Canada; its Defences, Condition, and Resources: Being a third and concluding volume of "My Diary, North and South"Russell, William Howard, Sir
History
Canada; its Defences, Condition, and Resources: Being a third and concluding volume of "My Diary, North and South"
Russell, William Howard, Sir
Canada -- Defenses; Canada -- Description and travel
“Rouse’s Point is the best means of defending both the ingress
into the lake, and the exit from it. And I say now, that on
the whole frontier of the State of New York, with the single
exception of the Narrows below the city, there is not a point
of equal importance. I hope this government will last for ever;
but if it does not, and if, in the judgment of Heaven, so great
a calamity shall befall us as the rupture of this Union, and
the State of New York shall thereby be thrown upon her own
defences, I ask, is there a single point, except the Narrows,
the possession of which she will so much desire? No, there is
not one. And how did we obtain this advantage for her? The
parallel of 45° north was established by the treaty of 1783 as
our boundary with Canada in that part of the line. But, as I
have stated, that line was found to run south of Rouse’s Point.
And how did we get back this precious possession? By running
a semicircle like that of the King of the Netherlands? No; we
went back to the old line, which had always been supposed to be
the true line, and the establishment of which gave us not only
Rouse’s Point, but a strip of land containing some thirty or
forty thousand acres between the parallel of 45° and the old line.
“The same arrangement gave us a similar advantage in Vermont;
and I have never heard that the constituents of my friend near
me made any complaint of the treaty. That State got about sixty
or seventy thousand acres, including several villages, which
would otherwise have been left on the British side of the line.
We received Rouse’s Point, and this additional land, as one of
the equivalents for the cession of territory made in Maine. And
what did we do for New Hampshire? There was an ancient dispute
as to which was the north-westernmost head of the Connecticut
River. Several streams were found, either of which might be
insisted on as the true boundary. But we claimed that which is
called Hall’s Stream. This had not formerly been allowed; the
Dutch award did not give to New Hampshire what she claimed; and
Mr. Van Ness, our commissioner, appointed under the Treaty of
Ghent, after examining the ground, came to the conclusion that
we were not entitled to Hall’s Stream. I thought that we were
so entitled, although I admit that Hall’s Stream does not join
the Connecticut River till after it has passed the parallel of
45°. By the Treaty of Washington this demand was agreed to, and
it gave New Hampshire 100,000 acres of land. I do not say that
we obtained this wrongfully; but I do say that we got that which
Mr. Van Ness had doubted our right to. I thought the claim just,
however, and the line was established accordingly. And here let
me say, once for all, that, if we had gone for arbitration, we
should inevitably have lost what the treaty gave to Vermont and
New York; because all that was clear matter of cession, and not
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account