[GANONG ] BOUNDARIES OF NEW BRUNSWICK 205 
the Nova Scotia of 1621, nor of 1628 and 1654. But the Nova Scotia 
of the Treaty of Utrecht is exactly defined by'the treaty ; it is Acadia 
according to its ancient limits. The contrary contentions of the Eng- 
lish commissioners are vain. It is necessary to distinguish clearly the 
ancient limits of Acadia, so as not to confound with the ancient Aca- 
dia these countries which have been given the name improperly in re- 
cent times. ‘The two names that are synonyms are the Nova Scotia 
of the Treaty of Utrecht, and the ancient Acadia. It is not the 
Acadia of any period of time that was ceded to England, but the Aca- 
dia with its ancient limits. So the whole discussion resolves itself into 
determining what were the ‘ancient limits of Acadia. 
Chapter 6 examines the use of the name Acadia for the whole 
country in the commissions of Charnisay and La Tour. This evidence 
they ‘consider as valueless since it is vitiated by the partizanship of Char- 
nisay and later of LaTour in trying to extend their boundaries, leading 
to a confusion which became fixed in'the wording of their charters. 
Chapter 7 examines the letters of Count d’Estrades which seem 
to show that Pentagoet and'St. John were in Acadia. The French 
commissioners do not deny that the name Acadia has sometimes been 
applied to the whole country, but ‘that is not the question, only the 
Acadia with its ancient limits is in discussion. Moreover the Count 
d’Estrades was not well informed as to the ancient limits of Acadia. 
Chapter 8 opposes the contention of the English commissioners 
that tle Acadia of the Treaty of Utrecht'was the same as that of the 
Treaty of Breda. They maintain there was no resemblance at all be- 
tween them, and hence one cannot throw light upon the other. 
Chapter 9 examines Temple’s contention that Pentagoet and St. 
John and Port Royal were not in Aicadia but in Nova Scotia, and 
they draw from it the conclusion that Temple was correct as to Acadia, 
and partially as to Nova Scotia, and in his statement they see a powers 
ful support of the French claim. 
Chapter 10 examines the various proofs of the English commis- 
sioners that Acadia extended to the bounds of New England, and in 
answer to them hold that all these pieces are posterior in date to the 
Treaty of Breda when it became customary to extend the name 
Acadia through that extent. These documents prove the later limits 
of Acadia but not®the ancient limits, the only ones here in question. 
The boundary between the French possessions and New England is 
fully examined with the conclusion that the Kennebec is the rightful 
boundary. 
Chapter 11 examines the instructions to the English negotiators 
of the Treaty of Utrecht, and holds that they are consistent with the 
