SPECIAL MESSAGES. (continued 3)

Mr. McLane, under date of 21st March, corrected the error into which Sir Charles had fallen in regard to the proceedings on the award in the Senate of the United States, and showed that that body not only failed, but by two repeated votes of 35 and 34 to 8 refused, to consent to the execution of the award, and by necessary implication denied its binding effect upon the United States, thus putting it out of the power of the President to carry it into effect and leaving the high parties to the submission situated precisely as they were prior to the selection of the arbiter.

The President had perceived, Mr. McLane said, in all the previous efforts to adjust the boundary in accordance with the terms of the treaty of 1783 that a natural and uniform rule in the settlement of disputed questions of location had been quite overlooked; that the chief, if not only, difficulty arose from a supposed necessity of finding highlands corresponding with the treaty description in a due north line from the monument, but it was plain that if such highlands could be anywhere discovered it would be a legal execution of the treaty to draw a line to them from the head of the St. Croix without regard to the precise course given in the treaty. It therefore became his duty to urge the adoption of this principle upon the Government of His Britannic Majesty as perhaps the best expedient which remained for ascertaining the boundary of the treaty of 1783. The Secretary could not perceive in the plan proposed anything so complicated as Sir Charles appeared to suppose. On the contrary, it was recommended to approbation and confidence by its entire simplicity. It chiefly required the discovery of the highlands called for by the treaty, and the mode of reaching them upon the principle suggested was so simple that no observations could make it plainer. The difficulty of discovering such highlands, Mr. McLane said, was presumed not to be insuperable. The arbiter himself was not understood to have found it impracticable to discover highlands answering the description of the highlands of the treaty, though unable to find them due north from the monument; and certainly it could not be more difficult for commissioners on the spot to arrive at a conclusion satisfactory to their own judgment as to the locality of the highlands.

Mr. McLane, in answer to Sir Charles's request for information on the subject, stated that the difficulty in the way of the adoption of the line recommended by the arbiter was the want of authority in the Government of the United States to agree to a line not only confessedly different from the line called for by the treaty, but which would deprive the State of Maine of a portion of territory to which she would be entitled according to the line of the definitive treaty; that by the President's proposition a commission would be raised, not to establish a new line differing from the treaty of 1783, but to determine what the true and original boundary was and in which of the two disagreeing parties the right to the disputed territory originally was; that for this purpose the authority of the original commissioners, if they could have agreed, was complete under the Ghent treaty, and that of the new commission proposed to be constituted could not be less.

Sir Charles R. Vaughan explained, under date of the 24th of March, with regard to his observation "that the mode in which it was proposed by the United States to settle the boundary was complicated; that he did not mean to apply it to the adoption of a rule in the settlement of disputed questions of location, but to the manner in which it is proposed by the United States that the new commission of survey shall be selected and constituted."

On the 8th of December, 1834, Sir Charles R. Vaughan transmitted a note to the Department of State, in which, after a passing expression of the regret of His Majesty's Government that the American Government still declined to come to a separate understanding on the several points of difference with respect to which the elements of decision were fully before both Governments, but without abandoning the argument contained in his note of 10th February last, he addressed himself exclusively to the American proposition for the appointment of a new commission to be empowered to seek westward of the meridian of the St. Croix highlands answering to the description of those mentioned in the treaty of 1783. He stated with regard to the rule of surveying on which the proposition was founded that however just and reasonable it might be, His Majesty's Government did not consider it so generally established and recognized as Mr. McLane assumed it to be; that, indeed, no similar case was recollected in which the principle asserted had been put in practice; yet, on the contrary, one was remembered not only analogous to that under discussion, but arising out of the same article of the same treaty, in which the supposed rule was invested by the agents of the American Government itself; that the treaty of 1783 declared that the line of boundary was to proceed from the Lake of the Woods "in a due west course to the Mississippi," but it being ascertained that such a line could never reach that river, since its sources lie south of the latitude of the Lake of the Woods, the commissioners, instead of adhering to the natural object—the source of the Mississippi—and drawing a new connecting line to it from the Lake of the Woods, adhered to the arbitrary line to be drawn due west from the lake and abandoned the Mississippi, the specific landmark mentioned in the treaty.

Sir Charles further stated that if the President was persuaded that he could carry out the principle of surveying he had proposed without the consent of Maine, and if no hope remained, as was alleged by Mr. McLane, of overcoming the constitutional difficulty in any other way until at least this proposition should have been tried and have failed, His Majesty's Government, foregoing their own doubts on the subject, were ready to acquiesce in the proceeding proposed by the President if that proceeding could be carried into effect in a manner not otherwise objectionable; that "His Majesty's Government would consider it desirable that the principles on which the new commissioners would have to conduct their survey should be settled beforehand by a special convention between the two Governments;" that there was, indeed, one preliminary question upon which it was obviously necessary the two Governments should agree before the commission could begin their survey with any chance of success, viz, What is the precise meaning to be attached to the words employed in the treaty to define the highlands which the commissioners are to seek for? that those highlands are to be distinguished from other highlands by the rivers flowing from them, and those distinguishing rivers to be known from others by the situation of their mouths; that with respect to the rivers flowing south into the Atlantic Ocean a difference of opinion existed between the two Governments; that whilst the American Government contended that rivers falling into the Bay of Fundy were, the British Government contended that they were not, for the purposes of the treaty, rivers falling into the Atlantic Ocean, and that the views and arguments of the British Government on this point had been confirmed by an impartial authority selected by the common consent of the two Governments, who was of opinion that the rivers St. John and Restigouche were not Atlantic rivers within the meaning of the treaty, and that His Majesty's Government therefore trusted that the American Cabinet would concur with that of His Majesty in deciding "that the Atlantic rivers which are to guide the commissioners in searching for the highlands described in the treaty are those which fall into the sea to the westward of the mouth of the river St. Croix;" that a clear agreement on this point must be an indispensable preliminary to the establishment of any new commission of survey; that till this point be decided no survey of commissioners could lead to a useful result, but that its decision turns upon the interpretation of the words of a treaty, and not upon the operations of surveyors; and His Majesty's Government, having once submitted it, in common with other points, to the judgment of an impartial arbiter, by whose award they had declared themselves ready to abide, could not consent to refer it to any other arbitration.

In a note from the Department of State dated 28th April, 1835, Sir Charles R. Vaughan was assured that his prompt suggestion, as His Britannic Majesty's minister, that a negotiation should be opened for the establishment of a conventional boundary between the two countries was duly appreciated by the President, who, had he possessed like powers with His Majesty's Government over the subject, would have met the suggestion in a favorable spirit.

The Secretary observed that the submission of the whole subject or any part of it to a new arbitrator promised too little to attract the favorable consideration of either party; that the desired adjustment of the controversy was consequently to be sought for in the application of some new principle to the controverted question, and that the President thought that by a faithful prosecution of the plan submitted by his direction a settlement of the boundary in dispute according to the terms of the treaty of 1783 was attainable.

With regard to the rule of practical surveying offered as the basis of the American proposition, he said if it should become material to do so—which was not to be anticipated—he would find no difficulty either in fortifying the ground occupied by this Government in this regard or in satisfying Sir Charles that the instance brought into notice by His Britannic Majesty's Government of a supposed departure from the rule was not at variance with the assertion of Mr. Livingston repeated by Mr. McLane. The Secretary therefore limited himself to the remark that the line of demarcation referred to by Sir Charles was not established as the true boundary prescribed by the treaty of 1783, but was a conventional substitute for it, the result of a new negotiation controlled by other considerations than those to be drawn from that instrument only.

The Secretary expressed the President's unfeigned regret upon learning the decision of His Majesty's Government not to agree to the proposition made on the part of the United States without a precedent compliance by them with inadmissible conditions. He said that the views of this Government in regard to this proposal of His Majesty's Government had been already communicated to Sir Charles R. Vaughan, and the President perceived with pain that the reasons upon which these opinions were founded had not been found to possess sufficient force and justice to induce the entire withdrawal of the objectionable conditions, but that, on the contrary, while His Majesty's Government had been pleased to waive for the present six of the seven opinions referred to, the remaining one, amongst the most important of them all, was still insisted upon, viz, that the St. John and Restigouche should be treated by the supposed commission as not being Atlantic rivers according to the meaning of those terms in the treaty. With reference to that part of Sir Charles's communication which seeks to strengthen the ground heretofore taken on this point by the British Government by calling to its aid the supposed confirmation of the arbiter, the Secretary felt himself warranted in questioning whether the arbiter had ever given his opinion that the rivers St. John and Restigouche can not be considered according to the meaning of the treaty as rivers falling into the Atlantic, and he insisted that it was not the intention of the arbiter to express the opinion imputed to him.

The Secretary also informed Sir Charles that the President could not consent to clog the submission with the condition proposed by Her Majesty's Government; that a just regard to the rights of the parties and a proper consideration of his own duties required that the new submission, if made, should be made without restriction or qualification upon the discretion of the commissioners other than such as resulted from established facts and the just interpretation of the definitive treaty, and such as had been heretofore and were now again tendered to His Britannic Majesty's Government; that he despaired of obtaining a better constituted tribunal than the one proposed; that he saw nothing unfit or improper in submitting the question as to the character in which the St. John and Restigouche were to be regarded to the decision of an impartial commission; that the parties had heretofore thought it proper so to submit it, and that it by no means followed that because commissioners chosen by the parties themselves, without an umpire, had failed to come to an agreement respecting it, that the same result would attend the efforts of a commission differently selected. The Secretary closed his note by stating that the President had no new proposal to offer, but would be happy to receive any such proposition as His Britannic Majesty's Government might think it expedient to make, and by intimating that he was authorized to confer with Sir Charles whenever it might suit his convenience and comport with the instructions of his Government with respect to the treaty boundary or a conventional substitute for it.

On the 4th of May, 1835, Sir Charles R. Vaughan expressed his regret that the condition which His Majesty's Government had brought forward as an essential preliminary to the adoption of the President's proposal had been declared to be inadmissible by the American Government.

Sir Charles confidently appealed to the tenor of the language of the award of the arbiter to justify the inference drawn from it by His Majesty's Government in regard to that point in the dispute which respects the rivers which are to be considered as falling directly into the Atlantic. The acquiescence of the United States in what was understood to be the opinion of the arbiter was invited, he said, because the new commission could not enter upon their survey in search of the highlands of the treaty without a previous agreement between the two Governments what rivers ought to be considered as falling into the Atlantic, and that if the character in which the Restigouche and St. John were to be regarded was a question to be submitted to the commissioners the President's proposition would assume the character of a new arbitration, which had been already objected to by the Secretary. Sir Charles also stated that while His Majesty's Government had wished to maintain the decisions of the arbiter on subordinate points, their mention had not been confined to those decided in favor of British claims; that the decisions were nearly balanced in favor of either party, and the general result of the arbitration was so manifestly in favor of the United States that to them were assigned three-fifths of the territory in dispute and Rouses Point, to which they had voluntarily resigned all claim.

Sir Charles acknowledged with much satisfaction the Secretary's assurance that if the President possessed the same power as His Majesty's Government over the question of boundary he would have met the suggestion of a conventional line, contained in Sir Charles's note of 31st May, 1833, in a favorable spirit. He lamented that the two Governments could not coincide in the opinion that the removal of the only difficulty in the relations between them was attainable by the last proposal of the President, as it was the only one in his power to offer in alleviation of the task of tracing the treaty line, to which the Senate had advised that any further negotiation should be restricted. He said that he was ready to confer with the Secretary whenever it might be convenient to receive him, and stated that as to any proposition which it might be the wish of the United States to receive from His Majesty's Government respecting a conventional substitute for the treaty of 1783, it would in the first instance, to avoid constitutional difficulties in the way of the Executive, be necessary to obtain the consent of Maine, an object which must be undertaken exclusively by the General Government of the United States.

Mr. Bankhead, the British chargé d'affaires, in a note to the Department dated 28th December, 1835, stated that during the three years which had elapsed since the refusal of the Senate to agree to the award of the King of the Netherlands, although the British Government had more than once declared its readiness to abide by its offer to accept the award, the Government of the United States had as often replied that on its part that award could not be agreed to; that the British Government now considered itself by this refusal of the United States fully and entirely released from the conditional offer which it had made, and that he was instructed distinctly to announce to the President that the British Government withdrew its consent to accept the territorial compromise recommended by the King of the Netherlands.

With regard to the American proposition for the appointment of a new commission of exploration and survey, Mr. Bankhead could not see, since the President found himself unable to admit the distinction between the Bay of Fundy and the Atlantic Ocean, how any useful result could arise out of the proposed survey. He thought, on the contrary, that if it did not furnish fresh subjects of difference between the two Governments it could at best only bring the subject back to the same point at which it now stood.

To the suggestion of the President that the commission of survey should be empowered to decide the river question Mr. Bankhead said it was not in the power of His Majesty's Government to assent; that this question could not properly be referred to such a commission, because it turned upon the interpretation to be put upon the words of the treaty of 1783, and upon the application of that interpretation to geographical facts already well known and ascertained, and that therefore a commission of survey had no peculiar competency to decide such a question; that to refer it to any authority would be to submit it to a fresh arbitration, and that if His Majesty's Government were prepared to agree to a fresh arbitration, which was not the case, such arbitration ought necessarily, instead of being confined to one particular point alone, to include all the points in dispute between the two Governments; that His Majesty's Government could therefore only agree to such a commission provided there were a previous understanding between the two Governments; that although neither should be required to give up its own interpretation of the river question, yet "the commissioners should be instructed to search for highlands upon the character of which no doubt could exist on either side."

If this modification of the President's proposal should not prove acceptable, Mr. Bankhead observed, the only remaining way of adjusting the difference would be to abandon altogether the attempt to draw a line in conformity with the words of the treaty and to fix upon a convenient line, to be drawn according to equitable principles and with a view to the respective interests and the convenience of the two parties. He stated that His Majesty's Government were perfectly ready to treat for such a line, and conceived that the natural features of the disputed territory would afford peculiar facilities for drawing it; that His Majesty's Government would therefore propose an equal division of the territory in dispute between Great Britain and the United States, and that the general outline of such a division would be that the boundary between the two States should be drawn due north from the head of St. Croix River till it intersected the St. John; thence up the bed of the St. John to the southernmost source of that river, and from that point it should be drawn to the head of the Connecticut River in such manner as to make the northern and southern allotments of the divided territory as nearly as possible equal to each other in extent.

In reply to the preceding note the Secretary, under date of February 29, 1836, expressed the President's regret to find that His Britannic Majesty's Government adhered to its objection to the appointment of a commission to be chosen in either of the modes heretofore proposed by the United States and his conviction that the proposition on which it was founded, "that the river question was a treaty construction only," although repeated on various occasions by Great Britain, was demonstrably untenable, and, indeed, only plausible when material and most important words of description in the treaty are omitted in quoting from that instrument. He said that while His Majesty's Government maintain their position agreement between the United States and Great Britain on this point was impossible; that the President was therefore constrained to look to the new and conventional line offered in Mr. Bankhead's note, but that in such a line the wishes and interests of Maine were to be consulted, and that the President could not in justice to himself or that State make any proposition utterly irreconcilable with her previously well-known opinions on the subject; that the principle of compromise and equitable division was adopted by the King of the Netherlands in the line recommended by him, a line rejected by the United States because unjust to Maine; and yet that line gave to Great Britain little more than 2,000,000, while the proposition now made by His Majesty's Government secured to Great Britain of the disputed land more than 4,000,000 acres; that the division offered by Mr. Bankhead's note was not in harmony with the equitable rule from which it is said to spring, and if it were in conformity with it could not be accepted without disrespect to the previous decisions and just expectations of Maine. The President was far from attributing this proposition, the Secretary said, to the desire of His Majesty's Government to acquire territory. He doubted not that the offer, without regard to the extent of territory falling to the north or south of the St. John, was made by His Majesty's Government from a belief that the substitution of a river for a highland boundary would be useful in preventing territorial disputes in future; but although the President coincided in this view of the subject he was compelled to decline the boundary proposed as inconsistent with the known wishes, rights, and decisions of the State.

The Secretary concluded by stating that the President, with a view to terminate at once all controversy, and without regard to the extent of territory lost by one party or acquired by the other, to establish a definite and indisputable line, would, if His Majesty's Government assented to it, apply to the State of Maine for its consent to make the river St. John from its source to its mouth the boundary between Maine and His Britannic Majesty's dominions in that part of North America.

Mr. Bankhead acknowledged on the 4th March, 1836, the receipt of this note from the Department, and said that the rejection of the conventional line proposed in his previous note would cause His Majesty's Government much regret. He referred the Secretary to that part of his note of the 28th December last wherein the proposition of the President for a commission of exploration and survey was fully discussed, as it appeared to Mr. Bankhead that the Secretary had not given the modification on the part of His Majesty's Government of the American proposition the weight to which it was entitled. He said that it was offered with the view of meeting as far as practicable the wishes of the President and of endeavoring by such a preliminary measure to bring about a settlement of the boundary upon a basis satisfactory to both parties; that with this view he again submitted to the Secretary the modified proposal of His Majesty's Government, remarking that the commissioners who might be appointed were not to decide upon points of difference, but merely to present to the respective Governments the result of their labors, which, it was hoped and believed, would pave the way for an ultimate settlement of the question.

Mr. Bankhead considered it proper to state frankly and clearly that the proposition offered in the last note from the Department to make the river St. John from its source to its mouth the boundary between the United States and His Majesty's Province of New Brunswick was one to which the British Government, he was convinced, would never agree.

On the 5th March the Secretary expressed regret that his proposition to make the river St. John the boundary between Maine and New Brunswick would, in the opinion of Mr. Bankhead, be declined by his Government; that the Government of the United States could not, however, relinquish the hope that the proposal, when brought before His Majesty's cabinet and considered with the attention and deliberation due to its merits, would be viewed in a more favorable light than that in which it appeared to have presented itself to Mr. Bankhead. If, however, the Secretary added, this expectation should be disappointed, it would be necessary before the President consented to the modification of his previous proposition for the appointment of a commission of exploration and survey to be informed more fully of the views of the British Government in offering the modification, so that he might be enabled to judge how the report of the commission (which as now proposed to be constituted was not to decide upon points of difference) would be likely to lead to an ultimate settlement of the question of boundary, and also which of the modes proposed for the selection of commissioners was the one intended to be accepted, with the modification suggested by His Britannic Majesty's Government.

In January last Mr. Fox, the British minister at Washington, made a communication to the Department of State, in which, with reference to the objection preferred by the American Government that it had no power without the consent of Maine to agree to the arrangement proposed by Great Britain, since it would be considered by that State as equivalent to a cession of what she regarded as a part of her territory, he observed that the objection of the State could not be admitted as valid, for the principle on which it rested was as good for Great Britain as it was for Maine; that if the State was entitled to contend that until the treaty line was determined the boundary claimed by Maine must be regarded as the right one, Great Britain was still more entitled to insist on a similar pretension and to assert that until the line of the treaty shall be established satisfactorily the whole of the disputed territory ought to be considered as belonging to the British Crown, since Great Britain was the original possessor, and all the territory which had not been proved to have been by treaty ceded by her must be deemed to belong to her still. But Mr. Fox said the existence of these conflicting pretensions pointed out the expediency of a compromise; and why, he asked, as a conventional line different from that described in the treaty was agreed to with respect to the boundary westward from the Lake of the Woods, should such a line not be agreed to likewise for the boundary eastward from the Connecticut? Her Majesty's Government could not, he added, refrain from again pressing this proposition upon the serious consideration of the United States as the arrangement best calculated to effect a prompt and satisfactory settlement between the two powers.

With reference to the American proposition to make the river St. John from its mouth to its source the boundary, Mr. Fox remarked that it was difficult to understand upon what grounds any expectation could have been formed that such a proposal could be entertained by the British Government, for such an arrangement would give to the United States even greater advantages than they would obtain by an unconditional acquiescence in their claim to the whole of the disputed territory, because it would give to Maine all the disputed territory lying south of the St. John, and in exchange for the remaining part of the territory lying to the north of the St. John would add to the State of Maine a large district of New Brunswick—a district smaller in extent, but much more considerable in value, than the portion of the disputed territory which lies to the north of the St. John.

With regard to the proposition for the appointment of a commission of exploration and survey, Mr. Fox stated that Her Majesty's Government, with little expectation that it could lead to a useful result, but unwilling to reject the only plan left which seemed to afford a chance of making a further advance in this matter, would not withhold their consent to such a commission if the principle upon which it was to be formed and the manner in which it was to proceed could be satisfactorily settled; that of the two modes proposed in which such a commission might be constituted Her Majesty's Government thought the first, viz, that it might consist of commissioners named in equal numbers by each of the two Governments, with an umpire to be selected by some friendly European power, would be the best, but suggested that it might be better that the umpire should be selected by the members of the commission themselves rather than that the two Governments should apply to a third power to make such a choice; that the object of this commission should be to explore the disputed territory in order to find within its limits dividing highlands which might answer the description of the treaty, the search to be made in a north and northwest line from the monument at the head of the St. Croix; and that Her Majesty's Government had given their opinion that the commissioners should be instructed to look for highlands which both parties might acknowledge as fulfilling the conditions of the treaty.

In answer to the inquiry how the report of the commission would, according to the views of Her Majesty's Government, be likely when rendered to lead to an ultimate settlement of the boundary question, Mr. Fox observed that since the proposal for the appointment of a commission originated with the Government of the United States, it was rather for that Government than the Government of Great Britain to answer this question. Her Majesty's Government had already stated they had little expectation that such a commission could lead to any useful result, etc., but that Her Majesty's Government, in the first place, conceived that it was meant by the Government of the United States that if the commission should discover highlands answering to the description of the treaty a connecting line from them to the head of the St. Croix should be deemed to be a portion of the boundary between the two countries. Mr. Fox further referred the Secretary to the previous notes of Mr. McLane on the subject, in which it was contemplated as one of the possible results of the proposed commission that such additional information might be obtained of the features of the country as might remove all doubt as to the impracticability of laying down a boundary in accordance with the letter of the treaty. Mr. Fox said that if the investigations of the commission should show that there was no reasonable prospect of finding the line described in the treaty of 1783 the constitutional difficulties which now prevented the United States from agreeing to a conventional line might possibly be removed, and the way be thus prepared for a satisfactory settlement of the difference by equitable division of the territory; but, he added in conclusion, if the two Governments should agree to the appointment of such a commission, it would be necessary that their agreement should be by a convention, and it would be obviously indispensable that the State of Maine should be an assenting party to the arrangement.

In acknowledging the receipt of Mr. Fox's communication at the Department he was informed (7th February) that the President experienced deep disappointment in finding that the answer just presented on the part of the British Government to the proposition made by this Government with the view of effecting the settlement of the boundary question was so indefinite in its terms as to render it impracticable to ascertain without further discussion what were the real wishes and intentions of Her Majesty's Government respecting the appointment of a commission of exploration and survey, but that a copy of it would be transmitted to the executive of Maine for the purpose of ascertaining the sense of the State authorities upon the expediency of meeting the views of Her Majesty's Government so far as they were therein developed.

Occasion was taken at the same time to explain to Mr. Fox, in answer to the suggestion in his note of the 10th of January last, that the parallel of latitude adopted as a conventional substitute for the line designated in the treaty for the boundary westward from the Lake of the Woods passed over territory within the exclusive jurisdiction of the General Government, without trenching upon the rights or claims of any member of the Union, and the legitimate power of the Government, therefore, to agree to such line was held to be perfect, but that in acceding to a conventional line for the boundary eastward from the river Connecticut it would transcend its constitutional powers, since such a measure could only be carried into effect by violating the jurisdiction of a sovereign State and assuming to alienate a portion of the territory claimed by such State.

In reply to the observation of Mr. Fox that it was difficult to understand upon what ground an expectation could have been entertained that the proposition to make the St. John the boundary would be received by Her Majesty's Government, he was informed that the suggestion had been offered, as the proposition on the part of Great Britain that led to it was supposed to have been, with regard to the extent of territory lost or acquired by the respective parties, and in the hope that the great importance of terminating this controversy by establishing a definite and indisputable boundary would be seen and acknowledged by the British Government, and have a correspondent weight in influencing its decision; that the suggestion in Mr. Bankhead's note of 28th December, 1835, of a part of the river St. John as a portion of the general outline of a conventional boundary, apparently recognized the superior advantages of a river over a highland boundary, and that no difficulty was anticipated on the part of Her Majesty's Government in understanding the grounds upon which such a proposal was expected to be entertained by it, since the precedent proposition of Mr. Bankhead just alluded to, although based upon the principle of an equal division between the parties, could not be justified by it, as it would have given nearly two-thirds of the disputed territory to Great Britain; that it was therefore fair to presume that the river line, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, presented advantages sufficient to counterbalance any loss of territory by either party that might accrue from its adoption; and it was also supposed that another recommendation of this line would be seen by Great Britain in the fact that whilst by its adoption the right of jurisdiction alone would have been yielded to the United States over that portion of New Brunswick south of the St. John, Great Britain would have acquired the right of soil and jurisdiction of all the disputed territory north of that river.

To correct a misapprehension into which Mr. Fox appeared to have fallen, the distinctive difference between the American proposition for a commission and that proposition as subsequently modified by Great Britain was pointed out, and he was informed that although the proposal originated with this Government, the modification was so fundamentally important that it entirely changed the nature of the proposition, and that the supposition, therefore, that it was rather for the Government of the United States than for that of Great Britain to answer the inquiry preferred by the Secretary of State for information relative to the manner in which the report of the commission as proposed to be constituted and instructed by the British Government might tend to a practical result was unfounded. Mr. Fox was also given to understand that any decision made by a commission constituted in the manner proposed by the United States and instructed to seek for the highlands of the treaty of 1783 would be binding upon this Government and could be carried into effect without unnecessary delay; but if the substitute presented by Her Majesty's Government should be insisted on and its principles be adopted, it would then be necessary to resort to the State of Maine for her assent in all proceedings relative to the matter, since any arrangement under it can only be for a conventional line to which she must be a party.

In conclusion, it was intimated to Mr. Fox that if a negotiation be entertained by this Government at all upon the unsatisfactory basis afforded by the British counter proposition or substitute, the President will not invite it unless the authorities of the State of Maine shall think it more likely to lead to an adjustment of the question of boundary than the General Government deemed it to be, although predisposed to see it in the most favorable light.

Your excellency will perceive that in the course of these proceedings, but without abandoning the attempt to adjust the treaty line, steps necessary, from the want of power in the Federal Government, of an informal character, have been taken to test the dispositions of the respective Governments upon the subject of substituting a conventional for the treaty line. It will also be seen from the correspondence that the British Government, despairing of a satisfactory adjustment of the line of the treaty, avows its willingness to enter upon a direct negotiation for the settlement of a conventional line if the assent of the State of Maine to that course can be obtained.

Whilst the obligations of the Federal Government to do all in its power to effect a settlement of this boundary are fully recognized on its part, it has in the event of its being unable to do so specifically by mutual consent no other means to accomplish the object amicably than by another arbitration, or a commission, with an umpire, in the nature of an arbitration. In the contingency of all other measures failing the President will feel it to be his duty to submit another proposition to the Government of Great Britain to refer the decision of the question to a third party. He would not, however, be satisfied in taking this final step without having first ascertained the opinion and wishes of the State of Maine upon the subject of a negotiation for the establishment of a conventional line, and he conceives the present the proper time to seek it.

I am therefore directed by the President to invite your excellency to adopt such measures as you may deem necessary to ascertain the sense of the State of Maine with respect to the expediency of attempting to establish a conventional line of boundary between that State and the British possessions by direct negotiation between the Governments of the United States and Great Britain, and whether the State of Maine will agree, and upon what conditions, if she elects to prescribe any, to abide by such settlement if the same be made. Should the State of Maine be of opinion that additional surveys and explorations might be useful either in leading to a satisfactory adjustment of the controversy according to the terms of the treaty or in enabling the parties to decide more understandingly upon the expediency of opening a negotiation for the establishment of a line that would suit their mutual convenience and be reconcilable to their conflicting interests, and desire the creation for that purpose of a commission upon the principles and with the limited powers described in the letter of Mr. Fox, the President will without hesitation open a negotiation with Great Britain for the accomplishment of that object.

I have the honor to be, with high consideration, your excellency's obedient servant,

JOHN FORSYTH.

WASHINGTON, April 5, 1838.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I herewith transmit to the House of Representatives a report from the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers, in answer to their resolution of the 21st ultimo.

M. VAN BUREN.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 4, 1838.

The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

The Secretary of State, to whom has been referred the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 21st ultimo, requesting the President, "if not incompatible with the public interests, to communicate to that House any information possessed by him respecting the capture and destruction of the steamboat Caroline at Schlosser during the night of the 29th December last, and the murder of citizens of the United States on board, and all the particulars thereof not heretofore communicated, and especially to inform the House whether said capture was authorized, commanded, or sanctioned or has been avowed by the British authorities or officers, or any of them, and also what steps have been taken by him to obtain satisfaction from the Government of Great Britain on account of said outrage, and to communicate to the House all correspondence or communications relative thereto which have passed between the Government of the United States and Great Britain, or any of the public authorities of either," has the honor to lay before the President the accompanying documents, which contain all the information in the possession of this Department relative to the subject of the resolution; and to state, moreover, that instructions have been transmitted to the minister of the United States in London to make a full representation to Her Britannic Majesty's Government of the facts connected with this lamentable occurrence, to remonstrate against the unwarrantable course pursued on the occasion by the British troops from Canada, and to express the expectation of this Government that such redress as the nature of the case obviously requires will be promptly given.

Respectfully submitted.

JOHN FORSYTH.

Mr. Forsyth to Mr. Fox.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, January 5, 1838.

HENRY S. FOX, Esq., etc.

SIR: By the direction of the President of the United States, I have the honor to communicate to you a copy of the evidence furnished to this Department of an extraordinary outrage committed from Her Britannic Majesty's Province of Upper Canada on the persons and property of citizens of the United States within the jurisdiction of the State of New York. The destruction of the property and the assassination of citizens of the United States on the soil of New York at the moment when, as is well known to you, the President was anxiously endeavoring to allay the excitement and earnestly seeking to prevent any unfortunate occurrence on the frontier of Canada have produced upon his mind the most painful emotions of surprise and regret. It will necessarily form the subject of a demand for redress upon Her Majesty's Government. This communication is made to you under the expectation that through your instrumentality an early explanation may be obtained from the authorities of Upper Canada of all the circumstances of the transaction, and that by your advice to those authorities such decisive precautions may be used as will render the perpetration of similar acts hereafter impossible. Not doubting the disposition of the government of Upper Canada to do its duty in punishing the aggressors and preventing future outrage, the President nevertheless has deemed it necessary to order a sufficient force on the frontier to repel any attempt of a like character and to make known to you that if it should occur he can not be answerable for the effects of the indignation of the neighboring people of the United States.

I avail myself of this occasion, etc.

JOHN FORSYTH.

Mr. Forsyth to Mr. Fox.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, January 9, 1838.

HENRY S. FOX, Esq., etc.

SIR: With reference to my note of the 5th instant, communicating to you evidence of an extraordinary outrage committed from Her Britannic Majesty's Province of Upper Canada on the persons and property of certain citizens of the United States at Schlosser, within the jurisdiction of the State of New York, on the night of the 29th ultimo, I have now the honor to transmit to you the copy of a letter26 recently received from the attorney of the United States for the northern district of New York, dated the 8th of the current month, with transcripts of sundry depositions26 which accompanied it, containing additional information in regard to that most disastrous occurrence. A letter from Mr. George W. Pratt of the 10th of January, with inclosures relating to the same subject, is also sent.

I avail myself of this occasion to renew to you the assurance of my distinguished consideration.

JOHN FORSYTH.

ROCHESTER, January 10, 1838.

The PRESIDENT.

SIR: Colonel McNab, having avowed that the steamboat Caroline was destroyed by his orders, justifies himself by the plea, sustained by affidavits, that hostilities were commenced from the American shore.

I inclose you the affidavits26 of four respectable citizens of Rochester, who were present at the time, who contradict the assertions of Colonel McNab.

I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,

GEO. W. PRATT.

Mr. Fox to Mr. Forsyth.

WASHINGTON, February 6, 1838.

Hon. JOHN FORSYTH, etc.

SIR: With reference to the letters which, by direction of the President, you addressed to me on the 5th and 19th ultimo, respecting the capture and destruction of the steamboat Caroline by a Canadian force on the American side of the Niagara River, within the jurisdiction of the State of New York, I have now the honor to communicate to you the copy of a letter upon that subject which I have received from Sir Francis Head, lieutenant-governor of the Province of Upper Canada, with divers reports and depositions annexed.

The piratical character of the steamboat Caroline and the necessity of self-defense and self-preservation under which Her Majesty's subjects acted in destroying that vessel would seem to be sufficiently established.

At the time when the event happened the ordinary laws of the United States were not enforced within the frontier district of the State of New York. The authority of the law was overborne publicly by piratical violence. Through such violence Her Majesty's subjects in Upper Canada had already severely suffered, and they were threatened with still further injury and outrage. This extraordinary state of things appears naturally and necessarily to have impelled them to consult their own security by pursuing and destroying the vessel of their piratical enemy wheresoever they might find her.

I avail myself of this occasion to renew to you the assurance of my high respect and consideration.

H.S. FOX.

TORONTO, UPPER CANADA, January 8, 1838.

His Excellency HENRY S. FOX, Her Majesty's Minister, Washington.

SIR: I have the honor to inclose you the copy of a special message sent by His Excellency Governor Marcy to the legislature of the State of New York, in relation to a matter on which your excellency will desire the earliest and most authentic information. The message only reached this place yesterday, and I lose no time in communicating with your excellency on the subject.

The governor of the State of New York complains of the cutting out and burning of the steamboat Caroline by order of Colonel McNab, commanding Her Majesty's forces at Chippewa, in the Province of Upper Canada, and of the destruction of the lives of some American citizens who were on board of the boat at the time she was attacked.

The act complained of was done under the following circumstances:

In Upper Canada, which contains a population of about 450,000 souls, the most perfect tranquillity prevailed up to the 4th day of December last, although in the adjoining Province of Lower Canada many of the French Canadian inhabitants had been in open rebellion against the Government for about a month preceding.

At no time since the treaty of peace with the United States in 1815 had Upper Canada been more undisturbed. The real causes of the insurrection in Lower Canada, namely, the national antipathy of the French inhabitants, did not in any degree apply in the upper Province, whose population, like the British and American inhabitants of Lower Canada, were wholly opposed to the revolt and anxious to render every service in their power in support of the Queen's, authority.

It had been reported to the Government some time before the 4th of December that in a remote portion of the home district a number of persons occasionally met and drilled with arms under leaders known to be disaffected, but it was not believed by the Government that anything more could be intended than to make a show of threatened revolt in order to create a diversion in favor of the rebels in Lower Canada.

The feeling of loyalty throughout this Province was known to be so prevalent and decided that it was not thought unsafe to forbear, for the time at least, to take any notice of the proceedings of this party.

On the night of the 4th December the inhabitants of the city of Toronto were alarmed by the intelligence that about 500 persons armed with rifles were approaching the city; that they had murdered a gentleman of great respectability in the highway, and had made several persons prisoners. The inhabitants rushed immediately to arms; there were no soldiers in the Province and no militia had been called out. The home district, from which this party of armed men came, contains 60,000 inhabitants; the city of Toronto 10,000. In a few hours a respectable force, although undisciplined, was collected and armed in self-defense, and awaited the threatened attack. It seems now to admit of no doubt that if they had at once advanced against the insurgents they would have met with no formidable resistance, but it was thought more prudent to wait until a sufficient force should be collected to put the success of an attack beyond question. In the meantime people poured in from all quarters to oppose the insurgents, who obtained no increase of numbers, but, on the contrary, were deserted by many of their body in consequence of the acts of devastation and plunder into which their leader had forced them.

On the 7th of December an overwhelming force of militia went against them and dispersed them without losing a man, taking many prisoners, who were instantly by my order released and suffered to depart to their homes. The rest, with their leaders, fled; some have since surrendered themselves to justice; many have been taken, and some have escaped from the Province.

It was reported about this time that in the district of London a similar disposition to rise had been observed, and in consequence a militia force of about 400 men was sent into that district, where it was speedily joined by three times as many of the inhabitants of the district, who assembled voluntarily and came to their aid with the greatest alacrity.

It was discovered that about 300 persons under Dr. Duncombe, an American by birth, were assembled with arms, but before the militia could reach them they dispersed themselves and fled. Of these by far the greater came in immediately and submitted themselves to the Government, declaring that they had been misled and deceived, and praying for forgiveness.

In about a week perfect tranquillity was restored, and from that moment not a man has been seen in arms against the Government in any part of the Province, with the exception of the hostile aggression upon Navy Island, which I shall presently notice; nor has there been the slightest resistance offered to the execution of legal process in a single instance.

After the dispersion of the armed insurgents near Toronto Mr. McKenzie, their leader, escaped in disguise to the Niagara River and crossed over to Buffalo. Reports had been spread there and elsewhere along the American frontier that Toronto had been burnt and that the rebels were completely successful, but the falsehood of these absurd rumors was well known before McKenzie arrived on the American side. It was known also that the ridiculous attempt of 400 men to revolutionize a country containing nearly half a million inhabitants had been put down by the people instantly and decidedly without the loss of a man.

Nevertheless, a number of American citizens in Buffalo and other towns on the frontier of the State of New York enlisted as soldiers, with the avowed object of invading Canada and establishing a provisional government. Public meetings were held to forward this design of invading a country with which the United States were at peace. Volunteers were called for, and arms, ammunition, and provisions were supplied by contributions openly made. All this was in direct and flagrant violation of the express laws of the United States, as well as of the law of nations.

The civil authority of Buffalo offered some slight shew of resistance to the movement, being urged to interpose by many of the most respectable citizens. But no real impediment was offered, and on the 13th of December some hundreds of the citizens of the State of New York, as an armed body under the command of a Mr. Van Rensselaer, an American citizen, openly invaded and took possession of Navy Island, a part of Upper Canada, situate in the Niagara River.

Not believing that such an outrage would really be committed, no force whatever was assembled at the time to counteract this hostile movement.

In a very short time this lawless band obtained from some of the arsenals of the State of New York (clandestinely, as it is said) several pieces of artillery and other arms, which in broad daylight were openly transported to Navy Island without resistance from the American authorities. The people of Buffalo and the adjacent country continued to supply them with stores of various kinds, and additional men enlisted in their ranks.

In a few days their force was variously stated from 500 to 1,500, of whom a small proportion were rebels who had fled from Upper Canada. They began to intrench themselves, and threatened that they would in a short time make a landing on the Canadian side of the Niagara River.

To prevent this and to keep them in check a body of militia was hastily collected and stationed on the frontier, under the command of Colonel Cameron, assistant adjutant-general of militia, who was succeeded in this command by Colonel McNab, the speaker of the house of assembly, an officer whose humanity and discretion, as well as his activity, have been proved by his conduct in putting down the insurrection in the London district and have been acknowledged in warm terms of gratitude by the misguided persons who had surrendered themselves into his hands. He received orders to act on the defensive only, and to be careful not to do any act which the American Government could justly complain of as a breach of neutrality.

An official statement of the unfriendly proceedings at Buffalo was without delay (on the 13th December) made by me to his excellency the governor of the State of New York, to which no answer has been received. And after this open invasion of our territory, and when it became evident that nothing was effected at Buffalo for preventing the violation of neutrality, a special messenger was sent to your excellency at Washington to urge your interposition in the matter. Sufficient time has not yet elapsed to admit of his return. Soon after his departure this band of outlaws on Navy Island, acting in defiance of the laws and Government of both countries, opened a fire from several pieces of ordnance upon the Canadian shore, which in this part is thickly settled, the distance from the island being about 600 yards and within sight of the populous village of Chippewa. They put several balls (6-pound shot) through a house in which a party of militiamen were quartered and which is the dwelling house of Captain Usher, a respectable inhabitant. They killed a horse on which a man at the time was riding, but happily did no further mischief, though they fired also repeatedly with cannon and musketry upon our boats.

They continued daily to render their position more formidable, receiving constant supplies of men and warlike stores from the State of New York, which were chiefly embarked at a landing place on the American main shore, called Fort Schlosser, nearly opposite to Navy Island. This place was once, I believe, a military position, before the conquest of Canada from the French, but there is now neither fort nor village there, but merely a single house occupied as a tavern, and a wharf in front of it, to which boats and vessels are moored. The tavern had been during these lawless proceedings a rendezvous for the band (who can not be called by any name more appropriate than pirates), and was in fact openly and notoriously resorted to as their headquarters on the mainland, and is so to this time. On the 28th December positive information was given to Colonel McNab by persons from Buffalo that a small steamboat called the Caroline, of about 50 tons burthen, had been hired by the pirates, who called themselves "patriots," and was to be employed in carrying down cannon and other stores and in transporting men and anything else that might be required between Fort Schlosser and Navy Island.

He resolved if she came down and engaged in this service to take or destroy her. She did come down agreeably to the information he received. She transported a piece of artillery and other stores to the island, and made repeated passages during the day between the island and the main shore.

In the night he sent a party of militia in boats, with orders to take or destroy her. They proceeded to execute the order. They found the Caroline moored to the wharf opposite to the inn at Fort Schlosser. In the inn there was a guard of armed men to protect her—part of the pirate force, or acting in their support. On her deck there was an armed party and a sentinel, who demanded the countersign.

Thus identified as she was with the force which in defiance of the law of nations and every principle of natural justice had invaded Upper Canada and made war upon its unoffending inhabitants, she was boarded, and after a resistance in which some desperate wounds were inflicted upon the assailants she was carried. If any peaceable citizens of the United States perished in the conflict, it was and is unknown to the captors, and it was and is equally unknown to them whether any such were there. Before this vessel was thus taken not a gun had been fired by the force under the orders of Colonel McNab, even upon this gang of pirates, much less upon any peaceable citizen of the United States. It must therefore have been a consciousness of the guilty service she was engaged in that led those who were employing her to think an armed guard necessary for her defense. Peaceable citizens of the United States were not likely to be found in a vessel so employed at such a place and in such a juncture, and if they were there their presence, especially unknown as it was to the captors, could not prevent, in law or reason, this necessary act of self-defense.

Fifteen days had elapsed since the invasion of Upper Canada by a force enlisted, armed, and equipped openly in the State of New York. The country where this outrage upon the law of nations was committed is populous. Buffalo also contains 15,000 inhabitants. The public authorities, it is true, gave no countenance to those flagrant acts, but it did not prevent them or in the slightest degree obstruct them further than by issuing proclamations, which were disregarded.

Perhaps they could not, but in either case the insult and injury to the inhabitants of Canada were the same and their right to defend themselves equally unquestionable.

No wanton injury was committed by the party who gallantly effected this service. They loosed the vessel from the wharf, and finding they could not tow her against the rapid current of the Niagara, they abandoned the effort to secure her, set her on fire, and let her drift down the stream.

The prisoners taken were a man who, it will be seen by the documents accompanying this dispatch, avowed himself to be a subject of Her Majesty, inhabiting Upper Canada, who had lately been traitorously in arms in that Province, and, having fled to the United States, was then on board for the purpose of going to the camp at Navy Island; and a boy, who, being born in Lower Canada, was probably residing in the United States, and who, being afraid to land from the boat in consequence of the firing kept up by the guard on the shore, was placed in one of the boats under Captain Drew and taken over to our side, from whence he was sent home the next day by the Falls ferry with money given him to bear his expenses.

I send with this letter, first, a copy of my first communication to His Excellency Governor Marcy,27 to which no reply has reached me; second, the official reports, correspondence, and militia general order respecting the destruction of the Caroline, with other documents;27 third, the correspondence between Commissary-General Arcularius, of the State of New York, respecting the artillery belonging to the government of the State of New York, which has been and is still used in making war upon this Province;27 fourth, other correspondence arising out of the present state of things on the Niagara frontier;27 fifth, the special message of Governor Marcy.27

It will be seen from these documents that a high officer of the government of the State of New York has been sent by his excellency the governor for the express purpose of regaining possession of the artillery of that State which is now employed in hostile aggressions upon this portion of Her Majesty's dominions, and that, being aided and favored, as he acknowledges, by the most friendly cooperation which the commanding officer of Her Majesty's forces could give him, he has been successfully defied by this army of American citizens, and has abandoned the object of his mission in despair.

It can hardly fail also to be observed by your excellency that in the course of this negotiation between Mr. Van Rensselaer and the commissary-general of the State of New York this individual, Mr. Van Rensselaer, has not hesitated to place himself within the immediate jurisdiction of the government whose laws he had violated and in direct personal communication with the officer of that government, and has, nevertheless, been allowed to return unmolested to continue in command of American citizens engaged in open hostilities against Great Britain.

The exact position, then, of affairs on our frontier may be thus described:

An army of American citizens, joined to a very few traitors from Upper Canada, and under the command of a subject of the United States, has been raised and equipped in the State of New York against the laws of the United States and the treaties now subsisting, and are using artillery plundered from the arsenals of the State of New York in carrying on this piratical warfare against a friendly country.

The officers and Government of the United States and of the State of New York have attempted to arrest these proceedings and to control their citizens, but they have failed. Although this piratical assemblage are thus defying the civil authorities of both countries, Upper Canada alone is the object of their hostilities. The Government of the United States has failed to enforce its authority by any means, civil or military, and the single question (if it be a question) is whether Upper Canada was bound to refrain from necessary acts of self-defense against a people whom their own Government either could not or would not control.

In perusing the message of His Excellency Governor Marcy to the legislature of the State of New York your excellency will probably feel some degree of surprise that after three weeks' continued hostility carried on by the citizens of New York against the people of Upper Canada his excellency seems to have considered himself not called upon to make this aggression the subject of remark for any other purpose than to complain of a solitary act of self-defense on the part of Her Majesty's Province of Upper Canada, to which such unprovoked hostilities have unavoidably led.

I have the honor to be, sir, your excellency's most obedient, humble servant.

F.B. HEAD.

Mr. Forsyth to Mr. Fox.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 13, 1838.

HENRY S. FOX, Esq., etc.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 6th instant, communicating a copy of a letter from Sir Francis Head, lieutenant-governor of the Province of Upper Canada, respecting the capture and destruction of the steamboat Caroline by a Canadian force on the American side of the Niagara River within the jurisdiction of the State of New York, together with the reports and depositions thereto annexed.

The statement of the facts which these papers present is at variance with the information communicated to this Government respecting that transaction; but it is not intended to enter at present upon an examination of the details of the case, as steps have been taken to obtain the fullest evidence that can be had of the particulars of the outrage, upon the receipt of which it will be made the subject of a formal complaint to the British Government for redress. Even admitting that the documents transmitted with your note contain a correct statement of the occurrence, they furnish no justification of the aggression committed upon the territory of the United States—an aggression which was the more unexpected as Sir Francis Head, in his speech at the opening of the parliament of Upper Canada, had expressed his confidence in the disposition of this Government to restrain its citizens from taking part in the conflict which was waging in that Province, and added that, having communicated with the governor of the State of New York and yourself, he was then waiting for replies.

It is not necessary to remind you that his expectations have been met by the adoption of measures on the part of the United States as prompt and vigorous as they have been successful in repressing every attempt of the inhabitants of the frontier States to interfere unlawfully in that contest. The most serious obstacle thrown in the way of those measures was the burning of the Caroline, which, while it was of no service to Her Britannic Majesty's cause in Canada, had the natural effect of increasing the excitement on the border, which this Government was endeavoring to allay.

I avail myself of this occasion to renew to you the assurance of my distinguished consideration.

JOHN FORSYTH.

BUFFALO, December 30, 1837.

His Excellency MARTIN VAN BUREN, President of the United States.

SIR: Inclosed are copies of affidavits28 which I have prepared in great haste, and which contain all that is material in relation to the gross and extraordinary transaction to which they relate. Our whole frontier is in commotion, and I fear it will be difficult to restrain our citizens from avenging by a resort to arms this flagrant invasion of our territory. Everything that can be done will be by the public authorities to prevent so injudicious a movement. The respective sheriffs of Erie and Niagara have taken the responsibility of calling out the militia to guard the frontier and prevent any further depredations.

I am, sir, with great consideration, your obedient servant,

H.W. ROGERS, District Attorney for Erie County, and Acting for the United States.

WASHINGTON, April, 1838.

To the Senate:

I transmit a communication from the Department of War, on the subject of the treaty with the Stockbridge and Munsee Indians of September, 1836, which is now before the Senate.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, April 15, 1838.

The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.

SIR: I transmit to you a report from the Secretary of the Navy, accompanied with the papers relating to surveys, examinations and surveys of light-houses, sites for light-houses, and improvements in the light-house system, called for by the resolution of the Senate of the 8th of March last.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, April 16, 1838.

Hon. JAMES K. POLK,

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

SIR: I have the honor to transmit to you copies of the letters, documents, and communications called for by a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 7th of December last, received from the Secretary of the Navy, to be annexed to his report of the 5th day of February last, in relation to the delay of the sailing of the exploring expedition.29

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, April 18, 1838.

To the Senate of the United States:

I return the petition and papers of Econchatta Nico,30 referred to me by a resolution of the Senate of February 7, 1837, and transmit a communication and accompanying papers from the Acting Secretary of War, showing the failure of the attempt made, in conformity with the resolution, to obtain indemnity for the petitioner by prosecuting the depredators on his property, and also the causes of the failure. The papers are returned and the report and documents of the Acting Secretary of War submitted in order that Congress may devise such other mode of relief as may seem proper.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, April 23, 1838.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 16th instant, relative to an attack on the steamboat Columbia in the Gulf of Mexico by a Mexican armed vessel, I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, to whom the resolution was referred.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, April 23, 1838.

To the Senate:

I transmit, for the consideration and action of the Senate, communications from the Department of War, accompanying treaties with the Indians in the State of New York, with the St. Regis band, and with the Oneidas residing at Green Bay.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, April 26, 1838.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

In partial compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 21st ultimo, calling for further information on the relations between the United States and the Mexican Republic, I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, to whom the resolution was referred.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, April 27, 1838.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit to the Senate, for their consideration with a view to its ratification, a convention between the United States and the Republic of Texas for marking the boundary between them, signed in this city by the plenipotentiaries of the parties on the 25th instant.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, April 30, 1838.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I herewith transmit to the House of Representatives a report from the Secretary of State, in answer to that part of their resolution of the 19th ultimo requesting the communication of all correspondence with any foreign government in regard to the title or occupation of the territory of the United States beyond the Rocky Mountains.

M. VAN BUREN.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 25, 1838.

The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

The Secretary of State, to whom has been referred so much of the resolution of the House of Representatives dated the 19th ultimo as requests the President, if not incompatible with the public interest, to communicate to that body all correspondence had with any foreign government respecting the title or occupation of the territory of the United States beyond the Rocky Mountains, has the honor to report to the President that no recent communication on this subject has passed between this Government and any foreign power, and that copies of the correspondence growing out of previous discussions in which the question of title or occupation of this territory was involved have been heretofore communicated to the House and will be found among the documents printed by their order. Document No. 65 of the House of Representatives, contained in the fourth volume of State Papers of the first session of the Nineteenth Congress, and that numbered 199, in the fifth volume of State Papers of the first session of the Twentieth Congress, are particularly referred to as immediately connected with this subject.

Respectfully submitted.

JOHN FORSYTH.

WASHINGTON, May 1, 1838.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I transmit herewith a report, and accompanying documents, from the Acting Secretary of War, which contains the information31 required by the resolution of the 16th ultimo, respecting the officers of the Corps of Engineers, the works upon which they were engaged during the last year, and the other matters embraced in the resolution.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, May 2, 1838.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

The report of the Secretary of State transmitted by me to the House of Representatives in compliance with their resolution of the 16th ultimo, respecting an attack alleged to have been made by a Mexican armed vessel upon an American steamboat, having stated that no information on the subject had at that time reached the Department, I now transmit another report from the same officer, communicating a copy of a note from the Mexican minister, with an accompanying document, in reference to the act alluded to, which have been received at the Department since the date of the former report.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, May 7, 1838.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit to the Senate, for their consideration with a view to its ratification, a convention signed at Houston on the 11th ultimo by Alcée La Branche, chargé d'affaires of the United States, and R.A. Irion, secretary of state of the Republic of Texas, stipulating for the adjustment and satisfaction of claims of citizens of the United States on that Government in the cases of the brigs Pocket and Durango. This convention having been concluded in anticipation of the receipt from the Department of a formal power for that purpose, an extract from a dispatch of Mr. La Branche to the Secretary of State explanatory of his motives for that act is also transmitted for the information of the Senate.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, May 10, 1838.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I submit to the consideration of Congress a statement prepared by the Secretary of the Treasury, by which it appears that the United States, with over twenty-eight millions in deposit with the States and over fifteen millions due from individuals and banks, are, from the situation in which those funds are placed, in immediate danger of being rendered unable to discharge with good faith and promptitude the various pecuniary obligations of the Government. The occurrence of this result has for some time been apprehended, and efforts made to avert it. As the principal difficulty arises from a prohibition in the present law to reissue such Treasury notes as might be paid in before they fell due, and may be effectually obviated by giving the Treasury during the whole year the benefit of the full amount originally authorized, the remedy would seem to be obvious and easy.

The serious embarrassments likely to arise from a longer continuance of the present state of things induces me respectfully to invite the earliest attention of Congress to the subject which may be consistent with a due regard to other public interests.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, May 11, 1838.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I herewith transmit to the House of Representatives reports from the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury, with accompanying papers, in answer to the resolution of the House of the 30th ultimo, relating to the introduction of foreign paupers into the United States.

M. VAN BUREN.

WASHINGTON, May 19, 1838.

To the Senate of the United States:

I herewith transmit to the Senate the copy of a letter addressed to me on the 28th ultimo by the governor of Maine, inclosing several resolves of the legislature of that State, and claiming reimbursement from the General Government of certain moneys paid to Ebenezer S. Greely, John Baker, and others in compensation for losses and sufferings experienced by them respectively under circumstances more fully explained in his excellency's letter.

In the absence of any authority on the part of the Executive to satisfy these claims, they are now submitted to Congress for consideration; and I deem it proper at the same time, with reference to the observations contained in Governor Kent's note above mentioned, to communicate to the Senate copies of other papers connected with the subject of the northeastern boundary of the United States, which, with the documents already made public, will show the actual state of the negotiations with Great Britain on the general question.

M. VAN BUREN.

[The same message was sent to the House of Representatives.]

STATE OF MAINE, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, Augusta, April 28, 1838.

His Excellency MARTIN VAN BUREN, President of the United States.

SIR: I have the honor to inclose to you a copy of a resolve32 of the legislature of this State in favor of Ebenezer S. Greely, also a copy of a resolve32 in favor of John Baker and others; and in compliance with the request of the legislature I ask of the Government of the United States a reimbursement of the several sums allowed thereby, which several sums have been paid by this State to the individuals named in the resolves.

The justice and propriety of granting this request, I can have no doubt, will be apparent to you and to Congress when the circumstances under which the allowances were made are called to mind.

Mr. Greely, acting as agent under a law of this State authorizing and directing a census to be taken in unincorporated places, was forcibly seized and imprisoned for several months, and then, without trial, released.

John Baker and his associates named in the other resolve suffered by imprisonment and otherwise for acting under a law of this State incorporating the town of Madawaska in 1831. The State of Maine has acknowledged by these and other resolves its sense of obligation to remunerate in the first instance these sufferers in its cause and to satisfy as far as it is able their claims upon its justice. But the wrongs by which they suffered were committed by a foreign power with whom we are now at peace. The State of Maine has no power to make war or authorize reprisals. She can only look to the General Government to assume the payment as an act of justice to a member of the Union under the provisions of the Constitution and to demand redress and remuneration from the authors of the wrong in the name of the United States.

A minute recapitulation of the facts upon which these resolves are founded is deemed entirely unnecessary and superfluous, as they have heretofore been communicated and are well known to the Executive and to Congress.

Maine has suffered too many repetitions of similar attempts to prevent her from enjoying her rightful possessions and enforcing her just claims to feel indifferent on the subject, and we look with confidence to the General Government for protection and support. The amount of money, although considerable, is of comparatively small importance when contrasted with the principles involved and the effect which must result from an immediate and ready assumption of the liability on the part of the United States. Such an act would be highly gratifying to the people of this State as evidence that their just claims and rights are fully recognized by the United States, and that the strong arm of the Union will be stretched out for their protection in every lawful effort to maintain and enforce their claims, which they know and feel to be just and unimpeachable and which they are determined to maintain.

I trust I shall be pardoned for earnestly urging immediate action on the subject.

I had the honor to inclose to you, under date of the 28th of March last, a copy of my message to the legislature and of the resolves of the legislature of Maine in relation to the northeastern boundary, which I have no doubt have received and will receive all the attention the importance of the subjects therein discussed and acted on demands. You will perceive that in accordance with your wishes I communicated the proposition in relation to a conventional line of boundary, with the letter of Mr. Forsyth addressed to the executive of Maine. The views and wishes and determination of the executive and legislature, and I think I may safely add of the people, of Maine are fully and distinctly set forth in the documents referred to, communicated to you heretofore by me. The proposition was distinct and definite, and the answer is equally so, and I consider that it may be regarded as the fixed determination of Maine to consent to no proposition on our part to vary the treaty line, but to stand by that line as a definite, a practicable, and a fair one until its impracticability is demonstrated. It is needless for me to recapitulate the reasons upon which this determination is founded. I refer you to the documents before alluded to for my own views on this topic, sanctioned fully by the legislature. The duty devolving upon me by your request I have endeavored to discharge in a spirit of profound respect for the constituted officers of the General Government, and with a single eye to the interest and honor of the United States and of the State of Maine. The attitude assumed by Maine in relation to the survey of the line of the treaty of 1783 has doubtless attracted your attention. I feel it due to the State to say to you frankly and unequivocally that this position was taken deliberately and with a full consideration of all the circumstances of the case; but it was assumed in no spirit of defiance or resistance and with no design to embarrass the action of the General Government. Maine feels no desire to act alone or independently on this question. She knows and feels that it is a national question, and that it is the right and duty of the General Government to move forward in effecting the object proposed.

I feel fully warranted in saying that Maine does not intend by this expression of her determination to run the line in a certain contingency to waive in the least degree her well-founded claim upon the General Government to run, mark, and establish it. On the contrary, she will most reluctantly yield the hope she now so strongly feels that it is the intention of that Government to relieve her from the necessity of throwing herself upon her own resources to assert and defend her most unquestionable right. The wish of this State is that the first act should be to run the line of the treaty of 1783 to ascertain the facts in relation to the topography of the country and the exact spot where the northwest angle of Nova Scotia may be found according to our construction of the treaty language, and to place suitable monuments along the whole line. Such a survey would not settle or determine any rights, but it would express and declare our views and intentions. Such a survey is not a warlike or offensive movement, and can not justly give offense to the other party in the controversy. It is the unquestionable right of litigants in a court of justice to make explorations of land in dispute, and if either party declines a joint survey it may be made ex parte and surely the United States have never so far yielded the actual possession to Great Britain as to preclude the right on our part to ascertain for ourselves the absolute facts and to mark out the limits of our claim and our alleged right. This act Maine asks, and asks earnestly, the General Government to perform without delay. Such an assumption of the controversy on the part of the United States would be to Maine an assurance that her rights were duly regarded, and would be steadily and perseveringly maintained. We want the name and the authority of the United States, and there can be no doubt that an act emanating from that source would be regarded by those interested on both sides as of more importance than any act of an individual State. So far, then, from any indifference on the part of Maine as to the action of the General Government, or any desire to be driven to assume the performance of the duty alluded to, she looks with intense anxiety and confident hope to be relieved from this position. She believes it is alike due to the honor of the United States and the rights of Maine that the General Government should go forward in the work, and that there is less to apprehend in the result from such a course than any other. But Maine feels that the time for decisive action has come, that she can not be satisfied to have the claim to absolute and exclusive jurisdiction of a large part of her territory longer tolerated and acquiesced in. She knows that it rightfully belongs to her jurisdiction, that it is hers by a clear, perfect, and honest title—as clear, as perfect, and rightful as her title to any portion of the State—and she can not consent to have this title impaired or weakened by bold encroachments and unscrupulous demands. She can not consent that a title transmitted by the fathers of the Revolution shall be destroyed or defeated by acquiescence in the adverse occupation of a foreign state, and that what was once fairly yielded shall be reclaimed in utter defiance of a solemn deed of cession. I am confident I am not mistaken in stating that the legislature of Maine considered the question as fairly and plainly before the National Government, and that if the present session of Congress should close with a denial or postponement of the proposed survey and no commission should be created by the Executive, as contemplated in the resolution referred to, we should have a right and be bound to regard such a delay or refusal as evidence of an indisposition on the part of the General Government to accede to our expressed views and wishes, and a denial of justice, and that Maine in that event owed it to herself to cause the survey to be made under her own authority. The duty of the executive of Maine is plainly pointed out and made imperative and absolute by the resolves of the legislature, and I certainly can not hesitate, so far as I have the means and power, to execute their declared will.

The people of Maine, sir, are not desirous of conflict or war. Both in their habits and their principles they love and wish for peace and quiet within their borders. They are not ambitious to win laurels or to acquire military glory by waging war with their neighbors, and least of all are they desirous of a border warfare, which may be the means of sacrificing human life and engendering ill will and bad passions, without bringing the controversy to a conclusion. They are scattered over our thousand hills, engaged in their quiet and peaceful labors, and it is the first wish of their hearts to live peaceably with all men and all nations. They have no anxiety to extend our limits or to gain territory by conquest, but there is a firm and determined spirit in this people which can not brook insult and will not submit to intentional injury. "They know their rights, and knowing dare maintain them" with calm determination and deliberate purpose, and they appeal with unshrinking confidence to their sister States and to the Government which binds them together for effective support in this their purpose.

The crisis, as we believe, demands firm and decided language and the expression of a determined design. Maine has never refused to acquiesce in any fair and honorable mode of fixing the line according to the treaty of 1783. I have no doubt (but upon this point I speak according to my individual belief) that the mode proposed by Great Britain of establishing the treaty line upon the face of the earth by a commission composed of impartial and scientific men, to be elected by a friendly power, would be satisfactory and acquiesced in by this State, but that we should neither ask nor agree that any preliminary points should be yielded by either party. We should only ask that the treaty should be placed in their hands with directions to ascertain and run and fix the line according to its plain language and obvious meaning.

Maine can never consent, as I apprehend, to yield the main points of the case and then refer it to enable the judges to divide the subject-matter of the controversy.

We feel that we now stand on the high vantage ground of truth and justice, and that it can not be that any nation professing to act on the principles of right and equity can stand up before the civilized world and contest with unyielding pertinacity our claim. We have too much respect for the nation from which we descended to believe that she will sully her reputation by such persevering resistance.

I am conscious that the language and style of this communication are unusual and probably undiplomatic; that there is more of the fervor of feeling and the plain language of direct appeal than is usual in such papers; but it is a subject of such vast importance to the State whose interests have been in part intrusted to me and whose organ I am that I can not speak in measured terms or indefinite language. On this subject we have no ulterior views and no concealed objects. Our plans and our policy are open and exposed to the view of all men. Maine has nothing in either to conceal or disguise. She plainly and distinctly asks for specific and definite action. In performing what I conceive to be my duty I have been actuated by entire respect toward the General Government and by the single desire to explain and enforce as well as I was able our wishes and our rights. I can only add that we trust the General Government will assume the performance of the act specified in the resolution and relieve Maine from the necessity of independent action.

With great respect, I have the honor to be, your most obedient servant,

EDWARD KENT.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 27, 1838.

HENRY S. FOX, Esq., etc.:

The undersigned, Secretary of State of the United States, has the honor, by the directions of the President, to communicate to Mr. Fox, Her Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary, the result of the application of the General Government to the State of Maine on the subject of the northeastern boundary line and the resolution which the President has formed upon a careful consideration thereof. By the accompanying papers,33 received from the executive of Maine, Mr. Fox will perceive that Maine declines to give a consent to the negotiation for a conventional boundary, is disinclined to the reference of the points in dispute to a new arbitration, but is yet firmly persuaded that the line described in the treaty of 1783 can be found and traced whenever the Governments of the United States and Great Britain shall proceed to make the requisite investigations with a predisposition to effect that very desirable object. Confidently relying, as the President does, upon the assurances frequently repeated by the British Government of the earnest desire to reach that result if it is practicable, he has instructed the undersigned to announce to Mr. Fox the willingness of this Government to enter into an arrangement with Great Britain for the establishment of a joint commission of survey and exploration upon the basis of the original American proposition and the modifications offered by Her Majesty's Government.

The Secretary of State is therefore authorized to invite Mr. Fox to a conference upon the subject at as early a day as his convenience will permit, and the undersigned will be immediately furnished with a requisite full power by the President to conclude a convention embracing that object if Her Majesty's minister is duly empowered to proceed to the negotiation of it on the part of Great Britain.

The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to renew to Mr. Fox the expression of his distinguished consideration.

JOHN FORSYTH.

WASHINGTON, May 1, 1838.

Hon. JOHN FORSYTH, etc.

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your official note of the 27th ultimo, in which you inclose to me a communication received by the Federal Government from the executive of Maine upon the subject of the northeastern boundary line, and in which you inform me that the President is willing to enter into an arrangement with Her Majesty's Government for the establishment of a joint commission of survey and exploration upon the basis of the original American proposition and of the modifications offered by Her Majesty's Government, as communicated to you in my note of the 10th of January last, and you invite me to a conference for the purpose of negotiating a convention that shall embrace the above object if I am duly empowered by my Government to proceed to such negotiation.

I have the honor to state to you in reply that my actual instructions were fulfilled by the delivery of the communication which I addressed to you on the 10th of January, and that I am not at present provided with full powers for negotiating the proposed convention. I will forthwith, however, transmit to Her Majesty's Government the note which I have had the honor to receive from you in order that such fresh instructions may be furnished to me or such other steps taken as the present situation of the question may appear to Her Majesty's Government to require.

I avail myself of this occasion to renew to you the assurance of my high respect and consideration.

H.S. FOX.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, May 8, 1838.

His Excellency EDWARD KENT, Governor of Maine.

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt on the 22d ultimo of the communication addressed to this Department by your excellency on the 28th of March last, transmitting a printed copy of your message of the 14th of the same month to the legislature of Maine, together with certain resolves passed by that body, in relation to the northeastern boundary of the State.