Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

ritory belonging to the United States, a representation should have been made of his offence to the government of the latter.

The undersigned has only to refer the Secretary of State to his note dated the 27th February, where it is shown that Baker was perfectly aware of his residing within the jurisdiction of New. Brunswick, as he had received the provincial bounty for corn raised upon land newly brought into cultivation.

The undersigned regrets that he should have found himself under the necessity of making the foregoing observations; and he cannot conclude without expressing his ⚫ earnest wish that the reference to arbitration may relieve the Secre. tary of State, and the undersigned, from any further discussion relative to the boundary on the northeastern frontier of the United States.

The undersigned avails himself of this occasion to renew to Mr. Clay the assurance of his distinguished consideration.

CHAS. R. VAUGHAN. Washington, March 25, 1828.

3. }

MR. CLAY TO MR. LAWRENCE. Department of State, Washington, March 31, 1828. Wm. B. Lawrence, Chargé d'Af. faires, London.

SIR-I transmit herewith a copy of a correspondence which has passed between Mr. Vaughan, the British minister, and this de. partment, respecting the exercise of jurisdiction, on the part of the province of New-Brunswick, within the territory respectively claimed by the United States and Great Britain, on our northeastern bor. der. In the course of it you will

remark, that we have demanded the liberation of John Baker, a citizen of the United States, and full indemnity for the wrongs which he has suffered by the seizure of his person within the limits of the state of Maine, and his subsequent abduction and confinement at Frederickton in jail. We have also demanded, that the government of New-Brunswick shall cease from the exercise of all and every act of exclusive jurisdiction within the disputed territory, until the question of right is settled by the two governments. The considerations which have led to those demands are so fully set out in the correspondence, that it is not deemed necessary now to repeat them. The President charges me to instruct you to address an official note to the British government, calling upon it to interpose its authority with the provincial government to enforce a compliance with both demands. The government of the United States cannot con. sent to the exercise of any separate British jurisdiction within any part of the state of Maine, as the limits of that state are defined by the treaty of 1783, prior to the de. cision of the question of title. And if there be a perseverance in the exercise of such jurisdiction, this government will not hold itself responsible for the consequences. It may, and probably will be urged, that if the province of New-Bruns. wick should abstain from exerting its authority over the inhabitants situated on the controverted ground, disorder and anarchy amongst them will ensue.

Should such an argument be brought forward, you will reply, that the inhabitants will, no doubt, institute some form of go. vernment themselves, adapted to

their condition, as they did for a long time on the Madawaska; that whether they do or not, however, it will be competent to the governments of Maine and New-Bruns. wick, within their respective acknowledged limits, to guard against any disorders; that the government of the United States cannot consent to the exercise of any exclusive British authority within the contested territory, founded on the plea of necessity; and that many of the settlers being intruders upon the soil, can have no right to com. plain of any disorders among them. selves, resulting from their own unauthorized intrusion. The President hopes that the British government, participating in the de. sire which he most anxiously feels to avoid all collision on account of a temporary occupation of the territory in contest, will effectually interpose its authority to restrain the provincial government from the exercise of any jurisdiction over it. Such an interposition alone will supersede those precautionary measures which this government will otherwise feel itself constrained to adopt.

I also transmit herewith copies of the report of Mr. Barrell, and of Mr. Davis, who were respectively deputed by the governments of the United States, and the state of Maine, to proceed to the dis. puted territory, and to ascertain on the spot the causes of the recent disturbances which have occurred there.

• I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, H. CLAY.

MR. LAWRENCE TO LORD DUdley.

Rt. hon. the Earl of Dudley, &c. The undersigned, chargé d'af. fairs of the United States of Ame

rica, regrets that he is compelled to call to the notice of his majesty's principal Secretary of State for foreign affairs, to acts on the part of the government of the province of New-Brunswick, within the territory claimed by the United States and Great Britain respectively, not only wholly inconsistent with that mutual forbearance which, it has been understood, should govern the proceedings of both countries during the pendency of the question of boundaries, for the decision of which arrangements have recently been made, but of a character to lead, by inviting retaliation, to dif ficulties of the most serious nature.

The proceedings complained of, to which it will be the duty of the undersigned particularly to refer, took place in settlements near the Aroostook and St. John's rivers, within the territory which is, and always has been, considered by the United States as a part of the present state, formerly district, of Maine. It appears from official documents, that, in this section of country, various attempts to exercise exclusive jurisdiction have been made by the Lieutenant Governor of New-Brunswick; that American citizens residing within the territory in dispute have been subjected to an alien tax; that they have been compelled to serve in the British militia; that the provincial government has undertaken to issue civil process against them for enforcing the collection of debts, and for other purposes; that they have been summoned to appear be. fore the tribunals of New-Brunswick for intrusion on the land occupied by them, as if it was the uncontested property of the British crown; and that they have been prosecuted before these foreign

courts for alleged political offences, which, if punishable at all, were only cognizable by the authorities of their own country.

These attacks on the rights of citizens of the United States having formed the subject of a correspondence between the British minister at Washington and the American Secretary of State, which it is understood has been transmitted to Lord Dudley, the undersigned does not deem it necessary to enter into the details of the different individual acts of exclusive jurisdiction that have been matters of complaint, but hastens to a case which he is instructed to bring particularly under the consideration of his majesty's government, with a view to the redress of which it may be susceptible. John Baker, a citizen of the United States, residing on a tract of land situated at or near the junction of the Meriumticook with the St. John's river, and held by him under a deed from the states of Massachusetts and Maine, was arrested in his own domicile, on the 25th of September last, under circumstances of aggravation. While Mr. Baker and his family were asleep, his house was surrounded by an armed force, and entered by a person of high official character in the province of New-Brunswick, by the command of whom Mr. Baker was seized and conveyed to Frederickton, and their committed to jail, where he is still confined on a charge of an alleged misdemeanour, growing out of a denial of British jurisdiction in the territory where he had settled, as above stated, under the authority of a grant from two states of the American union. This transaction hav. ing received the special consideration of the President of the United

States, the undersigned has been charged to call upon the government of Great Britain to interpose its authority with the provincial government, in order to the liberation of Mr. Baker, and to the granting to this American citizen a full indemnity for the wrongs which he has suffered by the seizure of his person within the limits ofthe state of Maine, and a subsequent abduction and confinement in jail at Frederickton.

The undersigned is further instructed to require, that the government of New-Brunswick shall cease from the exercise of all and every act of exclusive jurisdiction within the disputed territory, until the question of right is settled by the two governments of Great Britain and the United States.

The motives which have led to these demands may be sufficiently inferred from a consideration of the occurrences already cited. In declaring, through the undersigned, that it cannot consent to the exercise of any separate British jurisdiction, within any part of the state of Maine, as it understands the limits of that state to be defined by the treaty of 1783, prior to the decision of the question of title, the government of the United States is only protesting against unjustifiable encroachments on its sovereignty, and asking from Great Britain what it is willing on its side to accordthat forbearance which the present state of the controversy most strongly inculcates. Indeed, it is only by adopting such a course that the collisions, which would arise from an attempt by each party to give effect to its own pretensions, can be avoided. The importance of abstaining from any act, which might jeopard the amicable relations between the two powers, was

early perceived; and instances have not been wanting in which they have both been restrained by considerations of prudence and mutual respect, from exercising acts of exclusive jurisdiction within the disputed territory. To a complaint made so far back as the year 1818, by Mr. Bagot, at that time his ma. jesty's minister in America, of irregular settlements attempted by citizens of the United States on the lands in controversy, the most ready attention was paid. On the other hand, licenses to cut timber, granted by the provincial authorities, have been revoked, and the practice of cutting and removing the timber has been understood by the govern. ment of the United States to have been discontinued. Recent cases have also occurred, in which the interposition of the American government, requested by Mr. Vaug. han, has been promptly accorded in the spirit of that rule, of the ex, pediency of which no better evidence can be required, than the necessity which has given rise to the present communication.

The undersigned purposely avoids any observations which can lead to a premature discussion on points which are to be submitted to a tribunal selected by the two powers. However unanswerable he may conceive the arguments by which the claim of his country to the territory in question may be sustained, he is aware that it can be attended with no advantage to adduce them on the present occasion.

The undersigned also regards as inadmissible all attempts to defend the exercise of British authority, in the territory referred to, during the time which may intervene before the decision of the arbiter is

made, by asserting a title derived from possession. Considering the grounds on which the claims of the United States are founded, it is not perceived how arguments drawn cither from first occupancy or immemorial possession can be made to bear on the final determination of the principal subject in discussion between the two countries, or how they can affect the question of temporary jurisdiction. Before the independence of the United States, not only the territory in dispute, but the whole of the adjoining pro. vince and state, was the property of a common sovereign. At the time of the division of the empire, the United States and Great Britain defined, in express terms, their respective territorial limits, and it will not, it is presumed, be asserted that, on concluding the treaty of 1783, jurisdiction of the one party over the country allotted to it was less complete than that which was granted to the other over its terri. tory. The treaty by which the separation of the dominions of the two powers was effected, may be assimilated to a deed of partition between individuals holding property in common. From the ex. change of ratifications, the only doubts which could arise were necessarily restricted to the interpretation of its language. Nor has any thing occurred since the revolutionary war to vary the rights of Great Britain and America. The object of the 5th article of the treaty of Ghent was merely to direct the practical business of surveying and marking out the boundary line, in order to give effect to previous stipulations.

To avoid, however, any misconstruction that might be drawn from his silence on the subject of a pos

sessory title, the undersigned deems it proper to declare that New. Brunswick can adduce no claims by which a jurisdiction derived from prescription, or the first occupancy of the country, can be sus. tained; and he is far from admitting that, in this view of this case, the pretensions of the United States are less valid than those of Great Britain.

It appears, from the best information that can be obtained, that no settlement had been made in the territory at present in dispute, prior to the American revolution; that subsequently to that event, a small one was formed at or near the Madawaska, by French from Nova Scotia, who had always previously resisted the English authority; and that, though some grants of land may have been made to these settlers, by the provincial government, before the determina. tion of the river St. Croix, in pursuance of the treaty of 1794, the acts of authority which took place were few and doubtful, nor is it believed that they were, till very recently, known to, much less ac. quiesced in by Massachusetts, to whom, till the separation of Maine, the jurisdiction as well as soil belonged. There was little occasion for the employment of criminal process among the relics of a primitive population, as these settlers were represented to be of a "mild, frugal, industrious, and pious character," desirous of fiuding a refuge under the patriarchal and spiritual power of their religion. For the arrangement of their civil affairs of every description, including their accidental disputes and differences among themselves, they were in the habit of having recourse to a tribunal of their own establishment,

formed of one or two arbiters associated with the Catholic priest.

The settlement on the Aroostook was made within the last six years, partly by citizens of the United States, partly by British subjects, but with an impression, entertained by the whole community, that they were establishing themselves on American territory. It was not, indeed, till within three or four years, that the provincial government undertook to subject these settlers to civil process; and last summer, for the first time, proceed. ings for trespass and intrusion on the crown lands were instituted against them.

The opinion of Great Britain, as to the practical jurisdiction exercised over the territory in dispute, so late as the year 1814, may be seen by a reference to the proceedings at Ghent. When proposing a revision of the boundary line of Maine, with reference to convenience, and asking the tract now contested as a cession, for which compensation was elsewhere to be made, it is asserted by the English plenipotentiaries, "that the greater part of the territory in question is actually unoccupied ;" and strenuous as were the efforts of his majesty's ministers to adjust such a variation of line as might secure a direct communication between Quebec and Halifax, it no where appears, that a fact so important to their object as the actual settlement of the country by per. sons recognising British authority, was conceived to exist.

At as early a period as the gradual advance of population required, the usual preliminary measures were taken by Massachusetts, with a view to the settlement of the vacant lands on her eastern frontier.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »