Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

2

DEFINITIVE STATEMENT,

ON THE PART OF

THE UNITED STATES,

OF THE CASE REFERRED,

IN PURSUANCE OF THE

CONVENTION OF 29TH SEPTEMBER, 1827,

BETWEEN THE SAID STATES AND

GREAT BRITAIN,

TO HIS MAJESTY

THE KING OF THE NETHERLANDS,

FOR HIS DECISION THEREON.

PRINTED, BUT NOT PUBLISHED.

WASEMINGTON:
PRINTED AT THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES' TELEGRAPH.

1829.

CONTENTS.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Page.

I. NORTH-WEST ANGLE OF NOVA SCOTIA, &c.

1

§ 1. Preliminary Observations,

1

First Part.- Objections to the American Line examined,

4

$ 2. General Arguments, applicable to both the Bay of Fundy and the Gulf of

St. Lawrence,

4

1. Refutation o the assertion, that it was intended to assign to each Power,

the whole of the rivers which had their mouths in their territories, re-

spectively,

4

2. The term “ Alantic Ocean," in its usual acceptation, embraces the

Bay of Fundy and the Gulf of St. Lawrence,

8

3. Objection derived from the designation of the Bay of Fundy, as distinct

from the Atlantic Ocean. (First British Argument-Summary,)

14

1. The special designation, which in one clause of the treaty, restrains, can-

not affect the general meaning of the term “ Atlantic Ocean,” in another

clause, -

14

2. Reason why the Bay of Fundy was thus specially designated in that

clause of the treaty,

18

§ 4. Objections to the River St. John, derived from other sources than the terms

of the treaty. (Second and Third British Argument—Summary,)

23

1. The proposal on the part of the United States, prior to the treaty of

1783, to make the River St. John the boundary, does not affect their

right to the contested territory,

23

2. The Canadian origin and subsequent sales, &c. of the Fief of Mada-

waska, are altogether irrelevant to the question,

28

3. The notice, in 1765, not to hunt on Indian grounds, does not prove that

they were held to be within the Province of Quebec. (Fourth British

Argument,)

33

95. Objections relating to the Gulf of St. Lawrence,

34

1. Further proofs that the rivers, emptying themselves into that Gulf, are

comprehended amongst those designated in the treaty, as “Rivers that

fall into the Atlantic Ocean,” ·

S4

2. The error in Mitchell's Map cannot affect the obvious meaning of the

terms of the treaty,

36

g 6. Objections derived from the signification of the term “highlands.” (Fifth

British Argument-Summary,)

40

1. That term, indeterminate in its general sense, does not necessarily

mean a mountainous country; defined by the annexed condition of divid-

ing rivers; proper in that general sense, as descriptive of any dividing

ground whatever,

40

2. It is used as synonymous with “ height of land;" which last term is ap-

plied exclusively to the ground which divides rivers, without reference

to the absolute elevation or character, in other respects, of such ground,

3. Mitchell's Map proves, that the negotiators did not, by - highlands,

mean a generally mountainous country,

48

4. The surveys under the late Commission do not even prove the facts,

(irrelevant if proved,) asserted, respecting the character of the highlands

claimed by the two parties respectively,

48

Page. 97. Objections derived from a presumed constant assertion of the British

claim since the treaty of 1783. (Fourth British Argument–Summary) - 50 1. Attempts by Canada, 1783-1794,

50 2. Madawaska Settlement,

55 3. British claim not asserted, 1794-1814,

56 4. American claim asserted,

58 5. Negotiations of Ghent, 1814,

60 6. New Brunswick Jurisdiction,

62 Second Part.-The British Line examined,

63 $ 8. The terms of the treaty are irreconcilable with the British pretension, 63

1. The North-west angle of Nova Scotia must be on the dividing highlands, 64 2. The boundary line must, from the said angle to the North-westernmost source of Connecticut River, be along the said dividing highlands,

66 3. Interpolations and substitutions of other expressions to the terms of the

treaty, suggested by the British Agent and Commissioner, under the late
Commission,

68 4. Attempt to pervert the meaning of the word “to divide”

71 9 9. Intentions of the framers of the treaty of 1783, ascertained,

72 1. Deduced from the identity of the boundary, designated by the treaty,

with those assigned by the previous public acts of Great Britain, to the
Provinces of Quebec and Nova Scotia -

75
2. Inferred from the maps published between 1763 and 1783,
3. Proved by Mitchell's Map, which is acknowledged to have regulated the
joint and official proceedings of the framers of the treaty,

78 II. 10. NORTH-WESTERNMOST HEAD OF CONNECTICUT RIVER, 82 III. § 11. BOUNDARY LINE FROM THE CONNECTICUT RIVER, TO THE RIVER ST. LAWRENCE,

86 NOTES TO THE STATEMENT. A Extent of the Fief of Madawaska,

88 B Governor Pownall's information,

88 C Surveys filed with the Commissioners under the 5th Article of the Treaty of Ghent, 89 D Mr. Gallatin's Letter of the 25th December, 1814,

94 E Observations on the Engraved Maps,

95 F Adolphus's History of George the Third,

96

77

« AnteriorContinuar »