are the ques- tions to be asked. I reply, and the pages that follow will prove, that He has brought about the rejection of the award — that He has effected this without the knowledge or the concurrence of his colleagues. If Lord Palmerston has acted thus on one occasion, » * '1- I X PREFACR. may he not have done so on others ? must he not have done so on all ? and is it not enough that he should have done so on one, to prove the guilt of the man, the danger of the state, the apathy of the nation, and the complete incom- patibility of the public men of the day to deal with those questions which the fortune and the circumstances of this land have gathered around it, and which their position has imposed upon them the necessity of understanding or of sacrificing ? It must be here observed that this position is wholly new in England. England has been indeed infamously distin- guished in other days for the treason of her foreign min- isters ; still those ministers were free from collusion with foreign powers directly hostile to the British state. It was for the benefit of a Pretender or of a persecuted Religion: — It was to be indifferent to the maintenance of the balance of justice that the powerful and the unjust purchased with money the blindness or the silence of the servants of the British crown. In the present instance, however, the Bri- tish minister who has betrayed his country, has betrayed it to a power acting directly for its overthrow. He has not sold his eye-sight to his sense of hearing, he has not resigned his power of action or of deliberation. He has i'oined actively, energetically, the enemy of his country, — le has spread Britain's hostility to herself over both hemis- pheres, — extended it to every shore — to every race — to every state, and to every interest where Russia can have anything to gain by the direct loss of Britain, or by the degradation of her name, the sacrifice of her rights, the downfal of her power. This work is now published for the first time ; but it was printed in the month of April last year. It has been suffi- ciently circulated to have come to the knowledge of the principal men connected with public life. It has been the subject of articles in leading journals on every side of poli- tics, and has been the grounds of a petition to the House of Commons for inquiring into the conduct of the Foreign Secretary, signed by the leading merchants connected with North and South America. There has been not the re- motest attempt at refutation either in the press or in Parlia- ment ; and on the presentation to the House of the petition, the Foreign Secretary absented himself. I may here observe, that this is not the only subject with regard to which I have brought home to the Foreign Secre- tary a similar charge equally supported on official ev' lence ; and that in every other case, as m this, re-echoed as those charges have been by men of opposite parties in the House PREFACE. xi of Commons, no attempt whatever has been made by the Foreign Secretary, or any one else, to controvert my state- ments or to meet my arguments, so that the present system of fraud and of hostility to this nation remains without a cloud to shield it, or a pretext to support it — which stands based alone on a senate's ignorance «nd a people's apathy. Since these pages were written, a new step has been taken in regard to tnis matter. Another commission has been sent out to explore the disputed region, composed of a mili- tary and a professional surveyor — Colonel Mudge and Mr. Featherstonhaugh. The first is, I understand, a gentle- man who has long resided in America, and whose feelings and associations are entirely American. The second is, I perceive by the newspapers of British North America, an Englishman by birth, who is, or has been, in the service and the pay of the United States, and who has renounced and forsworn his allegiance to the British crown, and who con- sequently, in the eye of the British law, is a felon ! Comment is unnecessary. with f| liiL . ' .» ■ Mi ' "i ■ : ij.' I ' |f 1 i ■ ■ i • - 1 1 1 1 1 s i "■ 1 * • 1 '' ! ■ ^ ! I'r \ 1 ; 1 1 if 1 : i! ,1 • 1 . ! i 1 [ ■ 1 -1; ■ III -■i i',* 1." — ^_ . _, . y Ciypy of a ResoltUion passed at a Meeting of the Chamber of Commerce, held at the Cutler's Hall. Sheffield, March 26, 1839. ReSOLVED, That this Meeting regards the settlement of the question of the North-east Boundary Line, still pending between this Country and the United States, as of vital importance to the commercial interest of both Countries ; and that the Secretary be requested to write to David Urquhart, Esq., soliciting his views upon this interesting and important subject ; especially with re- ference to the rights of Great Britain, and the effect which the non-settlement of this question may have upon our Trade. Sheffield, March 27, 1839. Sir, Annexed I hand you copy of a Resolution passed unanimously at a Meeting of our Chamber of Commerce. The importance which the North-east Boundary Line has now as- sumed, and the great difficulty of forming a correct opinion upon it in the present state of the case, has compelled us to seek at your hands, that information by means of which we can the better understand its bearings. Knowing, as we do, the amplitude of your information on all diplomatic questions and international affairs, we hope you will pardon this trespass upon your time. The great willingness with which you entered into many subjects, of deep interest in a com- mercial and national point of view, when we had the pleasure of seeing you here, emboldens us to take this step. ii'i ^ J n li^f ilip ili N V^ 'wi Iii tT ; h ■ > XIV Hoping that your health is sufKciently restored to enable you, without the liability of further injury, to comply with our request, I beg to subscribe myself, SiK, Your very faithful and obedient Servant, CHARLES CONGREVE, Secretary. To David Urquhart, Esq. Speke Hail, April \2th, 1839. Sir, My delay in acknowledging the receipt of the Resolution of the Chamber of Commerce, of March the 26th, and in replying to your letter of the 27th, has been occasioned by my immediate and entire application to the task you have as- signed me. The Papers presented to Parliament, have been so arranged, the Diplomatic transactions so adjusted, and the Documents so worded, that it has been a task of no ordinary difficulty to arrive at the simple facts ; and still more difficult to render them intel^ ligible, to make them clear, and to prove them true. The best consideration which I have been enabled to give to the subject, has brought me to the conclusion, that the complica- tions and dangers of this question spring solely from the non- execution of the Award pronounced by the King of Holland ; to accept which, both nations ivere, and are, bound; — no interna- tional act having abrogated its authority. It appears to me that I have satisfactorily established the fol- lowing points : — 1. That there has been a settled purpose on the part of the British Minister to set aside the Award ; and, consequently, to disguise the truths, and to falsify the facts :— 2. That not to have exacted and enforced the execution of the Award, after its adoption by the British Crown, was a dereliction of duty, — a violation of the nation's rights ; it Mas to degrade the dignity of the Crown, and to involve this empire in difficulty and danger. 3. That this neglect has resulted, not from culpable negligence, but from criminal intention, exhibited in a variety of circum- stances, extending over a series of years : — 4. That the enforcement of the Award is now the only ad- missible ground of adjustment : — 5. That to abandon the Award, is to sacrifice our public rights and national honour ; and to fulfil and accomplish the scheme of foreign hostility, of which the Secretary for Foreign Affairs has been the agent. XV 6. If the Award of the King of Holland is binding on Great Britain and the United States ; if its fulfilment (were it not bind> ing) is the only practicable settlement, then it is imperative on the nation to arrest any attempt at a new arbitration. The convictions which I state now when collision is imminent, I have already stated at ShefKeld. Long before the occurrence of the events which have directed your attention so intently and painfully to Boundary "differences," I have pointed out that question as the most alarming, and that transaction as the most disgraceful, in the wide range of our dangers and our dishonour. That it required an armed assault by one of the States of the American Union, to call any attention to such a subject in the Parliament or the nation, is the amplest proof of the negligence that prevails — of the disasters which that negligence may produce, and the ruin it must ultimately entail. By the disregard of the mercantile class for all that nations have hitherto deemed prudent and considered just, the public service of this constitutional state has been reduced to a position, in which a negligent or a criminal Minister has only to sacrifice a British interest to secure the support of every foreign influence hostile to Great Britain. He secures, also, the support of the party to which he belongs, by committing it to a false line : — he is secure of the silence of the party to which he is opposed, from ignorance of facts and consciousness of error. In regard to this question, the party in power is committed through the Foreign Minister ; — the party in opposition is com- mitted through the misconception of the question when in office in 1835 ; — the third party has expressed in both Houses the doctrine, that the claims of Great Britain are unjust. No one, in either House, was found to contradict this assertion, except the Minister by whom the facts had been misrepresented. The rights secured to Great Britain by treaty, the result of triumphs on land and sea, bought by British blood, and purchased by two thousand millions of treasure, are an inalienable portion of our national and individual property. They are beyond all othei rights; they are our existence as a nation and a name. The abandonment of any one of these, touches the honour and the wel- fare, the political independence, and the individual possessions, of each member of the State ; it is treason ta the nation, the consti- tution, and the throne. The integrity of our national rights is the source of prosperity — the basis of security — the bond of government — the condition of allegiance. Bankruptcy, war, convulsion, and disloyalty, are the results of the infraction of treaties, — of the dishonour to that which is the personification of our unity, the expression of our rights, the emblem of our power, the record of our fathers, and the promise to our sons, — our national flag. The recollection of the interesting days I spent at Sheffield, and of the zealous and enthusiastic adoption there by the leading men of all parties — of British and national interests, leads me to feel no small gratification in addressing to the Chamber of Com- merce of that town, this exposition of a question, which I con- i } II, > %: ceive dangerous only because misrepresented, and a correct coni« prehension of which is a duty in every Briton — a duty to Ame- rica as well as to England — to mankind as well as to his country. I have the honour to be, Sib, Your obedient humble Servant, D. URQUHART. To Charles Congreve, Esq. Secretary to the C/iamber of Commerce, S/u'JfieUl. P. S. I have thought it better to send you ray Analysis in print. The shortness of time, my seclusion here, and consequent inability to refer to authorities, have been serious obstacles to the elucidation of this subject ; and I have from the Hrst cause also to apprehend repetitions and om'.ssions. :[ Erratum. Page 44, line eleventh, for " modification of the Award," read " modification of the Boundary after the acceptance of the Award." CONTENTS. PART I. State of the Question, before Reference to the Kino of Holland, PART II. The Reception of the Award of the Kino op Holland in America, AND THE Measures thereupon adopted by the Governments of Great Britain and the United States, PART III. Outrages Committed by Subjects and Subordinate Authorities of the United States aoainst the Rights of the British Crown, . PART IV. Double Instructions of Lord Palmerston, and consequent Rejec- tion of thic Award by the Government ok the United States, PART V. Course of Negociations subsequently to the Rfjection of the Award by the United States, Objections to tho Award of iho King of Holland, Project ot a New Commission, PART VI. Recapitulation — Violation of National Compact— Betrayal by the Foreign Secretary op the Public Interests — His Assumption op Unconstitutional Power— Only Remedy, Impeachment, PART VII. Consequences to Europe and America of the Abandonment ok the Award, 13 31 39 53 67 69 71 Appendix; (Part I.): — Extract from the Fourth Article of the Treaty of Ghent, (1014,) Extracts from a Convention between his Britannick Majesty and the United States of America, Relative to the Reference to Arbitration of tho Disputed Points under the Fifth Article of tho Treaty of Ghent. Signed at London, September 29, 1827 Extracts from the Award of the King of Holland, .... Appendix; (Part IV.): — Correspondence between Lord P-^lmerston and Charles Bankhead, Esq., Debates in the House of Commons on the North-East Boundary, from 1831 to 1837.— (Extracted from the Mirror of Parliament.) . Merits of tho Boundary Question. — (Extracted from tho Albion, Now York Paper, March, 1839.) Extracts firom Channing's Letter on the Annexation of the Texas, u ii iU vm xui xvi ^ (!} lilii I ^ PART I. STATE OF THE QUESTION BEFORE REFERENCE TO THE KING OF HOLLAND. "the AMBBICAN commissioners have enriched the ENGLISH DICTIONARY WITH NEW TERMS AND PHRASES RECIPROCAL ADVANTAGE, FOR INSTANCE, MEANS THE ADVANTAGE OF ONE OF THE PARTIES ; AND A REGULATION OF BOUNDARIES, — ACCESSION OF TERRITORY." — Lord Stormont, 1783. By the treaty signed in Paris, in x /83, between Great ^?X*U™1 Britain and the United States, by which the independence ^Ji'^tV^""' of these States and their sovereignty were recognized, a Boundary Line was fixed, separating from the United States the possessions still remaining to Great Britain in North America. In the adjustment of this frontier, be- tween the Atlantic Ocean and the Connecticut River, the physical features of the country were so vaguely and er- roneously laid down, that it was found impracticable to trace a frontier that should coincide with the constructive line of the Treaty, and the (assumed) natural features of the country. This region, however, being at the time uninhabited, little interest was excited with regard to the territory in dispute, or the claims in abeyance. The astute and reso- lute representatives of America, who, in the framing and j interpreting of treaties, in asserting or in infringing rights, have so invariably profited by the loss of this country, had i succeeded it would appear in introducing into the original IhrpTr't o" [treaty an intentionally faulty definition of localities,* con- state.. "" Ivinced that all timbigaity would be resolved in their favour, ind that every shock would tend to weaken the fabric of Britain's remaining power in America, to the benefit of the * " Language cannot be found too condensed and severe to char- acterize the terms of the ftrst Provisional Treaty of Peace in 1783. Ir Oswald, ov.v Plenipotentiary, who adjusted it with Franklin and Jay, after his return to England, and when waited upon by the lerchar.ts of London, that they might inform him of the concessions >;d sacrifices he had made, both confessed his ignorance, and wept, ) '.i. said, over his o'vn simplicity." — Yourg's '■'• Norfh American falonies" page 29. ** Mr Oswald— that extraordinary Geographer" — Lord Stormont. This incor- reetreu in- tpntional on 6 M: young and ambitious Union. With such expectations, — such confidence in their own powers, and justifiable con- tempt fc the diplomatists opposed to them, ambiguity and incorrectness in the wording of the Treaty, became a pri- mary and a paramount object to the United States, pre- senting as it did the means of realising, cautiously and systematically, results which successful war could scarcely have secured. Bxteni^ofoie The rcgiou, throughout which was pretended to be found, ritory. , or sought to bc established, by either party, the limits of their territory, as defined by the treaty of 1 783, extended over no less a space than five degrees of latitude, and four of longitude : an amount of no less than twenty millions of acres of rich and fertile soil, well watered and admirably situated, was claimed by each of the parties ; the claim of the British being at one time carried as far as the Keuebec, and that of the United States to within ten miles of St Lawrence on the north-west, and to the St John''s on the east. Between the peace of 1783, and 1812, negociations had been carried on between the two governments ; and a gradual retrocession of the claims of Great Britain took ?lace, until they were confined within their present limit, 'he United States, on the other hand, abandoned its pre- tensions to the St John's ; but maintained, to their fullest extent, its claims to the north and west. There was thus left in dispute, a territory amounting to eleven millions of acres, but cutting deeply into the English possessions, and intercepting the communication between Quebec, Nova jurirfiction Scotia, aud Cape Breton. Over this territory, which had of Great Bri- ,' ,• ii • i i -r» •,• i i • i over the now bocomo partially occupied by British subjects, the jurisdiction of Great Britain was established — it had never been questioned, nor ceased to be exerc'"ed. During the war between England and America, the Americans did not take possession of this territory ; and it remained at the peace as it formerly did, — in occupation of Great Britain, (so far as occupation extended), and under her jurisdiction. At the peace between the two countries, England — ^having then triumphed in Europe, and having the full power of her naval and military resources available for the contest with America, if she had chosen to prolong it — ^generc isly profiered peace ; and heedlessly made it upon conditions, which in every instance, seemed only intelligible by the triumph of America, and the defeat of England. America had declared war against England, in conse- quence of a disputed right of search, to recover her seamen. Uin whole. and of other no less grave subjects of difference, arising, ^l^^l^^t not out of counter-pretensions, or hostile interests, on the2Sut«'!hl part of the two countries, but being merely consequences of """^ ""*'*• the exercise of England''s beljigerent rights. Feace wasc«i»ioftho signed, without the settlement of any one of those questions, "" * "'*"* which induced the United States to declare war against this country — and which, therefore, must revive, when England has again recourse to the same measures. The consequence of leaving these questions unsettled was the certainty of a war between England and America, on the occurrence of a war between England and any other power. This certainly was a heavy drawback on England, and a serious blow to her consideration, (she being the careless mind, and the in- ert body) — although she herself was unconscious of the position in which she was placed or of the feelings inspired into the American people, or of the interests established in the Cabinet of Washington. On the other hand this certainly uUimate collision — was, in a proportionate degree, a national gain and a diplomatic triumph for the United States. The United States further acquired the right of free """«> s»*.tf» /T»«-l • I'll--- '"'l'^"'* *"* traffic with our eastern possessions, whilst she acquire obtained V„'dlr.rad2' Great Briuin from England the formal surrender on her part of all right exciudedfrom to traffic with the Indian tribes throughout those regions A^?ican"iJ!l designated as being under the "jurisdiction of the United'""'* States !" The United States further obtained from England those ^^u^frei^ rights of navigation, subsequently known under the desig- ^'°lli^^^^ nation of reciprocity treaties ; and it is singular, that whilst England withheld such rights from all other powers, she yielded them to the United States without an effort. When she did subsequently grant them to the Northern Powers, it was as it were by compulsion, — and the conces- sion gave rise to great aud not yet quieted exasperation and opposition. These concessions made to America »>assed in perfect silence. Another triumph for America was secured in negociation, obum in an enormous sum paid by Great Britain, as an Indemni- tu"""' fication for runaway Slaves, in consequence of the ambiguous wording of the Treaty.* * England and the United States having agreed to refer the dift'er- ences arising, as to the true meaning of the 1st Article of the Treaty of Ghent, to the mediation of the Emperor of Kussia, a Convention between Great Britain, the United States, and Russia, was signed on the 12th July, 1822, at St Petersburgh, whereby a Joint Commission was established for settling the value of slaves, and for carrying into ciFect the Award. The Convention was signed. — Charles Bagot, Ncsselrode, Capo-d'Istrias, Henry Rliddleton. in- fur I!-' I'l! I Obtain ilghU to Piiheriet. tqjuiioui to Grrat Britain and her Colo- nie>. ■l\ Infringe the remaining privilege of Britinh sub- jects with im- punity. ; ! I it t ii ii" United States successful on all points, prevent the •ettlcment of the Bound- ary. li' I In the treaty of 1 783, England had made to America, on the subject of fisheries, concessions the most unwarrantable and the most unjust to her own subjects ; it was expected, alike in England and in the Colonies, that at a peace signed under circumstances apparently so favourable, these con- cessions should be revoked and that the right of fishing on their own coasts should be restored to the North American subjects of Great Britain, so as to put them on a footing with the inhabitants of all the other shores of the ocean, and the subjects of every other crown. But interests and rights were alike disregarded ; and a negociation, conducted in secret^ ended in the Convention of 1818, by which still larger concessions were made to the Americans, and greater sacrifices imposed on the Colonies of Great Britain. Nor was it enough that stipulations so disadvantageous should have been signed ; even the remaining restrictions imposed upon the Americans have been broken and infringed, with the most perfect impunity, from the signing the treaty, up to the present hour.* At a period when England had the power (physical I mean, of course, for England seems incapable of using or comprehending any other) of enforcing on the United States her own conditions, and compelling submission to any terms, the United States extorted ftqpi and bound England to con- cessions and terms which no other nation would have yield- ed, save to a conqueror. Such being the relative powers of the American diplomatists, and those of Great Britain — in proportion to the ambiguity and the difficulty of a ques- tion, would be the chances of American triumph and of British discomfiture. In regard to the disputed teiritory, what did the United States seek — what did they extort? T^hey sought for nothing more than the terms of the Treaty of 1 783. These terms were sufficiently ambiguous and incorrect : they had nothing further to desire. The amount fixed was, I believe, about £600,000. England in- a*^antly submitted to the Award. The Emperor Alexander employs less formal expressions than those used by the king of tlic Nether- lands. He says, " Invite par 1% Grande Bretagne et les Etats Unis d'emettre une opinion comme Arbitre dans les difFerends, &c. L'Em- pereur considerans, &c. est d'aviii." * A committee of the House of Assembly of Nova Scotia, appointed in 1037, to inquire into the Fisheries, in commencing their report, state that it, " exhibits a melancholy picture of the evil consequences flowing from the indiscreet negociation betwe^; Great Britain and the United States of America ; and the flagrant violations of subsist- ing Treaties by the citizens of the latter, and the necessity of promptly repelling such invasion of our inherent rights." 9 lerica, on xrantable expected, ice signed hese con- fishing on American a footing the ocean, erests and conducted jvhich still ,nd greater tain. Nor ous should ns imposed inged, with treaty, up (physical I )f using or lited States ) any terms, land to con- 1 have yield- tive powers t Britain — r of a ques- id of British •y, what did hey sought of 1783. incorrect : England in- ider employs tl'.G Nether- les Etats Unis &c. L'Em- iiii, appointed J their report, [consequences It Britain and Ins of subsist- necessity of A limit however was placed to the indefinite prolongation Butrefertnef of the dispute, by a stipulation that, in the event ot diner- •«• *'»•"«'• ences arising between tne Commissioners appointed on both sides for the purpose of laying down the JBoundary, such differences should be submitted to an Arbiter, whose decision should be final and conclusive. In settling the Western Boundary, the two Governments completely overlooked the natural features of the country. The words of the treaty of 1 783, " by a line to be drawn from thence to the " Biver Mississippi," are not admitted as I requiring that the Mississippi should be a point in the fron- tier; yet the Mississippi is not a doubtful geographical fact; — whereas, in that part of the Boundary which was pt open to dispute, the terms of the treaty of 1783, "the Inorth-west angle of Nova Scotia,*" which is not a natural Ifeature, and not an ascertained point in geography, is again Ire-asserted, and re-committed to treaty stipulation. That the Treaty, where clear,* is at once set aside; where confused and impracticable, insisted upon as if a people''s 3xistence were at stake. I refer to these, to show that in every stage of the pro- ceedings, and on every point where the Interests of the two Countries were at variance, the American diplomatists gained pe advantage ; that in fact they proceeded in a systematic md consecutive course of aggression — but proceeded with much caution as determination : decided, when seeing neir antagonist waver; cautious and reserved, whenever Jie suspicion of England became awakened. No less patient liting their time, than dexterous in seizing their cp- lortunity, we find them, throughout fifty years, re-appear- ig with new forms, and speaking in altered tones, but re- irning always to the point where they had left off, and bsuming the thread where it appeared to be broken. Such leir confidence in their own superiority, that it seems to lem a triumph to create grounds of dift'erence ! The treaty of Ghent, in 1814, having thus sent England jid America back to their old disputes of thirty years, new fegociations were opened, and commissioners were again ap- wnted; — the result of which was the same confusion as More, and both parties found themselves as far as ever )m any hope or chance of settlement. But the extension 1 occupation throughout the disputed district, and the con- luent prospect of inevitable collision between the two The adoption of the Mississippi would have greatly extended the Etish possessions. .1 „„i ConTPntlonof Sept. 39,1837. NcwCommis- Bion, under that Conven- tiun. i'l ! iHlH Si'leetion of the King of Holland as Arbitet.-His final Award, 10 nations, induced the Cabinet of Great Britain to look more seriously upon this matter ; and, armed as it was, by the treaty of Gnent, with the power of referring the matter, in case of subsequent differences, to the final decision of a Sovereign Arbitrator, it required from the American Government the execution of that stipulation. To prevent the possibility of further misintelligence, difference, delay, or negociation, a formal Conrention was entered into by the two parties, on the 29th September, 1827, establishing with forethought, and defining with minuteness, the condi- tions according to which the litigation before the Sovereign Arbitrator was to be carried on, and solemnly binding both nations to adopt, " as final and conclusive," the decision of the Arbiter, and to carry it " without reserve into imme- diate effect." Under this Convenion new commissioners were appointed ■ by both Governments, and the whole of the facts and argu- ments were resumed on both sides ; these statements, with a single rejoinder from either party, were to constitute the documents to be laid down the Arbiter. The statesmen in England more particularly interested in bringing about this settlement, were Mr Canning, Lord Aberdeen, and Mr Charles Grant (now Lord Glenelg) ; while the reclassification j of the documents, and the preparation of the case to be sub- mitted to the Arbiter, were confided to the zeal and ability! of three of the most distinguished (or rather the three most'; distinguished) names in British diplomacy.* On the 10th January, 1829, tne documents were pre sented to the king of Holland, the selected Arbiter, and olI the 10th January, 1831, the king of Holland communicated j to the Plenipotentiaries of both the contending parties, atl the Hague, his final Award. The only point secured by England in 1814 against tliej unbounded concessions made to the United States, was, thel stipulation to refer the Boun 'ary differences to arbitration! Thirteen years, however, were suffered to elapse before anvf steps were taken in fulfilment of that stipulation. I aici inclined to attribute the fact of the Reference to arbitratioEp to the new and powerful position assumed by Great BritaiD.) when she possessed a man of genius for a minister. Fronl a people so grasping as those of the United States, to obtaici a right, seems to be the gaining of a victory : for a natioif so heedless as Great Britain not to sacrifice a contestel * Mr Addington drew up the first document : Sir Stratford Coil niiig the second. Sh* C. Vaughan was inhuster at Washington. I r: ! ! 11 point, is a thing lequiring explanation, and only to be ac- counted for by the extraordinary recurrence of a British Minister rising to power although unconnected with Party. Thus was settled a question, which in importance is s«ttiemnior second to none as affecting the interests or the destiny of ' •*"""""• this country. Thus was settled a question, which, in diffi- culty and complication — in the extent of time over which it had extended — in the natural and artificial obstacles attending its adjusting — exceeds that of any negociation upon record of ancient or modern times. Thus was con- cluded a negociation, in which the diplomatic ability of Great Britain was exhibited in a light no less novel than brilliant ; and no less advantageous to the public, than creditable to the men by whom it had been effected. Tho practical results of this decision were as follows ; rhe'tmiu.ry.'' two-thirds of the disputed Territory were awarded to America, and one-third to Great Britain : that is to say, that of the territory originally in dispute, and of the Treaty of ] 783, little more than one-seventn fell to the share of Great Britain. It might therefore be supposed that England had no grounds of congratulation upon the amount of soil which fell to her share. But it is to be observed, that the object ^^^^ of the United States was to keep the question open, and, ^'e')J['*''^"*'- by keeping it open, to have the power of constant action upon our North American Colonies, and of diplomatic communion and concert with every European power in any degree unfriendly to Great Britain; thence accrued a continuous source of irritation in America against Great Britain — of agitation in the North American possessions of Great Britain — and combinations of an unfriendly nature, and a secret character, in . the Cabinets of Europe : that America, pressing, in her gradual growth, at once upon tho disputed territory, and upon the Colonies of Great Britain — menacing, from her position, — and intent, through her spirit of acquisitiveness, — became from year to year more capable of injuring, and more disposed to injure ; and, con- sequently, that, collision being the ultimate point to which this progression could only tend, the question of collision between Great Britain and America was one which it be- came the duty of every European Cabinet to examine : and, being satisfied thereof that conclusion remained an element of European hostility against Great Britain. The whole of these complication and dangers were at once swept away by the decision of the King of Holland ; i: 12 and that decision, opening a prospect of harmony and good- will between the cognate race^ of the United States and Great Britain, placed England immediately in a new atti- tude, as regards the Powers of Europe, and, by assuring the concord, of the maritime Powers of the two hemispheres, the aggressive projects of the North and West received such a check, as to promise a long continuance ofpeace in Europe. By the award of the King of Holland, England obtained that northernmost portion of the disputed territory which was necessary to secure her position in the Canadas, and to connect her various possessions in North America ; while America, obtaining the largest share of that which she coveted, — land, had every reason to remain satisfied with the decision. By the fact of the settlement, and by the strengthening of the British frontier, the temptations were removed for those projects of aggression, which at that period, the majority of her people, and the most enlightened of her statesmen, deprecated and disavowed ; and which endangered her own prosperity, and her political existence in the chances of future collision with Great Britain. This award of the King of Holland is now a matter of m 'both'^'"! tJ'63'ty stipulation, by which England is bound. Although during eight years, the British Minister for Foreign Affairs has in his communications with the United States charac- terized that obligation as not binding — although he declares it in his dispatches to be set aside by the British Govern- ment — yet, as no formal international act has abrogated the convention of 1827, by which the decision of the Arbiter is established as finally and unreservedly binding on both parties, I conceive that the Award of the King of Holland is so binding, and that it constitutes at this hour one of the treaty obligations and rights of Great Britain. Award of the King of Hoi tJCl. PART II. . fe RECEPTION OF THE AWARD OF THE KING OF HOLLAND IN AMERICA, AND MEASURES THEREUPON ADOPTED BY THE GOVERNMENTS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES. " I HOPE, SIR, WHEN THOSE PAPERS ARE PRODUCED, THAT THEIR CONTENTS WILL NOT BE PARTIAL, MEAGRE, AND UNSATISFACTORY, — THAT THEY WILL NOT BE CONFINED MERELY TO THE CORRESPONDENCE OF THE NEOOCIATING PARTIES, BUT THAT THEY WILL INDICATE THE VIEWS AND POLICY OF GOVERN- MENT, DURING THE WHOLE OF THAT LONG AND IMPORTANT TRANSACTION," Lord Palmerstorii Feb. 5th^ 1830. On the 10th January, 1 831, the King of Holland declared ^*'^^i'^ his Award, and officially communicated it to both govern- ments through their representatives at the Hague. It is impossible to speak of this document without saying that the King of Holland, by the labour he had bestowed on the investigation of this involved and intricate question, and by the ability and judgment he displayed in his subdivis- ion of the question, and his decision upon it, is entitled to the gratitude of the interested parties. Never was award delivered in so explicit and detailed a form — never was an award so fortified by the statement of grounds of decision against the doubts of ambiguity or the suspicion of partial- ity; — and, in taking this unusual line, of detailing his grounds of decision, he probably was influenced by the ap- prehension that, being threatened by the fleets of one of the parties, he might have been suspected of vindictiveness against that party, and partiality towards the other. It appears by the official papers lately publiched, that )*nd AssrntofRng- Innd com- the adhesion of Great Britain to this Award was finally K^'onioi- expressed to the King of Holland so soon as it reached this country ; but the first public notice of this event, so im- portant to Great Britain, occurred in the House of Com- mons on the 14th of February in the same year. It had become public that this question had been finally settled, and that the Award of the King of Holland had oeen ren- B land. 14 Award rrfui- I ! i\ ! dcred. The Secretary of State for Foreign Aftaira was questioned on the subject, and the decision was asked for. <■- caine dependent on England, and therefore favoured British interests. It also denies that the Arbiter has decided ac- cording to the conditions proposed by the contending par- ties : — further, denies that the Arbiter has decided at all ! " The Arbiter," they say, " did not pretend to utcide, and " declared he could not decide the point in controversy be- " tween the parties, but only intended to suggest a mode by " which, in his opinion, it might be decided. The Arbiter *' seems to have been impressed with the limitation of his " powers, and that he had no authority to decide contrary " to the Question submitted; and that he was bound to de- " cide, if he decided at all, in favour of one of the two lines " claimed by the parties." They maintain, then, that the United States'* Government not having asked for "afl?«ec0," are not bound to accept it. " The Government of the United ^^;^^^^^^^ " States cannot feel themselves bound to adopt or be governed a**""- " by the advice of the Arbiter^ particularly when his advice " was not sought or asked by them.'''' They then enquire whether " the Arbiter has decided in pursuance of the au- " thority given him," and after a statement of the case, in the same spirit as the above, they conclude that he has not. The report terminates as follows: "In conclusion, youro;™"^'„„^ " Committee deem it to be their duty to the Legislature " and to the State, to declare that, in their opinion, in what- " ever light the document which emanated from the Arbiter " may be considered, — whether as emanating from an In- " dividual, and not from that friendly Sovereign, Power, or " State, &c. — the United States will not consider themselves " bound, on any principle whatever to adopt it. And further " should the United States adopt the document as a decision, " it will be a violation of the constitutional rights of the " State of Maine, to which she cannot yield." It may perhaps be superfluous to observe, that if any ob- J^' jection could be raised to the decision of the King of Holland, because he had lost Belgium, such objection should have been urged before the declaration of the Award; but the objection, inadmissible, subsequently, if valid, is itself too contemptible to merit observation. If the King of Holland had given advice instead of a de- cision, the course of the United States to adopt was to put that question to the Sovereign Arbiter himself; this plea, therefore, like the former, is wholly inadmissible. The ob- jection, however, is an utter ialsehood. The award is ren- dered with all due solemnity, and couched in the usual and IklM- umww 18 il-iJiiiM Rrceivptl niid admiili'd liv the i;nitt>il Mates' Go- VLTiinit^nt. The nritiiih Vinistcr U Sill'Dt. formal terms of arbitration: to +bo niap, mar!<:ed according to the A. ward, the Royal Signet is appended, countersigned by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs; and the terms of the Convention of September, 1827, are explicit and im- perative: — " The c 'don of the Arbiter^ when given^ shall he ''''final and conclusive, and it shall he carried^ without reserve^ " into immediate ejj'ect^'' This document is transmitted to the President, and we have no information regarding its receptim — no copy of the reply. These proceedings having appeared in the public prints, they were of course brought to the knowledge of the British Minister; so that it became impossible for him to avoid pro- nouncing 3 1 opinion — against these proceedings, by formal communication, or in favour of them, as it would necessarily be understood, by silence. The British Minister is silent. The communications sent home by the British minister at Washington, before the arrival of any instructions from England, mav appear at first worthy of little notice ; but, on examin;* ion, they will be found (even such extracts as have been given) to contain food for deep reflection, and to throw valuable light on the dispositions of the parties, and the position of the British mission at Washington. On the 1 2th March, Mr V^aughan writes : — i!iii ,:i li i.. ' 1 ,] l>is|.atcheB. 'I'lie Britisii " It has bc'jn long known at Washington, that His Majesty the King of Ministers the Netherlands delivered, on the lOth January, to Mr Preble, the minister from tlie United States, hi^ decision upon the question of boundary' referred to arbitration. " I am assured, however, by Mr Van Buren, that this Government has not yet received the official conmunicatimi of His Mqjes^y's decision ; though it appears that some communication of the import of it has been made by Mr Preble to the State of Maine, to which he belongs ; as it m stated in the newspapers, that the Legislature of that State immediately took it into consideration, in a secret Session ; and it is reported t>>at general dissatisfaction was expressed with the rtGcisioi.' of the Arbiter." That the Britissh Minister at Washington should learn /ro/» the newspapers so important a fact .s the Secret Session, reveals his perfect helplessness ; hence his admission of the extra\agant supposition that Mr Preble should have com- municated with Maine, without commuTiicating with his Government. It is curious hj observe +lie words " to which he belongs," inserted as justification of the American Secre- tary of State. " Washington, March 20th, 1831. " The dec'.sion of the King of the Netherlands upon the question of Boundary, submitted to his Majesty's Ar^itration, was received, by way of Havre, by the Government of the United Stai ^ on the 15th instant. II I'll 11- f 19 " On the 18tli instant, a messenger was despatched with an official coiii- munieation of it to the Government of tlie State of Maine. " I understand from Mr Van Buren that the Award of t',ie King of the Netherlands has called forth a ^^rotest against it from Mr Preble, the American Minister at the Hague, which I have not seen, — but I understand that a copy of it was delivered to Sir Charles Bagot ; and I presume, there- fore, that His Majesty's Government is already in possession of it. " This Government has resolved to abstain from any expression of on opinion until they are in possession of the ansicer to their official com- munication of the Award tt tlu State of Maine." That the despatches should have been received " hy way of Havre," accounts neither for the delay of two months and five days, in a matter of such urgent importance, nor for the strange assertion that the Government hietween tlie l/i^X-hiO ole c. ■ the Ameri- realised ; — de by it, not pressed that the British period of the imation had Dtentions of on the part more hostile lile, the acti- the Govern- cable. Two t suffered to st it by the Grovernment )8e between the t unintelligible ; s closed ! They CO to them, the isigned for the tter or the cir- protcst immediately to us that that Protest is unauthorized, while the Protest is significantly conveyed by a message to the State of Maine. The American Government had secured the means of a double communication of the Award of the King of Holland ; two separate constitutional steps take place on the part of the State of Maine — the one secret, the other public, with an interval between them admitting of intermediate reference to the supreme Go- vernment. The first announcement of the Award is made to the American people with circumstances calculated to divest it of all authority ; this announcement is so made by the Government without any formal or informal act or word, on the part of Great Britain, expressive of any in- te''3st, intention, or opinion, regarding this matter. But to whatever expectation the negligence of the British Government might have given rise, still there was one ground upon which her representative might rest. To the assertions " that the King of Holland had exceeded his powers," — "that he had not decided the question," — " that the State of Maine would not consent," — " that the Central Government could not enforce the Award," — the British Minister might have answered: — " To such frivo- lities it is superfluous to reply.. To Maine and its Resolves England has nothing to say. This is a question of grave and solemn treaty stipulation between Nations. I have not yet received instructions, but when I do — it will be to call upon the United States to proceed to the execution of the Award, delivered in conformity with the Convention of 1827, and the Treaty of Ghent." His strength, so far, would lie m his having no instructions. If the British Minister did not use this language, it was however that which he must ha.ve felt. It was what every American must have felt. The non-arrival, therefore, of *iii'patches from England, however unaccountable, must .'.'/ have served to excuse or to weaken the effect of the Ac >oe and inaction of the British Minister. However, on the 19th April, 1831, the British Minister Fimt instmc- was relieved from his anxiety by the arrival of despatches ini'merston ' r -i-v • rr»i i » /» • i ri'coivod, April from Downmg Street. The despatch referrmg co the'*"'- award of the King of Holland was not a long one, as in- deed it required not to be. But, together with the Award in question, strange to say, it contained another document, which was no other than the disavowed protest against it of the American Minister at the Hague. Short as is the despatch to v,hich the signature " Palmeuston" is affixed, „^„^"J:;;4^t- 3 it contains subjects of deep reflection. c It is the commence- re";.'.;!'"'"' 2^2 ment of a long series of tergiversation aad falsehood, of which the calculated consequences were the abrogation of the Award. I ill ' ! Viscount Irolmerston to the Right Honourable C. R. Vaughan. " Foreign Office, February 9, 1831. " Sir, " I have now to transmit to you a copy of the decision which His Majesty the King of the Netherlands has communicated in duplicate to the representatives of Great Britain and the United States at the Hague, upon the question of disputed boundary submitted by the two Governments to His Netherland Majesty's arbitration. " I am compelled by the pressure of other business to delay until a future opportunity whatever observations I may have to make to you upon the terms of this decision; against which you will perceive, by the enclosed copy of a paper communicated by the American Envoy at the Hague to His Majesty's Ambassador at that Court, Mr Preble has thought fit to protest in the name of his Government. " I can only acquaint you by this opportunity, that whatever might be tJ • eentiments or wishes of His Majesty upon some of the points embr^ c " " '^he decision of His Netherland Majesty, His Majesty has not hesi. ' 9 acquiesce in that decision, in fulfilment of the obliga- Jron\ft«tde." *^°**^ whltu (is Majcsty considers himself to have contracted by the •patch. terms of the Convention of arbitration of the 29th of September, 1827; and His Majesty is persuaded that such will be the course adopted by the Government of the United States. " If, however, contrary to this expectation, the American Govern- ment should determine upon taking any step of the nature of that which has been adopted by Mr Preble, and should make to you any communication to that effect, before you shall have received any further instructions from me on that point ; you will inform the American Minister, that you are not prepared to enter into any dis- cussion upon such a subject, and that you can only transmit the communication to your Government for its consideration. " I am, &c., " Right Hon. C. R. Vaughan," Src. Sfc. ^c. " PALMERSTON. It sacrifices tbe Award. ,i!| What may be supposed to be the stunning effect of such a despatch upon the British Envoy! Having for week after week expected the announcement of a decision, which was to terminate a difterence of half a century, he is at length told in a public despatch — that the Minister of England has no time to enter into the subject : — but what need he enter into it at all ? — That his instructions would be communicated at some future day ! — but what instructions could avail, if not communicated then ? Not to exact the fulfilment of the contract upon the judgment given, was the mockery of all that is held sacred among men — binding among nations. It was to set at nought forms of law — da principles of office — habits of business. The concealment of such abandonment, from the Parliament and the nation, leaves this act referable in no possible manner to ignor- ance or negligfence. The negociations of half a century had proved the na- tional purpose of the United States to keep open this boundary discussion — had also proved the ability with which that purpose had been pursued, and the success with which it had been attended. Decision was therefore called for, on the part of Great Britain, at the moment of the notification*of the Award. But so effectual had been the forethought evinced by the Minister of Great Britain in 1827, and so stringent the language of the Convention, that it seems a mystery how it ever could enter into any man's mind that such a compact could be broken. The individual who possessed the power of speaking in the name of England, and of withholding the truth from England, could alone hav3 dared to conceive the project. No American could have aimed at such a triumph : No other Englishman contemplated such a crime. The only means of accounting for negligence in a British {i^„"'"*'""'=- Secretary of State, on such an occasion, or for the excuse of "pressure of other business'' — is, that' it could not have entered into that individual's mind to suppose that the Award could be resisted. But the despatch itself does suppose resistance; — it encloses the very protest of the American Minister at the Hague (which his Government had declared unauthorized) as the only document to guide the views or reflections,* of the British Envoy at Wash- ington: — it limits the duties of an Envoy to the functions of a post-master, and prepares him to exhibit and announce the longing of the British Government for the re-echo from Washington of the insignificant, unauthorized, unnoticed, unanswered protest of the American Minister at the Hague. — The pretext, therefore, of " pressure of business" for leaving the Minister uninstructed, is as destitute of truth, as repugnant to reason. If the despatch had concluded with " You are not pre- pared to enter into any discussion on such a subject," the effect on the British Minister, and through him on the American Government, would have been that England J • It ia singular that whilst Lord Palmerston encloses the protest of Mr Preble, he does not enclose the reply of Sir Charles Bagot to that protest; nor is this reply at all given in the published documents:— although that reply was communicated by the President to the State of Maine. l[ X 2i< penr the com iDtfiiceuient iifgociations. considered the matter finally adjusted — but the words that follow, "You can only transmit the communication," &c. show that the English Government had not made up their mind. Thus this despatch did convey the most positive instructions ; therefore the pretext of " pressure of busi- ness" is no less inapplicable to the circumstance than unreasonable and untrue, and reveals a process of per- plexing what is simple and confusing what is plain, which must have been, even to a man of talent and dexterity, a heavy pressure on his legitimate avocations. It pa«iyzc» Let any one place himself in the position of the British Minibter. Euvoy, ou rccciviug this despatch, and he will at once feel all the doubt and bewilderment which such a commu- nication must have produced. By being relieved from responsibility, he became a cipher. It being enjoined him not to act ; he would receive the impressions made upon him, — be the channel of these to England, and the echo of them, as English, to Washington. nmdc''to'"a'J'! This dospatch is placed at the head of the communicated ^1 papers, as if it were the commencement of bona fide nego- ciations. The document that follows it, is the protest of Mr Preble ; so that the reader's mind is at once impressed with the idea that he is about to commence the negociations ; whereas, in the very first document, he has arrived at the conclusion, — and, if he reads it aright, has discovered the whole truth. And what is this truth? The frustration of the Award, and the sacrifice of all the anterior negocia- tions and contracts, through the studied vagueness and the calculated contradictions of a single despatch of twenty- three lines ! The papers, as already observed, are sepa- rated intc parts, and the documents necessary to their mutual elucidation are kept apart, and published at the in- terval of several months : — the separation, the transposition, and the selection, so calculated to bewilder the reader, that no member of either House of Parliament has ventured to deal with the subject; and so completely has the question been rendered unintelligible, that no individual in this country seems to be aware, that the setting aside of the Award of the King of Holland is the enigma that is to be solved ; and is the sole and unique cause of past, present, or future complication or collision. Though I am arguing this question on its intrinsic merits, and judging it according to evidence furnished solely by the functionary whose conduct is arraigned — evidence, diluted, prepared, and presented by himself — yet there is a consideration v.hich the inquirer ought to weigh, and of Tranaaction unintelligible ill iUclf. i 25 which he must not for a moment lose sight, if he deems it of value. In investigations of a legal character, the motive of the acts, and therefore the truth, lies within the subject- matter, and is contained in the statement of the facts ; but, in diplomatic transactions, the motives may lie without, as well as within ; and the truth may therefore have to be sought in external circumstances. In the present case, the course of the British Minister, judging of it by the facts before us, is incomprehensible. It is a simple case of the implementing of a contract, presenting no difficulty in the performance, — admitting no ambiguity in the policy of the State, obligations of the Crown, or the duties of the Mi- nister. These are all on one line, and concentrated in a single point. A requisition addressed to the adverse party, to proceed to execution was all that had to be done — was that which could not be omitted. Refusal on its part, ifMotivcfLd refusal there had been, would have regarded the Parliament ■..17b™»'"k«i and the Nation, not her Minister and Cabinet; for what ""^ "'*'"• Cabinet would bear such responsibility as submission to, I and concealment of, the violation of a national compact ? This step not having been taken, the subject itself furnishes no clue to the act of the Minister ; — supplies us with no intelligible motive for departing from routine forms, duties, and interests. In this dilemma it becomes necessary to inquire into the character of the Minister, and into the position and 1:notives of other powers, who may have an interest in the non-adjustment of this question, and be able to exercise any influence over the British Minister, to obtain such a result. The United States, in rejecting the Award, either ex-po united ' •' 0^_ /"-nil Stales must pected the concurrence or the opposition of England. In 'k";,';'^;;'';!;,^.: the first case the guilt of the Foreign Minister of England 'u/^t K" is clear, and we need not pursue the subject. If it anticipated the opposition of England, it became the duty of that Government to consider the question of colli- sion with England. It must therefore, (unless through a short-sightedness or negligence with which it never yet has been chargeable, or charged,) have sought to fathom the views of such great powers as must, by their opposition or concurrence, render negociation or an appeal to physical force fruitless, or successful. Russia and France are these powers. I therefore assume that the United States could not have entered upon this line, without the assurance of the concurrence of Russia and France against England, or of the Foreign Minister of England against herself — which M m ■ilii ^'.•1 i ii I ;Hii Mi! I i in m I ill Russia FrHiicc and eii- jects Great iiritain Russia am^ France are , huHtile to the ' 26 in fact was much more than the support of the other two, carrying as it did along with it, the support of these two powers. But Russia and France were at the time, actively en- ^^EimJiu.S^S^^ ^^ general projects of aggression — in opposition, not indeed to the policy^ but to the most vital interests of Great Britain. They could not therefore have looked with indifference on a settlement which would lose them the United States as an eventual ally — relieve England from an embarrassment and a danger which would diminish her power, if ever exerted against themselves — and would open up to her the prospect and the means of uniting with America to resist icheir aggressions. In the fulfilment of their duties, the Ministers of these States must have been theN3'-ea« prcparcd to take such measures as were within their reach, q.So"/ both with the United States and with England, with a view to averting from themselves the catastrophe of a set- tlement of the North-east boundary question. -tKKMife' These two Powers were at that time engaged in various of 'tCTJmlJh projects, the fruits of which have since appeared, and which leave no doubt as to their concert and their objects. I will instance only the three European questions directed by conferences held in Downing-street : — First, the affairs of Greece; secondly, the affairs of the East; thirdly, the affairs of Belgium. In regard to the first, their concur- rence to sacrifice the rights of England has been ^tab- lished.* In regard to the second, their common dismem- berment of the Ottoman Empire is before the eyes of al' men. — As regards the third, (Belgium), the results havo rot yet appeared, and no exposition of the question has been made, but the best attention which I have been able to give to the subject, leads me to conclude that the objects of both have not been less hostile, nor the policy of Russia less successful, in this matter than in the other two. But in all these, Russia — (France is but the half-in- structed and paralytic coadjutor) — Russia has succeeded^ solely by the co-operation of the Minister of England^ — who has placed the diplomatic functionaries and naval com- manders of Great Britain in the monstrous position of receiving orders signed by the representatives of these two powers,! and has accustomed England, Europe, and • See Diplomatic History of Greece, by H. H. Parish, Esck t Not only are commands thus given to representatives of England ; but they are ordered to make their representations to their own Government, conform with those of their colleagues (of Russia and France). Not only are they thus ordered and instructed, but disgraced and re-called by foreign functionaries. For instance: the Dutch Government brings a charge 1^ Liird Pnliiirr- ■ton co>o|K.'r* Ktck nitli Ihein f Mr 27 the world, to be governed by secret conclaves of Russian diplomatists. What then must have been the position of Lord Pal- merston with regard to the North-east Boundary ques- "»'«"'■•*! vi-'" ,oiti -xi. .3- 28 ;!'liii J i! Fnvouriilile (liapusitioii of Award, santly before his eyes, he says, " should the American Government make any communication to me of the nature of Mr Preble's Protest, I shall be prepared to conform strictly to what your Lordship sug'gests :" — the service is not one which would commonly be supposed to require preparation, or to admit of doubt as to strictness of per- formance ; but, in this case, the terms are happily selected, and show the importance which the Minister felt to be attached to the performance of — nothing. But Mr Vaughan was too able a man to be long entrusted with so delicate a charge. . Notwithstanding the advantages which the Anti-Enef-I Uiipositioii of » 1 -iT 1 • 11 • ' rcopi^To''the "^" and war party was thus allowed so rapidly to gam, •''"''"""""'" the great majority of the American people, the whole of I the Southern States, and her Senators and politicians of the highest distinction, were still all in fiivour of the adoption of the Award. Although, I say, the Award had been virtually sacrificed by Lord Palmerston; although formal measures had been taken against it, not only by a state, but by the general Government;* although the idea of a second reference to the Senate had been extensively spread, and had been generally adopted, still it was clear th , the Senate, left to its natural impulses, would, by the 1 same motives that led it to adopt the Convention of 1827,1 now adopt the Award rendered according to the terms of | that Convention. Let us now suppose for a moment that Lord Palmer- ston had an object in preventing the adoption by America I of the Award, but yet that, from particular circumstances, he could not commit himself to the English Envoy at Washington, by openly instructing him to oppose its adoption: — what would be the course which he would be likely to pursue? He would relieve America i om all apprehension as to England's insisting upon the fulfilment of the contract. If remonstrances were made by any party against the Award, he would be careful to give them | importance. If violation of Territory took place, or of the rights of the British Crown, he would sedulously! avoid noticing the occurrence. He would impose upon the Envoy at Washington silence and reserve. He would place in that post no man of commanding talents or of practical acquaintance with the subject matter, — or, finding such a man in that office, he would remove him. Means that could have been devised tu frustrate it. • The Protest of Mr Preble, though formally disowned, yet, having been subsequently published as a State paper, and having been received as | such by Great Britain, became in reality il'e P'-otest of the Government. i '^i: S9 k'tilmcrklun. Above all, at any critical moment, lie would lower the authority of the British Mission, by removing the titular representative, and by supplying his place with a diploma- tic officer, charged ad interim^ and accredited, not to the Government or the State, but merely to the Foreign Secretary. These suppositions constitute a simple narra tive of that which has occurred. The critical moment when the American Government had to decide as to whether or not it should submit the Award to the Senate, and when the Senate, if referred to, had to decide upon ij,7",t"i';';:,'' it, — arrives; and, as usual, the British Minister — departs.* ^""'»'" This intermission of the representation of Great Britain at Washington, is not for a short interval, for an interval important only by accident, or of an importance unexpected and unforeseen. The British Minister is absent during tivo Br'""*' »""!»• 1/ears, and that absence dates from the aggression of the y'""- subjects of the United States against the jurisdiction of the British Crown, and from the avowed formation of a party to defeat the decision of the King of Holland, /if it take, dgh- teas not till more than eighteen months had elapsed, that the [;;' J'j.'^';''",";" American Government refused its assent to the Award ! *""'''• To return now to the chain of evidence, at the point where it was last interrupted.. The last communication from Mr Vaughan, the British Representative, on the 20th of April, stated that he was " prepared to conform strictly" to Lord Palmerston's instructions to do nothing; and during three months that instruction is strictly conformed to. On the 2l8t of July, Mr Bankhead, the Charge d'affaires, writes, "the sameTi.c ci.nr«c reserve has been manifested by the United States' Govern- "/thh-g^-be. ment to my predecessor, has been contmued to me by Mr'"'j"'""»='"' Livingston." He communicates the arrival in America of Mr Preble, the energetic protester at the Hague, and the approaching departure of Mr Van Buren for England, the principal opponent of the Award in America. The state Jij^Vi^e")"™ of his own mind may be gathered from what follows : " I JJll^^j^j.;',',; am not altogether without hopes that the pretensions of *"""'^ *'"'"" the State of Maine will be much softened, and that an acquiescence will at last be given to the opinion of the Royal Arbitrator." In a substitution of the word " opin- ion" for " Award" in the mouth of the British Charge ■,-i'\ H • At the recent critical events in Europe and America, the British Am- bassador and Minister has almost alway^s been absent at the important moment — for instance, the occupation of Constantinople by Rnssia — the capture of St. John d'UUoa, by the French— and the march of the Shah of Persia on Herat. D r .1' ■'I' . ,. ;l. 11 III rin tlie 2:i(l lenrtiM llinttlie AwnnI Irt t(i bt' rrfrrii'd tu the EfTcctt of tho departure uf the British Aliniatcr. Of the Secre- tary of hcgA' tion beingleft, and withnut iastructiuDS. 80 (Vaffaires^ is the evidence of the success of Lord Palmer- aton in rendering the British Representative the coadjutor of the pretensions of the State of Maine. But it is only a month after the date of this last des- patch, that the project is admitted, of referring the matter to the Senate. On the *23d of August, Mr Bankhead writes, *' I learn from an authority which I have no reason to doubt, that before the President can consent to the provision contained in the Royal Award, it will be necessary to receive the approbation of the Senate, as the President has no power in himself to alienate any part of the territory of an indivi- dual state" To all these despatches, — to these sundry communica- tions, extending from the month of March (when com- menced the first secret Session of the State of Maine), dowii to that of the 4th of October (which we shall shortly touch upon), communicating the aggression of the State of Maine upon the disputed Territory and the jurisdiction of the British Crown, — no reply whatever proceeds from the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. With this momentous question suspended by a thread, shivering in the wind, the Minister, — a man of recognized ability, conversant with the anterior details of the negocia tion, and influential from his character, and the genei estimation in which he was held, — is suffered to abando.. his post. No Extraordinary Mission is on its way to meet and confer, on some neutral island. Nothing of the kind. The Minister withdraws — his post is left vacant — the Secretary of Legation is left in charge, and without instructions. The year rolls on ; his despatches are unre- plied to. The Sessior of Congress approaches, the mem- bers flock to Washington, — he turns his eyes in vain to the rising sun, but no counsel comes to him from the East. The question is to be referred to the Senate — he has no protest ready. The message of the President is to be prepared ; the day for its delivery arrives ; and not a sin- gle syllable dare the Representative of Great Britain arti- culate on any one point, — no fallacies can he refute — no truth assert — no enemy confute — no friend confirm or secure. Washington, the President, the North-east Bound- ary, the Award, and the British Charge d* affaires^ are as completely forgotten in Downing Street, as if Columbus or Canning had never lived, — as if another hemisphere had never been discovered ; nor a New World called into existence. PART 111. OUTRAGES COMMITTED BY SUBJECTS AND SUBOK- DINATE AUTHORITIES OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST THE RIGHTS OF THE BRITISH CROWN. "AN ENGLISH MINI8TEH WOULD BE UNWOBTHT OF HIS OFFICE, WHO SHOULD SEE ANOTHER STATE SWALLOWING UP TEMIITORIES IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD OF BRITISH COLONIES, AND NOT STRIVE BY ALL JUST MEANS TO AVERT THE DANGER." — Channing OH the Texas. fi nnwn dii' Mttinc. The dispositions of the State of Maine being well known ; k the violence of its population having been already expe rienced ; it was to be expected that a decision of the ques- tion would lead to commotion and aggression, and that outrages would be resorted to, as a means of preventing its adjustment. In this view, too clear not to have been taken ; with these consequences, too evident not to have been anticipated ; the hands of the Colonial Government of Great Britain ought to have been fortified by increased military means, and a firm and announced determination to resist all attempts at disturbance. But, as the English Government had not called upon the United States to proceed to the execution of the Award, — the hopes of Maine may be imagined, and its acts anticipated. We pass therefore, naturally, (as from cause to effect), to the announcement : — " Attempt of the ^^ „„t„M. Authorities of the State of Maine to exercise ".'"uSty/ Jurisdiction* within the Disputed Territory, Oc- TOIIDR AND NoVEMBEK, 1831." Sir A, Campbell to Charles Bankhead, Esq. " Fkedebicton, New Brunswick, September 13, 1831. « Sir, " I have the honour to inclose, for your information, some docu- ments from Lieut. Maclauchlan, at present in charge of the boundary line between the United States and this province, by which you will • 7 ne words " exercise jurisdiction" are not applicable to the fact. The attempt made was to annex the territory to Maine. Jurisdiction has re- ference to the administration of justice, which was in no case attempted. It was attempted to institute State Government, and to seduce British subjects from their allegiance. ^1 1 :,i ij ,1 m S2 Outrages nf Maine ex- cused by the General Go- veriiineiitt perceive that the authorities of ihe State of Maine have actually taken possession of part of the t'lritory now in dis^-ute between the British and American Governments. " I cannot believe for a moment that these proceedings, so lament- ably calculated to interrupt aud destroy the pt ace and harmony ex- isting between the two countries, can be sancticued or approved of by the Amc loan Government ; and I am sure you wi I therefore feel it to be your duty to call at once upon the American Government to put a stop to measures of so dangerous a tendency ; measures wliich, if persevered in, must infallibly lead to coaseq.ances the most preju- dicial and injurious to both countries. " I have the honour to be, &c., " (Signed) " ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL, " Lieut.-Govemor. " Charles Banhhead, Esq." Sfc. {-c. Sfc. The argumentative character of this letter is remark- able. All the agents and authorities of Great Britain seem to be individuals left to reflect, to act, and to shift for themselves. Mr Bankhead, in addressing Lord Palmei'ston on this subject, makes the following observations : — " As this proceeding was so much at variance with the spirit of forbearance inculcated by the President in his despatch to the Gover- nor of Maine, at the perjoc* of the receipt of the decision of the King of the Nether' tinds, in this country, and one so likely to produce unfriendly feelings between the respective parties, I lost no t?me in submitting the complaint of General Campbell tc the Government uf the United States ; and 1 trust that such a communication will be made to the Authorities of Maine, as shall prevent the rtcmrente of such irregularities (/) until the question of disputed Terriiory shall be finally (/) settled. " The General Government is most anxious to avoid ihe slightest collision between the State of Maine and His Majesty's prov.'ncial officers } and Mr Livingston expressed his regret that any occiision had been afforded by the State of Maine^ to embavrass the harmony and good-will subsisting between the two countries." Mr Livingston's regrot was superfluous — not the slight- est erabar: assmeut disturbed the harmony — not the faintest shadow overcast the good-will subsisting between the two countries, through this or any other " occasion" furnished by the State of Maine. In reply to a timid remonstrance from Mr Bankhead, the American Secretary writes as follows : — The Honourable Edward Living jton to Charles Bankhead, E~q. " (Extract.) " Department of State, Washington, October 17, 1831. " Immediately after receiving your note of ihe Ist instant, I wrote to the Governor of tho State of Maine f .»r inforn^ation on the subject 33 If 1 ' ton on this of it. I have just received his answer, of which I have the honour to inclose two extracts. By the first you will perceive that the elec- tion of town officers in the settlement of Madawaska, of which com- plaint was made in the papers inclosed in your letter, were made under colour of a general law, which was not intended by either the execu- tive or legislative authority of that State to be executed in that settle- ment; and that the whole was the work of inconsiderate individuals." It is in proof, that they were authorised by the State. " It is therefore of no avail, and can have no more effect than if the same number of men had met at Madawaska, and declared them- selves duly elected members of the British Parliament. The Act interferes with no right, it comes in actual collision with no esta- blished power : — not so the punishment of the individuals concerned. '*iis is at once a practical decision of the question, may lead to re- tu^ 'ory legal measures, or what is worse, to illegal violence ; for if the Lieutenanr Governor of New Brunswick feels himself obliged, as he says he does, to enforce the authority of the laws within what he thinks the boundaries of his province, will not the samo feeling excite the Governor of Maine, under the same sense of duty, to pursue the like measures ? And thus the fruits of moderation and mutual for- I bearance during so long a period, will be lost for the want of a per- severance ia them, for the short time that is now wanting to bring j tl:e controversy to an amicable close. It is therefore, Sir, that I in- vite your interposition with His Excellency the Lieut.-Governor of New Brunswick to induce him to set at liberty the persons arn?sted, j on their engagement to make no change in the state of things until I tlie business shall be finally decided between the two Governments." This is treating the British Minister as a cliild. The outrages nd- (leliberate and official act of the State of Maine is asserted fffjf['J,f„£\"^ not to have been intended: the violation of the British juiisdiction is asserted not to be sanctioned ; aT»d thence the double inference is drawn, that tiie violators are j innocent, and that punishnient inflicted upon them w ould legalize retaliatory measures. The United States* Go- vernment do not, however, conceive their imprisonment to be illegal, but, out of a kindly regard to both parties, [ request their release as a favour ; and counsel the British Crown to obtain from the prisoners a guarantee for its future security, before releasing them from gaol. Extract or Spb-Inclosure. " The measure (.aays the Governor of Maine) that is »r:d to have been adopted by the inhabitants of that territory, of voiuntarily or- \ ganizing themselves into a corporation, was unexpect« d by me, and (lone without my knowledge." A tuloehood, as may be seen by Mr Livingston's own I note. The public acts of the State of Maine, authorizing land ordering the proceedings, are to be found, Papers (B) page 10. Mr I -is- ; f fi i r - i 34 (Second Extract.) " A copy of this letter from Messrs. Wheelock and Savage is here- with transmitted, by which it further appears that they, together with several other citizens of this State, have been arrested by the British authorities, and transported towards Fredericton for the purpose of I being there imprisoned. They were arrested within the territory oj\ this State and of the United States, and, as citizens of the United States, now claim the aid and protection of their Government and country." " The territory of this State and of the United States," refers to the disputed Territory. On receiving this note from the American Secretary, putting the remaining absurdities out of the question, the British Minister '.«ad but one course to pursue in regard to this inclosure ; which was to refuse to hold any diplo- matic intercourse with the American Government, while ! it used, or suffered officially to be used, the designation of " territory of Maine," or " territory of the United States," as applied to the territory in dispute: by suffering thii falsification of language, all that was contended for, was given away. On this, Mr Bankhead writes to Lord Palmerston: — "Washington, October 2\, 1831. " I have great satisfaction in acquainting your Lordship, that the I language held by the General Government, upon this subject, has | been of the most friendly nature." And further — Advocacy iid- " J huvc Ventured to submit to his (Sir Archibald CampbelVs) I Siianh i/iiJ.- carZy consideration, the motives which the American Secretary oj\ ^'- State brings forward in favour of the release of the persons atpresenl\ in custody at Fredericton, " I venture to hope that my conduct upon this occasion will not bej disapproved of by His Majesty's Government." But, before the arrival at Fredericton of these satisfac- tory assurances, and conclusive "motives," — new events | had occurred. Sir A. Campbell to Charles Bankhead, Esq. "CExtract.) "Fredericton, October A, 1831. New ouiragM. t< gince I had the honour of addressing you on the 1 3th ult., rela- 1 tive to the extraordinary proceedings of certain agents of the State | of Maine in that part of the disputed territory called Madawaska, further and more serious aggressions than those therein mentioned I have taken place, for the avowed purpose of usurping the sovereignt!i\ of a large portion of His Majesty's dominions on 'both' sides of tin River St. John. tu'rcu!"" """ " The enclosed documents will clearly show the alarming extent of I 35 Ited States," merston: — ion will not be these aggressions on our territory by the presumed agents of the neighbouring State ; together with the legal measures which we have, in consequence, been compelldd to adopt, in order to make the I jurisdiction of our laws be respected by all classes throughout this province." C. T. Peters, Esq., to Sir A. Campbell. " (Inclosure.) *♦ Madawaska, September 24, 1831. " I have the honour to lay before your Excellency copies of state* ments, under oath, which I have been enabled to collect, of the pro- ceedings of a number of the inhabitants of this settlement, tending to disturb the peace of the place, calculated to estrange the French inhabitants from their allegiance, induce them to acknowledge them- selves citizens and subjects of the United States of America, and transfer the possession of this district of the province to that Govern- ment, and constituting a high and serious offence against the law, in open contempt of the King and his Government. " The conduct of the persons who have been concerned in these transactions is the more aggravating, as they evidently appear to be the instruments and agents of the State of Maine ; with a view enter- tained by that Government, through their instrumentality, to obtain possession of the tract of country at present in dispute between Great Britain and the United States, which both those Governments have solemnly pledged thcm&elves by the Convention entered into between them, that nothing shall be done by the one or the other, pending the proceedings for settling the dispute, which may alter the relative situations of either party. " The proceedings of these persons, aided by the conduct of cer- tain other agents from the Government of Maine, who, by the papers which I now have the honour to lay before your Excellency, will appear to have been secretly nassing through the settlement and in- termixing with the French inhabitants (of which the great majority consists), has, I regret to say, evidently had an effect of unsettling tho minds of a great number, if not almost seduce them from their allegiance to His Majesty's person and Government." The depositions follow, — mentioning also the adminis- tration to British subjects of an oath of allegiance to the United States. The United States' Government, it will be observed, disavowed the acts of these subordinate agents, but yet claimed for them immunity. The British Minister does not even attempt to deal with the question; but, with great satisfaction, admits the arguments of the American Secre- tary of State, and makes himself the channel of the request to the Governor of New Brunswick, for the liberation of the prisoners. The Americans, having secured this position, hesitate not to advance (the State of Maine taking the initiative) to the justification of the offenders: — thus constituting the caption (the release from which was obtained as a favour,) • i UniteilStnlei' Gnrernment clniineJ tlii? ptlsoneri. Surrendered by Great Bri- tain. Capture of pri- soner)} nnw tiouKlit t(i be r.HtablJRhed aJi Invasion un the part of Great Britain, r'n ■ I'l ; 36 ilii!''!' ;ii(;!i!r liilii an act of violence and aggression on the part of Great Britain. No. 5. — Charles Bankhead, Esq., to Viscount Palmerston (Received December \*J.) « (Extract.) " Washington, iVorewifter 20, 1831. " The Council of the State of Maine, in their late extraordinary sitting, have forwarded to Washington a report, couched in very] strong language; and orders have been given to the different bri- gades of militia on the frontier, to hold themselves in readiness to I support the views of the State, with reference to the neighbouring province. Notwithstanding this threatening proceeding, I am happy \ to find" Sfc. State op Maine. " (Inclosure.) " In Council, Nov. 7, 1831. Public net ot u Tjie Committee of the whole Council, to which was referred the I tlie State of , ■»»ii 11 ■ Maine. subjcct of the rcccnt transactions at Madawaska, ask leave to report; That, in common with their fellow-citizens, they view with feelings I of just indignation, the unwarrantable and oppressive acts of the authorities of the British Province of New Brunswick, in invading the territory of this State with a military force, and arresting a num- ber of our peaceable citizens, compelling others to conceal themselves in the wilderness, and abandon their homes, in order to escape the violence with which they were threatened. " In this violation of the sovereignty of the State, we perceive tlic I continuation of that system of encroachment, which, by our forbear- ance, the Provincial Government have long been enabled to practise I for the purpose of extending their possession, and afterwards relying on that possession, as the only foundation of the extraordinary claim they still persevere in making to a considerable portion of the State. .1 FH United States' GoTernment concurs in the vicwiiuf Maine. " On the 12th day of September last, they (the inhabitants of Ma-\ dawaska) held a Town Meeting for the purpost. of electing a Repre- sentative, as required by the laws and constitution of this State, " For these acts, four of the citizens have been arrested by the I authorities of New Brunswick, carried out of the State, and are nov confined in jail at Fredericton, in execution of a sentence pronounced | against them, after the form of a trial in a Court of that province." It concludes with a statement that the Governor had] addressed to th? General Governwient — *' An urgent request that the proper measures might be adopted, to procure the release of our Citizens, and protect our Territory from invasion." The President was thus appealed to by Maine to pro- tect them from invasion f He w.i<5 appealed to — to obtain I the release of agents whom, with the slightest sense of art of Great ber 20, 1831. 37 honour, he ought to have been the first to punish; and whom the Government, with any sense of its dignity abroad — any regard to its supremacy or power at home, ought to have sought to abandon to the justice they had outraged. And what does the President do ? — He seeks to obtain their release. What does England do ? — Grant their release ! That is not enough : the British Agent pens, as if to insult the English tongue, the following words : — Sn iliwn ihi" Hrilish Miiiit- Icr. overnor had " Washington, November 28, 1831. " The President, upon the receipt of this intelligence, having com- pletely disavowed the proceedings of Maine', and at the same time called upon the Governor of that State to discountenance any attempt to exercise jurisdiction over the disputed territory, until the question of boundary, as decided by the King of the Netherlands, should be formally brought before the Senate of the United States, I thought it my duty so fer to give eflFect to the pacific intentions of the Presi- dent as to solicit the early attention of Sir Archibald Campbell to the wishes of this Government, with respect to the persons who had been guilty of these irregularities, and who were in jail at Fredericton. " I have great satisfaction in acquainting your Lordship, that Gen- eral Campbell has deemed it proper to exercise his prerogative in favour of the prisoners, and they have accordingly been released from confinement, and their fines have been remitted. " / have great pleasure in thus being enabled to communicate to your Lordship, the satisfaction which has been evinced by the Presi- dent of the United States, in consequp" '9 of the very conciliatory spirit in which Sir Archibald Campbell b as acceded to the wishes of the American Government in this transaction," These outrages took place in the months of August and September, not in October and November, as headed in the documents presented to Parliament. There appears to have been no notice of them whatever taken by Lord Palmerston. The reader of the diplomatic correspondence, as published during the Session of 1838, would remain in perfect ignorance of the occurrence of such facts; all the papers referring to them having been collected together and reserved until the Session had ended, and until the minds of Members of Parliament had been made up on the unintelligible fragments, — or their interest and patience exhausted, by the inextricable confusion in which this simple transaction had become involved. The objects, however, of the opponents of the Award, were now attained ; outrages committed, — ^jurisdiction at- tempted — and discussed in terms that falsified the position of England. Agitation and irritation spread through the T' .ion. The Boundary question elevated in importance; £ These fiicLs ex- cluded fruin Papers pre- sented t<> i'ar- liaraent. 38 '111 .1 ,, pi 1 li! and insult and a^gt'ession-r- inflicted with impunity on England by a single member of the American Union — accepted by her with extreme submission. From this period, no further aggressions occurred for u space of more than two years. We must now revert to the diplomatic intercourse of the two Governments. w I 1 f! i II ■ 1 1 i PART IV. DOUBLE INSTRUCTIONS OF LORD PALMERSTON, AND CONSEQUENT REJECTION OF THE AWARD BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. " HE SEEMS TO HAVE NOTHING AT HEAnT, BDT THE GOOD OF MAN- KIND, AND THE PUTTING A STOP TO MISCHIEF." — Franklin on the British Negociator of the Treaty of 17 S3. As Lord Palmerston, before making his first vague inti- J;,';?"^,'"/;,^ raation to the British Minister at Washington, of the fact^"„"i'i„»f"'{5^: of the decision of the King of Holland, and of the acquies- p"*"'"" cence of England in that decision, had waited until time was allowed for the circulation of Mr Preble's Protest — until the prolonged silence of England had awakened in America the hope of setting aside the Award — and until the State of Maine had time to come to a formal decision against it; so long he delayed making the official com- munication to the American Government, which he could not possibly avoid, until he had intimation of the practical aggressions and outrages of the subjects of the United States against the British Authorities, arousing feelings of hostility throughout the union, calculated to frustrate any effect which might have been produced by England's ostensible demand to proceed to the execution of the Award. But as the Despatch of February 9th, dated as it i8,p',f„"/^«i; thirty days after the rendering of the Award by the King*' ""'• of Holland, did not arrive at its destination until the 1 9th of April — that is, until ninety days had elapsed ; so, in the present instance, does a delay occur scarcely less calculated to awaken suspicion of systematically practised deception. The memorable Despatches, dated 14th October, 1831, \m. which we have now to consider, were not received till the 18th of December, being a delay of ♦wo months and four days. But without any irregularity, accidental or inton- Of Oct. 14, p. m '"'Ul II l!i DatP of out ragfs. — Octn Imt siibstitut ed furAugUbt ml', m W.'. 1 1 " I'-i ■■ ■ m; I' M 7 llliil Hill 'llllll III mi m No iiistruc ti(ii)8 Hi-rive 40 tloniil, in this respect — no one who has perused the pre- ceding* account of the outrages committed against Great Britain under the authority (of the state of Maine — and therefore) of the United States, can fail to inquire what steps were taken by Lord Palmerston on so grave and alarming an event ? In what strain had he remonstrated ? In what terras required the instantaneous execution of the Award of the Sovereign Arbiter ? The Reader naturally looks to the next despatch from Lord Palmerston. He finds in it no allusion at all to the subject. Its date is the I Uh of October. He turns then to Papers (B) for the ,"',; di.te of these outrages. — The date, as given in the Index and the Heading, is October, 1831 ; of course he will in- fer, that when the despatch of 14th October was penned, Lord Palmerston could have had no knowledge of the outrages committed. It is true, that whoever read these documents when they appeared, had no means of making such reference ; because the papers connected with the transactions of Maine were withheld until after the close of the Session. But there is evidence that they were both printed at the same time ; because there is reference made in Papers (A) to the paff- ing of Papers (B.) An examination of these will show that the outrages, indexed in October, occurred on the \9th of August ; consequently the intelligence had six weeks to reach London (by other channels than Washington), before the transmission of Lord Palmerston's instructions, supposing the despatches of October 14th to have been transmitted on the day they were dated. A violation of the jurisdiction of the British Crown, by authority, and with the declared intention of taking possession of the land, the subject of arbitration, is committed on the 19th of August; /despatches from the British Minister, received at Washington four months after, take no notice of the fact; in the presentation of the papers to Parliament, the state- ment of these outrages is not presented together with the diplomatic correspondence; when presented, the date of October (in the index and heading) is given instead of August. There is another circumstance, worthy of consideration i'i,7'''Mers»«'^ in connection with the period of the arrival of this despatch tu c....gie... j^^ Washington. The Session of Congress was to open in the beginning of December ; the President's Message to both Houses became new a most important event in this discussion, which was beginning to assume the character of a new negociation. It was therefore absolutely necessary 41 that any step of the English Government towards realizing the objects it assumed to desire, should be taken previously to the presidential Message to Congress — a Message wherein that very question would assume a paramount im- portance; — a Message, which, in consequence of its ex- pression of opinion on that subject, was looked for with the greatest interest, not only throughout the Union, but throughout the North American possessions of Great Britain. Nor is this all : the assemblage of the Members of both Houses in Washington, was a period for which the Bri- tish Minister ought to have been armed and prepared with the utmost solicitude. I omit the past ; I take the nego- ciation (if that word can be so prostituted) as it stood at the time : — a measure, in which Great Britain had a deep interest, was to be referred to the decision of the Ameri- can Senate. The majority, indeed, of the Senate was known to be in favour of it ; but there was a number]], of individuals, active, able, and energetic, using every means which interest or ambition could prompt, ability and in- genuity suggest, or du^.licity sanction, to impose upon the remainder of their compatriots, through a false represen- tation, not only of the facts, but of the intentions of the British Government. These means being employed to lead the American Senate into a decision hostile to Great Britain, what is the diplomatic position of Great Britain at Washington? No official step taken, or communication made ; — the Representative — the authoritative and titular representative of Great Britain removed, and the C^arar^ f'i«i»hch«rKe a AJfatres, ad interim, not merely leit without mstructions, d"„"™"i{^^ '" but having positive instructions to do nothing ! Looking upon this state of things, no less unwonted "/e'cuunn "Vf than unao<;ountable, it cannot fail to strike and to startle t«„rded""«{ the inquirer, that there is recorded in the Foreign Office, llle 'rureig" as dated, and therefore despatched, on the 14th of Octo-"""- ber, (and therefore one month and twenty-two days be- fore the opening of the Session), a despatch calling upon the American Government to accept the Award ; and at the same time, dealing in a most conclusive and authorita- tive manner with the objections raised against it by the State of Maine. But this despatch does not arrive at Washington until after the Message is delivered.* When I * It is singnlar, that, daring the course of this negociation, Lord Pal- merston has written not quite one despatch a-year ; which has arrived subsequently to the meeting of the Session, — and, of course, to the deli- very of the President's Message. ili-lii,. 4>2 it does arrive, it is accompanied with a secret instruction, in an opposite sense ! Mesunge to Xho Messaffe of the President to the Conffress of the ucc.o, 1831. gth December, 1831, is however any thing but uniavourable to the Award, although abstaining from pronouncing an opinion. In reference to the Treaty of Ghent, to the Convention of 1827, he says, " The King of the Nether- lands having, by the advice of the late President and His Britannic Majesty, been designated as such friendly Sove- reign (who should be invited to investigate and make u decision upon the points of difference), it became my duty to carry with good faith the agreement so made into effect." Lord Palmer- On thc 18th Dccember, Lord Palmerston's despatch of II°,"ch*otocV. the 14th October arrived at Washington; and as this ri'vVs. '"" document is the most important of those that have been made public, and is the key to the ensuing transac- tions, I have transferred it in extenso to the Appendix, and request to it the reader's most uerious attention. It commences with instructing the Charg^ d^ Affaires to ad- dress, for the first time, an official communication to the Anierican Secretary of State, stating the King of Great Britain's assent to the Award of the King of Holland, and requiring the American Government to proceed to the Lorii Palmer- execution of that Award. It then recalls to notice and •ton « first ue- , />ii*t>ii "jP^'^j^ajfi^^i; importance the protest of Mr Preble, and proceeds to say '=''""'='*"'"'' that, notwithstanding that protest. His Britannic Majesty is persuaded " that the Government of the United States will not hesitate to accept the Award of His Netherland Majesty :" — thus neutralizing the effect of the first com- cBl'Ot. w Date of Date of the Date nf Lord Paliuemtoa's Despatch. President's Message. Arrival at WashingUm In 1831, - - - October 14th. Dec. 6tb. Dec. 18th. 1832, - - - (See note * belmv.) 1833, - - - December 21st. Dec. 5th. Feb. 10th, 1834. 1834, - - - October 30tb. Dec. 2d. Dec. 8th. 1836, - - - October 30tb. Dec. 8th. Dec. 27th. 1836, - - - {No communication.) 1837, - - - November 19tb. Dec. 5th. Jan. 10th, 1838. There are five annual despatches, independent of the first despatch of February 9th, 1831, and that of February 25th, 1833. The time occupied in the trausmis.sion of these seven despatches (which constitute the nego- ciations of seven years) is 390 days. The despatch of February 9th, occu- pied in its passage 72 days ; those of the 14th October, 1831, 66 days ; ana the mean time of transmission, during the whole period of negociation, that is to say, between the date (assumed to be the date at Downing Street) and the arrival at Washington, is 55 days and 18 hours. The average time occupied in the passage of common commercial letters has been, from the year 1831 up to the establishment of steam communication, twenty-7^hie days. * Despatch of Febnmiy 25th, 1833, Is In reply to a note of 21st July, 1832 ; and there- fore ought to be the despatch of 1832. ^:£'ii:'^^--MiU: 48 instruction, infavourable Jan. lOth, 1838. y, 1832 ; and there- munlcatio.i, by a selection of terms which showed that the English Government considered the future decision of the United States as optional, and not imperative. Lord Pal- merston then proceeds to argue the question. The in- troduction of argument in this stage of the proceedings is a setting aside of the question of right and treaty stipula- tion, upon which it is now rested; but the arguments themselves are conclusive. Lord Palmerston effectually disproves, from their own mouths, the frivolous — (were the subject less grave, I should say — ludicrous) objections, put forth by the opponents of this measure. These argu- ments, employed ^t an earlier date, would have left no room for discussion ; and, had Lord Palmerston left the Minister at Washington free to use his own judgment, his Lordship never would have penned them, because they would not have failed to have been used by the Minister lilmself, — and urged at the moment when they were called for, and would have been of use. By delaying to instruct, nnd by forbidding to discuss. Lord Palmerston allowed the opposition to get root, and to gain head; reserving to himself the opportunity of appearing to advocate British rights, when that advocacy would he of no Qvaily — and of overthrowing, triumphantly, the American fallacies, after these fallacies had produced their effect. This despatch, remaining in the Foreign office, or produced to Parlia- ment, becomes proof of his ability ; it stands a record of his zeal for British interests, — " the polar star — the lead- ing principle of his policy," and tends further to the com- plication of this, the simplest of all possible questions, as it stood on the 10th of January: — an arbitration, sealed, signed, and delivered to parties mutually bound to abide by it. Nearly twelve months had been allowed, as we have seen, to elapse, before the British Minister had been per- mitted to receive any instructions on the subject of the Award. On the 18th December the instructions just referred to had been received ; and feeble, contradictory, and untimely as they are, not a month — a week — a day — or even an hour, are they suffered to remain without sub- sidiary instructions, by which, whatever effect they could produce was entirely effaced ! — Another despatch of the same date, (October 14,)* and of course contained in the • It is singular that the office-nnmber of none of the Despatches is given. There is, on one occasion, a reference by number to a Despatch, contain- ing the opinion of the President expressed to the British Minister, which I am unable to find, and which is certainly not to be found, by its refer- ence, in the published documents. Lord I'aliiicr- stnn's second Despntrii con- ttndlcts the first. mm: i'liiii ll'ji M ■ |f lljiii- I ' iiii. M':i' 44. same bag, prepares the British Charge d'JffuireSi to looit to a new negot iation as being the "ulterior," and therefore real views of His Majesty's Government. This despatch will also be found, in extensOf in the Appendix.* Lord Palmerston commences by stating that, in reference to the other despatch of the same date, the simple and uncondi- tional acceptance of the Award is " the only course to be pursued consistently with the respective obligations of the two Governments^ He continues, " You are nevertheless au- thorized to intimate privately, upon any suitable occasion, a modification of the Award by a reciprocal exchange or concession." " You will, however," he adds, " be parti- cularly cautious in making any communication of this nature, to guard against the possibility of being misunder- stood as inviting negociation as a substitute for the adoption of the Award.'* Rewiider. the From such instructions, what would any man compre- iiilnd of the ,, '. •' .r fairM*' ^'^^' bend, save that he was to obtain — without appearmg to invite — negociation as a substitute for adoption. The in- structions in themselves are contradictory and self-destruc- tive; but as the contradiction destroyed in the British Agent's mind all idea of a determination of England that the stipulation should be fulfilled, it rendered him incap- able of doing that which his duty required, viz., — the en- forcement, by every means, of the adoption of the Aw^rd, and the energetic expression of the determination of Eng- land, that it should be so accepted ; furthermore, it placed that Agent in a position of dilemma, so that, whatever line he took, Lord Palmerston had reserved to himself the faculty of disavowing his act, and disgracing him, — a posi- tion, if calculated for nothing else, eminently calculated to render him timid and inefficient. Mr Bankhead, in the first instance, communicates to the American Government only the first despatch of Oct. I4th, and the American Secretary of State declines answer- ing (a new authority having now intervened) until the American Go- |'>)^" <"•;»( the decision ot the question by the bcnato, he intimates to"!""'*'- tbe American Secretary of State the substance of that second despatch. In reporting this step to Lord Palmer- ston, he commences with excusing himself for having re- served, up to that period, this second despatch. ** 1 did so," says lie, " because the Senate had shown no disposi- tion to take up the question, and I thought that the slight- \rit intimation on my part as to the possibility of future negociation, would perhaps endanger its favourable deci- sion." Is not this reason most clear and imperative for not making the communication at all ? Used, as it is, as an excuse for not having done so before, it proves the con- viction impressed upon his mind, that the ostensible views, conveyed in the first despatch of October 14th, were not the real views of his chief. If one moment could have been selected more favoura- ble ^han another for endangering the decision, it was that moment, when the Senate was about to come to its deci- sion : consequently, " I thought," says Mr Bankhead, Jasti«M wm- " that this was the proper moment iniormally to intimate do'ng »o i«. to the Secretary of State that His Majesty's Govern- ment might not be indisposed to enter into negociation with this Government, with a view to effect some modifi- cation by a reciprocal exchange and concession." The consequence of thir. step, as may be expected, immediately cnnscquent appears: — the next despatch, given in extract,* commences IheAwini."' " It is with great regrety that I announce to your Lord- ship, that the Senate has refused to sanction the acquies- cence," &c. We have thus arrived at the conclusion of the first phase of this negociation : — viz., the rejection, by the Se- nate of the United States, of the Award of the King of • As each despatch refers exclusively to one subject, the presentation of extracts from despatches, instead of entire despatches, requires explana- tion. Il^r;,' ;ii':i' i ''IK !!;iW! Holland, brought about, as I 'conceive no impartial man who will study even these documents, (selected, separated, and misplaced as they are,) can hesitate to admit, by the acts, positive and negative, of the British Minister. Dur- ing the eighteen months of suspense and indecision, no step was taken by Great Britain, in any way calculated to bring about an adjustment of the diflFerence : every imagin- able step was taken to prevent it. There is a continuous chain of evidence proving the favourable disposition, dur- ing seventeen months, (until the communication of the second despatch of October 14th), of the majority of the Congress and Senate, and of the President, towards the adoption of the Award. Before leaving this part of the question, I will refer to and establish three collateral points, — as confirmatory of these conclusions. pro"fa"of au First, the absence of all censure of Mr Bankhead for lh'/pii°"fL°d! the communication of the second despatch of October 14th ; M"nMe\he cvcu aftcr the result of that communication had appeared, in the rejection of the Award. Secondly, the indisposition of the Senate to reject the Award, up to the period of Mr Bankhead's communication. Thirdly, the language of Lord Palmerston in the House of Commons, as entirely corroborative of the views here given of his intentions in this matter. First. — Mr Bankhead, in his despatch of June the 13th, as in his previous despatches, has expressed his conviction that the decision of the Senate would be favourable to the adoption of the Award. It is upon this ground that he justifies, it is this fact that he assigns as the motive for, his communication of what he terms " the ulterior views of His Majesty's Government." The subsequent rejection of the Award proves, either that his opinion of the disposi- tion of the Senate had been erroneous, or that his com- munication had been the means of altering the favourable disposition which previously had existed. In the one case, he showed himself perfectly incompetent to fulfil the duties of his office ; in the other, he had acted in direct violation of the interests of Great Britain, and had consequently become liable to the extremest penalty of diplomatic delin- quency, — and Lord Palmerston had no alternative between censure of that servant, and dereliction of his own duty. But, as Lord Palmerston, in confiding to him the secret proposal of negociation, had, by the peculiar construction of the language he had used, thrown upon him the entire responsibility of its employment, and directed him to be Ist. Mr Bank- head not 'ven- tured. 47 particularly cautious, in riiaking any communication of this nature, to guard against the possibility of being (mis) un- derstood as inviting negociation as a substitute for the adoption of the Award; — and as Mr Bankhead himself had stated '' that the slightest intimation on his part as to the possibility of future negociation might endanger the favourable decision of the Senate :" — it is clear that he had contravened the positive instructions of his chief, and had acted in opposition to his own emphatically expressed conviction of his duty. If therefore Lord Palmerston, with the whole facts before him, with the rejection of the Award coming after the dangerous intimation of negocia- tion as a substitute for adoption, did not visit with his severest censure, the functionary by whom that intimation had been so unfortunately made, — it follows^ that he had placed him in that position of embarrassment with a pur- pose — and that the unfortunate step so taken, was that which Lord Palmerston desired. Second. — On the return of Sir Charles Vaughan to 2^- s«>;"te "f ITT ^ • • • Mil 111 • I lilted Washmgton, it was impossible he should not m some**"""^''™'" degree reconsider what had taken place during his absence and in the despatch of his, dated July, 1833, (of which only an extract is given), he makes an observation upon llXerii'.' the authority of the Senate, to the effect that it was limited to advising and consenting to ratify, or advising the in- structions to be given previously to opening a negociation ; adding, that when in the month of July it advised the re- jection of the Award of the King of the Netherlands, it took the initiative in the process of negociation which it directed the President to open at Washington. Sir C. Vaughan was therefore of opinion that they had not autho- rity constitutionally to interfere, and that in this instance they had departed from their constitutional practice. There was indeed no use in alluding to the subject at that time, or in speaking at all in that sense to Lord Palmer- ston; but this indication alone, from Sir C. Vaughan, is sufficient to show that unless he had been removed from Washington, even the despatch of Feb. 9th would not have sufficed to keep him silent and indifferent, when in- trigues and misrepresentations such as these were employed to obstruct a measure of which his ostensible instructions required the adoption. Sir C. Vaughan, in addressing the American Secretary of State, bursts out more indignantly against the decision of the Senate: " When the undersigned finds so important a measure defeated by a bare majority — when the majority iibli' tn the Award, up to 9 the (iimiimiii- riition of the Secret Des- h nf Oc- fill HHi'i ''' m SiK l-V/i' !i^n ::'!':^i'ii: ';i:!,.y;i|!: IIh!!! lllliiii I'':;* IP. i'.'' ;;i 'fiV' lii-! =^^liii!ii'; i:^::i 48 of only one decides the Senate to open a new uegociation," &c. This was in March, 1884, consequently two years after the rejection of the Award. It is the first time that any allusion has heen made on the part of England ; and slight and fleeting, timid and inoffensive, as is the remark, it calls forth a long and complicated reply from the American Secretary of State. And I refer to the cor- respondence, for the purpose of obtaining the Evidence of Mr M'Lean, the American Secretary of State, as to the disposition of the Senate — " The Committee," says Mr M*Lean, under date, March 31st, 1834, " to whom the President's Message was referred, and to whose Report Sir Charles has alluded, expressed the opinion that in this case (a question referring to the practice of the Senate), the United States were not bound by the decision of the F» i 49 28th of July, says: " I take the liberty of transmitting to your Lordship an account of the proceedings which took place in the Senate, in their executive capacity, during the discussion upon the Award of the King of the Nether- lands. Your Lordship will observe by the perusal of this paper* that the Senate was divided into three parties : the iirst composed of those who desired the acceptance of the Award ; among them was Mr Tazewell, the Chairman of the Committee of Foreign Relations; the second was com- posed of those who thought that the question did not come under the cognizance of the Senate ; and the third party included those who were opposed to the acceptance of the Award, The unfortunate wording of that Instrument, which might imply mediation as well as decision, has given a strong hold to those who were opposed to that measure." Here, then, on the testimony of the American function- aries, that is, of the adverse party; and of the British functionaries, that is, of the over-reached parties ; there is proof of the favourable disposition of the Senate to whom the decision was referred; so that the rejection by thai body can be attributed only to the impression pro- duced upon them, that England would not take unkind- ly their decision against herself, or even, that the Eng- lish Ministry desired that the Boundary question should not be settled. These facts being before Lord Palmer- ston, he has no censure to convey to the Agent through whose means these dispositions were sacrificed, and re- entrusts him with the representation of Great Britain at Washington. In entering into this point, it must not be for a moment forgotten, that the Senate had nothing to do with the ques- tion ; that the Senate had already considered the Conven- tion of 1827, as absolute and final ; and whatever had been the decision of the Senate, or whatever the steps of the American Government, no course was left open to the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, except to require the immediate execution of the decision of the Arbiter. Had the United States resisted, it remained but for him to make his report to the Government, and for the Government to go to Parliament, and to trans- fer to Parliament the responsibility — too grave for any administration to assume; — that of the admission of a declaration by a foreign power, that the obligations by which it had become bound to this country should not be fulfilled. • This importaut inclosure is not given. The Senate had no further nctiun on the A'vard ; hav- ing snnctinn- eil tliuConven- tionofl827. kiM l'*:i rmm cuurse, publi cation of Atrardt r>o mentrL™'. ^ "®^^ comc to the third point : namely, Lord Palmer- HoL'" 'o?8ton's conduct in the House of Commons. Commons. Immediately upon the reception of the Award of the King- of Holland, the natural, the necessary course for the HUoiiiy Foreign Minister, was to declare that decision to Parlia- ^he ment and the country ; and, thereby support the action of the British Minister at Washington, fortify himself at home by the national support, and exhibit to the United States the decision of Great Britain to carry it into effect. The negociations were terminated — the affairs wound up — the decision given — the assent of His Majesty notified to the Sovereign Arbiter ; and consequently there was no- thing further to do. There were no negociations to be embarrassed by publicity — there was no honest or then in- telligible motive for secrecy or reserve — there was every motive for instantaneous publication. There was indeed a necessity— from regard to the feelings and interests of our North American Colonies, not less than with a view LumblSiej! to any possible resistance on the part of the United States — at once to proclaim the conclusion of the negociations and the decision of the Government. No such step how- ever is taken by Lord Palmerston ! and these extraordi- nary transactions exhibit no step more extraordinary than this concealment, where every public motive and every pri- vate feeliiig of the Minister combined to call for the pub- sum is","!™-' llcation of a fortunate event — of the only diplomatic suc- •ubjett. ' " cess which perhaps England ever obtained. Refuses give any re- ply- On the 14th February,* a Member of the House of Commons, interested in the North American Colonies, puts a question to the Secretary of State for Foreign Af- fairs, and requires to know whether the negociation has been completed, and whether there is any objection to the production of the decision. Lord Palmerston, with that peculiar adaptation of phraseology, and that facility of j^ perverting the sense of the question to which he replies, which characterize each of the well-weighed periods that escape from his lips, answers in the following terms : — "I am not aware of any circumstances which would render it incumbent on His Majesty's Ministers to lay that deci- sion before the House: if the honourable gentleman, or any • The first despatcli of February 9tli, as has already been stated, did not reach its destination until two months and ten days after the day when it is assumed to be dated. There were, connected with the sub- stance of that despatch, reasons for supposing that this delay had not been accidental, and that the despatch had been post-dated, or that its transmission had been postponed. It is not unlikely that the interest which had been manifested, even by one Member of the House of Com- mons, was a motive for hastonin;? this first communication. ' I" of the Awnrd : Lord Palmer - stcn resiHtt it. III en t of the CRHf. Mntivet of Kuch tttttte- muut. 51 other Member, have a specific motion to make on the JJ;",™ „'^»;J_^ subject, it is of course in his power to do so." Upon this, Mr Robinson gave notice of a specific mo- tion upon the subject, and when it comes in this shape before the House, Lord Palmerston resists the production of the document; refuses to assign any reason for so doing; " appeals to the House for sufficient reliance on the de- claration which he makes in his Ministerial capacity," to resist the production of the document. He will make no statement upon the subject ; he will assign no reason for his silence : but " he trusts that the House will not con- sider the circumstances of the case to have been such as have been stated by the honourable gentleman, in conse- F»ise .ute quence or his not answermg him. * His assumption, that the (correct) statement of the case was false — his throwing himself upon the confidence of the House, in his Ministerial capacity, to avert the expression of that decision which the English Government had in reality taken — can leave no doubt as to his having then deliberately formed the plan of setting aside that decision ; and of his having, from the earliest hour, commenced a systematic suppression of the truth, and falsification of the facts ; thereby to be enabled to carry this purpose into execution, and bewilder and mislead opinion after it was eifected. The conception of such a scheme might be considered heroic, were it not that the perfect ease with which it has been executed, and the complete delusion with which it has been followed, shows that facilities so great must have been calculated upon. In a degraded age, not even crimes can have the character of grandeur. The effect upon the L-nited States, of language like that used in the House of Commons, by a British Minister, — language repeated again with an interval of five years, — it is needless to point out or to comment upon. The pur- pose for which it was intended, was realized; and into the official documents themselves, strange to say, has slipped Jj^';,'!/'''^,';: the evidence of its effects. f,3 '",^J|jj Sir John Harvey thus writes to Lord Glenelg (1837) ;Jr,r8tX'''/t — " I will take care to keep your Lordship and Her *'°""' mm • The discusMion in the House of Commons on the 14th March, appears, to me to be so important, that T have given it in the Appendix. I have also added tw^o subsequent discussions, including all that transpired in the House of Commons during this prolonged negociation. — bee Ap- pendix, Part 4, No. 8. p.' i s ■ i; IPi . ., . I'll 52 Majesty's Minister at Washington, promptly informed of all that may occur connected with these vexatious pro- ceedings; to which I have been assured that some (doubt- less wilful) misconception on the part of thje people of Maine, of a declaration imputed to Lord Palmerston, in his place in the House of Commons, some months ago, if it did not actually give rise, yet is believed to have given an increased degree of confidence on their part." I , PART V. COURSE OF NEGOCIATIONS SUBSEQUENTLY TO THE REJECTION OF THE AWARD BY TH^ UNITED STATES. " BESTIR THYSELF IN ANT THING, RATHER THAN STAND IDLE." Hesiod [as quoted by Socrates, and reported by Xenophon.) The Award is thus at length rejected by the United Award ^.ject- States ! — What was now to be done ? — The question could' not solve itself. No events jould alter or modify the facts : time could not change the interests thus opposed, and could only serve to increase. the confusion so created. Stipulations, conventions, commissioners, negociations, — had, over and over, been tried in vain. Judgment itself had been discarded with indignity and contempt. Still, it was impossible to discard that judgment, and yet to ap- pear to do nothing. We will now trace the course of the subsequent interchange of proposals, which, it is to be assumed, were believed capable of effecting a more ad- vantageous settlement than the Award which had been rejected. On the 21st July, 1832, the United States announce to American pro- Great Britain, in the most summary manner, the rejection'"'"^''' "*^"" of the Award, and propose a new negociation^ This is the first communication of the United States. Sir C. Vaughan is then sent back. He is instructed to assent tosircvaugh- the rejection of the Award — to assert the conviction of the in»t'ru"cted'^t<; 1-) • • V ^-- I • • 7 7 7 nduiit tlie re- British Government, " that it is utterly hopeless to attempt i=j=j;^°—}^^ to settle the question by a new negociation" — and to assure !!;;■; jj„'k^7;»- the American Minister, " that upon receiving satisfactory t„ assert the explanations, they will enter upon the new negociation in Jhc'''"Tritis"h the most friendly spirit and the most sincere desire," &c. to^ncgMiate. An interchange then ensues of long, involved, and fruitless notes. Sir C. Vaughan is now allowed to discuss ; he is suffered to exhibi*; the valuelessness of the propositions. ■J.W»»»^1 54 This tioii the y negocia- Itt'CUIlipS !ar 1833. and tho groundlessness of the hopes of adjustment. Mr Vail, (in the meantime,) in London, on the invitation of Lord Palmerston, advancing the very points that Sir Charles Vaughan, at Washington, is left to contradict. The first dis.'^ussion of the American proposal, occupies the year 1833, and eighteen folio pages of the produced papers. — The third annual Presidential Message comes round, without any notice of them being deigned by Lord Palmerston, and, as usual, his despatch arrives after the Session has opened. The American Government with the most perfect coolness, assert : — " These difficulties arise from a denial of the power of the General Govern- ment, under the constitution of the United States, to dis- pose of any portion of territory helongiiif) to cither of the States composing the Union." Hence all negociation was vain ; and this single statement must instantly have put an end to all discussion, had there been any real object in debate. jun Sir « bilit conv puto the To this Sir Charles Vaughan replies :- \ Itllllii III , " The undersigned will lose no time in submitting the proposition made by the Government of the United States to His Majesty's Go- vernment; as the President, it appears from Mr M' Lean's letter, is not authorized, afit^ the recent proceedings in the Senate, to agree upon a conventional 'inc of boundary, without the consent of the State of Maine ; which it is not probable would be given, while there remains a reasonable prospect of discovering the line of the Treaty of 1783." Sir Charles Vaughan, however, remonstrates thus with his chief, in transmitting the American note : — " To admit the pretensions of Maine, would be to allow the effects of the Treaty to be construed entirely to the advantage of the United States." " It is surely therefore for the two Governments to remedy any defects in the original contract, and to carry it into complete execution, without reference to the pretensions of any particular State." " It is utterly impossible to establish a division of the disputed Territory according to that Treaty, and yet we are assured that cer- tain insurmountable constitutional difficulties must restric^t the Go- vernment of the United States to treat only upon that basis. " At the time when His Majesty's Government is called upon to deliberate upon the only deviation from his restrictions which the President feels himself authorized to make, I cannot refrain from submitting to your Lordship these observations, upon the pretensions of Maine which have imposed restrictions upon the powers of the executive directed to settle this question, and upon the hopelessness of arriving at any satisfactory result, if wo are to adhere to the letter of the Treaty." 55 And all this takes place in the face of the prescriptive jurisdiction of Great Britain, over the disputed Territory ! fcjir Charles Vaughan says : — " The rejection of Mr Livingstone's proposition, and tlic impossi- NegofUtioii bility of engaging the Government of the United States to treat for a"'' ''' conventional line, must have the eifect, I presume, of leaving the dis- puted territory in the possession of His Majesty, unless it should still bo left at the option of this Government to aciiuiesce in the boundary suggested by the King of the Netherlands." I.y Urituiii of the: liiii- ffiinKt-'iiKcil by ttieAiUL'i'icnns. OJbserve, in the term " suqnesled," the departure from A.inpiim tlie term decision^ — hitherto employed by Great Bntam. The new proposal brought out by this process is — a project of negociation without a prospect of a settlement — only as a means of overcoming supposed " constitutional diffi- culties." The rights of Great Britain are thus made to depend on the option of the United States: — the Minister of England, who sanctions the existence of a fleet of fifty pennants within ten days' sail of London, on the ground of a Russian review, prepares to justify the aggressions of America on our North American Colonies, by the " con- stitutional difficulties" of the United States. The new proposal is, that Commissioners be appointed to settle "a line, deviating only from the defective descrip- tion in the Treaty of 17 S3, bg permitting a search for high- lands, in any direction westward of the line due north from the St. Croix laid doiou in that Treaty." To deviate from a treaty in one point, is to invjxlidate it in all ; for it cannot be deviated from, in any respect, ex- cepting by an authority that extends to all. The pretence for rejecting the Award of the King of Holland was, that it had departed from (it was assumed) the terms (as were assumed) of the Treaty of 1783. This is met by a counter proposal on the part of Great Britain, conveyed in two despatches, dated December 21st, 1833; wherein Lord Palmerston proposes the adoption of seven of the grounds of decision contained in the Award of the King of tlolland, while agreeing to reject the conclu- sions to which they lead. Not content with this, he now reasons against the Award he had before adopted, and pro- poses a new negociation ; — after having declared any new negociation " utterly hcfpeless." In his second Despatch of the same date, he virtually admits the pretenc^ed " constitutional obstacles" on the part of the United States, by entering into a discussion on the subject. '^m ! w 56 li m I'rqpoHnlt iinil rffimnls of 1831. rrnpoials and ret'itHaU of 1835. The arguing of these propositions occupies another year ; and then comes the periodical despatch of Lord Palmer- ston for the year 1834. It is dated October 30th, and con- cludes thus : — " His Majesty's Government having once sub- mitted this point,'' — [the question of the Atlantic and St. Lawrence rivers,] — " in common with others, to the judg- ment of an impartial arbitrator, by whose award they have declared themselves ready to abide, they cannot now consent to refer it to any other arbitration," Of what use is saying that he will not refer to another arbitration, when he never has exacted the execution of the decision which resulted from the first ? The notes continue to be exchanged ; and on April 28th, 1835, the American Secretary of State proposes another new Commission, which is replied to by Lord Palraerston on the same day in 1835 as his despatch of the previous year. The following are specimens of the communications, the Nc-Bod... and or the nes^ociators : — I:|||i;!| ,'::';,>■;: ..h'll mW' MWi'' '4'' ^mt m I " The President has derived a satisfaction proportionate to his deoit sense of its importance, from the success which has attended the past efforts of the two Governments, in removing existing, and preventing the recurrence of new, obstacles, f' o most liberal and friendly in- tercourse between them." Lord Palmerston, on the 30th October, 1835, says: — " His Majesty's Government have observed with the greatest plea- sure, during the whole of the communications which of late have taken place on this question, the friendly and conciliatory spirit which has been manifested by the President of the United States ; and they are themselves equally animated by the sincerest desire to settle this matter by an arrangement just and honourable for both parties. ** His Majesty's Government are fully convinced that if the repeated attempts which they have made to come to an understanding on tliis subject with the Government of the United States, have not been attended with success, the failure of their endeavours has been owinjy to no want of a corresponding disposition on the part of the President, but has arisen from difficulties on his side over ivhich he has had no control. " The time seems, however, now to be arrived, when it has become expedient to take a review of the position in which the discussion between the two Governments stands ; and by separating those plans of arrangement which have failed, from those which are yet sus- ceptible of being adopted, to disencumber our future communications of all useless matter, and to confine them to such suggestions only as may by possibility lead to a practical result. " His Majesty's Government, on receiving the Award of the King of the Netherlands, announced without any hesitation, their willing- ness to abide by that Award, if it shoidd be equally accepted by tlie. United States.'' 57 The acceptance, or the non-acceptance, of the American Government, formed no part of the decision of England. The decision of England was absolute — it was never stated in any way to be contingent on any view or measure, policy or act, of America. "Who ever heard of the ac- quiescence of both parties, after judgment, being required to make it binding? They bound themselves before judg- ment, solely with the view of over-ruling resistance. If the adoption of an Award were optional, who would sub- mit differences to an arbiter — who would arbitrate? The proposition is so preposterous, that it requires but to be pointed out, to display the character of the whole transac- tion ; and this passage alone, if it was the only one pub- lished, could leave no doubt as to the intentions of the principal actor. But the statement is moreover false : Lord Palmerston, in October, 1835, dares — what he did not dare in 1831 ; and, confident of the incapacity of the men with whom he has to deal, he asserts in 1835, that the monstrous proposition he gives utterance to then, had been already uttered in 1831. The opposition having been some months in office, and become committed, he could now proceed with greater decision. The terms, explanatory of the proceedings, have been used by Lord Palmerston himself. The communications were " all useless matter," and contrived so as not to lead by any "possibility to a practical result." He continues: — " But their expectations were not realized. The Senate of the United States refused, in July, 1832, to subscribe to the Award; and during the three years which have elapsed since that time, although the British Government has more than once declared that it was still ready to abide by its offer to accept the Award, the Government of the United States has as often replied that on its part that Award could not be agreed to. " The British Government must now, in its turn, declare, that it considers itself, by this refusal of the United Staiea, fully and entirely released from the conditional offer which it had made, and your are instructed distinctly to announce to the President, that the British Government withdraws its consent to accept the TERniTORiAL com- promise BECOMMENDED by the King of the Netherlands.^' Then comes a refusal to accede to the proposal of the«riti^i>r™i.n- T-» • it 1 "T I T-» 1 1 M.il y are thus put out L f the way •, tholr opinions treated as those of public or '• personal enemies." Gi :^',, /. Right orjtiris* (lirtioii uiic- fjuivocal. 3;|:: 1 1 I' •1' 1 1 llll'i :': Ah t'» tlip tin- vixfttioiiol the St. John's ri- ver. — reluctantly and doubtinglyi — in the claim of Great Britain to exercise jurisdiction within the disputed territory until the Boundary question shall be adjusted; and conceding this point only so far as to recognize the British jurisdiction as resting upon an * arrangement^ and an " understanding ^^ and nut upon a right" Having no instructions, and guided only by the above- quoted opinion of Lord Palmerston, in his despatch of February 25, 1833, (which was an admission of the first step of the American Government in this matter) — what could Mr Fox do, save, like his predecessors, assent to whatever was stated, yield whatever was contested, and learn whatever he was taught ! The question of jurisdiction in the disputed territory, was as distinct and clear a point as the Sovereignty of the Crown in the British dominions. It could admit of no doubt — of no equivocation. That Mr Fox should be left in the predicament of not knowing what to reply — that he should have suffered the equivocations of the American Secretary — would seem to show that the diplomatic ser- vice is incapable of transacting any business, however trivial, or settling any point, however clear. If so, it had better be done away with. Power uncontrolled — autho- rity unchecked — cannot long exist without destructive effects on the interests of those who entrust, and on the character of those who are entrusted. In the question of jurisdiction, then, as in each other branch ol '^e subject, Lord Palmerston has done nothing to refute v iisound arguments, or to resist unjust claims; on the contrary, he has invited the advancement of claims, in opposition to the rights he was commissioned to defend, — he has suggested arguments destructive of the views he pretended to advocate. In summing up the negociations from the year 1831 to 1837, I have reserved the important question of the navi- gation of the St. John for separate notice. When, in October 14th, 1831. Lord Palmerston hinted at negocia- tion, and at a system of compensation as a substitute for the adoption of the Award, he must have had in view the certainty of an instantaneous demand from the Americans, of the navigation of the St. John. The navigation of the St. John, and that river as a frontier, was the original claim of the United States; the abandonment of that claim on their part, v/as the only occasion on which a point ad- vanced by America had not been secured, or a pretension put forward had been withdrawn. To whisper, therefore, all. 65 it Britain ' until the this point as resting and not le above- spatch of the first r) — what assent to isted, and territory, \ly of the nit of no lid be left — that he American natic ser- however so, it had 1 — autho- estructive id on the ich other e nothing st claims ; of claims, ,0 defend, views he 1831 to the navi- kVhen, in negocia- jtitute for view the mericans, on of the original that claim point ad- iretension therefore, (o the United States, the word " negociation," was to say : — " Re-assert your claim to the St. John." No sooner does Mr Bankhead, in fulfilment of his instruc- tions, whisper negociation, than the claim to the St. John is re-asserted ! That such was the necessary result of Lord Palmerston's proposal, is too clear to admit of any object in proposing it, save that which was obtained by its proposal : but that such was his object, is established by the terms in which he replies to the proposal. He pre- tends to reject it ; but in such terms as in reality to adopt it, and establish it as a claim against Great Britain : — Quest i(in o( tlio Ilivir St. Jullii adiiiitti'd us n Hubj«'Ct III' lieKocJatMiM liy GrcutUritaiii. " It will be impossible for His Majesty to admit the principle upon uliich it is attempted to treat these two questions as necessarily con- nected with each other. Whatever might be the eventual decision of His Majesty upon the latter question, if treated separately, and what- ever may be His Majesty's disposition to promote the harmony so happily subsisting between the two countries, by any arrangements Avhich might tend to the convenience of the citizens of the United States, without being prejudicial to the essential interests of his own subjects, His Majesty cannot admit any claim of right on the part of the citizens of Maine to the navigation of the St. John, nor can he consider a negociation on that point, as necessarily growing out of the (luestion of Boundary." — February 23, 1833. By refusing to admit this claim as necessarily connected with the Award, he does admit it, as standing alone. He does admit it, therefore, not in a relative, but in an abso- lute manner ; he does admit it — not as a contingency, a consequence of negociation already undertaken, of princi- ples already in dispute ; he admits it as a thing distinct — us a new original — as springing from a separate source — as flowing from a one-sided faculty, to exact, and not to bargain, and involving therefore, if it means anything at all, superiority of right or of power, — resting the right to exact on inability to resist. But, it may be asked, what were the Colonial interests about, all this while ? If the House of Commons and House of Lords were negligent in such matters, if the Colonial Legislatures had no representative in England, if publ'c opinion was dead to every question beyond those which touched the selfishness of its local passions, — could the commercial community remain ignorant of such pro- ceedings, or indifferent to them ? The commercial com- munity is divided, unorganized, possesses no attributes, performs no functions, has no distinct existence in the State. But the Corporation of the great Metropolis of the Empire? It has nothing to do with national questions. m Lonl Pnlmcr- stun dcDies, tlircMlKli the Coliiliinl Sec- rctiiry, the ex- istence u( iie- {^ocintinn fiH to tlic St Johii'ii Kivci'. Lord I'lilnicr* htoii utiU the l.'iiiteil States' Government combine to disguise and perpiex the question. ri.ntnil m tlie F'treiKU Sfiiii- star over the Adtnlnihtra- tion, t)ie I'ar- lianii'iit, ni.il the Nntioik: and roiirert Willi ■ Foreijjn I'owers. Then, at all events, the Chamber of Commerce of Lon- don ? No such body exists ! There was no associate body in the country, conceiving itself to be at all interested or to have any right to interfere in the matter of the North-East Boundary, excepting the North American Association, who having heard something of the right of navigation of the St. John being drawn into the negocia- tion, became alarmed. They sought an interview with a Minister of the Crown upon this diplomatic question. The interview was not, however, with the Minister who alone was the manager of these matters. They expressed their apprehensions to Mr Stanley, then Secretary to the Colonies, and received from him the emphatic assurance that the claim to the navigation of the St. John had been "peremptorily negatived" by His Majesty's Ministers.* Thus had Lord Palmerston practised a deception on the Colonial Minister, and rendered the colonial department effectively subservient to the prosecution of his views. And what is all this negociation about? Nothing, — absolutely nothing ! That America aimed at gaining ad- vantages is clear: but the disposition to do so was prompted by the occasion. It did not appear in the early stage of the proceedings. When she did articulate pretensions, so groundless were they, so inadequate her means, that it would be futile to imagine that the end she sought, or the advantages she gained, had their origin elsewhere save in the support of the British Minister. The Americans, when dealing with an honest Minister, have shown suffi- cient dexterity in perplexing and confusing questions ; but what must not be the results in confusion, of concert be- tween them and a dishonest and dexterous man, whose power and ability, from the hour of his committal to this fatal line, nncst have been exerted to disguise every step, however simple, and to confuse every question, however insignificant, — i\i order to make himself necessary, and thus secure that tenure of office which was requisite to prevent detection. What have been the results of their joint la- bours? The complete bewilderment of the House of Commons ; the complete perversion of the public mind. One man — an English Minister, at once the tool and the strength of foreign ambition, holds in his hands the par- liamentary majority of his party, the subserviency of his oppooents, the apathy of the nation, and the support of every foreign power that has aught to dread in England's • See U«j)ort of the Nwrtli Amuricau Aeujciation lor the year 1833, 67 m strength, or any thinw to covet in her weakness. His colleagues are his dupes : the various departments of the State, his instruments ; the Colonial Minister speaks at his bidding ; the Horse Guards disposes of the military — the Admiralty, of the naval force, at his command ; his words in the House of Commons lull the nation into in- difference, and at the same time arouse the border popu- lation of America to aggression. The firm bearing of the Colonial Governors prepares for the collision, vtrhich their weakness in military force invites; while he himself, in his own immediate department, can put falsehoods into the mouth of England — sanction hostility — inspire the spirit, and suggest the pretext, of aggression. These may be strange sounds, and startling thoughts, but they are facts : and you have the proofs before you. }3ut why refer to these minor things. Has not this man spoken falsely in the name of the Sovereign of Eng- land ? Has he not abrogated a national Treaty, and cast to the wind a solemn Award, after its adoption by the Crown? Has he not done this of his own will, for his own purposes ; by his own act, for his own behoof? The Crown and the Parliament have submitted, in silence and in ignorance, to his assumption of their prerogatives, and to the exercise of them for the violation of the Sovereign's faith, and the prostration of the Nation's power. 1$ Foreign Miiii- Kti'r ashttiUL'S the preroga- tive uf the Crown. Objections to the Award of the King of Holland. First Objection. — That the Award was not prono'inced according to the Authority given. licphj. — The Award is in strict conformity to the autho- rity given. The Arbiter was authorised to decide on all and every subject of Boundary which had arisen, or could arise. And the Award, when rendered, was to be carried, without reserve, into immediate effect* Second Objection. — That the decision was not in conformity to the Treaty of 1783. liepli/. — The "differences" had reference to the interpre- tation of the Treaty (of 1783). If the parties had agreed in the interpretation of that Treaty, — no re- ference would have taken place. * Tcrmr, ot Submission. — The two Powers request of the King of Hol- land, "that he would please to take upon himself the arbitration of their dift'ercnces." — See also Convention of 1827. Treaty of (ihent, (Appendix.) ;l; :«,! 68 ;■!( I The terms of the Treaty of 1783 contain a descrip- tion of localities,* admitted by both parties to be in- correct. The Treaty of Ghent, and the Convention of 1827, in stipulating a reference to arbitration, did so to remedy recognized defects : that they existed, was the ground of the arbitration : that the arbitra- tion should be final, was the object of the compact. The terms of the Treaty of 1783 have been in- fringed. The frontier of the Mississipi, secured by it to England, has not been given to England : — that Treaty is therefore invalid, and binding in no part. The American Government has proposed, since the rendering of the Award, a new negociation, on the basis of departure from that Treaty. Therefore, objection to the Award of the King of Holland on the pretext of inconformity with the Treaty of 1783, is unfounded, — is the reverse of the truth, — is frivolous, — is not acted on or believed by the Government of the United States. Both objections are utterly contemptible ; and the ad- mission of either for a moment, would render the diploma- tists on the British side (on the supposition of integrity) so obnoxious to reproach and contempt, as to be committed to America, and against this country, through the dread of exposure. These pretexts were originally put forward by a single State, and by a few interested individuals. Repeated, year after year, without contradiction, — they came to be ad- mitted and acted upon by the American legislature. By the very dishonesty of the grounds assumed — by the very absurdity of the arguments advanced — has the determina- tion to enforce their pretensions on England's weakness become fixed and resolute. Thus, the perversion of lan- guage (the source of all human disaster,) has equally degraded and disgraced the American State, and British diplomacy. • Probably the difficulties in regard to the Treaty of 1783, have arisen from the substitution of the word " North," for the word fFest, from the source of the St. Croix. That is the common sense direction of the Boundary ; and it would avoid the difficulties of intermediate waters between the St. Lawrence and the Atlantic. An indicative, but unlet- tered line, in Mitchell's Map, seems to confirm this idea. In the same Article of the same Treaty, a line is directed to be drawn due west from the North-west point of Lake Superior, to the Mississipi,— the Mississipi lying South of that point. The men employed by America in the nogociatiug of that Treaty, were Franklin and Jay. — The negociator on the part of Great Britain was Mr Oswald, — a man utterly ignorant of the subject, and wholly unfitted for the undertaking. 69 1 a descrip- es to be iu- Convention tration, did ley existed, the arbitra- compact. re been in- secured by land : — that I no part, id, since the ion, on the the King of y with the /erae of the believed by and the ad- ihe diploma- if integrity) e committed the dread of I by a single ipeated, year B to be ad- tlature. By ■by the very J determina- I's weakness rsion of Ian- has equally and British '83, have arisen ff^est, from the irection of the mediate waters tive, but unlet- ted to be drawn he Mississipi,— at Treaty, were Britain was Mr illy unfitted for The negociations, in the parliamentary papers, extend over six years. They commence from the receipt of the Award of the King of Holland, and its adoption by Eng- land ; that is to say, from the settlement of the Boundary Question : and they are directed to unsettling that Ques- tion, — by violating the Award, and reversing the decision of Great Britain. The communications from Downing Street may be sum- med up as follows : — In 1831, the Award was by Ld. Palmerston, < „' d In 10(3t2, •.. ••• ... in iO(Jt3, ••. ••• ... i\\ 18(34, ... ••• ••• In lo<3>), ... ••• ••• in 18e3o, ••• ••• ••• in 18o7, ... ot ..• — -for(/otten. — relinquished re-pi'oposedj superseded, re-asserted. — abandoned. —forgotten. — cast away. [ The Project of a Netv Commission. The project of a new commission is the accomplishment of the transactions which have been exposed. But this project will now no longer be the secret deed of a Minister — with this, at least, to say — that he staked his head upon the die. Now, it will be the act of the Nation. No " Mini- sterial capacity " (responsibility) stands any longer between these transactions and the light of day. On the nation, therefore, and its representatives, will now lie the respon- sibility of this new and public violation of national faith — this outrage on common sense, — a new commission — to find, what is known not to exist — to interpret, what is recognized to be void of sense — and to execute, what is admitted to be impracticable. The object of the new proposal is of course the same as that to which the previous negociations have been di- rected. By it the Parliament will be formally committed. Suspicion in the nation, and interest on the subject, will be laid at rest; while the warlike disposition of the United States will be kept up and increased. Thus will measures be matured with equal progression in the East and in the West: and, when India is ripe for insurrection, Persia prepared for assault, Alexandria for revolt, Constantinople I ill; m' 70 for occuputlon, — (and with frightful rapidity do those fates approach,) — then will be determined at St. Petersburg the mode and the moment of our war with America.* • On the occnrrcnce of the events in Maine, which have directed the attention of England, for the first time, to this snb^ect, the eyes of every one at Washington were turned to the Russian Mission. The American newspapers in which 1 read the account of the proceedings in Congress at the close of the Session, had given a full half of their colnnins to the details of the festivities at the ilussian Embassy — and to the mutual hos> jiitalities of the Burghers of New York, and tlie officers of the French Steam Frigate Vcloce— who received the honour of American citizenship. Meanwhile, the Governor of New Brunswick speaks as a soldier ought ; — the Minister at Washington as, — alas ! — British diplomatists are now taught to speak. The first declares his determination and obligations, " at all hazards," to resist aggression : — the second, begs the Aiuerican Government to yield — implores the Governor of New Brunswick to with- draw— declares England to be wholly unprepared for War with any one, far less with the United States. And, in character with the remainder of these proceedings, the Secvetary of Legation is publicly stated in the newspapers to have asserted, that the Governor of a British province had exceeded his instructions ; and that he would be recalled. PART VI. RECAPITULATION—VIOLATION OF NATIONAL COM- PACT—BETRAYAL BY THE FOREIGN SECRETARY OF THE PUBLIC INTERESTS— HIS ASSUMPTION OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL POWER— ONLY REMEDY, IM- PEACHMENT. " SUCH A MAN IS A PUBLIC EMBMY, WHO SAPS THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE PEACE AND COMMON SAFETY OF NATIONS." — Vattel, Book ii. Chap. XV. Great Britain and the United States are*bound, by the Treaty of Ghent, to submit differences respecting the Boundary to an Arbiter, and to be bound by his decision. The peace of those States reposes on that Treaty. To violate it, un any one point, is to abrogate it in all. The violation of the stipulation which renders arbitration final, would be abrogation of all international ties subsisting between fhose States. The two Governments ha\ signed a convention, on the 29th September, 1827, execui y of the stipulation of the Treaty of Uhent, and binding themselves to accept, as final and conclusive, the Award which the Arbiter should pronounce; and to carry it, without ieser\<', into imme- diate execution. This international compact had solely reference to, and was to be JulfiUed in, the single act of the adoption of the Award, wl.cn rendered. In conformity with this public deed, and on the faith of these obligations, the King of Holland was requested by the High Parties " to be pleased to take upon himself the arbitration of their differences ;" and that prince did so undertake that oliaj.. On the 10th cf J auary, 1831, the King of Holland pronounced his decis^^-n. The King of Great Britain immediately expressed to the King of Holland, his acquiescence in that decision. s^. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I laiM |2.5 ^ Uii 12.2 1^ I4S. 1.25 |||.4 16 «i ^ 6" — ► V X- niotographic Sciences Corporation 23 WIST MAIN STMST WnSTH.N.Y. MS80 (716) 872-4S03 •^^"^^ ^^% .V .** z % «> 72 The King of Great Britain did not so express to the United States, his acquiescence in that decision. The Uilited States made no communication on the sub- ject, either to the King of Holland or to the British Government. In December, 1831, the British Government communi- cated to the United States the acceptance of the Award by Great Britain, and requested to know what the United States proposed to do. The United States gave no answer. In the month of July, 1832, the Senate of the United States advised the President not to accept the Award ; and also advised him to open a new negociation with Great Britain. Communication to that effect was made in July 21st, 1832. On April 14th, 1833, after an interval of nine months from the period of the American communication, and two years and three months after the rendering of the Award, the receipt of this communication is acknowledged by the British Government ; — the setting aside of the Award, by America, acquiesced in; and a proposal for new negocia- tions adopted. On the 29th December, 1835, the English Government signified to the American Government, that it distinctly withdrew its assent to the Award of the King of Holland, which it then designates as a "territorial compromise, recommended." From April 1833, to January 1808, sixteen notes are exchanged between the British Minister at Washington, and the American Secretary of State, containing proposals for negociation — counter-proposals — refusals — and coun- ter-refusals. On the 10th of January, 1838, the British Minister at Washington receives from the principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, a despatch containing these words : — *' Both Governments have agreed to consider the Award of the King of Holland as binding on neither party ; and the two Governments therefore are in this respect as free as they were before the reference to that Sovereign was made." Thus — The British Minister had accepted the Award in the name of the Crown ; had applied to that Award the anterior treaty stipulations ; had signified to the King of Holland his acceptance of it ; had signified 73 to 'ih.' American Government his acceptance of it. He had not produced it to the House of Commons; he had resisted in his ministerial capacity the produc- tion of it in the House of Commons ; he had refused to assign any reason for the withholding of it. He had obtained the rejection of it by the American Senate — by an intimation that England \r as not in- disposed to open new negociations; he had submitted to that rejection : he had acceded to a proposition of a new negociation ; he had himself offered projects of negociation ; he then withdrew the assent of the Bri- tish Government from the Award altogether, jind finally instructed the Envoy at Washington, that both Governments were entirely absolved from all obliga- tions imposed upon them by the Award, and conse- quently imposed upon them by the Convention of 1827 and the Treaty of 1814. Further — He had suffered a long series of aggressions against the rights of Great Britain, and the preroga- tive and authority of the Crown, to be perpetrated without obtaining satisfaction, or demanding it; with- out making remonstrance, or even comtaunication, to the Government by whose subjects these crimes were committed, until he had encouraged, sanctioned, and fully established, a determined spirit of hostility to the fulfilment of the common obligations of the two States, and until h^ had diplomatically set aside the rights of Great Britain in that question. He had, moreover, by his positive declarations in the House of Commons, excited the American people and Government to re- sist the Award, had fomented a spirit of hostility, and encouraged the outrages of the population bordering on the disputed Boundary. But — The Award of the King of Holland, founded as it is on international compact, remains binding upon this country, and upon the United States, so. long as both are not absolved from such obligations by the same authority as that by which they were contracted. Until such compact is entered into, the proposal of a new negociation on the part of a British Minister, being an attempt to set aside an act, the fulfilment of a conven- tion, is an assumption of the prerogatives of the Crown. It is therefore illegal, and is not binding on Great Britain. The public safety requires an immediate inquiry into the conduct of the principal Secretary of State for Foreign 74 Affairs in regard to this question ; and if it appearo that by his acts, or his negligence, or even his ignorance, these cWming and unfortunate results have been brought about, then are the means furnished, by which to restore our na- tional position, and to transfer, from the Parliament and the Crown, to the guilty Minister, the responsibility of such acts, by his impeachment and condemnation. earn that ice, these ht ahout, e our na- nent and Ability of PART VII. CONSEQUENCES TO EUROPE AND AMERICA, OF THE ABANDONMENT OF THE AWARD. i " THE FAITH OP TREATIES IS INTERESTING, NOT ONLY TO THE CON- TRACTING rABTIES, BUT I.IKEWI8E TO ALL NATIONS, AND TO THE UNIVERSAL SOCIETT OF MANKIND." — Vattel. If the previous conclusions are correctly drawn from the facts stated in the papers presented to Parliament, — the setting aside of the Award involves the national disgrace and dishonour of Great Britain, and is an act of state treason. Are the Government and people of the United States desirous to take advantage of, and prepared to profit by, such an act ? Are they prepared to ally themselves to the diplomatic scheme of which it is a part ? — to associate them- selves with treason and dishonour ; to become the tools of Russian ambition ; and so labour to effect the downfall of Great Britain? Is England prepared to violate, before the eyes of man- kind, her national honour ; to sacrifice her rights ; to adopt the guilt of a dishonest servant : and, by the prostitution of her power, to confirm those gigantic projects of ambition, which tend to place in common jeopardy, her own power, and the liberties of mankind ? Is America in this mattei* the originator oi sl policy which she has grasped, — or the instrument of an ambition by which she is used ? Is England a party to the proceedings in which she is involved, — or the sufferer from a compact of which she is ignorant ? Have either of the Nations deliberately examined and thoroughly comprehended the subject in debate ; the pro- ceedings of their Governments, or their respective rights 1! '■'■1! ill 76 I and obligations ? Does either comprehend the steps they are now taking — the point to which they are now tending — the policy by which they are now influenced — the objects for which that influence is now exerted ? These points are more particularly deserving of the attention of America, seeing that she is the aggressive party, — and, though the disasters may be equal to each, the principal guilt of this unnatural alliance will rest with her. But "no American Statesman," it will be said, "has contemplated such results; there is no desire in the American people for such a catastrophe ; their minds are absorbed in the pursuits of gain — their horizon does not extend to the politics of Europe. The general feeling of the Union was in favour of the adoption of the Award, even if it had not been a matter of treaty. It has been set aside by a process of which the nation knows nothing, and in which it was not interested ; and therefore there is no ground whatever for the supposition that War between the two countries must ensue, — still less for the assumption that union of ends, or concert of means, should be intro- duced or established between our republican institutions and federal union, and the despotic autocrat of a military empire." It is precisely because the American nation has not understood the politics of Europe — it is precisely because the American Statesmen have not grappled with this ques- tion in its larger diplomatic bearings, nor have penetrated to its mdividual and moral source — that the United States find themselves at this moment committed, — as they are committed, to a career of which they no more comprehend the conclusion, than they can account for the progress they have made. But, it is because they have gone so far, without calcu- lation, and without defined object, that the obligation is imposed upon them, as responsible agents, as members of a free State, as originators of a new national type and destiny, — to examine with solemnity the position in which they stand; to scrutinize the motives by which they are actuated ; to compare boldly the temptations with which they are surrounded, with the consequences with which they are threatened ; and, at once, to make the election between a futurity of justice and of peace, or an existence of injustice and convulsion. The steps by which America has advanced to the pre- teps they sv tending he objects )g of the ggressive to each, will rest aid, "has in the minds are does not feeling of e Award, s been set hing, and lere is no between ssumption be intro- istitutions a military i has not ly because this ques- >enetrated ted States I they are mprehend ^ress they out calcu- ligation is embers of type and in which they are ith which ith which ) election existence > the pre- 77 sent position of antagonism with Great Britain, have been already traced : — they have not been taken as the result of a fixed resolve — they stam rathei unpremeditated, and almost involuntary; so that her guilt of aggression, as that of England in submission, has been brought about by the art of a British Minister, the enemy no less of his country than of the United States : by the disavowal of whose acts, England and America may at once be restored to amity and good-will ; the honour of the one, as of the other, retrieved, and the misfortunes threatening both, averted. In thus encroaching upon the undefended and unsup- ported rights of Great Britain, the American diplomatists have followed the natural course of business — the common laws of nature. As the able and the active gain upon the weak and the inert ; as the weight of the solid mass presses upon the slight and yielding substance ; so have the Ame- rican diplomatists gained from their antagonists, and pressed upon their neighbours; occupied the positions she has abandoned, and disregarded the power of which she was unconscious. To proceed in this line, required neither concert nor plan ; and the range of their political vision probably never extended beyond personal satisfaction I)i a supposed trial of strength ; or, at the furthest, an ultimate incorporation of some British provinces, which England might appear to be more disposed to relinquish, than America to acquire. A larger view, however, of these subjects, presents other elements of calculation, and other results. These are, the inability to resist an impulse given ; to disguise the fact, or to counteract the effect, of unjust advantages gained on one side, and dishonourable sacrifices incurred on the other: hence the growth of national hatred between the two people ; the advancement of the one to a position which the other will not be aole to endure, — by which its patience will be exhausted, and its vengeance aroused ; the consequent collision of the two States, and the employment of the whole resources of the one, for the destruction of the other. Besides, there is the action of the policy of other States upon these animosities, and the prospects of ambition opened to the Great Nations of Europe, in the lowering of the consideration, in the weakening of the power, in the diminution of the commerce, in the prostra- tion of the maritime strength, of one or other of the Anglo- Saxon Nations ; and, above all, in their mutual animosities and reciprocal destruction. 1 m * : i: m 78 To these calamities both parties are led by the setting aside of the decision of the Boundary question; which cannot be set aside except by a violation of our honour ; which, if set aside, would only be so, through^the betrayal by a British Minister, of British rights — and through desigfn on the part of the American Government to do what is dishonest, and to gain what is unjust. On this Eoint, let us not deceive ourselves: there is no interval etween the adoption of that Award, and the plunging of both nations into a career of animosity and injustice, involving reciprocal disasters, and ending in the certainty of the destruction of one, and probably in the ruin of both. I therefore now come to the question, — What, to the United States, will be the consequences of entering upon this career ? As, however, they may not feel, in regard to England, the impossibility of her adopting in this matter a middle course ; as, by the proposition of Lord Palmerston for a new commission, they may be deceived even now into the idea that England will yield to them the territory in dis- pute; it may be advantageous to state the grounds upon which I conceive that the submission of England to the progress of the United States northward, must lead to collision with the United States, or to the downfall of the British power, — the greatest possible disaster, as I conceive, that could befall the United States. These complications have arisen solely from the secrecy in which the question has been involved, from the total ignorance of the subject in the House of Commons, and from the general apathy of the Nation in all questions of foreign policy. There has existed, throughout the British nation, a great regard and profound attachment for the American people ; a disinclination to construe any doubtful fact unfavourably to them ; an earnest desire to preserve the closest union of political interests, of commercial in- terchange, and national sympathy. These elements are now all changed : and whoever has watched the tendency of opinion in England, must have perceived a turn in its direction, — must be prepared for the setting of a strong tide in a counter sense, and for a re-action, strong, perhaps heedless, in proportion to the tameness and the extent of past endurance. This, I say, is the feeling arising in this country with regard to its general position ; but its recovered energies will be directed most immediately, and with most effect. 79 against the United States' perseverance in its present career. That is the question most immediate, most sensi- bly touching us ; redoubled hate will spring from outraged affections: and retaliation was never yet slow to follow insults cast upon a powerful people in its mother tongue. England will not be more astounded herself at the energy which she will put forth, than America, at the vengeance she will have so heedlessly aroused. The language of the Provincial Senate of Nova Scotia, and its decision, regardless and careleus of the opinions of England, furnish the proof of what I say, and are the ear- nest of what I prognosticate. But there is another consideration which will tend in no slight degree to unchain the slumbering energies of Eng- land, when we begin to examine our position, and to inquire into the objects, views, and means of the United States : and it is this, — that, while daring our power, and defying our vengeance, she lies completely at our mercy. But it can admit of no question, and of no doubt, that, if England is aroused to action, the settlement of the North- East Boundary Question remains the only means oy which the United States can ward off a storm which must over- whelm her. But it may be said, the restoration of England to energy, is a mere supposition: England has endured so long, and lost so much, that she has no spirit or mind remaining for the assertion of right or the resistance to wrong. Let us concede that point for a moment, and examine its consequences. The submission to the abrogation of the Award of the King of Holland is the carrying out of the poJ^cy of the present Foreign Minister : it is the accomplishment of the designs of Russia. Now, if, as already stated, the restora- tion of England depends upon the overthrow of the present fatal system of diplomacy, and the consequent arrestation of the designs of Russia, — it is clear, without going a step further, that to set aside that Award establishes that fatal policy, supports a traitor in the Councils of Great Britain, gives Russia a triumph over England, enabling her thereby to continue with impunity her aggressions on the British dominions in the East and in the West, of establishing her supremacy over France, the United States, Persia, &c., compromising them separately against Great Britain, and rendering their (henceforward necessary) concert, practi- cable only through herself. In fact, it is the triumph of 80 her delegate in London, — combining the representation of the two antagonist systems that divide the world. The setting aside of the Award of the King of Holland increases and prolongs the irritation between the two people; the sacrifice of right and territory brings the United States into an attitude of menace, and a position of aggression : — they reach the St. Lawrence — they cut off the North American possessions of Great Britain from each other — shut it out from Canada, — they blow the spirit of discord and faction throughout the whole of these provinces — they become strong, in the degradation of British power, in the indignation of the loyal subjects of the British Crown. Our attached and intelligent fellow citizens across the Atlantic, will vainly proffer that aid, in our cause as in theirs, which we shall have shown our- selves unable to receive, and unworthy to use. Will not this position of the United States, co-operating with Russia's eastern and southern allies, insure and hasten the downfall of the fabric of British dominion ? Can such motives exist, or such objects be in project, without alli- ance and without concert between the United States and Russia ? Are not these the consequences that flow from the abrogation of the Boundary Award ? Was not the setting aside of that Award the work of Russia's agent? Were not these the consequences to which she looked in requiring that servira? I therefore assume that to set aside the Award of the King of Holland is to bring about coJ^ision between America and England, or to be *he accomplishment and the seal of a scheme for the dismem- berment of the British Empire. There is, therefore, no middle course for America, between acceptance of the Award, and single or conjoint collision with England. It is not by accumulation of wealth, or extension of dominion — it is not by the possession of armies or of navies, that greatness is attained or tranquillity secured. These things, important and valuable as they are, yet are not the sources of power. There is a possession beyond these : by which these are created ; without which they are useless, — national character. A Nation's destinies are in its mind ; its circumstances flow from its qualities : its strength lies not in its political institutions, but in its indi- vidual character. Wherever Men are just and prudent, the Nation will live and prosper. It will, above all things. ■•i^^^Sli^-jk 81 ip^ itation of ' Holland the two •ings the oaition of y cut oiF lain from blow the i of these lation of ibjects of int fellow at aid, in )wn our- operating nd hasten Can such hout alii- tates and flow from 3 not the I's agent ? ooked in at to set ing about be *he d ism em- America, conjoint ;nsion of Bs or of secured. , yet are n beyond ich they tinies are ities: its its indi- prudent, 11 things, revere and preserve the moral attributes which alone en- noble the human race. It will not be unjust to others : it will endure insult or injustice from none. We read in history of the fall of nations through the decay of their institutions : but if history really were the handmaid of philosophy, we should learn that the decay of institutions is an effect, and not a cause; — that things which men's opinions create, interpret, and apply, have no existence — whatever the form they wear, whatever the name by which they are known — save in the spirit of the age. Whatever produces unworthy desires or ignoble subser- viency in the people of a country, exposes to hazard the politic body — because the parts have been corrupted; ronders feeble and valueless its forms of Government — because principles of honour and a sense of dignity are wantitig in the men. Implant in the people an object of policy which is not just, — cause it to submit to an act which is dishonourable, — and you instantly sink the value of each individual of which it is composed, and lower at once institutions, power, and character ; diminish the value of possessions, and of existence, — for whatever detracts from the morality of a people, diminishes its happiness. For three hundred years has Europe been kept in a state of agony and convulsion, by the desire of France to secure the Rhine for a frontier ; and France has not yet extended to the Rhine which she has so frequently over- past. Each succeeding century has found her with mature designs, and confident expectations, relying on the heed- lessness of ^he other powers, and on the depth and pene- tration of her own diplomacy : each struggle has left her discomfited and overpowered, and unpossessed of the Rhine. On each of these occasions the attempt of France was only practicable by having lulled or deceived England, or by having bought with money the Ministers of the British Crown.* What have been the moral conse- • Indeed, the Sovereign of England has himself heen a pensioner of France ; but France was not then forming designs immediately injnrious or necessarily hostile to Great Britain. She only bought inaction from the British Cabinet, so as to separate England from the policy of the Con- tinent, and to leave the Netherlands at Tier mercy. Happy had it been for herself, as for Europe and mankind, if she had been less snccessfiil in these attempts, or if the institutions of England had been less unhappily formed for tne management of Foreign interests. It is curious to observe a nation, exerting all the energy of a free people to resist a shadow of undue prerogative, and placing it in the power of a foreign intriguer, or the mistress of a Sovereign or a Minister, to plunge it in war, or to cause it to violate its most sacred rights and duties. — E. g ; — See Sir f William Temple — On the Treaty of Nimeguen, 82 quences to France? What the fate of the dynasty — what the end of the inititutions, under which those unjust projects were formed and executed ? The New World was to read a political lesson to us of the old. May the moral of the old not be cast away on its young ambition ; and, tainted already with crimes from which the oldest civilization recoils, let it not suppose that the experience of the past is not available for it, nor that retributive justice is to slumber over violence, because it is disguised as free, or excused as new. An apostle of national justice, worthy of better ages and of nobler times, has arisen among our descendants in the West. In the seclusion of remoteness — under the shade of privacy — engaged in the holy ministry of the altar; this extraordinary man has grasped the political re- lations of the old and the new world, with a precision, and exposed them with a power, — which the land of his birth, as that of his ancestry, has hailed with cold and fruitless admiration. To attempt to exhibit to America the ruin of its char- acter ; the aestruction of its institutions; the downfall of' its political existence ; as the inevitable consequences of a career of aggression ; — the deluging of Europe and Amer- ica in blood, as the result of an insane purpose of great- ness and dominion ; — ;Would but be to follow the argument exhausted by Dr. Channing.* I refer to his letter on the Texas, to Mr Clay ; from which, extensive as has been its circulation, I have extracted some passages, confident that those who have already read them will re-peruse them with increased interest and advantage. The attempt of Dr. Channing to arrest the spirit of violence, or the lust of plunder, amongst his countrymen, was made during the first aggressions upon a large scale against the Province of Mexico. He justly considered that event, not as an accident, but as the result of inherent national immorality, and as the commencement of a long series of future violence, wars, and disasters. His argu- * See Appendix. I cannot omit stating that tbe qnestion of the Texas, so far back as the vear 1833, had engaged my most serioos attention, and has been to me, looking to it from the shores of the Enxine, as the key to the events of the world. The pemsal of Dr. Channing's letter produced on me an electrical . effect.— That snch thooghts should in this age exist any where ! That snch views should proceed from America ! dynasty — ;hose unjust son to us of ut away on crimes from luppose that it, nor that , because it better ages jcendants in —under the istry of the political re- ecision, and if his birth, ind fruitless of its char- downfall of' [uences of a ! and Amer- se of great- 16 argument etter on the IS has been !S, confident )eruse them 18 spirit of ountrymen, large scale considered of inherent t of a long His argu- ir back as the been to me, events of the an electrical vhere ! That 88 ments bore on considerations of a moral kind ; and on the misfortune which the United States, as a na'lon, was pre- paring for itself. These are his strong — his unassailable positions: having, however, established these, he proceeds to unrol before his countrymen another aspect of futurity; he points out to them the certainty of collision with England, (although, at that time, designs against the Canadas, nor aggressions upon the disputed territory, appeared in the distance, but as incidentally among a hundred other results of a purpose of aggression,) and he pointed out the impossibility on the part of England, of submission to the assaults of the United States on any people whatever : the imperative obligation resting on the British Cabinet, not merely to prevent an extension of her dominions, alarming to the peaceful relations of the world, but also to curb and repress, in the people of the United States, the spirit of aggression. That spirit, easily arrested at its source, would be irresistible in the full current of its accumulated streams, and accelerated course. The re- sponsible guardian of the interests and destinies of a neighbouring people, could not contemplate, without dis- may, the development of such a spirit in America; nor avoid, without criminality, to use every just and hon- ourable means to repress its growth, and resist its pro- gress. England has falsified the prognostics, and disproved the conclusions, of Dr. Channing. England has been heedless of the alarms which he entertained, — she has been blind to the motives he has exposed : felt, or seemed to feel, no interest in the present or the future, to entertain no sense of duty, or instinct of preservation. England has thus abandoned Dr. Channing, with the friends, in America, of England and of peace, to the contempt of their compatriots. Those who, with him, respected alike England's power and her intelligence, and who had raised their voices to say to their countrymen, " Venture not there, it is unjust, it is moreover, injurious to England, and she will not sufiler it," have learnt to disbelieve reason, or to despise England; have learnt that nothing was too unjust for England to approve, and nothing too injurious for her to suffer. America has commenced to speak of war — to threaten England. Is this a result of the perversion of its own reason, or a justifiable conviction of the degradation of 84 that of Great Britain? It is a natural result of long endurance of injustice, that they should threaten violence : but new inquiries will not fail to be made, and conclusions, startling to America, mi>y be the result. With a Governirtsnt, weak in its central authority, disjointed in its constitutional power; with a People, destitute of national patriotism, sacrificing every feeling to gain, and bending every faculty on acquisition, — dis- united in popular sympathies, divided in immediate in- terests, distinct in ulterior aims, — haughty in the exaction of submission, suspicious in the yielding of authority, — untrained to war, unbroken to discipline ; with a Country, extended, unoccupied, exposed, — undefended by frontiers of difficulty, unprotected by fortresses of strength ; with every neighbour a foe — a servile insurrection threaten- ing within, — and the Indian prowling around, mad- dened by injustice and desperate in revenge; to enter into a war, except a war of necessity, and a war of justice, would be an act of madness, not a measure of policy. Let us suppose, however, that collision takes place-^ let us suppose the United States re-enacting the tragedy of 1812, and marching her armies to the St. Lawrence, in the last war, when England was in arms against France, (then mistress of Europe,) and could not send a single soldier to Canada, did not the United States incur defeat after defeat? Was not army after army captured ? And did that power not reckon then on a bloodless triumph : and was not the result all but fatal to her po- litical existence ? No elements of strength have grown up since then; no fortifying of popular judgment — no strengthening of executive authority : the United States are, now, as weak as then : no better fitted to judge, and more liable to err, — to be carried away by popular passion, and to be acted on by foreign intrigue. The American Union is now more likely to plunge into war, because England ceases to steady its judgment, by imposing respect for justice; and less likely either to muster strength for the struggle, or lo exhibit judgment in its conduct. What could America do against England? Invade Canada? Does she conceive that the conquest of Canada can be effected, except with the destruction of the power of Great Britain : or that England, recalling her energies, as she has always done in 85 war, will not bring them all to bear on a contest for ex- istence ; strike the Union at all points at once, ^nd by the weapons the most dreadful — legalized by necessity. A struggle arising between the two, either the United States or England must perish. America being over- powered, it requires no argument to show that England must exact conditions, and that the rival portions of the Union would assert pretensions incompatible with its ex- istence. If England be overpowered, success will scarcely be less fatal to the United States, than discomfiture. The name, character, industry, and commerce of Great Britain, constitute a large portion of the national existence of the American Union, by exciting its emulation, and preserv- ing its feelings of nationality. Great Britain gives strength to its Government at home, by competition of character, and rivalry of dominion in America ; and maintains its in- dependence in the world, by controlling the ambition and neutralizing the power of the old Governments. Eng- land's power and position, are the real band of the Union : remove these, and it will be found that there is none with- in. The annexation of the British possessions to the United States, would lead to a separation of sovereignty, to transatlantic complications and collisions; blasting all the anticipations and the hopes with which the patriotic of the United States, and the philanthropists of the world, have contemplated its future grow»^^h and greatness. The genius of the old world would re-assert its influence over the new, and exercise that influence, as it has ever done, in each distant region it has reached, to the destruction of individual worth, and national strength — of patriotism, and of peace. If the United States have so essential and so paramount an interest in the preservation of Great Britain ; England has, no less, a vital interest in maintaining the indepen- dence and promoting the well-being of the United States. England has, in this, a moral as well as a political inter- est : she is led to it by compunction for the past, no less than by the hopes of the future. If England has to lament the overreaching policy, the ambitious aims, and immoral acts of the American Govern- ment; she has also to reproach herself with having inspired her transatlantic progeny widn contempt for justice, alike by her conduct towards them, and by her conduct to herself. It was the violation, not vess impolitic than criminal, by L m 86 England, of the rights which she had c'onferred on her Colonies, and of the principles she had established in the breasts of her subjects, that drove the United Colonies into the dire necessity of rending asunder every tie that belonged to nationality ; of extinguishing the associations of race — the aspirations of loyalty. Could a people behold crimes committed by the authority they had been taught from their earliest hour to revere, — violence and folly enacted by the fatherland which it was their pride to vin- dicate, and their happiness to love, — without revulsion in all their moral being, disturbance of every settled princi- ple, without disregard for the supkemacy of justice and honour, — the swaddling bands of infant nations, without the corruption of those sympathies and affections, which bind men into societies, and societies into States? The Anglo-Americans, commencing with a triumph over their best feelings, proceeded in their revolution to triumph over constituted authority; but, not having taken up arms to defend their hearths and homes, their patriot- ism lay not in associations of local interests of race or of country,— but in a point of honour — an abstraction, digni- fied by the defeat of England. They spoke not of their country y but of their institutions : — the political disputations that arise in the decrepitude of decayed nationalities, had perverted the simplicity of their early affections. In pre- serving to the letter the forms of their colonial govern- ment, they thought themselves the imitators, the equals — of Athens and of Rome. The nervelessness of the new creation was displayed in designating, and causing to be regarded, their achieved existence and triumphant sover- eignty, as a political experiment ! Such men the descend- ants of Anglo-Saxon fathers ! Thus demoralized; their first step was to re-enact on the Indian, the lessons of injustice they had learnt from their parental state. Each district brought into cultivation — each successive extension of territory and dominion, was extorted by violence, oi abstracted by fraud, from the " lords of the soil :" and each successive wave of popula- tion, as it spread in a widened circle around, marked its flow with blood. The settlement of the new race upon the virgin soil, was effected by the extirpation of the charities of nature, and the outrage of the rights of man. Among the chief sources of American weakness,— glar- ing amidst the proofs of constitutional fallacy and of human injustice, is the state of the Negro, and the condition of on her d in the Colonies tie that ociations e behold a taught nd folly to vin- ulsion in d princi- tice and without 18, which triumph lutton to ng taken r patriot- ice or of tn, digni- of their butations ities, had In pre- i govern- equals — the new ng to be it sover- descend- ct on the om their ivation — lion, was From the • popula- arked its ace upon 1 of the >f man. 18,— glar- )f human idition of 87 the coloured race. But here, too, has not England with humiliation to remember, that that system was her system, — that the crime of which she has ceased to be guilty, had been by her transmitted to her American progeny, as a principle of law, and an hereditary possession. A popular opinion arose in the southern portion of the Union, in favour of invading the neighbouring country ; and that measure was announced, adopted, and carried into effect in the manner of a proposal touching some munici- pal or parochial regulation. Public opinion justified it ; a free press advocated it ; and a people proud of their insti- tutions carried it into effect : exhibiting a departure from those ordinary feelings of integrity and honour which had hitherto been admitted in common by all men, — and, at the same time, a disregard for the existing authority of the State, which I believe has never before occurred in the history of man ; for even rebellion in the old world has been united by a principle or controlled by a leader. Dr. Channing asks whether they are prepared to take the new position in the world of a " robber state :" — but robbers have never yet been known destitute of authority among themselves. What prospect does such an event present to the neighbours of the United States ? What prospect for itself? England, — whose interests in the independence of Mexico were not less than her interests in the indepen- dence of this Island, — extends no protecting shield before that State ; articulates no word to save it from this disas- ter — the American people from this guilt — the American Government from this degradation. Yet, one word would have sufficed. England — whose most anxious efforts ought to have been directed, and whose whole power, if neces- sary, ought to have been exerted, to arrest the progress of a spirit of aggression in the United States, — carefully avoids the indication of any interest or of any opinion on that subject; when an expression of her intention and her determination would have effectually overawed and re- pressed that spirit. She is indeed the first to hail, and first to confirm, the triumph of this injustice.* The United States, thus mentally constituted, thus morally instructed, next turned the lawlessness of their ambition, directed with the cunning of the Indian, against Great Britain herself And here again has Great Britain • Witness the Commercial Treaty between England, and the Sovereign State of Texas, of 65,000 inhabitants. ilill Ml i:'! 88 to bear the disgrace of their attempts, and the penalty of their success. Her contemptible submission was the cause of their boldness, the justification of their injustice, by yielding up every contested right, and sanctioning each advanced pretension. Commotions take place in Canada: the people of the North, emulating those of the South, look on Canada as a new Texas, on England as another Mexico. Armed bands proceed to carry war into the provinces of a friendly power; and constituted authorities applaud, support, and co- operate. England, differing in this respect from Mexico, finds excuses for such acts in " the constitutional diffi- culties" of the Government of the United States; — the perpetrators, when discomfited, withdraw in peace to their homes, experiencing, and fearing, no retribution from the power they have offended, or from the state to which they belong : and. Instructed by the " harmony prevailing be- tween the two Governments," consider such acts as hon- ourable enterprizes. — Then follows : — the new assault on the disputed territory. It is because England has been false to herself, that the United States have not been true to their own interests. It is because England is allied to her foes, that the United States have been false to her. The interests of both are then identical. England, by the assertion of her own rights and the performance of her own duties, can still preserve both. Thus much as to the relations and interests of the two States, in connection with each other : but the question pending between them is, unfortunately, now contingent upon foreign influences and combinations. In assuming a position of hostility to Great Britain, is America not influenced by the idea of support from Russia and from France ? Is she not influenced by the knowledge of the hostility of these powers to England ? It cannot be that America should have ventured upon her present line, without confidence in such support: and it is precise- ly this which casts the darkest shade over her national tendencies. Let us therefore examine this position : — Russia, France, and the United States, leagued against England in an un- just cause; in opposition to all that is honest in these countries themselves : and constituting every independent people throughout the world, the allies of Great Britain. What would be the consequence ? 89 England must either triumph or sink. If she triumphs, France and Russia return to their natural position — America is ruined. If England sinks, the United States acquire, for the moment, extended frontiers ; but no share of England's power. In that very extension lies the cer- tainty of dissolution. Tho separation of the parts of a cognate race, of an unjust and acquisitive character, can present but the prospect of incessant rivalry, and unnatural hatred : of a futurity realizing the fable of a soil sown with dragon's teeth. But what would be the action of the policy of Europe, under such circumstances, on the United States ? We are supposing the power of England overthrown; consequently, there would be no further balance in Europe, to the com- bined aggression of France and Russia. But it is not only that there would be no balance to these powers; they would have absorbed into themselves the elements of the strength of England and Turkey. If Russia and France have, since 1815, been concerting views of ambition on America; if they have both exhibited, already, a determination to extend their dominions, and to secure influence in that region ; to promote quarrels between the States, and disafi^ection among the people, of the transatlantic world ; is it not to be an- ticipated, that their triumph over England would be followed by their domination in America, North and South ? Will she look for respite in the subsequent collision of France and Russia? But France and Russia will not come into collision while they are kept in check by any respectable power in America. It is to be supposed that Russia will prt^serve her supremacy in intellect and diplomacy ; if so, she will use France for her ends : and when Russia is in possession of the Dardanelles, she will command France and Europe. The high-way of the sea, and the roads to a hundred people, will be in her hands; the materials for war secured in her arsensals; in her granaries, will be locked the bread of Europe — in her store-houses, the com- merce of the world. I trust, however, that for such anticipations the time is not yet come. I trust it is not yet too late to rest the question on the basis of justice ; to appeal to Anglo-Saxon sympa- thies, not yet efiaced. A semi-barbarous race, the subjects of difi*erent crowns, with their language separated into distinct dialects — yet impelled by the memory of a common ovigin, and attracted by the instinct of future glory and 11 90 supremacy in their union, — exhibits to those who speak the English tongue, a subject of humiliation in its mutual sym- pathies, — an object of dread in its growing power. Can the Sclavonian subjects of the Russian sceptre glory in mutual affections to which the sons of Britain are dead ? — Can the Sclavonian subjects of the three North-east powers of Europe, look with the kindness of fraternity on each other, and sigh for the day of their union — ^^whilst no such impulses are known or felt throughout the forty millions of educated and polished inhabitants of the British isles and ofthe American Union? The children ofa common ancestry, the co-inheritors of political freedom, the joint masters of the seas, the common explorers of the remote regions of the earth, the favoured children of science, the subduers of time, distance, difficulty, and nature itself — do they own no honourable and honest pride associated with their common name ? Throughout such a population — so distinguished and so blessed — are no fraternal yearnings spread, linking their hearts ? Is it possible that one or both of them^ for- getful of the past, and heedless of the future, — deaf to the ' promptings of charity, to the dictates of religion, to the voice of honour, and the suggestions of policy, should rush into mutual destruction ? Is it possible that, with infirmity of mind equal to such extravagance of passion, they should so rush without an intention ? Will they tear down, labouring for their own destruction, the large prospects of their future fortunes ; raise the Sclavonic above the Eng- lish tongue; and place, by the crimes of freedom, the sceptre of the world in a despot's hands ? But it is a vain and useless concession to make, that England must perish, because America is unjust: England, the mother of Nations, the Parent of Freedom, and the wielder of the Trident, has her destinies within her own breast. True it is, that, for a season, she has been forgetful of herself. In the benumbing confidence of security, in the lethargic shadow of repose, phe has become heedless of those common interests that sanctify the name of country, and which are wisely given as the spur to individual energy, in the pride of national glory and renown. Thus has confidence in her power been lost, not only in the estimation of mankind, but in her own. Let, however, visible danger threaten from without, — let some great dis- aster fall on this land, — she would arise again, but with a » speak the utual sym- ver. Can B glory in e dead ? — ast powers ty on each Ist no such ty millions ih isles and a ancestry, masters of regions of ubduers of ley own no ir common itinguished id, linking them^ for- deaf to the ion, to the hould rush h infirmity hey should ear down, rospects of e the Eng- sedora, the make, that : England, n, and the n her own forgetful of rity, in the heedless of of country, individual wn. not only in t, however, B great dis- but with a 91 power far beyond that which heretofore she has ever wielded : for her assailants have aroused against themselves^ the fears or the vengeance of every race of the old world and the new. Break but the spell that binds England to an ally stained with every crime, and she will no longer credit the lie of her own weakness — that sole strength and confidence of her foes. 4ii I 1! ipi. mm liii :| ■1:1 I i A\'. ■ APPENDIX. PART I. No. 1. Extract FEOM THE FoDRTU Articieofthe Treaty of Ghent,* 1814. " It is further agreed that ia the event of the two Commissioners differing upon all or any of the matters so referred to them, or in the event of both or either of the said Commissioners refusing or declining, or wilfully omitting to ict as such, they shall make, jointly or separately, report or reports, as well to the Government of Ills Britannic Majesty as to that of the United States, stating in detail the points on which they differ, and the grounds upon which their respective opinions have been formed, or the grounds upon which they, or either of them, have so refused, declined, or omitted to act. And His Britannic Majesty and the Government of the United States hereby agree to refer the Report or Reports of the said Commissioners to some friendly Sovc> reign or State, to be then named for that purpose, and who shall be requested to decide on the differences which may be stated in the said Report or Reports, or upon the Report of one Commissioner, together with the grounds upon which the other Commissioner shall have re- fused, declined, or omitted to act, as the case may be. And if the Commissioner so refusing, declining, or omitting to act, shall also wil- fully omit to state the grounds upon which he has so done, in such manner that the said statement may be referred to such friendly Sove- reign or State, together with the Report of such other Commissioner, that such Sovereign or State shall decide, exparte, upon the said Re- port alone ; and J^i* Britannic Majesty and the Government of the United States engage to consider the decision of such friendly Sove- reign or State as final and conclusive on all the matters so referred. \, * In the Papers presented to Parliament there is the Fifth Article of the Treaty of Ghent, which has reference to the disputed Boundary between New Brunswick and the State of Maine ; but the Fifth Article of the Treaty of Ghent, in as far as the subsequent negociations are concerned, does no more than rc/er to the Fourth Article, wherein the conditions of the reference to arbitration are stipulated. The omission of this important act is here supplied ; and that omis- sion is the more remarkable, seeing that the ground assumed by the United States, and by Lord Palmerston, for setting aside the award of the King of Hol- land, is, that he, instead of selecting one of the two lines proposed by the parties, had laid down another line. Now, the Treaty of Ghent, as clearly as words can express, determines that the differences which might arise, of whatever kind, were to be settled by the award of the arbiter, a u No. 2. Extracts from a convention between His Britannick Majesty AND THE UnITEB StATES OF AMERICA, RELATIVE TO THE REFERENCE TO Arbitration of the dispdtbd points under the Fifth Article OF the Treaty of Ghent. Signed at London, September 29, 1827. Article I. " It is agpreed that tho points of difference whicti have arisen in the settlement of the boundary between the British and American dorai- nions, as described in the Fifth Article of ''be Treaty of Ohent, shall be referred, as therein provided, to some friendly Sovereign or State, who shall bo invited to investigate, and make a decision upon such points of difference. '* The two contracting powers engage to proceed in concert to tho choice of such friendly Sovereign or State, as soon as the ratifications of this Convention shall have been exchanged, and to use their best endeavours to obtain a decision, if practicable, within two years after the arbiter shall have signified his consent to act as such." Article VII. " The decision of the arbiter, when given, shall be taken as final and conclusive ; and it shall be carried, without reserve, into immediate effect, by Commissioners appointed for that ourposo by the contracting parties." No. 3. Extracts from the Award uf the King of Holland. " AnimS du dSsir sincere de r^pondre par une decision scrupuleuse et impartiale, a la confiance qu'elle Nous ont t6moign4e, et de leur donner ainsi un nouveau gage du haut prix que nous y attachons : — " Ayant a cet effet dument examine et mdrement pes6 le contenu du premier ezpos^ ainsi que de I'expos^ d^finitif du dit diffgrend, que nous ont respectivement remis, le 1 Avril de I'ann^e 1830, I'Ambassa- deur Extraordinaire et PlSnipotentiaire de Sa Majesty Britannique, et I'EnvoyS Extraordinaire et Ministre Pl^nipotentiaire des Etats Unis d'AmSrique, avec toutes les pieces qui y ont ete jointes a Tappui : " Voulant accomplir aujourd'hui lea obligations que nous venons de contractor par I'acceptation des fonctions d'Arbitrateur dans le susdit diff^rcnd, en portant k la connaissance des deux Hautes Parties int6r- essges le rSsultat de Notre examen et Notre opinion surles trois points dans lesquels se divise de leur commun accord la contestation." " Dgclarons que, — " Quant au memier point, savoir, la question. Quel est I'endroit d6- sign^ dans les Traites comme I'angle nord-ouest de la Nouvelle Ecosse, et quels sont les Highlands s6parant les Rivieres qui se dechargent dans le Fleuve St. Laurent, de celles tombantdansl'Ocean Atlantique, le long desquels doit etre tir^e la Ligue de Limites depuis cet angle jusqu'a la source nord-ouest de la Riviere Connecticut ?" [After enumerating twenty-eight grounds of his award on this first point, the Document proceeds :] " Nous sommes d'avis, — " Qu'il conviendra d'adopter pour limite des deux 6tats une ligne tirSc droit au nord depuis la source de la Riviere St. Croix jusqu'au point Oli elle coupe le milieu du thalweg dc la Riviere St. John ; de-la ^ HI le milieu du ttialweg de cetto riviere, en la remontant jusqu'au point ou la Riviere St. Francis se d^charge dans la Riviere St. Jolin ; de-Id le milieu du thalweg de la Riviere St. Francis, en la remontant jusqu'd la source de sa branche la plus sud-ouest, laquelle source nous indiquons sur la Carte (A) par la lettre (X) authentiouee par la signature de Notre Miuistre des Affaires Etrangc-res ; de-la une ligne tirge droit d I'ouest jusqu'au point ou olio se rg-unit k la liffne rgclamee par les Etats Unis d'Am^rique, et tracSe sur la Carte (A) ; de-la cette ligne jusqu'au point oil, d'apr^s cette carte, elle coincide avec cello demandge f)ar la Grande Bietagne ; et de-la ligne indiquee sur la dite carte par es deux Puissances, jusqu'a la source la plus uord-ouest de la Riviere Connecticut : " Quant au second point, savoir, la question, quelle est la source la plus nord-ouest (north-westernmost head) de la Riviere Connecticut ?" [Five Grounds enumerated] — " Nous sommes d'avis, — " Que le ruisseau situS le plus au nord-ouest de ceux qui coulent dans le plus septentrional des trois lacs, dont le dernier porte le nom de Connecticut Lake, doit etre consid6r6 comme la source la plus nord- ouest (north-westernmost head) du Connecticut. " Et quant au troisi^me point, savoir, la question, Quelle est la limite k tracer depuis la Riviere Connecticut le long du paralliile du quarante-cinq degt^ de latitude septentrionale jusqu'au Fleuve St. Laurent, nomme dans les Traitgs Iroquoi ou Cataraguy ?" [Three Grounds enumerated]— " Nous sommes d'avis, — * " Qu'il conviendra de proceder u de nouvelles operations pour mesurer la latitude observee, afin de tracer la limite depuis la Riviere Connec- ticut, le long du parallele du quarante-cinq degre de latitude septen- trionale, jusqu'au Fleuve St. Laurent, nomme dans les Traites Iroquois ou Cataraguy ; de mani^re cependant, qu'en tout cas, a I'endroit dit Rouse's Point, le territoiro des Etats Unis d'Am^rique s'etendra jusqu- 'au fort quy s'y trouve ^tabli, et comprendra ce Fort et son rayon kilometrique. " Ainsi fait et donn6 sous Notre Sceau Royal, k la Haye, ce Dix Janvier, de I'an de Grace Mil Huit Cent Trente-un, et de Notre R^gne de Dix-huiti^me. "(Sign6) GUILLAUME. " Le Ministre des Affaires Etrang^res, "(Signe) VERSTOLK DE SOELEN." ligne PART IV. No. L Viscount Palmerston to Charles Banhhead, Esq. "Foreign Office, October 14, 1831. *• SiB,— With reference to my despatch of February 9, of this year, to Mr. Vaughan, on the subject of the award of his Majesty the King * The second ground of objection taken to the award by the State of Maine and Lord Palmerston, is that the King of Holland had not decided, but only re- commended a line, and that if he had decided at all, he had only decided on two out of three points submitted to him. It will be seen from these extracts that the award was as formal as possible, and that the same forms and terms are equally applied to the three points. iv of tho Netherlands, upon the question of the diaputod boundary, sub- iiiittod by Groat Britain and the United States of America to the arbi- tration of that Sovereign, I am commanded by tho King to instruct you to address a note to tho American Secretary of State to tho following effect. " Mr. Livingston is doubtless aware that his predecessor in oftico was informed, verbally, by Mr. Vaughan, that tho King, our Master, upon the receipt of the instrument by which tho award of tho King of tho Netherlanus was communicated to tho British Government, had considered himself bound, in fulfilment of tho obligations which ho had contracted by the terras of tho Convention of arbitration of the 29th September, 1827, to express to His Nctherland Majesty His Majesty's assent to that award. " It appears to His Mi^esty's Government, that tho time is now arrived, when a final understanding between tho British and American Governments, on the subject of that award, and on the measures neces- sary to be taken for carrying it into cfl'oct, ought no longer to be delayed : and I am accordingly to direct that, in making to the Ameri- can Secretary of State tiie present more formal communication of tho assent of His Majesty to the decision of His Nethcrland Majesty, yon inquire of Mr. Livingston whether his Government are now ready to proceed, conjointly with that of Great Britain, to tho nomination of Commijsioncrs for marking out the boundary between tho possessions of His Msgesty in North America, and those of the United States, agreeably to his Netherland Majesty's award. " His Majesty's Government are not ignorant that tho Minister of tho United States of America, residing at tho Hague, immediately upon the receipt of tho award of His Nctherland Majesty, protested against that award, on the ground that the arbitrator had therein ex- ceeded the powers conferred upon him by tho parties to tho arbitration. But that protest was avowedly made without instructions from Wash- ington, and His Majesty is persuaded that the Government of the United States, influouced, like his Majesty, by a sincere determination to give a fair and full effect to the spirit and intention of their engage- ments, no less than by an anxious desire to settle this long pending difference between the two Governments, in the only way which the experierice of so many years has shown to be practicable, will not hesi- tate to accept the award of His Nethcrland Majesty. " In deciding to give his own assent to this award, for the reasons above stated, His Majesty was not insensible to tho sacrifice which he was thus making of a most important portion of those claims, of the justice of which, in their full extent. His Majesty ccntinues to be, as he has always been, entirely satisfied. " It was impossible for His Majesty to see, without deep regret, that, on one branch of the British claims, tho award deprived the British crown of a largo tract of country, to which it had long been held to be entitled ; while, on another branch of the claims, that award, at the same time that it pronounced in favour of the principle of demar- cation for which Great Britain contended, introduced a special modifi- cation of that principle for the convenience and advantage of the United States, without offering to Great Britain any compensation for the loss thus occasioned to her. " But th'ise were not considerations by which His Mdjesty thought himself at liberty to be influenced, in deciding the question of his acceptance or rejection of^ the decision of His Netherland Majesty. In whatever degree His Majesty's wishes or expectations may have been disappointed by that decision. His Majesty did not hesitate to act upon the stipulation contained in the Vllth Article of tho Convention ut' Arbitralion, that ' tho decision of the arbiter, when vivcn, shall bo taken to bo final and conclusive ;' and Ilis Majesty fulHllcd this duty with tho greater cheerfulness, from tho confident hoiie, that in thus completing tho engagement which ho had coutracteii, ho was Knally setting at rest a dispute which had been so long and so hopelessly agitated between tho two Governments, to the interruption of that per- fect agreement and harmony on all points, which it is His Mt^esty's sinccro desire to see permanently established between Great Britain and the United States of America. " His Majesty would indeed bo deeply griovod, if ho could suppose that the Government of tho United States could hesitate to adopt tho same course which His Majesty has pursued on this occasion. For what other prospect of an adjustment of this long pending differonco would then remain ? Commissioners, since the Treaty of 1 783, have found it impossible to reconcile tho description of the boundary contained in that Treaty, with tho real features of tho country ascertained by actual survey ; and tho hopelessness of establishing absolutely, in favour of either party, tho point which has thus, binco tho year 1783, been tho subject of controversy between them, has now received a now confir- mation, by tho solemn decision of an arbitrator, chosen by both parties, who has pronounced it to be incapable of being established in accord- ance with tho terms of tho original Treaty, that Treaty having been drawn up in ignorance of the real features of tho country which it pro- fessed to describe. " Seeing that there cannot bo a settlement of the claims of cither party in strict accordance with tho Treaty of 17t*3, what course would remain, even if tho choice wero now to bo made, but that which was agreed upon by tho negociators of the Treaty of Ghent, viz. tho adjust- ment of tho difforencce between tho two Governments by means of an arbitrator ? And how unreasonpblo would it be to object to such an adjustment, because it aimed at settling, by compromise, differences pronounced to bo otherwise irreconcilable. That such an adjustment, and not a rigid adoption of one of the two claims to tho exclusion of all compromise, was the object of tho IVth Article of the Treaty of Ghent, will bo manifest upon referring to that Article, in which provision is made for a decision of the arbiter which should be final and conclusive, even although tho arbiter, owing to the neglect or refusal of one of the parties, should have had before him only one of the two claims which it would be his province to adjust. Even the ofHcial correspondence of the United States furnishes proofs that such v/ef> the understanding in that country, and among parties most interested in the subject, as to what would be the effect of the reference of this question to arbitration. ' By arbitration,' (says the Governor of the State of Maine, in a letter to the President of the United States, dated May 19th, 1827, and pre- viously, of course, to the conclusion of the Convention,) • I understand a submission to some Foreign Sovereign or State, who will decide at pleasure on the whole subject, who will be under no absolute obligations or effectual restraint, by virtue of the Treaty of 1783.' And it api)ears, by a letter from the same functionary, dated tho 18th of April m the same year, that Mr. Gallatin had used the following words, in a dis- patch to his Government on the same subject : • An umpire, whether a king or a farmer, rarely decides on strict principles of law ; he has always a bias to try, if possible, to split tho differonco ;' and the Secre- tary of State of the United States, in a letter to the Governor of Maine, written after the conclusion of the Treaty of Arbitration, (viz. on the 27th of November, 1827,) adverting to tho above-mentioned exposition by Mr. Gallatin, of the usual practice of umpires, and to tho objection which tho Governor of Maino had thereupon stated to the mode of :!:"! ffl.i, &-. vi settlement by arbitration, while he defends the Convention in spite of the objection of the Governor of Maine, admits that it is an objection to which the Convention is Mable. "These passages will be found in the printed paper. No. 171, 30th Congress, 1st Session, at pages 80, 85, and 99. " On every ground, therefore. His Majesty feels confident that if the Government of the United States have not already, h-^'^re your receipt of this dispatch, announced their assent to the awa>u of the King of the Netherlands, they will not hesitate to enable you to apprize His Majesty's Government of their acquiescence in that decision. The grounds on which His Majesty's acceptance of it was founded, have been fully explained to you in this dispatch, and among the motives which influenced His Majesty on that occasion, there was none more powerful than the anxious desire which His Majesty feels to improve and confirm the harmony which so happily exists on other subjects, between Great Britain and the United States of America, by thus settling, once for all, a question of jreat difhculty, and for which His Majesty is unable to sec any other satisfactory solution. "I am, &c. "C. Bankhead, Esq., 8fc. 6j-c. Sfc. "(Signed) PALMERSTON." No. 2. Viscount Palmerston to Charles Bankhead, Esq. "Foreign Office, Oct. 14, 1831. " Sir, — You will learn from the instructions contained in my other dis- patch of this date, on the subject of the north-eastern boundary, that the communication which you are to make, in the name of His Majesty, to the Government of the United States, extends no farther than to pro- pose a simple and unconditional acceptance of the award of the King of the Netherlands by the United States, and the consequent appoint- ment of commissioners to carry that award into effect; such being, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, the only course to be pur- sued at the present stage of the boundary question, consistently with the respective interests and obligations of the two Governments. " You are nevertheless authorised to intimate, privately, to the American Minister, upon any suitable occasion, that His Majesty's Government would not consider the formal acceptance of the award by Great Britain and the United States, as necessarily precluding the two Governments from any future modification of che terms of the arrangement prescribed in that instrument, provided it should appear that any particular parts of the boundary line, thus established, were capable of being improved to the mutual convenience and advantage of both countries ; and you will state, that, after the award sha'.l have beeq formally acceded to by both Governments, His Majesty's Gov- ernment will be ready to enter, with the Government of the United States, into the consideration of the best means of effecting any such modification by reciprocal exchange and concession. " You will, however, be particularly cautious, in making any commu- nication of this nature, to guard against the possibility of being misun- derstood AS inviting negociation as a substitute for the adoption of the award. " Until the award is mutually adopted, any such Concert between the two Governments would be impossible, because, each party claiming VJl 4 the wholo of the territory in dispute, there is o boundary line between the txTo, with respect to which modification could be proposed by either party ; but when the award is acqreliminary understanding were come to upon certain points. One of them was, that the Bay of Fundy should be taken to be part of the Atlantic Ocean.f A despatch was sent out on the subject in the course of last autumn, but sufficient time has not yet elapsed for us to receive an answer. Negociations are, there- fore, still pending; and the President of the United States has refused to produce certain papers, lest he should compromise any of the interests he is bound to protect. 1 believe that there is an earnest desire, on both sides, to come to an amicable adjustment of the only remaining question of litigation. A proposition wcs made by this Government in the month of October last, and it is impossible for us yet to know whether the preliminary arrangements will or will not be accepted." APRIL 24th, 1837. Sir Robert Peel. — " I will avail myself of this opportunity to ask the Noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs, in what position our differen- ces are with the United States, as to the Northern Frontier ? I wish * [These mis-statements, or rather this complete falsification of the tacts and the truth, made by Sir Robert Peel, shows how Lord Pal- merston had adjusted his records, measures, and men, before leaving office, to impose upon his successor. — After this, of course, the other party is committed to the measures of Lord Palmerston. [There are two points worthy of attention. First, Sir Robert Feel does not conceive that there was any ground for suppressing what he knew (or what he heard) to be the state of the case. Secondly, there was no member in the House of Commons able to expose the falsehood of the statements, or the fallacy of the arguments put in his mouth. One might suspect that the English language had ceased to be an available vehicle for any national purpose. — It is, however, the language used in America.] f [By reference to the article from the New York Albion, pp. xi. xii. it will b3 seen that the arguments of Maine are adopted by Sir Robert Peel.] Xll h 1 W'. \ ,.:' to know whether they are adjusted, or whether any progress has been made towards their adjustment?" Viscount Palmerston. — " There have been a great many com- munications upon the subject, between the Governments of the two coun- tries; and I can assure the Right Hon. Bart, that the Government of each is animated by a sincere desire to come to an amicable arrange- ment. I must do this justice to the Government of the United States, and to the late President especially, to say that the Central Govern- ment has laboured under great difficulty with regard to the negociatinn, from the circumstance of its discretion being limited by certaii. inde- pendent actions on the part of the Government of Maine. There have not, lately, been any written communications upon the subject; but many verbal communications have taken place between the Govern- ment of this Country and the American Minister here, as well as between the British Minicter in America and the Government of the United States. The whole correspondence on the subject has been published by order of the Congress, in the United States; and, when it reaches this country, the Right Hon. Bart, will see all the official communications that have taken place upon the subject. I am sorry, however, to say, that there does not seem to be any prospect of an immediate settlement of the question." ^ Mb. Hume. — " Would there be any objection to lay before the British Parliament the papers that have been published upon the sub- ject in America ? " Sir Robert Peel. — " I beg to ask the Noble Lord whether the state of Maine is in the occupation of any portion of the disputed terri- tory ?" Viscount Palmerston. — " The whole of the territory is, / believe, at present in our possession ; with a clear understanding, however, that neither party is to exercise within the limits any rights that belong to a permanent sc:-ereignty." Sir Robert Peel. — " 1 do not exactly see how that arrangement can have been made. The land must be occupied by one party or the other. Am 1 to understand that it is at present occupied by British subjects ?" Viscount Palmerston. — " The district is not inhabited. The ter- ritory is chiefly covered with forests; and it has been agreed that neither party shall cut wood in it until the question is finally settled. As regards the question put to me by the Honourable Member for Middlesex, I beg to state that there can be no objection to produce all the correspondence that has taken place upon the subject, except that it would be a departure from a very wholesome rule generally acted upon in this country, of not producing any papers relating to negocia- tions still pending. As the papers in question, however, have been published by order of Congress, 1 do not see that there can be any ob- jection in placing them before the House." Mb. Roebuck. — " The Noble Lord cannot be aware that the gov- ernment of Maine has passed some regulations which operate severely upon the neglected and destitute condition of the inhabitants of the disputed territory. The Noble Lord says, that Great Britain is in occupation of the territory, but that she cannot enforce the rights of occupation. The truth is, that at this time there are a great number of persons who are cutting down trees, who are peopling the land, and ♦A ! I are called — a large portion of them — citizens of the United States. ''• i f population consists, indeed, of reftigees from both sides the terri- ! —rogues and vagabonds — who find there a safe asylum from the lav. )f either country." Viscount Palmerston. — " The Honourable and Learned Gentle- Xlll has been nany com- ! two coun- jrnment of I arrangc- „ed States, il Govorn- egociatinn, •taii. inde- Phere have ibject; but e Govern- is well as ent of the , has been id, when it iho official am sorry* ipect of an before the n the sub- hether the puted terri- , I believe, wever, that belong to a I rangement arty or the by British The ter- grced that illy settled, [ember for )roduce all xcept that ■ally acted :o negocia- have been be any ob- the gov- e severely ints of the ■itain is in rights of at number land, and ted States. the terri- from the jd Gentle- // man must refer to another part of the country, and not in the territory in dispute." [Such are the words dropped, io the Imperial Senate of this mighty Nation, — during six years, — on the subject of a disputed Frontier and a National Treaty ! [In tracing the debates on Foreign Policy, during the course of the Peace, I find that information is constantly refused, on the plea that it might endanger the success of the matter under ncgociatiun ; — but I also find that, though information has been invariably withheld, failure has been as invariable.] MERITS OF THE BOUNDARY QUESTION. From the Albion New York Paper, March, 1839. [As the inquiry to which these pages have been devoted commences with the Award of the King of Holland, it would have been beside the question to enter at all into the negociations preceding that act, and the merits of the dispute which was btought to a close by that decision, — indeed, to refer to 'the anterior question would only servo to perplex the reader, to confuse the argument, and to cut away the grounds on which the matter rests. However, a plain and simple exposition of the state of the case, independently of the arbitration, may not be without interest ; the more so as that which follows is an American statement, and one which, as it carefully avoids all reference to the Award, is clearly not the production of a man who sees the question in a British point of view.] " The subject of the North-eastern Boundary so fully absorbs public attention, that we may be pardoned for occupying a large portion of our paper with it. We are the more anxious to do so, because the opinion so generally prevails that nothing can be said in behalf of the British claim. It is indeed affirmed, and generally believed, that Eng- land is claiming what she knows is not her own, and that her dcsigtis are altogether dishonourable and even fraudulent ; but she is never dishonourable, and it is therefore but fair after we have heard so much in favour of Maine, that something should be said on the other side. We shall endeavour to do this as briefly as possible, and then refer our readers to the Award of the King of the Netherlands — a document, we may remark, drawn up with great clearness and impartiality — which will be found in the preceding columns. " Wo must take it for granted, that all our readers who feel any in- terest in the matter, understand the preliminary fact of the case, viz. that the difficulty has arisen from a misconstruction of the 2nd article of the treaty of 1783, made at Paris between Groat Britain and the United States at the close of the revolutionary war. This article we insert above, as it may be necessary to refer to it in the course of the few observations wc arc about to make. It will be observed, that, in XIV tracing the boundaries, it is declared that the lino shall commence at the ' North-west angle of Nova Scotia, viz. that angle which is formed by a lino drawn duo north from the Kourco of the St. Croix river to the Highlands, along the said Highlands which divide those rivers that empty themselves into the River St. Lawrence, from those which fall into the Atlantic ocean, to the North-westernmost head of the Con- necticut river,' &c. Under the Treaty of Ghent a Commission was appointed to run this line, and to ascertain the true position of those Highlands, but unfortunately the British and American Commissioners disagreed, and the matter regains unsettled to this hour. The British Commissioners asserted that the Highlands commenced at Mars Hill, while the American contended for a range of hills one hundred miles further to the north These points will be found designated upon the map now before the reader. " The gist of the case lies in a nut-shell. It is clear that the north- west angle of Nova Scotia of the Treaty, must be sought for at those Highlands which separate waters flowing into the River St. Lawrence and into the Atlantic ocean. Now do the Highlands contended for by Maine at the north of the River St. John, separate such waters? Certainly not. They separate waters flowing into the St. Lawrence, but not into the Atlantic, and consequently a main requisition of the treaty is unprovided for. By a reference to the map it will be seen, that the rivers which flow to the south of these Highlands are the Restigouche, which falls into the Bay of Chaleur ; and the St. John, which empties itself into the Bay of Fundy. No river in that part of the line flows into the Atlantic, and therefore those that do exist, can- not be regarded as the true streams, or those required by the treaty. But, say the Maine claimants, this is immaterial ; for, as the Bays of Chaleur and Fundy ultimately reach the Atlantic, they must be considered as the Atlantic itself.* This is geographically incorrect ; the Bay of Fundy is the Bay of Fundy, and nothing more ; so is the Chesapeake. As well might we call the Baltic and the Mediterran- ean the Atlantic ocean ; but if we did so, what schoolboy would not correct us ? Besides, the terms of such an important instrument as a treaty cannot be so loosely construed ; every word must bear its true and precise meaning, and nothing more. No expounder of law can possibly say that the general term • Atlantic Ocean,' means and comprehends every bay, inlet, and gulf that may ultimately flow into it. If so, where is the utility of giving such bays, inlets, and gulfs, distinctive names at all ? — But the treaty itself settles this point, for it makes a clear and broad distinction between the * Atlantic' and the ' Bay of Fundy.' This is visible to any one who will peruse the 2nd article inserted above. The east line, it says, shall be drawn ' along the middle of the Saint Croix from its mouth in the Bay of Fundy -^ and that all islands shall be comprehended and given to the United States lying within twenty leagues of the coast, where the aforesaid boundaries, between Nova Sootia on the one part and East Florida on the other, shall respectively touch the Bay of Fundy AND the Atlantic ocean.^ Now, here the negociators of 1783 have drawn a clear distinction between the Bay of Fundy and the Atlantic Ocean, which is immediately fatal to the claim of the State of Maine, for the Highlands designated by her do not separate rivers, falling into the St. Lawrence and into the Atlantic Ocean, as prescribed by the treaty, but rivers emptying into the St. Lawrence, and into the Bay of Cha* leur, the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and the Bay of Fundy. A treaty * See page ix, uii/t'.- Note (t.) -Sir Robert Peel's Statement in the House of Commons, XV must be construed like an Act of Pdrliamcnt or an Act oF Congrcs.4, and no such latitude of construction could be given as claimed by tlic State of Maine to any legislative act whatever. " But the American diplomatists fortify their position by citing the boundaries of the Province of Quebec, a? set forth in the Royal Pro- clamation of 1763 and other British documents. Such citations would certainly be useful if it were apparent that the negociators of the treaty of 1783 intended to make the southern boundary of the province of Quebec form one part of the north-west angle of Nova Scotia : but no such evidence appears — on the contrary, the strongest presumption exists that neither party intended to carry the line north of the St. John. If it had been the intention to carry the north line to the southern extremity of the Quebec Province, why was it not so specified ? The Royal Proclamation above mentioned was then extant, and per- fectly well known to Dr. Franklin, Mr. Adams, and Mr. Jay, and it is inconceivable that they should have been silent on such an important point, had it been their intention to carry the line into that vicinity. But, say the jurists of Maine, behold the similarity in the words of the Treaty and of the Proclamation. The latter says ' the line shall cross the River St. Lawrence and Lake Chaniplain in 45 degrees north lati- tude, pass along the Highlands which divide the rivers that empty themselves into the St. Lawrence from those which fall into the sea, and along the north coast to the Bay of Chaleur.' Here the single word sea makes an important difference, and clearly indicates the dis- tinction to be drawn between that comprehensive monosyllable in the Proclamation and the more limited term ' Atlantic Ocean,' employed in the treaty. The * sea means the ocean in general ; the ' Atlantic' the Atlantic in particular— the one is comprehensive, the other distinct and limited, and upon this point the whole question turns. " A vast number of collateral arguments are brought forward on the British side which our limits do not allow us to quote ; we shall how- ever mention a few of the more prominent. " If we are to be governed by the treaty, it is impossible to depart from its strict letter ; and if it be found that the words of the instrument are incompatible with the geographical delineations of the country, and that neither party can satisfactorily establish its line — it follows that a new one should be adopted by mutual and friendly agreement. It was with this view of the case that the King of the Netherlands recom- mended a compromise, and designated the St. John and the St. Francis as the basis of that compromise. It was also in accordance with the same friendly spirit that the British Government, only a few months since, offered to make an equal and exact division of the whole terri- tory, and take one half — an offer, in our opinion, most just, most rational, and in the highest degree expedient. " The north-west angle of Nova Scotia of the treaty was conventional, rather than geographical, and the treaty prescribed the mode of finding and fixing that angle. The American Commissioners of 1783 first proposed as a boundary the river St. John, from its source to its mouth, and if this had been agreed to, where would the north-west angle of Nova Scotia have been then f Of what utility would have been the southern boundary of Quebec in that case ? Surely, if it had been the settled purpose of the negociators to fix irrevocably the north-west angle where the western line of Nova Scotia intersects the southern limits of Quebec, the treaty could not have been silent upon a point of such moment. The King of the Netherlands pointedly alludes to this defect. " The British Commissioners refused to surrender the whole territory washed by the river St. John, because the demand was exhorbitant, XVI !S::: and the American Commissioners abandoned it for tlie same reason. Now, can it be supposed, as tlie award romarlcs, that England would consent to give up more land to the north of the St. John than at the south, especially when such surrender cut off her communication with Canada? Such an arrangement never could have been meant or in- tenned by either party. " In the Preliminaries of Peace, entered into in 1782, we fine' the following :— " • It is agreed to form the Articles of the proposed Treaty on such principles of liberal equity and reciprocity, as that, partial advantages (those seeds of discord) being excluded, such a bencHcial and satisfac- tory intercourse between the two countries ma}' be established, as to promise and secure to both perpetual peace and harmony.' " Now look at the map, and see if the boundary as claimed by the United States corres^ponas with this injunction, Does this line yield no partial advantages to Maine, — those ' seeds of discord ?' ""Let any candid person draw a line from the city of St. John to the city of Quebec, and see if it describes a good and sufficient boundary to Great Britain. The American Commissioners of 1733 would not have asked for such a line, nor would those of England have yielded it, and, consequently, it cannot be in conformity to the true intent and meaning of the Treaty of that date. " The whole question has been submitted to an impartial arbiter — the King of the Netherlands : that monarch has investigated it, and given his award, which will be found in this day's impression. This award the State of Maine refused to be bound by, although England, notwithstanding it gave her the smallest portion, expressed her willing- ness to accede to it. " There was no reason to suppose that His Majesty of the Nether- lands was unduly favourable to England, for at that period a hostile English fleet was at his door, endeavouring to dissever his kingdom ; which was ultimately done, and Belgium wrested from him. " We have made these remarks for the purpose of showing that England has some justice on her side, and is not acting the fraudulent part that is represented. The position assumed by the State of Maine, and in part by Congress, places England in a painful situation. The whole territory is insisted on ; and if Great Britain yields it, she cuts her- self off from Canada, and renders herself incapable of sending succours during the winter to her loyal population in those provinces, and thus place in imminent jeopardy their safety. Are the United States, then, prepared to force on England the dire alternatives of war or the loss of Canada f We hope not, most fervently, especially when the matter in dispute is comparatively of little value, and of doubtful title. Wc trust that the sober good sense of the American people will calmly examine this matter, and enable the President and his Cabinet to pre- sent to England some less obnoxious alternative. Let the case be once more referred to a third power — let moderation and justice guide the councils of both nations ; but never let two kindred people again imbue their hands in each other's blood." 'i\ EXTRACTS FROM CHANNING'S LETTER ON THE ANNEXATION OF THE TEXAS. [Though addressed to America, these words are no less ominous to England. The crimes of nations affect not the perpetrators or the vie- the xvu timn alone. It was in England's power to prevent the diaasters here described and prognosticated : it was her duty to have done so. The perusal of these lines, besides awakening Englishmen to a sense of their position in the actual crisis, way lead them to reflect on the duties associated with their great fortune, and on the prospect of bloodshed and misery, of violence and injustice, in every quarter of the globe, resulting from their unfitness for the station they occupy. I pray God that it may lead them to think on their children's fate : and on the execration that may yet bo heaped on their name, where it has hitherto been revered.] " Some crimes, by their magnitude, have a touch of the sublime ; and to this dignity the seizure of Texas bv our citizens is entitled. Modern times furnish no example of individual rapine on so grand a scale. It is nothing less than the robbery of a realm. The pirate seizes a ship. The colonists and their coadjutors can satisfy thcm< selves with nothing short of an empire. They have left their Anglo- Saxon ancestors behind them. Those barbarians conform4d to the maxims of their age, to the rude code of nations in time of thickest heathen darkness. They invaded England under their sovereigns, and with the sanction of the gloomy religion of the North. But it is in a civilized age, and amidst refinements of manners; — it is amidst the lights of science and the teaching of Christianity, amidst expositions of the law of nations and enforcements of the law of universal love, amidst institutions of religion, learning, and humanity, that the rob- bery of Texas has found its instruments. It is from a free, well-ordered, enlightened Christian country, that hordes have gone forth, in open day, to perpetrate this mighty wrong." •• We boast of our rapid growth, forgetting that, throughout nature, noble growths are slow. Our people throw themselves beyond the bounds of civilization, and expose themselves to relapses into a semi- barbarous state, under the impulse of wild imagination, and for the name of great possessions. Perhaps there is no people on earth on whom the tics of local attachment sit so loosely. Even the wandering tribes of Scythia are bound to one spot, the graves of their fathers ; but the homes and graves of our fathers detain us feebly. The known and familiar is often abandoned for the distant and untrodden ; and ■ sometimes the untrodden is not the less eagerly desired because be- longing to others. To this spirit we have sacrificed justice and huma- nity ; and through its ascendany, the records of this young nation are stained with atrocities, at which communities grown grey in corruption might blush." " Texas is a country conquered by our citizens ; and the annexation of it to our Union will be the beginning of conquests, which, unless arrested and beaten back by a just and kind providence, will stop only at the Isthmus of Darien. Henceforth, we must cease to cry. Peace, peace. Our Eagle will whet, not gorge its appetite on its first victim ; and will snufF a more tempting quarry, more alluring blood, in every new region which opens southward. To annex Texas, is. to declare perpetual war with Mexico. That word, Mexico, associated in men's minds with boundless wealth, has already awakened rapacity. Already it has been proclaimed that the Anglo-Saxon race is destined to the sway of this magnifi'''Jnt realm, — that the rude form of society, which Spain established there, is to yield and vanish before a higher civili- zation." " A deadly hatred burns in Mexico towards this country. No stronger c » ' • I '.» XVIU national sentiment now binds her icattored province! together, than dread and detestation of Republican America. Slio is ready to attach herself to Europe for defence from the United States. All the moral power which we might have gained over Mexico, we have thrown away ; and suspicion, dread, and abhorrence, have supplanted respect and trust." " I am uwaro that these remarks are mot by a vicious reasoning which discredits a people among whom it finds favour. It is sometimes said, that 'nations are swayed bv laws, as unfailing as those which govern matter ; that they have their destinies ; that their character and position carry them forward irresistibly to their gaol ; that the stationary Turk must sink under the progressive civilization of Rus'ia, as inevitably as the crumbling edifice fulls to the earth ; that, by a likd necessity, the Indians have melted before the white man, and the mixed, degraded race of Mexico must melt before the Anglo-Saxon. Away with this vile sophistry ! There is no necessity for crime. There is no Fate to justity rapacious nations, any more than to justify gamblers and robbers, in plunder." *' Hitherto, I have spoken of the annexation of Texas as embroiling us with Mexico ; but it will not stop hero. It will bring us into colli- sion with other states. It will, almost of necessity, involve us in hostility with European powers. Such are now the connections of nations, that Europe must look with jealousy on a country, whose ambition, seconded by vast resources, will seem to place withiu her grasp the empire of the new world. And not only general considera- tions of this nature, but the particular relation of certain foreign states to this continent, must tend to destroy the peace now happily subsist- ing between us and the kingdoms of Europe. England, in particular, must watch us with suspicion, and cannot but resist our appropriation of Texas to ourselves. She has at once a moral and political interest in this question, which demands and will justify interference." " England has a political as well as moral interest in this question. By the annexation of Texas wo shall approach her liberated colonies; we shall build up a power in her ncigtibourhood, to which no limits can be prescribed. By adding Texas to our acquisition of Florida, we shall do much toward girdling the Gulf of Mexico; and I doubt not that some of our politicians will feel as if our mastery in th&t sea were sure. The West Indian Archipelago, in which the European is regarded as an intruder, will, of course, be embraced in our over-grow- ing scheme of empire. In truth, collision with the West Indies will be the most certain effect of the extension of our power in that quarter. The example which they exhibit, of African freedom, of the elevation of the coloured race to the rights of men, is, of all influences, most menacing to slavery at the South. It must grow continually more perilous. These islands, unless interfered with from abroad, seem destined to be nurseries of civilization and freedom to tho African race." *• Will a slave-holding people, spreading along the shores ol' the Mexi- can Gulf, cultivate friendly sentiments towards communUies, whose whole history will be a bitter reproach to their institutions, a witness against their wrongs, and whose ardent sympathies will be enlisted in the cause of the slave? Cruel, ferocious contlicts, must grow from this ncigMbourhood of hostile principles, of communities regarding one another with unextinguishable hatred. All the islands of the Archi- pelago will have cause to dread our power ; but none so much as the emancipated. Is 't not more than possible, that wars, having for an object the subjugation of the coloured race, the destruction of this tempting example of freedom, should spring from the proposed cxtcn- mi XIZ •ion of our dominion along the Mexican Gulph ? Can England view our encroachments without alarm ?" " An English Minister would bo unworthy of his oftico, who should see another state greedily swallow up territories in the neighbourhood of British colonies, and not strive, by all just means, to avert the danger." " By encroaching on Mexico, we shall throw her into the arms nf European states, shall compel her to seek defence in transatlantic alli- ance. How plain is it that alliance with Mexico will be hostility to the United States, that her defenders will repay themselves- by making her subservient to their views, that they will thus strike root in her soil, monopolise her trade, and control her resources. And with what face can we resist the uggressiona of others on our neighbour, if we give an example of aggression ? Still more, if, by our advances, we put the colonics of England in now peril, with what face can we o|)- pose her occupation of Cuba? Suppose her, with that magnificent island in her hands, to command the Mexican Gulf and the mouths of the Mississipi, will tho Western Slates find compensation forlhis formi- dable neighbourhood in the privilege of flooding Texas with slaves?" '* Thus, wars with Europe and Mexico are to be entailed on us by tho annexation of Texas. And is war the policy by which this country is to flourish ? Was it for interminable conflicts that we formed our Union? Is it blood, shed for plunder, which is to consolidate our insti- tutions ? Is it by collision with the greatest maritime power, that our commerce is to gain strength ? Is it by arming against ourselves the moral sentiments of the world, that we are to build up national honour? Must we of the North buckle on our armour, to fight the battles of slavery ; to fight for a possession, which our moral principles and just jealousy forbid us to incorporate with our confederacy ? In attaching Texas to ourselves, we provoke hostilities, and at tho same time expose new points of attack to our foes.* Vulnerable at so many points, we shall need a vast military force. Great armies will require great reve- nues, and raise up great chieftains. Are we tired of freedom, that we are prepared to place it under such guardians? Is the republic bent on dying by its own hands ? Does not every man feel, that, with war for our habit, our institutions cannot be preserved ? If ever a country were bound to peace, it is this*. Peace is our great interest. In peace our resources are to be developed, the true interpretation of the con- stitution to be established, and the interfering claims of 'Ibv^rty and order to be adjusted. In peace we are to discharge our grcj.i debt to the human race, and to diffuse freedom by manifesting its fruits. A country has no right to adopt a policy, however gainful, which, as it may foresee, will determine it to a career of war. A nation, like an individual, is bound to seek, even by sacrifices, a position, which will favour peace, justice, and tho exercise of a beneficent influence on the world. A nation, provoking war by cupiditv, by encroachment, and, above all, by efforts to propagate the curse of slavery, is alike false to itself, to God, and to the human race." *• This possession will involve us in new Indian wars. Texas, besides being open to the irruption of the tribes within our territories, has a tribe of its own, the Camanches, which is described as more for- midable than any in North America. Such foes are not to be coveted. The Indians I that ominous word, ■vhich ought to pierce the conscience of this nation, more than the savage war-cry pierces the ear. The Indians ! Have we not inflicted and endured evil enough in our * If these consemiences have not fallen as yet on the United States, it is that France encouragea the outrages, as committing thai, people against England; and a Minister of England, false to his country, did not repress the wrong, '■'"* did suppress the truth. and A\ XX intercouKd with this wretched people, to abstain from new wars with them ? Is the tragedy of Florida to be acted again and agsdu in our own day and in our children's ? " ' ** But one thing does move me. It is a sore evil, that freedom should be blasphemed, that republican institutions should forfeit the confidence of mankind, through the unfaithfulness of this pec^le to their trust." • ' < .jT!' V ' -■ •- 'j,. . . m . . ^^ ■Jl. - *^M- i r ]♦ '^>' J : .«;'! "^-'is. 4 fl 1 ' fff > , -^i^^faa,*! --» ' 1 w; r-i5'''i. ^^iv. i ' ^/ -e,' if 1 ' ' 4 J > > ..V .. "^..ii •n- 'i^ !?i* . ' , jkj-'-' i ■>! 31 s-* y •«):«, » .' ' ' '.f f •sf «>f ' ,.^ ? **-»•<' , --v > !■ i-d ^ . v" -f^, >' <> t- f '* *" * lit , s' » If -£.'J J ' .- ^ . ' - 9^ -ij?*! * -:% .^ r,? -'^•***! »■* .1S^',\ ,t ,*<* BKIX AMD BAIN, PBISTKRS, C.LASUOW. A '-t nth our lorn the > to KT-^! 3 i#' :!>■*? *