[GANONG] BOUNDARIES OF NEW BRUNSWICK 203 
In the first chapter they trace fully and correctly the origin of the 
English settlements in America, from which they show that the English 
settlements in America were posterior to those of the French. The un- 
certainties as to the Cabot voyages, on which England’s claim is chiefly 
based, are well set forth. 
The second chapter considers the French establishments in Am- 
erica showing that they were earlier than the Engüsn. 
The third chapter discusses very clearly the history of Acadie and 
the neighbouring region up to the Treaty of Utrecht, controversial poiats 
in which are taken up more minutely in the later chapter. They con- 
clude that the English rights in Acadia, following its ancient limits, rest 
upon the Treaty of Utrecht only. 
The fourth chapter deals with the opinion of the English connis- 
sioners as to the French rights in Acadia. ‘They contend that France 
possessed Acadia by right of discovery and settlement, and that the 
earlier treaties of St. Germain and Breda simply restored it to France. 
The fifth chapter faces the most difficult point in their whole con- 
tention, namely, to explain away the fact that the Treaty of Utrecht 
ceded Nova Scotia or Acadia, as if they were equal, for they could not 
pretend that Nova Scotia was ever confined to the peninsula. Their 
own argument on the subject is as follows :— 
Before the Treaty of Utrecht, Nova Scotia was never recognized in 
France, and in taking possession of Acadia the English have given it the 
name Nova Scotia, just as they gave Annapolis Royal to Port Royal; and 
the Treaty of Utrecht adopts both of these new names, a matter of indif- 
ference to the French. A diversity in names cannot alter the fact that 
by the Treaty of Utrecht the present (actuelle) Nova Scotia, and the 
ancient Acadia are one and the same place. France never having pos- 
sessed a colony called Nova Scotia, could not cede anything under that 
name. France could not have intended to cede under a name that had 
no existence for her more than she ceded under a name recognized and 
real, and all agreed that what she did not cede she was to keep. That 
France never possessed a colony of Nova Scotia needs no proof ; and 
indeed it has been proven not only that the land which it is wished to 
include under this name belonged to France from the earliest times 
before the Treaty of Utrecht, but also that she has possessed it under 
other names, such as New France, or Canada in general, Norumbegue, 
Etchemins, Baye francoise, Acadie, Grand Bay of St. Lawrence, and 
Gaspesie. 
They then proceed to meet the evidences of the English com- 
missioners that Nova Scotia had a real existence covering the main- 
land. To the charter of King James I. of Nova Scotia to Alexander, 
they reply that that charter gave the right of settlement only in places 
