provision as to the (then) western termination of the line. It was traced through the Lake of the Woods to the most northwestern point of that lake, "and from thence on a due west course to the River Mississippi." They and the cartographers of that day supposed that the source of the Mississippi was in Canadian territory, northwest of the Lake of the Woods, whereas, it was a considerable distance south of that lake.

It was thought at the time that if the disputed question as to the St Croix River and the eastern boundary should be adjusted, the remainder of the line described in the treaty could be amicably demarked. It was accordingly agreed in the treaty of 1794, negotiated by Mr Jay, that this question should be submitted to arbitration by a commission composed of one American, one Englishman, and one umpire selected by the two. The commission rendered a unanimous award, describing with precision which was the river intended by the treaty to be the eastern boundary, and the award was accepted by both nations.

This arbitration, however, was far from settling the boundary questions. Four distinct controversies arose over different parts of the divisory line. The first was as to the ownership of the islands in and near Passamaquoddy Bay, a part of the Bay of Fundy. The second was as to the line from the source of the St Croix River along the MaineNew York frontier; the third as to the ownership of the islands in the St Lawrence River and the Great Lakes; and the fourth as to the line from Lake Superior to the northwestern corner of the Lake of the Woods.

Various efforts were made after the date of the award as to the St Croix River, in 1798, to adjust these questions by diplomatic negotiations, especially the first two, and a treaty to that end was signed but never ratified. In the negotiations which resulted in the treaty of peace of 1814 these subjects were con

sidered and provision was made for their definitive settlement. This treaty was signed on the part of the United States by John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, James A. Bayard, Jonathan Russell, and Albert Gallatin. It provided that the ownership of the islands in Passamaquoddy Bay should be passed upon by a commission composed of one American and one Englishman, and if they failed to agree they should report to their respective governments the points of disagreement and the grounds thereof, and the governments were to refer the points of disagreement to the arbitration of some friendly power. The commissioners were able to agree upon all the questions submitted to them, and there was consequently no arbitration.

The second question whose adjustment was provided for in the treaty of 1814-the line from the source of the St Croix River along the Maine-New York frontier to the St Lawrence-was likewise submitted to two commissioners, under the same terms as to arbitration in case of disagreement as just stated respecting the islands in Passamaquoddy Bay. This proved to be the most irritating, difficult, and tedious of all the subjects of dispute between the United States and Great Britain. The two commissioners first met at Portland, Maine, in 1816, and held various other sessions at different points in Canada and the United States adjacent to the region in dispute. They also caused elaborate surveys to be made and charted. After five years of vain efforts to reach an agreement, they adjourned in 1821, submitting to their respective governments their divergent views.

This threw the subject back into diplomacy for the naming of the arbitrator and fixing the terms of arbitration. Six years elapsed before these were consummated, and meanwhile the situation was further aggravated by the acts of conflicting authorities in the disputed territory. Finally, in 1827, it was agreed

that the matter should be referred to the arbitrament of the King of the Netherlands. In 1830 the King rendered his award, not accepting the line contended for by either party, but recommending a compromise boundary or a line of convenience. The American minister at The Hague, without instructions from Washington, protested against the award on the ground that it was a departure from the powers delegated to the arbitrator. The British Government manifested a disposition to acquiesce in the award, but intimated that its acceptance would not preclude the two governments from modifying the line. President Jackson was at first inclined to accept it, and it is said that he afterwards expressed regret that he had not done so ; but he finally submitted the question of acceptance to the Senate, and that body advised him that it was not obligatory, and that new negotiations should be opened.

The British Government consented to this latter alternative, with the understanding that meanwhile the boundaries actually possessed should be observed by the authorities. The negotiations dragged along through several years, and new surveys were ordered; but it was not possible for the people on the border to observe the temporary boundary understanding. Strife occurred, a state of border warfare was created, Congress authorized the President to call out the militia, and voted $10,000,ooo for public defense.

An open conflict between the two nations seemed imminent; the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, General Scott, was dispatched to the frontier, and through his interposition a temporary border truce was arranged.

In 1841 Mr Webster became Secretary of State. He was well acquainted with the controversy and possessed the confidence of those most interested-the people of New England. Lord Ashburton was sent to Washington by the

British Government as a special plenipotentiary to adjust this long-pending and vexatious question. The result of their negotiations was the treaty of 1842, by which the line in controversy was definitely agreed upon and fixed. It was, however, a no more advantageous settlement for the United States than would have been secured by the award of the King of the Netherlands, and the prolongation of the dispute kept the border in a state of turmoil for more than ten years, brought the two countries to the verge of war, and caused a heavy outlay from the national treasury. In addition to the military and diplomatic expenditures, Congress voted to the States of Maine and Massachusetts the sum of $300,000 as compensation for the territory claimed by them, but conceded to Canada.

The third question respecting the Canadian boundary, for which provision was made for settlement by the treaty of 1814, was that relating to the line extending through the St Lawrence River and the Great Lakes, and the ownership of many islands along the route. The commissioners were to be appointed, with provision for arbitration in case of disagreement. They held their first meeting in 1816, and they spent a period of six years in causing surveys to be made, in visiting in person the entire line, and in conferences at different cities in the United States and Canada, and in the end were enabled to reach a harmonious decision in 1822. By this decision various islands which had been claimed and occupied by Canadians were transferred to the American side of the line, and others claimed by Americans were placed on the Canadian side.

The fourth question which was sought to be adjusted by the treaty of 1814 was the boundary line from Lake Superior to the northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods. This was entrusted to the same commission which had success

fully fixed the boundaries of the St Lawrence and the Great Lakes. After they had concluded their labors under Article VI of the treaty of 1814, they began the work of delimitation of the frontier to the extreme of the Lake of the Woods. Their first session in discharge of this duty was held in 1822, and the work of survey and conference extended until 1827, when they adjourned sine die, with a disagreement upon the entire line from St Marys River, between Lakes Huron and Superior, to the western limit of the Lake of the Woods, and after an expenditure of more than $200,000. Under the treaty this disagreement should have been followed by a reference to a friendly sovereign as arbitrator; but the experience in the arbitration of the northeastern boundary did not encourage such a course, and the agitation over that subject overshadowed the less important question at that day of the extreme northwestern frontier. It was allowed to remain in a state of quiescence until the Webster - Ashburton negotiations, in 1842. After fifty years of diplomatic and arbitral controversy, the two governments had reached a state of political complaisance, and the large tracts of territory which had been the subject of disagreement on the northwest border were, in a spirit of mutual concession, divided by the treaty of 1842, and the line was marked out upon the maps made by the surveys of the commission. But even this settlement has not proven entirely complete, as some portion of the water boundary in the lakes is yet in doubt, and it is charged by Canada that the United States Land Office has surveyed, platted, and sold to Americans a considerable extent of land on the Minnesota-Wisconsin frontier which really belongs to Canada. The Government of the Dominion has sought on its own account to survey and mark the boundary in that region without the coöperation of the American authorities, but our Government has not accepted this survey.

The uncertainty as to the true boundary west of the Lake of the Woods, as described in the treaty of 1783, was removed by the treaty of 1818, Article II of which provided that from the lake the line should be drawn westward along the 49th parallel of latitude to the "Stony or Rocky Mountains.

The line from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean remained for forty years a subject of controversy. It engaged the attention of successive administrations up to the presidency of Mr Polk, various treaty and arbitral propositions being advanced only to be rejected by one or the other of the two nations. Our claim to the whole territory on the Pacific coast, from California to the Russian possessions at 54° 40', was asserted by the Democratic National Convention of 1844, and entered largely into the campaign which resulted in Mr Polk's election. In his first message to Congress he declared our title to this region to be "clear and unquestionable," and he recommended to Congress to extend our laws and jurisdiction over it. John Quincy Adams, who was recognized as the highest living American authority on international questions, held with President Polk that our title to the territory up to 54° 40' was complete and perfect.

Congress, acting upon the President's suggestion, passed a joint resolution authorizing the President to give notice to Great Britain of the termination of the joint occupation. This brought about an energetic protest from Great Britain, and the country was awakened to the danger of hostilities; but the two nations found a better way of reconciling their differences, and after anxious deliberations Mr Buchanan, the Secretary of State, and the British Minister signed a convention in 1846 whereby the line of the 49th parallel was extended from the Rocky Mountains to the waters of the Pacific Ocean. By this act the vast domain now embraced in British Columbia was yielded to Great Britain,

although our title to it had been declared unquestionable by a national convention, by the President in his annual message, by Congress through joint resolution, and by some of the highest authorities on international law.

Still one more step was necessary before our chain of title to a fixed and unquestioned line from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean should be complete. In describing the Oregon boundary, Article I of the treaty of 1846 provided that the line should be "along the 49th parallel of north latitude to the middle of the channel which separates the continent from Vancouver's Island; and thence southerly through the middle of the said channel, and of Fuca's Straits, to the Pacific Ocean." The treaty had hardly been proclaimed before this water boundary began to be a matter of dispute. Between the Gulf of Georgia on the east and the Straits of Fuca on the west lie a number of islands, and it was not clear what was "the middle of the channel" among these islands. In this state of uncertainty the islands were being populated by both Americans and Canadians and conflicts of authority arose. Efforts were made to reach an agreement as to the channel by diplomatic negotiations, but they failed. In 1856 Congress passed an act authorizing a commissioner on the part of the United States to act with one to be appointed by Great Britain. These commissioners met, and after visiting in person the region in question were unable to reach an agreement. The subject went back into diplomacy, and for more than ten years it was a frequent topic of discussion, but no method of settlement could be attained.

In 1859 the settlers on San Juan Island came into conflict, the troops of the two countries became involved, and a collision seemed imminent. A second time the services of General Scott were in

voked, and he arranged for a joint and peaceful occupation by troops of the two nations, but with difficulty were they able to prevent conflicts of the civil authorities. Finally, when the Joint High Commission met in Washington in 1871, the question of the true channel was submitted to the arbitration of the Emperor of Germany, and he rendered an award. in favor of the contention of the United States.

It

The foregoing review shows that ever since the independence of the United States the boundary with Canada has been a subject of almost constant consideration between the United States and Great Britain, and that every step of the frontier line from the initial point on the Atlantic coast to the last water channel on the Pacific has been a matter of controversy, and sometimes of such bitter contention as even to threaten war. also shows that three courses of action have from time to time been taken by the Government of the United States, to wit, treaty adjustment, joint and equal commissions, and arbitration. In the case of the important question of the northeastern boundary, resort was had successively to all three of these methods. It is seen that where adjustment by treaty has failed, a resort has been had to either joint commissions or to a foreign and neutral arbitrator. Treaty adjustment has not always been found the most acceptable method in popular estimation, as instance the Oregon boundary treaty. We have suffered less, in loss of territory claimed, by the action of joint commissions and by arbitration than by treaty settlement. public men and the Government have not found a strong title to territory a bar to the submission of boundary questions to the adjudication of a commission or an arbitrator.

Our