assert, therefore, that in looking for the highlands of the treaty you must search for highlands south of the St. John. This brings them far south to Mars Hill, and from thence westwardly along the highlands, marked in map No. 2, to the western boundary of the State of Maine, where they first reach the highlands, which, as they contend, "divide those rivers that empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean." The whole argument of the British Government, it will be perceived, rests upon the assumption that the St. John is not a river falling into the Atlantic Ocean because it has its mouth in the Bay of Fundy.

Now, what are the objections to this extraordinary pretension, as the committee are constrained to call it?

And, first, what is the Bay of Fundy, if it be not a part of the Atlantic Ocean? A bay is a mere opening of the main ocean into the landa mere interruption of the uniformity of the seacoast by an indentation of water. These portions of the ocean have received the name of bays solely to distinguish them from the remainder of the vast deep to which they belong. Would it not be the merest special pleading to contend that the Bay of Naples was not a portion of the Mediterranean or that the Bay of Biscay was not a part of the Atlantic Ocean?

Again, the description of the treaty is, "rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean." Can it be said with any propriety that a river does not fall into the Atlantic because in reaching the main ocean it may pass through a bay? And yet this is the British argument. The Delaware does not fall into the Atlantic, because it flows into it through the Bay of Delaware; and, for the same reason, the St. John does not fall into the Atlantic, because it flows into it through the Bay of Fundy. The committee know not how to give a serious answer to such an argument. The bare statement of it is its best refutation.

But, like all such arguments, it proves too much. If it be correct, this portion of the treaty of 1783 is rendered absurd and suicidal, and the wise and distinguished statesmen by whom it was framed must be condemned by posterity for affixing their names to an instrument, in this particular at least, absolutely void. Although they believed they would prevent "all disputes which might arise in future on the subject of the boundaries of the United States" by fixing their commencement at "the northwest angle of Nova Scotia," and running thence along "the highlands which divide those rivers which empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean," yet it is absolutely certain that there was not a single river in that whole region of country which, according to the British construction, did fall into the Atlantic Ocean. They all fall into bays without one exception. Neither can we plead ignorance as an excuse for these commissioners, because it is fully in proof that they had Mitchell's map before them, from which the fact clearly appears. The Ristigouche does not fall into the Atlantic, because it has its mouth in the Bay of Chaleurs; nor does the Penobscot, because its mouth is in the Bay of Penobscot; nor do the Kennebec and Androscoggin, because after their junction they fall into the Bay of Sagadahock. The same is true even of the Connecticut, because it empties itself into Long Island Sound. All the rivers in that region are in the same condition with the St. John. Thus it appears, if the British argument be well

as it may seem, her claim has since grown to such a magnitude that she now demands the whole by right under the treaty of 1783.

Our commissioners at Ghent having successfully resisted every attempt for the dismemberment of Maine, agreed upon an article with the British commissioners not to revise or to change the ancient treaty boundary, but to run and establish upon the ground that very boundary, without any alteration, and to ascertain "the northwest angle of Nova Scotia," its place of beginning. This article is the fifth in the treaty. Under it each party appointed a commissioner. These commissioners disagreed. According to the treaty, the question was then referred to the King of the Netherlands as umpire, whose award was rejected by the United States because it did not even profess to decide the controversy according to the terms of the submission, but proposed a compromise by a division of the disputed territory between the parties. Great Britain has also since announced her abandonment of this award, and now, at the end of more than half a century after the conclusion of the treaty of 1783, the question not only remains unsettled, but threatens to involve the two nations in a dangerous dispute.

The committee will now proceed to state the principles on which Great Britain rests her claim to the disputed territory, and to give them such an answer as in their judgment they merit. She contends, in the first place, that the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, mentioned in the treaty, is to be found at Mars Hill, in the line due north from the monument at the source of the St. Croix, and 40 miles distant from it, and that the highlands of the treaty are those running to the westward from that point and dividing the sources of the streams flowing north into the St. John and south into the Penobscot. A reference to map No. 2 will clearly show the extent of this claim.

Great Britain contends, in the second place that, if this be not the true treaty line, it is impossible to find it; that, then, the description of the treaty would become void for uncertainty, and that no mode remains of terminating the controversy but by abandoning the treaty altogether and agreeing upon a conventional line.

The committee trust that a sufficient answer has already been given to this last proposition. They have endeavored, and they believe successfully, to prove that the northwest angle of Nova Scotia was a wellknown point, capable of being easily ascertained, ever since the proclamation of 1763, by simply running a due north line from the source of the St. Croix to intersect the southern line of the Province of Quebec, which consists of the highlands running from the western extremity of the Bay of Chaleurs to the head of Connecticut River, and dividing those rivers that empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean. It is certain as the laws of nature that these highlands, from which we know that streams do flow in opposite directions, can be found on the face of the country.

In support of the first proposition, the Government of Great Britain contends that, as the eastern boundary of the United States runs "by a line to be drawn along the middle of the river St. Croix from its mouth in the Bay of Fundy to its source," and as the St. John, though nowhere mentioned in the treaty, has its mouth also in the Bay of Fundy, that therefore the St. John is not a river which falls into the Atlantic Ocean according to the description of the treaty. They

assert, therefore, that in looking for the highlands of the treaty you must search for highlands south of the St. John. This brings them far south to Mars Hill, and from thence westwardly along the highlands, marked in map No. 2, to the western boundary of the State of Maine, where they first reach the highlands, which, as they contend, "divide those rivers that empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean." The whole argument of the British Government, it will be perceived, rests upon the assumption that the St. John is not a river falling into the Atlantic Ocean because it has its mouth in the Bay of Fundy.

Now, what are the objections to this extraordinary pretension, as the committee are constrained to call it?

And, first, what is the Bay of Fundy, if it be not a part of the Atlantic Ocean? A bay is a mere opening of the main ocean into the landa mere interruption of the uniformity of the seacoast by an indentation of water. These portions of the ocean have received the name of bays solely to distinguish them from the remainder of the vast deep to which they belong. Would it not be the merest special pleading to contend that the Bay of Naples was not a portion of the Mediterranean or that the Bay of Biscay was not a part of the Atlantic Ocean?

Again, the description of the treaty is, "rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean." Can it be said with any propriety that a river does not fall into the Atlantic because in reaching the main ocean it may pass through a bay? And yet this is the British argument. The Delaware does not fall into the Atlantic, because it flows into it through the Bay of Delaware; and, for the same reason, the St. John does not fall into the Atlantic, because it flows into it through the Bay of Fundy. The committee know not how to give a serious answer to such an argument. The bare statement of it is its best refutation.

But, like all such arguments, it proves too much. If it be correct, this portion of the treaty of 1783 is rendered absurd and suicidal, and the wise and distinguished statesmen by whom it was framed must be condemned by posterity for affixing their names to an instrument, in this particular at least, absolutely void. Although they believed they would prevent "all disputes which might arise in future on the subject of the boundaries of the United States" by fixing their commencement at "the northwest angle of Nova Scotia," and running thence along "the highlands which divide those rivers which empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean," yet it is absolutely certain that there was not a single river in that whole region of country which, according to the British construction, did fall into the Atlantic Ocean. They all fall into bays without one exception. Neither can we plead ignorance as an excuse for these commissioners, because it is fully in proof that they had Mitchell's map before them, from which the fact clearly appears. The Ristigouche does not fall into the Atlantic, because it has its mouth in the Bay of Chaleurs; nor does the Penobscot, because its mouth is in the Bay of Penobscot; nor do the Kennebec and Androscoggin, because after their junction they fall into the Bay of Sagadahock. The same is true even of the Connecticut, because it empties itself into Long Island Sound. All the rivers in that region are in the same condition with the St. John. Thus it appears, if the British argument be well

founded, that the commissioners have concluded a treaty and described highlands whence streams proceed, falling into the Atlantic, as a portion of the boundary of the United States, when from the very face of the map before them it is apparent no such streams exist.

There is another objection to the British claim, which is conclusive. Wherever the highlands of the treaty exist they must be highlands from which on the north side streams proceed falling into the St. Lawrence. This portion of the description is as essential as that from their south side streams should issue falling into the Atlantic. Now, the British claim abandons the former part of the description altogether. Their line of highlands commencing at Mars Hill is at least a hundred miles south of the highlands whence the tributaries of the St. Lawrence flow. Between these highlands and those claimed by the British Government the broad valley of the St. John spreads itself, watered by the river of that name and the streams which empty into it from the north and from the south. The two points on the western line of New Brunswick are distant from each other more than a hundred miles; and when you arrive at the British highlands you find that they divide the sources of the St. John and the Penobscot and not the sources of streams falling into the St. Lawrence and the Atlantic Ocean, according to the description of the treaty.

But even suppose it were possible to prove that neither the St. John nor any other river in that region falls into the Atlantic Ocean, would this fact essentially benefit the British Government? If this portion of the description should entirely fail would it render the other portion void? Certainly not. It might be said that the commissioners were mistaken as to where the streams emptied themselves which flowed from the southern side of the treaty highlands; as to the existence of these highlands there could be no mistake. They are the boundary; and the streams flowing from them are mere matters of description. Can they be sufficiently identified independently of this mistake? If they can the question is settled. Now, fortunately, on this subject no doubt can exist. Two circumstances concur to identify them about which it is not possible there can be a mistake. According to the act of Parliament of 1774 they constitute the southern line of the Province of Quebec, between the western extremity of the Bay of Chaleurs, in latitude 48, and the eastern bank of the Connecticut River, in latitude 45; and it is equally certain that from them, all along in regular succession, streams proceed falling into the St. Lawrence. A mistake in one part of a description of boundary has never been held to vitiate the whole, provided sufficient remains clearly to designate the intention of the parties.

But how is it possible ever to embrace Mars Hill in the line of highlands running from the western extremity of the Bay of Chaleurs and forming the southern boundary of the Province of Quebec? It is clear that in this, and in this alone, the northwestern angle of Nova Scotia is to be found. Mars Hill is 100 miles directly south of this line. You can not by any possibility embrace that hill in this range, unless you can prove that a hill in latitude 46 is part of a ridge directly north of it in latitude 48; and this, notwithstanding the whole valley of the St. John, from its southern to its northern extremity, intervenes between the two. The thing is impossible. Mars Hill can never be made, by human ingenuity, the northwest angle of Nova Scotia.

Particular emphasis has been placed by the British Government on the word "highlands" mentioned in the treaty; and comparisons have been made between the height of Mars Hill and that of different parts of the highlands which divide the streams of the St. Lawrence from those of the Atlantic. Even in this they have failed; because it has been shown that the summits of the more elevated portions of the treaty highlands are considerably above that of Mars Hill, the highest point on the ridge claimed by Great Britain. The committee, however, deem such a question to be wholly immaterial. When highlands are spoken of as dividing waters flowing in different directions the meaning is plain. From the very nature of things they must exist and slope off in opposite directions; but whether they consist of tableland, of mountains, or even of swamp, still if there be a height of land from which streams flow down in different directions this is sufficient. It is not their elevation, but their capacity to divide, which gives them their character.

It is strange that the mere incidental mention of the Bay of Fundy in the treaty, though not at all in connection with the St. John, which is not even named, should have been the foundation of the whole superstructure of the British argument. The reason why it was mentioned at all is obvious. It was palpably not for the purpose of creating a third class of rivers flowing into that bay distinct from those flowing into the St. Lawrence and the Atlantic, as the British Government contend, but merely for the purpose of specifying with greater precision the commencement of the eastern boundary of the United States. Several rivers in that portion of the country had borne the name of St. Croix, from the fact that the early French navigators, actuated by motives of piety, had planted a cross at their mouth when they were first discovered. Hence it was necessary, in specifying the beginning of our eastern boundary, to state that it was in the middle of that St. Croix which had its mouth in the Bay of Fundy. Notwithstanding this description, it has been seen that which of these rivers was the true St. Croix became a subject of dispute between the two Governments. Still both parties were prevented from claiming that any river which did not flow into that bay was the St. Croix of the treaty.

In

The Bay of Fundy has been twice mentioned in the treaty. After starting at the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, and from thence sweeping round the boundaries of the United States to this bay, it was necessary to fix as precisely as possible the point at which our eastern boundary commenced. This was essential for a double purpose. the first place, it was the extreme northern point from which a line was to be run due east 20 leagues into the ocean, according to the treaty, within which space the United States were entitled to all the islands along their coast, except such as were within the limits of Nova Scotia; and, in the second place, it was the point from which our eastern line was to commence, and to run to the northwest angle of Nova Scotia.

Had the commissioners omitted to fix this point with as great precision as they could, they would have been guilty of culpable neglect. Having done so, and having mentioned the Bay of Fundy as that part of the ocean in which the St. Croix has its mouth, the British Government have used it, not merely as it was intended, to mark the eastern boundary of the United States, but to render the whole treaty, so far as the northeastern boundary is concerned, absurd, uncertain, and void.