USA > Louisiana > The province and the states, a history of the province of Louisiana under France and Spain, and of the territories and states of the United States formed therefrom, Vol. II > Part 38
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48
In a communication dated May 13, 1803, Mr. King wrote from London to the secretary of state that "the source of the Missis- sippi nearest to the Lake of the Woods, according to MeKenzie's report will be found about twenty-nine miles to the westward of any part of that lake, which is represented to be nearly cir- cular. Hence, a direct line between the northwesternmost part of this lake and the nearest source of the Mississippi, which is preferred by this Government, has appeared to me equally advan- tagcons with the lines we had preferred." After a long period
379
THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY.
of negotiation by the envoys of the two countries, the following article was finally agreed upon and incorporated in the treaty formulated by the convention of May 12, 1803 :*
"Article V. Whereas, it is uncertain whether the river Mis- sissippi extends so far to the northward as to be intersected by a line drawn due west from the Lake of the Woods, in the man- ner mentioned in the treaty of peace ( 1783) between His Majesty and the United States, it is agreed that instead of the said line, the boundary of the United States in this quarter shall and is hereby declared to be the shortest line which can be drawn between the northwesternpoint of the Lake of the Woods and the nearest source of the river Mississippi; and for the purpose of ascer- taining and determining the northwest point of the Lake of the Woods and the source of the river Mississippi that may be near- est to the said northwest point, as well as for the purpose of run- ning and marking the said boundary line between the same, three commissioners upon the demand of either Government shall be appointed and authorized, upon their oaths, to act; and their compensation and expenses shall be ascertained and paid and vacancies supplied in the manner provided in respect to the com- missioners mentioned in the preceding articles ; and the decisions and proceedings of the said commissioners or of a majority of them made and had pursuant to this convention shall be final and conchisive."
In a communication dated January 31, 1So4, Mr. Madison wrote to Mr. Livingston: "The northern boundary (of Loni- siana ) we have reason to believe was settled between France and Great Britain by commissioner. appointed under the treaty of Utrecht, who separated the British and French territories west of the Lake of the Woods by the forty-ninth degree of latitude. In support of our just claims in all these cases, it is proper that no time should be lost in collecting the best proofs which can be obtained. This important object has already been recom- mended generally to your attention. It is particularly desirable that you should procure an authenticated copy of the commer- cial charter granted by Louis XIV. to Crozat in 1712, which gives an outline to Louisiana favorable to our claims, at the same time that it is an evidence of the highest and most unexceptionable authority. A copy of this charter is annexed to the English translation of Jontel's journal of La Salle's last voyage, the French original not containing it. A record of the charter doubt- less exists in the archives of the French Government; and it may
. Treaties of the United States.
4
380
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
be expected that an attested copy will not be refused to you. It is not improbable that the charter or other documents relating to the Mississippi project a few years after, may afford some light and be attainable from the same source. The proceedings of the commissioners under the treaty of Utrecht will merit particular research, as they promise not only a favorable northern bound- ary, but as they will decide an important event involved in a con- vention of limits now depending between the United States and Great Britain. To these may be added whatever other documents may occur to your recollection or research, including maps, &c. If the secret treaty of Paris in 1762-3 between France and Spain, and an entire copy of that of St. Ildefonso in 1800 can be obtained, they may also be useful. An authentication of the precise date at least of the former is very important."*
The acquisition of Louisiana by the United States so altered the rights of the latter, that the senate, on February 9, 1804, deter- mined to ratify the convention of May 12, 1803, with article V, above set forth, wholly excluded, which was accordingly done.t This action was partly due to the contents of the following let- ter from Mr. King, dated New York, December 9, 1803: "The draft of the convention with Great Britain respecting boundaries, having been settled in previous conferences, was drawn up and sent by me to Lord Hawkesbury on the 11th of April; on the 12th of May the convention was signed without the alteration of a word of the original draft; and on the 15th of May the letter of Messrs. Livingston and Monroe (a copy of which was annexed to my No. 100), announcing the treaty of cession with France, was received and communicated by me to Lord Hawkes- bury. At the date of the signature of the convention with Great Britain, I had no knowledge of the treaty with France; and have reason to be satisfied that Lord Hawkesbury was equally uninformed of it. It results that the convention with Great Brit- ain was concluded without any reference whatever to the treaty of cession with France." The report of the senate committee on the subject was as follows: "That from the information they have obtained, they are satisfied that the said treaty was drawn up by Mr. King three weeks before the signature of the treaty with the French Republic of the 30th of April and signed by Lord Ilawkesbury without alteration of a word; and that it had, in the intention of our minister, no reference whatever to the said treaty with the French Republic, inasmuch as he had no
* American State Papers.
t Senate Documents.
381
THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY.
knowledge of its existence. But not having the means of ascer- taining the precise northern limits of Louisiana as ceded to the United States, the committee can give no opinion whether the line to be drawn by virtue of the third (fifth) article of said treaty with Great Britain would interfere with the said northern limits of Louisiana or not."
The rights of the United States thus became so improved by the acquisition of Louisiana, that the stipulations concerning the northern boundary in the treaty of May 12, 1823, could not in fairness be agreed to by the government. The reasons were given in detail in the paper delivered to Lord Harrowby by the American minister on September 5. 1804, wherein it was stated that "after the treaty of 1783, and at the time the convention in contemplation was entered into, the territory which Great Britain held westward of the Lake of the Woods, was bounded south by the forty-ninth degree of north latitude; that which lay between the Lake of the Woods and the Mississippi southward of that parallel belonged to the United States; and that which lay to the west of the Mississippi to Spain. It being, however, understood by more recent discoveries or observations that the source of the Mississippi did not extend so high north as had been supposed, and Great Britain having shown a desire to have the boundary of the United States modified in such manner as to strike that river, an article to that effect was inserted in the late convention ; but in so doing it was not the intention of the American minister or of the British minister to do more than sim- ply to define the American boundary. It was not contemplated by either of them that America should convey to Great Britain any right to the territory lying westward of the line, since not a foot of it belonged to her ; it was intended to leave it to Great Britain to settle the point as to such territory, or such portion of it as she might want, with Spain, or rather with France, to whom it then belonged. At this period, however, certain meas- ures respecting the Mississippi and movements in that quarter (interdiction of the deposits at New Orleans) took place which seemed to menace the great interests of America that were dependent on that river. These excited a sensibility, acute and universal, of which in equal degree her history furnishes but few examples. They led to a discussion which terminated in a treaty with France, by which that Power coded to the United States the whole of Louisiana as she had received it from Spain. This treaty took place on the Both of April, 103, twelve days only before the convention between Great Britain and the United States was signed, and some days before the adoption of such
1
١
١٠
382
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
treaty was known to the plenipotentiaries who negotiated and signed the convention. Under such circumstances, it is impos- sible that any right which the United States derived under that treaty could be conveyed by this convention to Great Britain, or that the ministers who formed the convention could have con- templated such an effect by it. Thus the stipulation which is contained in the fifth article of the convention has become by the cession made by the treaty perfectly nugatory; for as Great Britain holds no territory southward of the forty-ninth degree of north latitude and the United States the whole of it, the line pro- posed by that article would run through a country which now belongs exclusively to the latter."
The cession of Louisiana to the United States had no sooner become known in America than it was seen that a boundary wholly different from the one that had been contemplated and one much more favorable to the United States would have to be established. At this point the first serious mistake by the United States was made. The treaty of 1783, confirmed by that of 179.1, carried the northern boundary up to the northwestern- most point of the Lake of the Woods, from which a due west- erly line was to be drawn to the Mississippi. This had been the undoubted intention of the parties, and should have been the line ' insisted on in the extension westward by reason of the acqui- sition of Lonisiana as far at least as the Rocky mountains. But the United States could not rightfully claim through Louisiana an extension beyond the Rocky mountains, because the Louisiana held by France prior to 1763 and from 1800 to 1803, and the Louisiana held by Spain from 1762 1 15, were at to tune claimed to extend lasand that chain of mountains, or farther than the sources of the branches of the Mississippi. Thus the United States, whether it acquired the one Louisiana or the other, had no claim by reason of the acquisition of Louisiana to any territory beyond the Rockies. But the attitude of England in regard to the boundary question seemed to change wholly by the improved interests of the United States, as will be shown in sub- sequent pages.
All important matters having been duly considered in Lon- don by the ministers of the two countries, it was mutually decided to postpone further negotiations until after the return of Mr. Monroe from the court of Spain. But after such return, ques- tions of much greater weight, as, for instance, the course of Great Britain in impressing men from American vessels, engrossed the attention of the ministry, and the question of the northwestern boundary, while occasionally brought forward, was
383
THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY.
permitted to languish. Although a treaty of amity, commerce and navigation between the two countries was concluded on December 31, 1806, nothing therein was agreed upon by the commissioners concerning the northern boundaries. However, it was mutually agreed at the time to take up that important con- troversy in a separate convention at no distant day. This was done in 1807. Much opposition to the American plans was at once encountered "from the prejudices, supposed interests and mistaken views of many persons, an explanation of some of which will be found in an idle paper written by Lord Selkirk."> The American commissioners proposed the following line: "It is agreed that a line drawn due north or south (as the case may require) from the most northwesterly point of the Lake of the Woods, until it shall intersect the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, and from the point of such intersection, dne west along and with the said parallel, shall be the dividing line between His Majesty's territories and those of the United States to the westward of the said lake; and that the said line to and along and with the said parallel shall form the southern boundary of His Majesty's said territories and the northern boundary of the said territories of the United States: provided, that nothing in the present article shall be construed to extend to the north- west coast of America or to the territories belonging to or claimed by either party on the continent of America to the west- ward of the Stony mountains." The British commissioners were willing to run the line as follows: "It is agreed that a line drawn dnc north or south (as the case may require) from the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods until it shall inter sect the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, and from the point of such intersection due west along and with the said parallel, shall be the dividing line between His Majesty's territories and those of the United States to the westward of the said lake as far as their said respective territories extend in that quarter ; and that the said line shall to that extent form the southern bound- ary of His Majesty's said territories and the northern boundary of the said territories of the United States: provided, that nothi- ing in the present article shall be construed to extend to the north- west coast of America or to the territories belonging to or claimed by either party on the continent of America to the westward of the Stony mountains."
The above two articles, as explanatory provisions, accompa- nied the project of the proposed supplementary treaty of April,
· American State Papers.
384
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
1807. The article finally agreed upon by both parties was as follows: "It is agreed that a line drawn due west from the Lake of the Woods along the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude shall be the line of demarcation (division line) between His Maj- esty's territories and those of the United States to the westward of the said lake, as far as the territories of the United States extend in that quarter ; and that the said line shall, to that extent, form the southern boundary of His Majesty's said territories and the northern boundary of the said territories of the United States ; provided, that nothing in the present article shall be construed to extend to the northwest coast of America or to the territo- ries belonging to or claimed by either party on the continent of America to the westward of the Stony mountains." The Ameri- cans objected to the words, "as far as the territories of the United "States extend in that quanter." They wrote to Mr. Madison that "It appeared to us that by these words a great portion of the subject was in danger of being set at large; that the pro- vision would perhaps do no more than establish between the par- ties the commencement of the line, and might of course leave it open to Great Britain to found a claim hereafter to any part of the tract of country to the westward of that commencement, upon the notions of occupancy or conquest, which you will find . stated by Lord Selkirk in the paper above mentioned, or upon some future purchase from Spain, as intimated by others. We therefore proposed to omit the words in question altogether, which the concluding proviso appeared to render wholly unnecessary, even upon the ideas of the British commissioners. This was not agreed to; but it was said there would be no objection to give to this part of the description a character of reciprocity, so as to make it read, "as far as their said respective territories extend in that quarter." Why the language "as far as their said respect- ive territories extend in that quarter," since the British commis- sioners themselves proposed it, was not used in the project, instead of in an explanatory article, is hard to comprehend. However, whether that expression or "as far as the territories of the United States extend in that quarter" was used, the Ameri- can commissioners knew that the concluding proviso limited both countries, so far as the treaty was concerned, to the line cast- ward of the Stony mountains. That and the accompanying articles explained the intention of the parties. But this treaty was not concluded.
In November, 1806, when commenting on the claims of the United States to the northern boundary west of the Mississippi,
385
THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY.
Mr. Gallatin said :* "The boundary fixed by the treaty of U'trecht might be and probably was intended for Canada rather than for Louisiana ; and Crozat's charter expressly limits the last province to the forty-fifth degree of latitude." He therefore advised the president against a "commitment respecting the northern boundary of either Louisiana or the United States." It follows that had the United States relied upon the Crozat char- ter when settling the northern boundary west of the Mississippi, the line would undoubtedly have been fixed on the forty-fifth parallel. To offset this serious objection, the American com- missioners argued that long after the grant to Crozat, Louisiana had been extended in all directions. However, the strongest argu- ment for the United States in support of their contention for the forty-ninth parallel westward of the Mississippi to the Rocky mountains, was the boundary fixed by the treaty of Utrecht and the line established up the water courses to the Lake of the Woods in 1782-83.
It was mainly due to the influence of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany that the British government fought so long over the bound- ary between Canada and the United States .; It was granted extensive and valuable privileges of trade and commerce on Ind- son bay and the tributary rivers, and at first the country was called "Rupert's Land." Their privileges to the westward were very much enlarged when they undertook to send an expedition to explore the northwestern coast of America with the hope of finding a passage to the South Sea. They were made as secure in the possession of the country as if they had been granted territory in "the manor of Hat Greenwich in heat." The only payment required for the grant by the king was the annual assess- ment of "two elks and two black beavers." The company became very strong and sich. They finally merged with the Northwest- ern Fur Company, which had been formed when it was learned of the wealth awaiting such an enterprise. After the Revolution, they expanded all over the northwest, and threatened the Span- ish settlements in California and the American settlements on the Oregon, or Columbia river. Possessing the exclusive right to trade with the Indians of the northwest, they became intensely interested in the settlement of the boundary that should sepa- rate their fields of profit from the territory of the United States. They brought great pressure to bear upon the mother country. with the result that the English commissioners to settle the bound-
· Writings of Albeit Gallatin.
# History of Canada. Kingsford.
11-25
1 1
386
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
ary were extremely tenacions of every foot of territory, even though their claims were far weaker than those of the Unite ! States. After the failure in 1807 to settle the boundary dispute. no further action was taken by either government, owing to the general war in Europe and to the war between Great Britain and! the United States, until 1814.
In the draft of the original protocol looking to the termination of the War of 1812, the American commissioners requested that there should be a revision of the boundary line between the ter- ritories of the United States and those of Great Britain adjoin- ing them in North America, to which the British commissioner> agreed .* This was in August, 1814. The latter also requested that the line from Lake Superior to the Mississippi should be revised. When asked if they did not mean from the Lake of the Woods to the Mississippi, they replied that they meant from Lake Superior to that river. To this the American commission- ers properly replied that "under the alleged purpose of opening a direct communication between two of the British provinces in America, the British Government require a cession of territory forming a part of one of the States of the American Union, and they propose without purpose specifically alleged to draw the boundary line westward not from the Lake of the Woods as it now is, but from Lake Superior. It must be perfectly immate- rial to the United States whether the object of the British Gov- ernment in demanding the dismemberment of the United States, is to acquire territory as such or for purposes less liable in the eyes of the world to be ascribed to the desire of aggrandizement. Whatever the motive may be and with whatever workstens views of conquest may be disclaimed, while demanding for herself or for the Indians a cession of territory more extensive than the whole island of Great Britain, the duty marked out for the under- signed (the American commissioners) is the same. They have no authority to cede any part of the territory of the United States, and to no stipulation to that effect will they subscribe. The conditions proposed by Great Britain are above all dishonorable to the United States, in demanding from them to abandon territory and a portion of their citizens ; to admit a for- cign interference in their domestic concerns, and to cease to exer- cise their natural rights on their own shores and in their own waters. A treaty concluded on such terms would be but an armistice. . It is with deep regret that the undersigned have seen that other views are entertained by the British Gov-
. American State Papers.
·
387
THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY.
ernment, and that new and unexpected pretensions are raised, which if persisted in must oppose an insuperable obstacle to a pacification. It is not necessary to refer such demands to the American Government for its instruction. They will only be a fit subject of deliberation when it becomes necessary to decide upon the expediency of an absolute surrender of national inde- pendence." This stinging rebuke, so amply merited by the unblushing effrontery of the British commissioners, was another intimation, in addition to the declaration of war in 1812, that the time had come for all European governments to cease regard- ing the United States as unwilling or unable to defend their rights as to territory and sovereignty. The only inexplicable feature in the diplomatic negotiations of that time is the yickling attitude of the American commissioners as regards the northern and northwestern boundaries.
Finally on the ioth of November, 1814, the American com- missioners submitted, in a "projet of a treaty of peace," the fol- lowing proposition to the British commissioners : "Article VIII. It is agreed that a line drawn due north or south (as the case may be) from the most northwestern point of the Lake of the Woods, until it shall intersect the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, and from the point of such intersection due west along and with the said parallel, shall be the dividing line between His Majesty's territories and those of the United States to the westward of the said lake, as far as the said respective territo- ries extend in that quarter, and that the said line shall to that extent form the southern boundary of His Majesty's said ter- ritories and the northern bounday of the said that nie of the United States: provided, that nothing in the present article shall be construed to extend to the northwest coast of America, or to the territories belonging to, or claimed by, either party on the continent of America to the westward of the Stony mount- ains." The British plenipotentiaries submitted the following counter "projet:" "It is agreed that a line drawn dne west from the Lake of the Woods, along forty-ninth parallel of north lati- tude, shall be the line of demarcation between His Britannic Maj- esty's territories and those of the United States to the westward of the said lake, so far as the territories of the United States extend in that quarter, and the said line shall to that extent form the southern boundary of His Britannic Majesty's territories and the northern boundary of the territories of the United States. It being always distinctly understood that nothing in the pres-
' American State Papers.
388
THE PROVINCE AND THE STATES.
ent article shall be construed to extend to the northwest coast of America, or to territories belonging to, or claimed by, cithe party on the continent of America westward of the Stony mount- ains (and it is further agreed the subjects of His Britanni; Majesty shall at all times have access, from His Britannic Maj. esty's territories, by land or inland navigation into the aforesaid territories of the United States to the river Mississippi, with their goods, effects and merchandise, and that Ilis Britannic Majesty's subjects shall have and enjoy the free navigation of the said river)." Of course, the latter proposition was so audacious, not to say insolent, and so different from what had just been talked of, that the intentions of the British envoys were revealed, either to carry their point, or to suspend negotiations wholly on the boundary question. Such suspension was finally agreed to by the commissioners of both governments. Thus the two countries were very far apart in their respective demands. The concilia- tory and yielding attitude of the American commissioners.was turned to the advantage of the adroit Englishmen, who amplified their demands in accordance with the submissive policy of the Americans. The indefiniteness of the boundary between the possessions of Great Britain and the United States, enabled the former during the War of 1812 to gain important footholds on American territory along the border, which advantages she claimed as conquests after the war. But the United States insisted on the restoration of the statu quo, which demand was finally acceded to by Great Britain. Although the proposed article con- corning the boundary west of the Lake of the Woods was omitted from the treaty of December 24. 181, the following attuale was agreed to and incorporated in that instrument :+
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.