PART II. RECEPTION OF THE AWARD OF THE KING OF HOLLAND IN 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 NEGOCIATING PARTIES, BUT THAT THEY WILL INDICATE THE VIEWS AND POLICY OF GOVERNMENT, DURING THE WHOLE OF THAT LONG AND IMPORTANT TRANSACTION.-Lord Palmerston, Feb. 5th, 1830. the Award. On the 10th January 1831, the King of Holland declared his Award, and officially communicated it to both governments through their representatives at the Hague. It is impossible to speak of Character 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 subdivision 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 partiality;—and, in taking this unusual line, of detailing his grounds of decision, he probably was influenced by the apprehension that, being at the moment threatened by the fleets of one of the parties, he might have been suspected of vindictiveness against that party, and partiality towards the other. communicated to It appears by the official papers lately published, that the Assent of England adhesion of Great Britain to this Award was finally expressed to the King of Holland so soon as it reached this country; but the first public notice of this event, so important to Great Britain, occurred in the House of Commons on the 14th of February of the same year. It had become public that this question had been finally settled, and that the Award of the King of Holland had been House of Com rendered. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was questioned Award refused to on the subject, and the decision was asked for. The Foreign Minister, however, refused to give any information, or to produce any papers. mons. This first step will perhaps be considered, by men of business, conclusive, as to the character of the whole transaction. An arbitration is concluded, and being formally accepted by one of the parties, is binding on both; it is a compact settled, a contract signed. The refusal to state the fact-to produce the decision-is, on the part of the Secretary of State, a contradiction of the final character of the transaction, and is an invitation to the adverse party to refuse its assent, if so disposed. It is further fearfully compromising the dignity of the country, by refusing to produce, on the score of unconcluded negociation, the decision which the Crown had already declared to be final. It reveals, from the earliest period of this transaction, (which indeed takes its origin from the settlement of the question), that the real views of the Foreign Secretary were at variance with the ostensible policy and objects avowed by the State. The second consideration that presents itself is, that his Britannic Majesty officially announces to the King of Holland his acceptance of the Award; but makes no such communication to the President of the United States. It was however not less essential to make such a communication to the latter, than to the former ;-indeed, much more so,—and the neglect of such a step was in fact a virtual contradiction of the communication made to the King of Holland: for negligence could not be admitted as an explanation, nor pressure of other business" as a pretext, for the omission of so important a duty. From the relative geographical positions of the Hague, London, and Washington, it became, on that ground alone, the part of the British Minister to take the initiative; and the American Government must have expected to receive the formal communication from the British Government, together with the decision itself. Moreover, the whole course of the proceedings of the United States having been directed to keep this question undecided, and that of Great Britain, to bring about a decision,-silence on its part at this moment could not fail to be interpreted as a proof that some secret influence in England paralyzed the action of its government, and favoured the hostile views and pretensions of the United States. We must now turn to the steps taken by the American Go- Steps taken by vernment. the United States. interests of the State of Maine. It is probably known to the reader that the State of Maine was Dispositions and more particularly interested in this matter,—that it had pronounced the most decided opinion respecting it, that the value of the property it aimed at acquiring was then estimated at £3,000,000,-that grants of this land had been made, and that many individuals, and some of the most influential in the United States, were deeply interested, in a pecuniary point of view, in the acquisition of this property,—that the State of Maine had already attempted to exercise jurisdiction and to locate townships, and that the central Government had already connived at the assumption of unconstitutional powers by the State of Maine, as appearing to lead to the further embarrassment of the negociations, and the advancement of the American pretensions. It is further to be remarked that, during the negociations at the Hague, the individual selected by the United States as its representative belonged to the state of Maine, was an influential member of that state, and was believed to have pecuniary interests in its settlement. He was moreover one of the Commissioners appointed to draw up the case to be submitted to the Arbiter. The representative of England was not one of the diplomatists employed in the same capacity by Great Britain. Amember of the Minister at Maine, and an interested party, the Hague. against the Award On the 12th of January, 1831, two days after the Award is ren- His Protest dered, the United States' Minister at the Hague, protests against what he terms "a document purporting to be an expression of His Majesty's opinion on the several points submitted to him as "Arbiter"! communicated to The Award reaches the United States in the beginning of March, Award privately ---is communicated to the State of Maine, who hold a secret sitting, the result of which is communicated at Washington on or before the 12th of March; but the United States' Government inform the British Minister that the Award reached Washington on the 16th of March! It is then ostensibly communicated to the State of Maine, who transmit to the President a declaration that they will not submit to it, and immediately proceed to pass regulations for the purpose of extending the State and Sovereign jurisdiction throughout the disputed Territory, subject to the jurisdiction of E from the British Minister, on false pretexts. Results concealed Great Britain. The British Minister, informed of these proceedings by the press, states in a despatch to his Chief, that he had requested from the United States' Government copies of the documents, and was told that "the Government had not yet received any account "of them ;" copies of the whole documents having, as it subsequently appears, been transmitted to the President twelve days before,shewing in this earliest stage the deception practised with complete success on the British Minister. Up to this period the British Minister had remained without any communication whatever from his own Government! Public acts of the State of Maine. The President, in communicating the Award, ostensibly, to Maine, carefully avoids any the slightest expression of opinion,transmits the protest of Mr. Preble, equally without the slightest indication of censure or approbation of the extraordinary step he had taken, but stating that step to be without instructions. The message concludes thus, "under these circumstances the President will rely "with confidence on the candour and liberality of your Excellency, “and the other constituted authorities of Maine, in appreciating “the motives which may influence that course on his part, and in "a correspondent interpretation of them to your constituents, in "whose patriotism and discretion he has equal confidence." Thus, on the threshold of this subject, we have satisfactorily defined the position of the United States Government; that of tacit acquiescence in the Award, but a resolution to wait, and watch the tone and attitude of England, in the hope of setting it aside. The Governor of the State of Maine, on March 25th, 1831, communicates to the Senate and House of Representatives of that State, the message of the President, with the documents: and responds to the request of the President for a candid and liberal interpretation of his motives in the future course he might adopt, by declaring that the State of Maine relies with confidence on the central Government "for the enforcement of its claims against the power of Great Britain." These earliest proceedings of Maine may however merit a more special notice, as they contain the germ of the ensuing discussions and events. A joint Committee of the two Houses of the State is appointed to deliberate, and on the 31st of March they make a long report to |