152 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 
as to these loose boundaries until the region concerned becomes of im- 
portance either through settlement, discovery of mineral wealth, or other 
cause. The settlers or discoverers then have very positive convictions 
as to the place of the boundary, convictions which happen always to 
favour their own particular wishes or interests. Then attempts are 
made to trace out the boundary legally established, and if it is not found 
to fit the topography of the country (as usually it does not), an excited 
debate with vigorous claims by both peoples begins, the one side stand- 
ing for a literal rendering of the words of some treaty, and the other for 
the apparent intention of the framers of the treaty. This goes on and 
becomes more intense until threats of force are made by the irresponsi- 
bles on both sides, and the governments begin to fear that the words of 
these irresponsibles may lead to deeds which may involve both nations in 
war. ‘Their good sense prevails, and an agreement is made that both will 
withdraw from the territory in dispute until the claims can be settled 
by commissioners. The commissioners are appointed, a thorough survey 
of the disputed territory is made at joint expense, and the consideration 
of the subject begins. Usually this is marked by the strongest of par- 
tizan pleading by the counsel upon both sides, and finally a decision is 
reached which is almost invariably a compromise between both sets of 
claims. Finally skilled engineers are employed by both Governments 
conjointly, who mark out the line permanently, and the boundary is 
finally settled, at least so far as legal questions are concerned. But 
the people of both nations continue for generations to believe that they 
were defrauded of their rights by the artfulness of the other side, for 
it pleases them so to believe and they never investigate, nor want to 
investigate, the questions for themselves. Such disputes are of course 
the more serious the larger the divisions and the more divided in nation- 
ality and interests the peoples concerned. But international disputes 
are more serious than interprovincial or interstate not only for this 
reason, but also because in the former case there is no natural arbiter 
as there is in the latter, in which the good offices of a mother country 
or of a central government may be invoked. And of course lesser 
boundaries are of proportionally lesser importance. 
Such in general outline is the usual history of boundary disputes, 
at least in modern times, and more than one must be described in the 
following pages. ‘Though the different ones differ somewhat in detail, 
in their main outlines they are alike, for they are essentially a psycho- 
logical product, and psychological constants are wide-spread and 
persistent. 
