That time never arrived, but a time did arrive when Maine sacrificed her territory and her rights for some paltry considerations, alleged to be equivalents. A settlement of the northeastern boundary was supposed to have been effected-but it was a settlement that met with no hearty response from a majority of the people of Maine. It was not in accordance with the anticipations or wishes of the people of Maine-it was not in accordance with their long cherished affections. But it was believed that the whole question was settled, and that the "considerations and equivalents" that it was proposed to bestow upon Maine for receding from her boundary and relinquishing her territory, however insignificant those considertions and equivalents might be in character, were to have validity and effect. It was believed that the terms of the treaty would be honestly complied with on the part of the British government, and that what was clearly and distinctly defined in that treaty as a matter of right, as such would be respected.

It is to be regretted that while the memory of the wrongs and indignities to which we have been subjected is so fresh and vivid, that other grievances should be offered to our consideration demanding redress, intimately connected with those wrongs and indignities, and reminding us of those assumptions and impositions that outraged and finally triumphed over our rights.

Among the most important of the equivalents and considerations for the relinquishment of her territory to which the attention of the people of Maine was invited, was the free navigation of the St. John.

The commissioners appointed under the "resolves in relation to the northeastern boundary of this State," in their report to the Governor of this State dated 4th January, 1843, say that it was with the greatest reluctance that they assented to the terms which were ultimately engrafted into the treaty. They say, "we found it exceedingly difficult to bring our minds to entertain the proposition. The proposition when first presented was so objectionable in our estimation that it was not until after much consideration and reflection that we were brought to hesitate in regard to it." But baffled at every point, borne down by a combination of interest

and influence and the pressure that was brought to bear upon them from every quarter from without the limits of our State, and standing unaided and abandoned, the commissioners were at length induced to yield so far as to submit to the Senate of the United States whether "Maine ought under existing circumstances to consent to so great a sacrifice of her just claims for the peace and harmony and general welfare of the Union." The Senate consented, and we consoled ourselves for the loss of territory with the idea of an acquisition of the free navigation of the St. John. This was treated as the concession of a great privilege-a privilege which many believed the law of nature and of nations confirmed to us as a matter of right, and which could not be withheld without giving just cause of offence-that it was quite as much of a privilege to Great Britain as to us-and in either view no equivalent for the concession we made. It was a privilege which we had previously enjoyed without treaty-it was a privilege assuredly understood to be embodied in the terms of the treaty, and fully and freely secured thereby. The State of Maine claims for all the produce of the forest, or of agriculture (not being manufactured) grown on any of those parts of the State watered by the river St. John or by its tributaries, a free course to and from the seaport at the mouth of the St. John, and a free departure from said port for the produce before mentioned, subject to no restriction or duty whatsoever. We are now called upon to take ground upon this question. It should be deliberately taken and unswervingly maintained.

By the memorial of Oliver Frost, a citizen of Bangor, it appears that he has been engaged since the ratification of the Treaty of Washington in the manufacture of pine timber in that part of the State of Maine watered by the St. John and its tributaries—and that he entered upon the business in the full belief that the lumber floated out on those waters would be free from any tax, toll or duty whatever. It further appears that the Province of New Brunswick has levied a duty upon all American timber shipped from any port in New Brunswick, and that the same has been demanded and collected of the said Frost and other American citizens; and that said timber cannot be shipped without the payment of 20 cents per ton

to the Provincial Treasurer; and that the said Frost has been compelled to pay 20 cents per ton on 9,044 tons of timber, amounting to the sum of $1,808-80, Against the exactions of the Province of New Brunswick as a direct and palpable violation of the terms of the Treaty of Washington, the memorialist filed his protest with the Treasurer of the Province, and has claimed the protection of the government of the United States from said exactions and asked remuneration of the sums that he believes to be thus wrongfully and illegally taken, and has now appealed to the authorities of Maine, asking them to consider the subject and adopt such measures as they may deem just and expedient in order to have his interests and the interests and rights of the citizens of Maine in the prosecution of their lawful business protected and placed upon a more secure basis than the will and pleasure of the authorities of New Brunswick. The third article of the Treaty of Washington is as follows:

"In order to promote the interests and encourage the industry of all the inhabitants of the countries watered by the river St. John and its tributaries, whether living in the State of Maine or the Province of New Brunswick, it is agreed that where by the provisions of the present treaty, the river St. John is declared to be the line of boundary the navigation of the said river shall be free and open to both parties and shall in no way be obstructed by either; that all the produce of the forest in logs, lumber, timber, boards; staves or shingles, or of agriculture, grown on any of those parts of the State of Maine watered by the river St. John, or by its tributaries, of which fact reasonable evidence shall, if required, be produced, shall have free access into and through said river and its said tributaries, having their source within the State of Maine, to and from the seaport at the mouth of the said river St. John, and to and round the falls of the said river either by boats, rafts, or other conveyance; that when within the Province of New Brunswick, the said produce shall be dealt with as if it were the produce of the said Province; that in like manner the inhabitants of the territory of the Upper St. John determined by this treaty to belong to Her Britannic Majesty, shall have free access to and through the

river for their produce in those parts where the said river runs wholly through the State of Maine; provided always, that this agreement shall give no right to either party to interfere with any regulations not inconsistent with the terms of this treaty which the governments respectively of Maine and New Brunswick may make respecting the navigation of the said river, where both banks thereof shall belong to the same party."

any

In April, 1843, a law was passed by the legislature of New Brunswick, imposing an export duty on all timber shipped from port in the Province, excepting from duty all timber cut on any part of the United States and passed down the river St. John, and thence shipped to the United States. This law was transmitted to the home government, and submitted to the Queen's Advocate and Her Majesty's Attorney General and Solicitor General. These officers, the legal advisers of the government, report upon said law, among other things, as follows: "The construction which has been put upon the third article of the Treaty, by the British government, is that the produce of those parts of the State of Maine which are watered by the river St. John or its tributaries, after it is brought within the Province of New Brunswick, shall be dealt with in all respects as the produce of that Province; and it appears to us, therefore, that the provision at the end of the first section of the proposed act, excepting from duty all timber cut on any part of the United States, and passed down the river St. John, and then shipped to the United States, may be considered to be inconsistent with the stipulation of the Treaty, and as affording an objection to the confirmation of this act, although it may not be a contravention of the Treaty of which the United States would complain."

Here we have the decision of the crown officers that the imposition of duties, such as is now established, is in conformity with the Treaty a decision deliberately made upon an investigation of the Treaty, and the correspondence connected with it. And not only this, but the law was refused the approbation of the home government, because it did not impose duties upon the timber of Maine. Whatever views we may entertain, or measures we may

adopt, should be with the conviction of the settled determination on the part of Great Britain to persist in her policy of aggression.

The existing law, entitled "an act relating to the collection of duty on timber and other lumber," passed 25th March, 1844, incorporated into it the feature of taxation above alluded to, at the suggestion of the home government. It imposes a duty of one shilling, equal to twenty cents, on every ton of pine timber shipped from the Province, Is this a law in violation of the Treaty of Washington, or is it not? We contend that it is.

In the first place the duty imposed is not a fair and honest duty bearing equally upon the Maine and Provincial timber.

In the second place the Province of New Brunswick has no right to impose any duty whatsoever upon the produce privileged by the Treaty.

In relation to the first point, admitting for the sake of the argument, that the Province of New Brunswick has a right to impose duties on Maine lumber, provided she imposes the same duties on her own lumber, it is contended that then the existing duty is not justified, but that it is a mere subterfuge-an evasion of the very principle on which it is endeavored to be established. The duty is justified under the provision that the Maine lumber when within New Brunswick shall be dealt with as the lumber of New Brunswick. Now, although there may be a duty imposed upon all lumber shipped from St. John, it in fact bears only upon Maine lumber. The duty, so far as the New Brunswick lumber is concerned, is simply a substitute for stumpage-a duty imposed since the ratification of the treaty-partly for the purpose of convenience in obtaining payment for stumpage-perhaps partly for the purpose of fraud. To show the character of this duty, and the purpose for which it was established, we will recur to the despatches and correspondence of the British authorities. Sir William Colebrook in his despatches to Lord Stanley, of 28th April, 1843, transmitting the act of April, 1843, imposing export duties on timber, holds the following language: "The expenses attending this mode of administration (meaning collecting pay for stumpage) have constituted a large deduction from the gross proceeds of the revenue, and in the last two