same has been determined by the commissioners appointed for that purpose, and the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, to be run and marked according to the provisions of the treaty aforesaid." Provision was also made for the ascertainment of other parts of the line between the United States and the British possessions. But, in consequence of an amendment which the cession of Louisiana caused the Senate of the United States to adopt, the convention never was ratified. A similar attempt to effect a settlement by Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney and Lords Holland and Auckland in 1807 also suffered defeat by reason of an extrinsic cause.2 Thus it happened that when the American Revision of Boundary and British commissioners met at Ghent in 1814 Proposed at Ghent. to conclude a second treaty of peace no progress had been made toward the determination of the northeastern boundary. At the first conference, which was held on the 8th of August 1814, the British commissioners proposed a "revision of the boundary line between the British and American territories, with a view to prevent future uncertainty and dispute;" a proposition which, in a note to the American commissioners, they explained as embracing "such a variation of the line of frontier as may secure a direct communication between Quebec and Halifax." To this proposition the American commissioners replied that they had "no authority to cede any part of the territory of the United States; and to no stipulation to that effect will they subscribe." The British commissioners explained that "the boundary of the District of Maine" had "never been correctly ascertained; that the one asserted, at present, by the American Government, by which the direct communication between Halifax and Quebec becomes interrupted, was not in contemplation of the British Plenipotentiaries who concluded the treaty of 1783;" and that all they required to be "ceded" to Great Britain was "that small portion of unsettled country which interrupts the communication between Quebec and Halifax, there being much doubt whether it does not already belong to Great Britain."3 It must be admitted that the propositions and the explanations of the British commissioners did 'Am. State Papers, For. Rel. II. 584. Am. State Papers, For. Rel. III. 162-165. The negotiations at Ghent are detailed in Am. State Papers, For. Rel. III. 695-748; IV. 808–811. not fit well together. It was they themselves who brought forward the subject of the boundaries; and they at the outset proposed a "variation" of the line for a specific purpose. Nor had the American government "asserted" any boundary line but in the language of the treaty of 1783.1 trate. The American commissioners therefore adAgreement to Arbi- hered to their determination to make no cession of territory; and, the British proposition to vary the line having been abandoned, they presented on the 10th of November a draft of "five articles, drawn on the principles formerly adopted by the two powers for settling the question respecting the river St. Croix," for the ascertainment and marking of the whole line from the source of the St. Croix to the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods, as well as for the determination of the ownership of the islands in Passamaquoddy Bay and of the island of Grand Menan. These articles the British commissioners, with unimportant modifications, accepted. In the treaty concluded at Ghent on the 24th of December 1814 they appear as Articles IV., V., VI., VII., and VIII. The proceedings under Article IV. in relation to the islands have been narrated in the preceding chapter. Article V. of Treaty of Ghent. Article V. relates to the northeastern boundary question. Reciting that neither "that point of the highlands lying due north from the source of the river St. Croix, and designated in the former treaty of peace between the two powers as the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, nor the northwesternmost head of Connecticut River," had yet been ascertained; and that that part of the "I believe that Great Britain is very desirous of obtaining the northern part of Maine, say from about 47 north latitude to the northern extremity of that district as claimed by us. They hope that the river which empties into Bay des Chaleurs, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, has its source so far west as to intervene between the head waters of the river St. John and those of the streams emptying into the river St. Lawrence: so that the line north from the source of the river St. Croix will first strike the heights of land which divide the waters emptying into the Atlantic Ocean (river St. John's) from those emptying into the Gulf of St. Lawrence (River des Chaleurs), and afterwards the heights of land which divide the waters emptying into the Gulf of St. Lawrence (River des Chaleurs) from those emptying into the river St. Lawrence; but that the said line never can, in the words of the treaty, strike any spot of land actually dividing the waters emptying into the Atlantic Ocean from those which fall into the river St. Lawrence." (Mr. Gallatin to Mr. Monroe, Sec. of State, Ghent, Dec. 25, 1814, Adams's Writings of Gallatin, I. 646.) boundary line "which extends from the source of the river St. Croix directly north to the abovementioned northwest angle of Nova Scotia, thence 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 northwesternmost head of Connecticut river, thence down along the middle of that river to the forty-fifth degree of north latitude; thence by a line due west on said latitude until it strikes the river Iroquois or Cataraquy," had not yet been surveyed, it was provided that for these several purposes two com missioners should be appointed, one by His Britannic Majesty and one by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, who should be sworn impartially to examine and decide upon the matters submitted to them according to such evidence as should be laid before them on the part of His Britannic Majesty and of the United States respectively. It was further provided that the commissioners should meet at St. Andrews, New Brunswick, and that they should have power to adjourn to such other place or places as they should think fit; that they should have "power to ascertain and determine the points above mentioned, in conformity with the provisions of the said treaty of peace" of 1783, and should "cause the boundary aforesaid, from the source of the river St. Croix to the river Iroquois or Cataraquy, to be surveyed and marked according to the said provisions;" and that they should "make a map of the said boundary, and annex to it a declaration under their hands and seals, certifying it to be the true map of the said boundary, and particularizing the latitude and longitude of the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, of the northwesternmost head of Connecticut River, and of such other points of the said boundary as they may deem proper." This map and declaration the contracting parties agreed to consider "as finally and conclusively fixing the said boundary." But, in the event of the commissioners differing, it was provided that they should make, jointly or separately, a report or reports to their governments, stating in detail the points of difference and the grounds on which their respective opinions had been formed; and the contracting parties agreed to refer the report or reports to some friendly sovereign or state for final decision. It should be observed that the "point of the highlands" designated as the "northwest angle of Nova Scotia," and the point designated as the north Appointment of westernmost head of Connecticut River, were treated as matters to be "ascertained and determined," while the establishment of the rest of the line was treated as a mere matter of surveying. As commissioner on the part of Great Britain George III. on September 4, 1815, appointed Thomas Barclay, who was by the same commission constituted the representative of Great Britain also under Article IV. relating to the islands. On the part of the United States President Madison appointed as commissioner under Article V. Cornelius P. Van Ness. His commission, issued by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, bears date April 3, 1816. Mr. Van Ness, who was a native of New York, was at the time of his appointment a citizen of the State of Vermont, of which he subsequently became chief justice and governor. During the administrations of Jackson he was minister to Spain, where he concluded the convention of February 17, 1834, for the settlement of claims. Meeting of Commissioners. As the commissioners under Article V., like those under Article IV., were required to hold their first meeting at St. Andrews, Mr. Barclay, who was a commissioner under both articles, arranged for the assembling of both commissions at the same time. He met the United States commissioners, Messrs. Holmes and Van Ness, at Portland, in Maine, from whence they sailed September 17, 1816.2 Arriving at St. Andrews on the 22d, they held their first meeting on the following day. The commissioners under Article V. were sworn by Mr. Justice Mackay in the same form as the commissioners under Article IV.3 Choice of a Secretary. British Agents. The commissioners under Article V. chose Henry H. Orne, a citizen of the United States, as their secretary, at an annual salary of £500.1 As agent on the part of Great Britain Ward Chipman appeared, and exhibited as his authority a letter in the same form as that which he produced as agent under Article IV. The difficulty was settled in the same way, by the subsequent production of a commission issued by George III. on the 24th of January, 1817, appointing Ward Chipman and Ward Chipman, jr., to act, I Supra, p. 48. 2S. Ex. Doc. 97, 20 Cong. 2 sess. 3 Supra, p. 52. 4 MSS. Dept. of State. jointly or separately, as British agents. At the first session of the commissioners no agent appeared on the part of the United States. Adjournment of Commissioners. On the 24th of September 1816 the commissioners after a two days' session adjourned. Not only had the surveyors not arrived, but the season was too far advanced to begin surveying for the year; and as the first work required of the commission was to have explorations and surveys made of the practically unknown wilderness through which the line was to run, and as it was the opinion of the best-informed persons that, owing to the snows remaining in the woods and the streams being surcharged with water, the field operations could not be begun till the following summer, the commissioners adjourned to meet in Boston on the 4th of June, when the surveyors were directed to attend and receive such instructions and orders as might be thought necessary." Difficult Nature of Questions to be Decided. The British foreign office, taking an even more simple view of the matter than the negotiators at Ghent, pronounced the establishment of the whole of the northeastern boundary "a mere operation of survey," in regard to which it was not necessary to give the British commissioner any "specific instructions." 3 The British commissioner, however, was better informed. While the running of a line due north from the source of the River St. Croix was, he said, " certainly a simple operation," yet it was very doubtful whether highlands such as would satisfy the treaty of 1783 would be found on running that line; nor was he, he added, less apprehensive, admitting that such highlands were found, that a difficult question would arise with respect to what stream constituted the northwesternmost head of Connecticut River. These difficulties removed, the execution of the remainder of the line would be plain and easy; but he feared that one or both of the points above mentioned would "prove insuperable to the Commissioners, and that recourse must be had to a reference, on the reports of the Commissioners, to some friendly sovereign or MSS. Dept. of State. Supra, p. 53. 2MSS. Dept. of State. 3 Lord Castlereagh to Mr. Barclay, September 14, 1815, Rives's Correspondence of Thomas Barclay, 368. |