OCR Interpretation

Lincoln telegraph. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1836-1846, April 12, 1838, Image 2

Image and text provided by Maine State Library

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn82014358/1838-04-12/ed-1/seq-2/

What is OCR?

Thumbnail for

North Eastern Boundary.
To the Senate and House of Representa
I herewith communicate for your con
sideration, n communication addressed to
me by the Secretary of State of the United
States, with the correspondence therein re
ferred to, in reference to the North East
tern Boundary. This communication is
made bv request of the President of the
United States, and in suggestion, I ask
your careful and deliberate attention to
the facts and propositions therein contain
ed. . The duty devolving^n me would per
haps be performed by the™iinple communi
cation of these documents, without anv re
marks or comments of my own. But this
subject, always interesting to Maine, has
become more so by this direct application
on the part of the President of the United
States, for the expression of the wishes and
will of this State in reference to the adjust
ment of this long pending question; and
feeling a deep interest personally and offi
cially in every thing that relates to it, and
Anxious mainly that the rights and honor of
Maine should not be jeopardized or im
paired, I fee), it to he a duty which 1 own to
the peoplo who have assigned mo my part
of responsibility, to speak my honest opin
ions and views, plainly and unreservedly,
upon the grave matters now submitted to
you. [ ask for my views no other weight
or influence then such as their intrinsic
value may entitle them to, and I desire on
ly to ho regarding as connected with you
in guarding with watchful care the great
interests entrusted to us and doing my du
ty in this important crisis according to my
best judgment. If mv views are erroneous,or
if I am in your opinion unnecessarily stript
or severe in my judgment of intentions,
or too limited in tny suggestions of policy —
I trust to you to correct or overrule me. I
assume no right to dictate or control your
In the communication ot i\ir Forsyth,
in connection with u very lucid and inter
esting history of the negotiations between
the two Goveininents, we arc informed
that the discussion between the Federal
Governments, and that of Great Britain,has
arrived at a stage in which the President
thinks it dun to the State of Maine and ne
cessary to the intelligent action of the
General Government, to take the sense of
this Stale in regard to the expediency of
Opening a direct negociation fur the estab
lishment of n conventional line, and if
Maine should deem an attempt to adjust
the matter in controversy in that form ad
visable, then to ask the assent of Maine to
the same.
The grave and important question thore
®fore presented for your consideration, as
you will more fully perceive, by the docu
ment referred to, is whether you will clothe
the Executive of the United Stans with
unlimited power of fixing a ne w and cosi
ventional line in view of the treaty boun
It is certainly gratifying to perceive that
the right of Maine to he heard and consul
ted, before the treaty line is abandoned is I
fully recognized by tbc General Govern- I
merit; and I have no doubt the Legislature
of Maine will approach the consideration
of the proposition in the same spirit in
which it is offered, and with an anxious de
sire to terminate this long pending and em
barrassing question if it can be done with
out too great a sacrifice of honor and right.
Although the documents nro somewhat
voluminous, the proposition is single and
simple in its character, and easily under
l nave given uit; r?uwj- mi mu m ucu- ,
lion anil examination I have been ah!e to
bestow, since the reception of the docu
ments; and with a most anxious desire to
acquiesce in any feasible scheme of ad
justment, or any reasonable proposition for
a settlement, feel constrained to say that 1
ran see little to hope and much to fear,
from the proposed departure from the trea
ty line.
I think that the most cursory examina
tion of the correspondence and movements
on the part of Great Britain, must satisfy
any one that the leading objects which her
diplomatists have had in view, since the
result of the arbitration, has been to des
troy ot lay aside the treaty line, to lead us
away from the clear unambiguous, definite,
terms of that treaty, and involve us in in
terminable discussions, propositions and re
plies in relation to conventional lines, no
one of which will be accepted unless it
gives to them a large part of our territory.
We find that in May 1833, very soon af
ter the President in pursuance of the ad
vice of the Senate, had opened a new ne
gociation to ascertain the line according
to the treaty of ’83—to which treaty line
the negociation was of course confined, the
British Minister suggested "that this per
plexed,and hitherto interminable question,
could only he set at rest by an abandonment
of the defective description of Boundary
contained in the treaty, and by the two
governments mutually agreeing upon a con
ventional line, more convenient to both
"parties.” The same intention is apparent
in the refnsal to acquiesce, in lire proposi
tion to refer the settlement of the boundary
line to a commission, to be constituted of
an equal number chosen by each party,
with an Umpire to be designated by a
friendly power, from the most skilful men
in Europe, or secondly—that the commiss
ion should be entirely composed of such
scientific men in Europe, to be selected by
some friendly power, to be attended in (be
survey and view of the country, by agents
appointed by the parties. It was in answer
to this proposition that the suggestion of
the impracticability of the treaty line was
made, and the intention became apparent
to lead us away from that inconvenient ob
stacle to their wishes, and plans—the trea
ty languauge.—The propositions was so
equitable and fair—so just to all parties and
so full of promise of adjustment up or pro
ceedings satisfactory to us, that it could
not be preemptorHy rejected. Bui although
it was entertained the answer to it clogged
the proposition with so many conditions and
so limited the powers of the commission
ers, and required the concession on otir
part of the all important fact, that the St
John’s and Ristigoucho are not Atlantic
river—that the original plan was at once
deprived of nil vitality or pouer, or use—
and in fact, the reference would have been
merely an agreement to abide by the decis
ion, provided both parties should be satis
fied and assent to it.
i It is certainly somewhat retnai liable,
that if the assumed fact is true, viz: that
the treaty line cannot he laid down or fixed
.according to the treaty, that so much un
willingness should he exhibited to have an
i attempt made to ascertain it, or if Great
! Britain is so strongly convinced of the jus
tice and strength of her argument and
I Haim, that should be so reluctant to refer
! the whole question to disinterested and
j scientific Europeans.
I There is an apparent and I doubt not n
I real anxiety to avoid discussion or examin
| ntion based upon tne treaty—and 1 fear
that if we once abandon that line in search
of a conventional one, we shall never he
able to bring thorn back again to consider
the present line or to recognize the treaty
ns of any binding eliicncy. I fear, too,
that the only question in negociations for a
conventional line will be, how large a por
tion of our territory we must y ield up. The
suggestion made by our government, to
take the river St John from its mouth to its
source ns the boundary was rejected, with
a simple expression of wonder that it should
have been made—and our Government is
told explicitly that his “Majesty’s Govern
ment cannot consent to embarrass the nc
gociation respecting the boundary by mix
ing up with it a discussion regarding the
vai'ii'ntion of the St John, as an integral
part of the question.”
The intimation seems plain, and no ne
gociation for an exchange of territory or
privileges will be entered into, but the sin
gle. point w ill he, how shall the disputed
territory be divided between the parties. 1
fear that if we abandon the treaty lunguage
—so clear nnd so decided in our favor, and
sb much at variance with their claim, we
1 shall leave a certainly for an uncertainty,
and throw doubt, confusion and embar
rassment over our claim and our course of
action, and yield to Great Britain, the great
obstacle we now. present to her grasping
spirit, the solemn treaty of ’S3. And what
security have we that any line can be fixed
upon which shall he permanent, or what
certainty is tlirie that the new line may not
be declared to be “impracticable” whenev
er it may come in contact with any of the
plans nr wishes ofGreat Britain? It would
certainly lie difficult to present a stronger
nnd clearer case than we now do, and if
diplomacy and skill can manufacture
doubts arid embarrassments, in the discus
sion of the question as now presented, we
may well despair of ever fixing a certain •
anil unalterable line of boundary. If I am
accused of in justice or severity in these re
marks, I would point in justification to the
remarkable progress of the doubts and as
sertions in relation to the treaty line of
boundary,—When the question as to which
river was the true 1st Croix of the treaty,
(which was the only question thru in dis
pute) was before the commissioners under
the treaty of 1794, the British agent found
ed his principal argument for the western
most river, upon the ground that, a line due
north from the source of that river, (the
St Johns,) which have their mouth within
New Brunswick.
He says, “ tlie most accustomed and
convenient rule in cases of this kind, is to
leave to each power respectively the sour
ces of those rivers that empty themselves,
or whose mouths are within its territory up
on the sea coast, if it can be done consist
ently with, or in conformity with the intent
of the treaty.” * * * * “A line due
north from the source of the western or
main branch of the Schrodiac 01 St Croix,
will fully secure this effect to the United
States in every instance, also to Great Brit
ain in all instances except in that of the
river St John, wherein it becomes impossi
| blc, by reason that the sources of this river
jare to’ the westwnrd, not only of the west
I ern boundary line of Nova Scotia, but of
the sources of the Penobscot, and even of
the Kennebec so that this north line must
of necessity cross the St John, but it will
cross it in a part of it almost at the foot of
the highlands and where it ceases to he
navigable. But if a north line is traced
from the source of the Cheputnatecock, it
will not only cross the river St Jphn within
about fifty miles from Fredericton, the me
tropolis of New Brunswick, but will cutoff
the sources of the rivers which fall into the
Bay Cheleurs, if not of many others, prob
ably of Meramaichi, among them which
tall into the Gulf of St Lawrence, nnd
thereby be productive of inconvenient con
sequences to the two powers, if not of con
tention between them,instead of terminating
their differences in such a manner,as may,be
best calculated to produce mutual satisfac
tion and good understanding, which is one
of the principal und avowed objects of the
At this time then, there was no doubt
that the line running due north to the high
lands of the treaty, must cross the St
John’s river; and if the starting point was
carried cast it is admitted that such line
I would cut off the Restigouche, which is
nearly as far north ns our claim. And cet
tainly the line was to run equally far north
whether the starting point was east or
west; unless the highlands inclined to the
south. And yet we are now required as a
preliminary to admit that the St John and
the Resligouce are not Atlantic rivers.
In 1814, when the negociations which
resulted in the Treaty of Ghent were in
progress, no pretence was made that our
line did not extend beyond the St Johns,
and according to our present views, Great
Britain by her negociations expressly sta
ted. that she " desires the revision of the
frontier between her North American domin
ions and those of the United Stales, not with
aiiH view to an acquisition of territory, as
such, but for the purpose of securing her pos
session, and preventing future disputes.” *
* * * * ‘‘And snch a vxm ation of the
line of front ier as may secure a direct commu
nication between Quebec and Halifax.”
And when our negociators peremptorily ,
refusrd to agree t® any cession of territory, j
the nnswet was that they “were not prepar
ed to anticipate the objections contained in
the note of the American Plenipotentia
ries, that they were instructed to treat for I
the revision of their boundary lines, with |
the statement which they had subsequently
made, that they had no authority to cede
any part however insignificant of the United !
Stales, although the proposal left it open for j
them to demand an equivalent for such ces
sion in territory or otherwise,’'
And vet now that territory which they
then offered to pay us for, is claimed as
their own;—and that line which then was
admitted and recognized as including the
territory as c aimed by us, is now declared
to lie iinpract cable, and must be abandon
ed, and a more convenient one sought for .
and establislicd. I1
I fed most sensibly that this question
now presented is one of very grave impor
tance, and t! at the action now to he had
by the Legislature of Maine may and prob
ably will ha'c a material influence upon the ,
relations between this government and
Great Britain The painful conviction is
forced upon me that G Britain is determin
ed to hold this territory that she now claims,
deeming it important, as securing a con
nection between her provinces in time of
war and peace. And I reiterate the asser* 1
lion heretofore made, that we have little
to hope from the forbearance or action of j
the British government. Their aim is ap-1
parent to expunge the treaty provision, and
to hold on with an unyielding grasp to their
modern claim, and to reject all proportions 1
having the treaty line for their basis I can
not but regret it as unfortunate, that our
own general government, although it has
always recognized our rights to he consult
ed before any conventional line should he
adopted, has in a degree at least given
countenance to the propriety nnd expedi- ,
ency of departing from the treaty line.
“In a note from the Department of
State, dated 28th April, 1835, Sir Charles
R. Vaughan was assured that his generous (
suggestion, as llis Britanic Majesty’s
minister, that negotiation should he open
ed for the establishment of a conventional
boundary between the two countries, was
duly appreciated by the President, who,
had he possessed like powers with llis
Majesty’s government over the subject
would have met the suggestion in a favora
ble spirit.”
Such a suggestion, it seeins to me, al
though dictated by a sincere desire to end
the controversy, Was well calculated to
lead our opponents ns a matter of policy on
their part to clog the previous proposition
with insuperable difficulties, and to en
courage them to persevere in their at
tempts to obliterate the treaty language.
I think the same effect must huve result
ed from the singular announcement to the
British Government of the United States in
1832, in opening the negociation under the
vote of the Senate for a settlement of the
treaty line, “that If the Plenipotentiaries
should fail in a new attempt to agree upon
the Line intended by the treaty of 1783,
there would probably be less difficulty than
before in fixing a conventional boundary,
as measures were in progress to obtain
from the State of Maine more extensive
powers than were before possessed, with a
view of overcoming .the constitutional ob
otaclcs, which had opposed themselves to
such an arrangement.”
If n direct proposition had come to us
through the general government for a spe
cific line of boundary, yielding to us terri
tory or privileges of navigation equivalent
to the unsettled territory which we might
I cede to them, it would certainly have pre
j seated the question in a different aspect.
But the question now is, as I understand
] it, whether we shall take the lead in
| abandoning the treaty and volunteer pro
! positions for ’a conventional line. In res
j pect to the proposition for additional sur
veys, as it long seems to me inexpedient
for this State to acquiesce iu the proposed
negociation for a conventional line, until it
is demonstrated that the treaty line is ut
terly impracticable and void for uncertain
ty. I can have no doubt that the line ought
to he run, either by a joint commission of
exploration and survey, or independently
of our own General Government, by its
own surveyors. It is evident to me that
Groat Britain is determined to avpid if pos
sible such an examination and exploration
establishment of the line, and such proof
of the real facts of tho case. . It will be
perceived that the President intimates, that
if the consent of Maine is not obtained, for
entering into direct negotiations for a con
ventional line, and all other measures fail
ing, “he will feel it to be his duty to sub
mit another proposition, to the government
of Great Britain to refer the decision of the
question to a third party.
As this right is claimed on the part of
the President, as within his constitutional
powers, without the consent of Maine,
and as no action on the part of Maine in
reference to this mode of adjustment is
asked by the President, I forbear to com
ment upon it, but refer it to your consider
Our situation in relation to this inter
esting question at this moment, demands
tlie exercise of cool and dispassionate
judgment, and careful, cautious but firm
action. We owe it to the General Govern
ment and our sister States, to do nothing
rashly or hastily—to bear and forbear, for
:he sake of tho peace of the nation and the
quiet of our borders. But we have a duty
to perform to ourselves and our constitu
ents, who have entrusted the rights and
honor of Muine in our keeping. Relying
upon your patriotism, intelligence and cau
tion, I place these documents before you,
and ask your action upon them, in the con
fident hope that the rights ar.d the territo
ries secured to us by our fathers, in the
field and the cabinent, will not be impair
sd or surrendered.
Council Chamber, March 14, 1833.
We have the satisfaction*to announce to
jur readers, a thorough political revolution
in Connecticut. That State has been re
leemed,—regenerated,—disenthralled from
Van Burenism. Locofocoism has suffered
i Waterloo defeat. Last year the Van Bu
en ticket prevailed, by more than TWO
l'HOUSAND majority, giving them, the
Governor,Lt. Governor, and overwhelming
riajormes m doiii orancncs ot tne J.egisla
ure. On Monday last, the Whig candid
ltcs for Governor, and Lt Governor, pre
vailed by a majority of FIVE THOU
SAND, over the Van Buren ticket, and
we have elected TWENTY out ofTWEN
TY-ONE Senators, and more than two
'hiri/s of the House of Representatives.
Van BurenLoco-focoism is totally prostra
t'd, coffined, and buried.—A more com
plete and thorough revolution was never a
chieved. Connecticut has thus followed
the glorious example of Rhode Island,
Maine,and New York. She has at length,
cast offthe yoke,and taken her place among
the great Whig family of the nation.—Make
room for her, and give her a large space in
the glorious constellation of States redeem
ed from thraldom. New Hampshire is now
the only New England State, that does now
bow down to idols. We trust, that a single
year more, will be sufficient to bring the
Granite State into the constitutional union
of Whig confederates.
This result is exceedingly important at
this lime. Connecticut is represented in
the U. S. Senate, by Messrs. Niles and
Smith, two of the most thorough-going col
lar members of that body. They have vo
ted the high toned Van Buren measure*
an all occasions, and have been pnrticular
y zealous, in advocating the lull of abomi
nations—the sub-Treasury system. The
erm of Mr. Niles expires next March,and
lie will now be compelled to march out of
the Senate, and give place to a more wor
thy SeUator. This election will operate ns
a vote of instructions for him and liis col
league, to voto against the sub-Treasury
Hill, and it will be one of the most powerful
arguments against the hill, addressed not
only to the Connecticut Delegation in the
House, hut to all the other administration
members. It will bean argument as potent
as the speech of Mr. Webster. Mr. Web
stet’s argument was addressed to their
heads, and this Is addressed to their scats,
and the relative effect of these arguments
nre Well understood, when addressed to
menofeonvenient principles.
i lie sub*t reasury iiin irom the srnnte
Was killed in the House. We apprehend
that the result of this election will he a death
blow to the equally odious bill reported by
Cambreleng in the House. It will tend to
break up the party in Congress, and scat
ter their forces. Under such circumstanc
es, it will be difficult for their drill sergeants
to rally their troops, and impossible for
them to carry their high parly measures.
From this day forth, we shall consider the
sub-Treasury Bill as defunct, and that the
day of returning prosperity has dawned. It
will not be in the power of a reckless party
to withstand such repented and withering
shocks. Once more, we repeat, all hail
and a thousand guns fur old Connecliiul.
The following are the glorio'us results,
from all the towns in the State excepting
Ellsworth, (Whig) 21,6.52
Beers, (Loco Foco) 15,593
Whig majority over the Locofoco. 5,059
In addition to the above it is supposed,
that the Conservatives, who run a third
ticket, have cast some 3000 votes for Mr.
Phelps, as candidate for Governor. The
Conservatives, although formerly friendly
to Gen Jackson,are in favor of Whig prin
ciples, and dead set against Van Buren Lo
cofocoisin. The majority agninst the des
tructives will therefore, probably, mount
above 8000. The towns to be heard front,
are New Milford, Warren, Derby, Oxford,
Middlebury, and Southhury. These towns
will probably increase the Whig majority.
So much for Mr. Van Buren’s experiment.
Bost. Com.
Another sub treasurer oone.—The
Detroit Adv. says that Allen Hutchins,the
receiver at the Ionia Land Office, has tak
en to himself wings and fled, leaving Uncle
Sam minus some 10 or 15,000 dollars.
Much iniquity is said to have been practis
ed in the Ionia office, the extent of which
will now probably be known.
For the Telegraph.
’Tie midnight—at meridian height,
1 he Cross upright appear*—
And distant planets roll around
Their course of lengthened year*.
Unnumbered lights beam brightly forth
In the clear vault above—
Formed, placed, and still controlled by Him
Whose dearest name is Love.
The sen is dashing round our prow—
Its billows gaily dance,
Come by the favoring gale, to meet
' The full moon's earliest glanee.”
Asher soil radiance gently fall*,
1 he waters brightly gleam,
As if u shower of pearls were thrown
Around—so fair they *eem.
Each object lovelier is than when
In Sol's bright beams it lay—
"The night brings light and beauty forth.
We cannot see by day.”
The southern skies and southern land*
Have beauties lich and rare—
But to my heart my woodland homo
Is far more dear and fair.
For years I’ve wandered farand wide—
And sea and land roved o’er—
But yet no sight creates such flfc
As my native rock-bound shore.
And all abodes or human kind,
'I he peasants quiet cot—
Or monarch’s stately palace—fair
As my own home are not.
The low-roofed cottage, decked with vines—
The spreading elm’s cool shade—
Beneath whose boughs, at summer eve#
We jointly knelt nnd prayed—
My mother's dark calm eye, and browt
On which the raven hair
Was smoothly parted — her sweet voice—
What tones of love dwelt there ;—
My sisters’ notes of mirth and gloe.
Echoing the woods among,
The joyous laughter, wild and free—*
The sad or merry song ;—
Those tones are ringing in my ear—
Those scenes before my eye,
In nature’s own bright hues appear—
O could I mount on high,
Upon the eagle’s pinions borne
Swift thro’ the yielding air,
Homeward would I direct my flight,
Home's calm delights to share 1
All! why did my nmbitition urge
To tempt the faithless wave?
Why di I I seek for other joys
T han quiet home scenes gave ?
'Mid the w ild roaring of the waves
“Glad voices mingling come/'
And the wild wind seems like the sir
Of my own forest home.
O mother ! could I kneel once morS
With thee, beside his tomb.
Whose love flung beams of sunshine o’etf
Earth’s scenes of darkest gloom,
Whose fond paternal Care fust taught
My infant heart to pray,
And gather sweets from every flower
Strewn o’er life's chequered way !
My father’s tomb ! fair be the flowors
That deck tlmt holy spot !
The love of him that dwells within
Can never be forgot.
Time swiftly flies—“Midnight ia pxal,
The Cross begins to bend"
Another, to direct our barque.
Will soon assistance lend.
I to my hammock shall retiro—
O may I in tnv dreams
Pehold those much-lovcd scenes arrayed
In fancy’s brightest beams !
There is a bliss in dreams, utiknovra
To those who never roam—
Sweet to the homesick wandf tr
la fancy’s view of home. H.
Shipwreck. Advices frorti Monte Vi
dro, mention that the ship New Orleans,
Capt Cole, lying in the outer roads, was
during a gale.which took place on the 28th
of January, driven from her anchors, and
stranded four miles N.Vv. of the port. The
lives of the crew were saved, and lighter*
: were sent from the city to endeavor to sav*
the cargo.

I Death of another mf.mner of Con
gress.—The Hon. Isaac McKim, a rep
resentative in Congress from the city of
Baltimore, died at Washington on Sunday
evening last, after some days illness.
! We learn by the Thomaston Recorder*
that the dwelling house of Capt Joshua
Smalley, of St. George,. was destroyod
by fire on Friday, 23d inst.
! We can think of one good effect that will
; result from passing the temperance law. It
will prevent Loco Foco candidate* from
^ treating voters at the polls.
j Absence of Mind. A man trying to
swallow a newspaper iie, the other day,
made a slip and swallowed himself.
The Zion’s Herald gives an account of
a man whose arm became paralytic by
sleeping in church; but if every one’s arm
was to become paralytic who followed the
same amusement, thi e would be a crippled
set of us about the streets.
On Sunday evening, Mrs. Adams, wife
of Dr. Samuel Adams, Cambridge »t., wai
! inhtantly killed by falling down the c*llnr
1 stair* at her own residence.—[Traveller.

xml | txt