« ПретходнаНастави »
of boundary between Great Britain it; as he had applied for, and re. and the United States will intersect ceived, in 1822, the bounty upon any portion of the Madawasca ter corn grown in newly cultivated ritory. In the mean time, the un ground, given by the government dersigned begs leave to express his of that province. A moderate bail conviction, that neither the esta. was demanded of Baker, for his blishment of settlements upon that appearance to take his trial. He river, nor the grants of land made did not profit by this offer of the to the settlers by the government magistrates, and thereby obtain his of New Brunswick, in 1790, can, release from confinement, because in any shape, affect the final set. he understood that a writ had been tlement of the boundary, or tend, taken out against him by some one as Mr. Clay seems to imagine, of his creditors. It does not ap. to strengthen the claims of Great pear that the proceedings have Britain, or in any manner to inva. been carried on against him with lidate the rights acquired by the any unusual severity; and after United States under the treaty of the investigation which has taken 1783
place into all the circumstances The Secretary of State ob- attending his arrest, the undersignserves, in his last note, that the ju. ed did not expect that the Presi. risdiction exercised by the govern. dent of the United States would ment of New Brunswick, in the have demanded his immediate libe. Madawasca settlement, has not ration, and full indemnity for the been exclusive, inasmuch as an injuries he has suffered by the ar. agent sent by the Governor of the rest and detention of his person. State of Maine took the census of A copy of the note which the un. the population in 1820, as belong. dersigned has had the honour to ing to that state. The undersign. receive from the Secretary of State ed begs leave to remind Mr. Clay, shall be immediately transmitted to that that attempt of the state of his majesty's government, and to Maine to interpose its jurisdiction the Lieutenant Governor of New. was considered by the British go. Brunswick. vernment as an encroachment, and It appears that the President of it was the subject of a remon. the United States does not view strance to the government of the with satisfaction the exercise of United States.
jurisdiction by the government of With regard to the arrest of New Brunswick, in a settlement John Baker, surely his outrageous upon the Aroostook river, which conduct in stopping the mail from had its origin in the unauthorized Canada, in hoisting the American residence of stragglers from other flag, and forming a combination to districts. They remained for some transfer the territory in which he time unnoticed; but, within the last resided to the United States, made three or four years, civil process him amenable to the laws, Al. has been issued against the settlers though his residence, as it is obe by the provincial government, served by Mr. Clay, was not ac. which Mr. Clay is at a loss to retually in the Madawasca settle. concile with the resolution which the ment, it was within the jurisdiction undersigned has stated to have been of New.Brunswick, and he knew adopted by the Lieutenant Gover.
por of New Brunswick, to maintain abeyance, the title of the United the disputed territory in the state States. in which it was after the conclusion The undersigned cannot conclude of the treaty of Ghent. The un. this note without expressing his dersigned is convinced that Mr. Clay anxious wishes that the measure, will admit that no part of the dispu. now resorted to by both Govern. ted territory can be left without the ments, of arbitration, may put at control of any civil authority. All rest, for ever, the question of boun. persons, of whatever description, dary which has lately so repeatedly who take up their residence in the occupied the attention of the Secre. disputed territory, are within the tary of State and of the underBritish jurisdiction, until the boun. signed. dary line is adjusted, and are ame. The undersigned requests Mr. nable to the government of New. Clay to accept the assurances of Brunswick, and owe a tempora- his highest consideration. ry allegiance to His Majesty, so
CHAS. R. VAUGHAN. long as they remain under his pro. tection. It is not for the Lieute. Mr. Clay to Mr. Vaughan. nant Governer of New-Brunswick Rt. Hon. Chas. R. VAUGHAN, &c. to surrender up the exercise of an
&c. &c. ancient jurisdiction, but in strict con. The undersigned, Secretary of formity with his resolution, above State of the United States, in acalluded to. His Excellency has knowledging the receipt, on the exercised it with great moderation, 20th ult. of the note of Mr. by refusing to make grants of land, Vaughan, of the day of that and by suspending the issuing of month, in answer to that which the licenses for the cutting of timber, undersigned had the honour to ad. and by strictly enjoining all magis. dress to him, transmitting the re. trates under his control to prevent ports made by the agents of the trespasses and intrusions of every United States and the State of description. The Secretary of Maine, would have restricted himState may rely upon the moderation self to a simple expression of his with which the jurisdiction will be satisfaction with the engagement of exercised by His Excellency over Mr. Vaughan to lay the demand of the disputed territory.
the Government of the United States The undersigned has observed for the immediate liberation of John that a misconception pervades all the Baker, and a full indemnity for the papers, which have fallen under his injuries he had suffered by his ar. notice, from the State of Maine. rest and detention, before thegovernThe disputed territory is invariably ments of Great Britain and the Pro. represented as a part of that State, vince of New-Brunswick, but for unjustly withheld from it ; overlook, certain opinions and principles ad. ing, always, the difficulties which vanced by Mr. Vaughan, to which Great Britain and the United States the undersigned cannot assent. have encountered in appropriating And he feels it to be necessary, to and setting apart that portion which guard against any misinterpreta. belongs to the United States under tion from his silence, expressely to the treaty of 1783, and which have state his dissent from them. In so unfortunately kept, as it were, in doing this, he will avoid, as much as
possible, any discussion of the re. Great Britain, than the treaty of spective claims of the two countries peace of 1783, was necessary; and to the disputed territory. If it were that, until that other act should be necessary to enter into that argu. performed, the United States could ment, it would not be difficult to not be considered in possession. maintain as clear a right, on the This argument would prove that part of the United States, to that the United States are not now law. territory, as they have to any fully in possession of any portion other portion of the territory which of the territory which they ac. was acknowledged by Great Bri. quired in the war of their Indepen. tain to belong to them by the dence; the treaty of 1783 being treaty of 1783. But as, by the the only act of separation in virtue arrangements between the two go. of which they are in possession of vernments, the question of right has their territory. It, at the conclusion received a different disposition, it is of the treaty of 1783, Great Britain unnecessary to give it a particular had had the actual, and not merely consideration here. The corres. constructive possession, and that pondence which the undersigned actual possession had all along re. has had the honour of holding with mained with her, Mr. Vaughan Mr. Vaughan has related to the in. night have contended that the go. termediate possession, and to acts vernment of Great Britain had a of jurisdiction within the dispu. right to exercise a jurisdiction, de ted territory, until the right is finally facto, over the disputed territory. settled. It would furnish a just oc. But at that epoch neither party had casion for serious regret, if, whilst the actual possession of the dis. the settlement of that question is in puted territory, which was then an amicable progress, any misunder- uninhabited waste. Which of the standing should arise between the parties had the right to the posses. two governments, in consequence sion, depended upon the limits of of what must be regarded by the the treaty of 1783. If, as the Uni. government of the United States ted States contend, those limits em. as the unwarranted exercise of a braced it, they had the right both right of jurisdiction by the govern. of sovereignty and to the possession, ment of the province of New. and Great Britain could not law. Brunswick within the disputed ter fully exercise either. It is true ritory.
that Great Britain asserts that those The undersigned cannot concur limits do not comprehend the dis. in the opinion that the limits of the puted territory. On that point the treaty of 1783, being undefined parties are at issue, and cannot and unadjusted, the sovereignty agree. They have, however, ami. and jurisdiction of the disputed ter. cably agreed to refer the decision ritory rests with Great Britain, un of it to a common friend. Whilst til that portion of it, designated in the experiment is making for this the treaty of 1883, shall have been peaceable settlement of the ques. finally set apart from the British tion, ought either of the parties to possessions as belonging to the assume the exercise of sovereignty United States. Mr. Vaughan's ar or jurisdiction within the contested gument assumes that some other territory? If he does, can he exact of setting apart the territories peet the other party to acquiesce in of the United States from those of it, or to look on with indifference ? It was a mutual conviction of the justitication for his arrest, and the irritating consequence which would subsequent proceedings against ensue from the exercise of a sepa. him in the courts of New Bruns. rate jurisdiction by either of the wick. The President is far from parties, that led to the under. being disposed to sanction any acts standing, which has so long pre. of Mr. Baker, by which, on his pri. vailed between them, to abstain vate authority, he would undertake from all acts of exclusive jurisdic. the settlement of a national dispute. tion which might have a tendency He derived no power for any such to produce inquietude. In con. acts, either from the government of formity with that understanding, the United States, or, as is believed, licenses to cut timber from the dis. from the government of Maine. puted territory, granted by the pro. National disputes ought always to vincial authority, had been revoked, be adjusted by national, and not in. and the practice of cutting and re. dividual authority. The acts of moving the timber has been under. Baker complained of, were, how. stood, by the government of the ever, performed by him under a United States, to have been discon. belief that he was within the right. tinued.
ful limits of the state of Maine, and It follows from the view now pre with no view of violating the terri. sented, that the undersigned can. tory, or offending against the laws not subscribe to the opinion, that of Great Britain. This case, there. the jurisdiction of the British go. fore, is very different from what it vernment, through its provincial would have been, if the irregulari. authority, over the disputed terri. ties attributed to him had been com. tory, has continued with Great Bri: mitted on the uncontested territory tain, notwithstanding the treaty of of Great Bri:ain. 1783. To maintain that opinion, The undersigned finds himself as Mr. Vaughan must make out, either, unable to agree that the misconduct first, that the terms of the treaty do of Mr. Baker, whatever it may have exclude altogether the disputed ter been, warranted the government of ritory, or that, if they include it, New Brunswick in taking cogni. actual possession of the disputed zance of his case, for the purpose territory was with Great Britain in of trying and punishing him by Bri. 1783. Neither proposition can be tish laws, as he was unprepared to established.
admit that the want of civil govern. Mr. Vaughan seems to think that ment, on the part of the inhabitants some civil government is absolutely of the disputed territory, created a necessary within the disputed ter right in the government of New. ritory. If its utility be conceded Brunswick to supply, in that re. in reference to the inhabitants, it spect, their necessities. In assu. would not be a necessary conse. ming that Baker rendered himself quence that the government of amenable to the laws of New. New Brunswick, and not the state Brunswick, Mr. Vaughan decides of Maine, ought to exert the requi. the very question in controversy. site civil authority.
He decides that the part of Maine The alleged irregularity of the in contest appertains to the province conduct of John Baker is relied of New Brunswick, and that the upon by Mr. Vaughan as forming a laws of New-Brunswick can run into the state of Maine, aw the limits be sufficient to remove them ; and of that state are understood to exist that, if he, Mr. Bagoi, would pro. by the government of the United cure and communicate their names States. The provincial govern. to the Secretary of State, he would ment of New Brunswick, in the invite the governor of Massachu. arrest and trial of Baker, for acts setts to take the necessary mea. of his, done on the disputed terri. sures for restraining them. But tory, commits the very error which their names were never, in fact, is ascribed to Baker, that of under. disclosed to this government. taking, in effect, to determine a Ainong the papers recently comnational question, the decision of municated by the government of which should be left to the govern. New Brunswick to Mr. Barrell, the ment of Great Britain and the Uni. agent of the United States, the Pre. ted States, which are, in fact, en. sident has observed, with regret and deavouring peaceably to settle it. surprise, a letter from Mr. Bagot to
It would have been more con- the lieutenant governor of the pro. formable with good neighbourhood, vince, bearing date the 8th of De. and the respective claims of the cember, 1818, in which, after re. two governments, as well as the ferring to the above interview, Mr. mutual forbearance which they Bagot gives it as his opinion that stand pledged to each other to prac- the government of New Brunswick tise, if a friendly representation had might remove the settlers by force. been made to the government of the This conclusion is not only unwar. United States of any misconduct ranted by any thing which passed charged against John Baker, or any at that interview, but, I am directed other citizen of the United States, in to say, is contrary to that which habiting the disputed territory, ac. the government of the United States companied by a request for the re. had reason to expect would havo dress called for by the nature of resulted from it. So far from con. the case. Such was the course ceding a right in the government pursued by Sir Charles Bagot, as of New Brunswick forcibly to re. far back as the year 1818. In move those persons, their names December of that year, he had an were requested, to enable their own interview with the Secretary of government to operate upon them, State, in which he preferred a com. if necessary. In the letter from plaint of irregular settlements at. Mr. Bagot to the lieutenant go. tempted by citizens of the United vernor of New-Brunswick, he did, States on the lands in controversy. agreeably to the request of the The Secretary of State, on receiv. Secretary of State, ask for their ing the complaint, stated that he names, whilst the advice that the supposed the settlers were of that government of New Brunswick class of intruders denominated should forcibly remove them as in. squatters, meaning persons who truders obviously superseded the commence settlements upon the only practical purpose for which public lands without title; that, as, their names had been desired, that by Mr. Bagot’s representation, it the governor of Massachusetts appeared that they were entering might be called upon by peaceable on the disputed borders in families, means, and by his lawful authority, peaceable means would, doubtless, to restrain them.