Page images
PDF
EPUB

SUPPLEMENT.

SINCE the preceding pages were sent to press and made ready for publication, an unexpected piece of information has transpired, so vitally connected with the late negotiations at Washington, that the Author, even after the pamphlet has been announced for sale, has felt himself compelled, by its unparalleled importance, to lay it before the world.

The mission of Lord Ashburton was founded not only upon those considerate and just views which have been stated in the preceding pages, but upon the implicit confidence placed by Her Majesty's Government in the sincerity of those solemn and repeated declarations of all the branches of the American Government, that that belief in the justice of their claim, which they had rendered so general in their own country, arose from an honest conviction that it was' founded in truth, and that it accorded both with the physical geography of the country, and the intentions of the Negotiators of the Peace of 1783.

It has been already remarked at page 26, that the same conviction of right apparently existing

G

in both countries, neither of them could give way to the extent of the claim of its opponent, and that the friends of peace would therefore naturally desire to resort to a peaceful compromise. It was this which rendered Lord Ashburton's position at Washington so respectable; he had been sent there as the representative of a powerful Sovereign, and a Government which was convinced of the justice of its claim; but which, preferring the blessings of peace to objects not essential to the welfare of Great Britain, had generously offered to lay aside her own unquestionable title, and to enter upon a friendly compromise, under the sanction of that good faith so necessary to the international transactions of all governments, and without which no government can be either respected or feared.

Lord Ashburton was, to all appearances, met in the same spirit by those with whom he had to negotiate. Mr. Webster, in his letter to him, dated Washington, July 8, 1842, says,

"I must be permitted to say that few ques"tions have ever arisen under this Government "in regard to which a stronger or more general "conviction was felt that the country was in the "right, than this question of the north-eastern "boundary. To say nothing of the sentiments "of the Government and people of the States "more directly interested, whose opinions may

[ocr errors]

"be supposed capable of bias, both Houses of Congress, after full and repeated considera"tion, have affirmed the validity of the American

[ocr errors]

claim, by a unanimity experienced on very few "other subjects; and the general judgment of "the whole people seems to be the same way." And again:

[ocr errors]

"The question before us, is whether these "confident opinions, on both sides, of the rightful nature and just strength of our respective claims, will permit us, while a desire to pre"serve harmony, and a disposition to yield libe

66

66

[ocr errors]

rally to mutual convenience so strongly incites us, to come together and to unite on a line "by agreement."

t

[ocr errors]

It now becomes necessary to state that the sincere conviction entertained by Her Majesty's Government, of the justice of the British claim, was not solely founded upon the accordance of the physical geography of the country in dispute with the second article of the Treaty of 1783, as established in the Report which was laid before Parliament in 1840; but was confirmed by documentary evidence, and by certain ancient maps, upon which the Boundary, established at the Peace of 1783, was laid down precisely as it is in Map A in the Report of 1840, that is to say, south of the St. John.

It was well known also that authentic maps

of this kind had existed, but unfortunately they could not be found, many of the public and private papers, connected with the Treaty of 1783, having disappeared during the various changes in the departments of the Government about that period. Shortly, however, after the departure of Lord Ashburton, an ancient map, which had apparently been hid away for near sixty years, was discovered in one of the public offices, with a red line drawn upon it, exactly conforming to the British claim; and upon a careful consideration of all the circumstances connected with it, no doubt was entertained that that map was one of the maps used by the Negotiators of the Treaty of 1783, and that the red line marked upon it designated the direction of the Boundary they had established. But this map was not signed, and could not be authenticated. A map, however, engraved in 1785, only a year perhaps after the ratification of the Treaty, by W. Faden, Geographer to the King, was taken to the United States by Lord Ashburton: this was evidently copied from an official map, and probably from the one last mentioned: it had the Boundary line traced in the copper, and was coloured, exactly in the same direction with the red line on the map that could not be authenticated, running from the St. Croix, along the Highlands, south of the St. John, and thence to the Lake

of the Woods, according to the terms of the Treaty. This map of Faden's was strong evidence of what was considered to have been the established boundary at that time, and deserved much consideration from the circumstance of its being a semi-official map which had never been objected to by the Government of the United States at any time after its appearance. In a letter of the Maine Commissioners to Mr. Webster, dated Washington, June 29th, 1842, it appears that this map had been submitted to them, and in long passage respecting it, remarkable for its sneers, they seem to be satisfied with impeaching its value as evidence, in the following words:

"The map (Faden's) referred to is a small one, "of small pretensions."

The reader will now be prepared for an extract from the Washington Globe the late official newspaper of Presidents Jackson and Van Buren. It is from the speech of Mr. Rives, à senator from Virginia, delivered in a Secret Session of the Senate of the United States, held for the purpose of discussing the ratification of the late Treaty. This gentleman was Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, the most responsible situation in that body. It is evident from this speech, which is an extremely long one of five columns, that he was labouring to overcome the reluctance of many members of that

« PreviousContinue »