Sir Charles Vaughan, though he does not appear to have pressed it upon the American Government; and he contented himself with demanding farther explanations as to where the line drawn North West was to stop, asserting that every thing tended to prove that the Boundary of the Treaty of 1783 was merely imaginary, and hinting that it was time to abandon both that Boundary line and the line suggested by the King of the Netherlands. The answer of the President, however, put such a proceeding entirely out of the question, the power of the Central Government being so limited, and its operations so fettered by the claims of the State of Maine, that he could agree to no other deviation than that proposed by Mr. Livingston.

The question now, however, was stripped by the proposals of deviation on the part of America (or rather might have been stripped) from all pretended adherence to the exact terms of the Treaty of 1783; and the real question became to what deviation from that Treaty the State of Maine would permit the federal Government to consent.*

Another most important question remained, but that was between the federal Government

*This is never to be forgotten, THAT AMERICA HERSELF

HAS PROPOSED DEVIATIONS OF THE MOST IMPORTANT CHARACTER FROM THE LINE PRESCRIBED BY THE TREATY OF 1783.

and the State of Maine: namely, what constitutional power that State had so to limit the authority of the federal Government. The question of the territory was in dispute, and had been so for years, with the general Government of the United States, before Maine became one of those States; and, to the understanding of most people, it would seem, that the mere fact of Maine becoming one of the States by being detached from Massachusets, while the territory originally in dispute was supposed to belong to Massachusets, could give Maine no claim to fetter the operations of the general Goverment in regard to negotiations which had commenced between that Government and another State, before Maine was admitted as a State at all.

Circumstances, however, and considerations, in regard to which we have no power of deciding, induced the President to act upon the objections of Maine, as if constitutionally valid; and in the very first reply of Lord Palmerston addressed to the American Government through Sir Charles Vaughan, that Nobleman points out in clear and explicit words, the idleness of pretending to adhere strictly to one part of the treaty of 1783, and to deviate from another; and taking into review the various points considered in the award of the King of the Netherlands, toge

ther with the terms of the reference to that Prince, he demands inasmuch as the only pretence for rejecting that award wasthat one of the points was not truly decided at all, that the points that the King of the Netherlands did absolutely and clearly decide should be received by the American Government as determined; and that satisfactory proof should be given that the American Government is possessed of the power to carry into effect any determination to be produced by subsequent negotiations. In regard to the first demand, the American Government distinctly refused to acquiesce; and in regard to the second, no satisfactory proof was given whatever that the views of the President would not be overborne in all instances, as they had been in regard to the award of the King of the Netherlands, by the States of Maine and Massachusets.

In the course of the preceding discussions, a new pretension had been put forth by the American Government, the American Secretary of State boldly asserting that his Government had constantly and pertinaciously insisted upon the proposed line of Boundary being carried to the North of the river St. John; whereas, on the contrary, Sir Charles Vaughan, in a luminous summary of the proceedings, drawn up about this time, shews that from the signature of the treaty of 1783 up to 1822, the American Government

made no pretension whatsoever to carry the Boundary beyond the river St. John, while England claimed at least ten thousand square miles on the south side of that river.

In the beginning of 1835, a strong disposition was evinced on the part of the Representatives of Maine and Massachusets in Congress, to throw elements of irritation into the controversy, by representing in loud and angry terms that the Government of Great Britain was in forcible. possession of territories rightfully belonging to the United States, and that aggressions had been committed therein, by British authorities, upon American citizens.* One of the Representatives of the State of Massachusets demanded that the correspondence between Great Britain and America on the question of the Boundary, and any representations and correspondence between the general Government and the provinces of Maine, regarding the possession of the disputed territory by Great Britain, should be laid before Congress.

On this demand the Secretary of State reported, that it would be detrimental to lay the

*Two things will be remarked in regard to these points now revived, first-that England has been in uninterrupted possession up to the present day; secondly—that the American Secretary of State, in his report to the President, dated 5th January, 1835, admitted that an understanding did subsist between the Government of Great Britain and the United States, regarding the possession of the disputed territory.

late correspondence between Great Britain and America before Congress; that no complaints had been made on the part of Maine, but that complaints on the contrary had been made of aggressions on the part of America. The application therefore was refused, and the question remained between the two Governments, the Government of the United States adhering strenuously, notwithstanding all the sacrifices offered by Great Britain, to the impracticable plan of seeking according to the terms of the Treaty of 1783, for Highlands, separating the rivers which flow into the St. Lawrence from those which flow into the Atlantic; although it had been shewn that the American Government itself had at various times acknowledged that such Highlands were totally imaginary in the due North line from the source of the river St. Croix, presented by the Treaty of 1783.

This important fact had been admitted by Mr. Madison, American Secretary of State, in 1802; by President Jefferson in 1803; had been virtually acknowledged by the Commissioners. of inquiry in 1816; and had positively been declared to be the case by the King of the Netherlands, in 1831.

The only deviation from this impracticable plan that had been suggested was, that the High