242 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 
But first of all we should endeavour to enter upon the discussion 
of the results of the treaty of 1783 with as accurate a conception as 
possible of the view point of the framers of the treaty. Particularly 
important to an understanding of the subject is a clear idea of their 
geographical knowledge, and for this we turn to the maps used by 
them. Happily upon this subject we have the most complete and 
satisfactory information, for all testimony from both sides in the sub- 
sequent controversies agrees that the map used by the commissioners 
and agreed upon by them was Mitchell’s map of 1755,1 of which a copy 
is given herewith (Map No. 19). Whatever is shown upon that map 
was accepted by the commissioners as correct and their description in 
the treaty was drawn up in the assumption that this map was correct. 
It is absolutely essential to keep this fact in mind in considering this 
subject, since a failure to do so, and a constant comparison of the 
words of the treaty with modern and correct maps, has been the most 
fertile source of misunderstanding of the whole subject in later times. 
Readers with their good modern maps before them usually fail to 
understand the mental attitude of men of earlier times who had to 
depend upon the imperfect maps of the time. I am often astonished 
at the neglect of the contemporary maps not only in discussions of 
this sort but in local history generally. I have not the least doubt 
that far more vivid and correct pictures of the times would be con- 
veyed to readers if modern maps were omitted from such works alto- 
gether and only the earlier ones, with all their imperfections, were 
used to illustrate the text of local works. In the present case, I am 
sure the reader will find it greatly to his profit to consult constantly 
the Mitchell map, using the modern maps only for comparison. 
Another fact to be kept in mind is that in the peace negotiations 
leading up to this treaty the United States was the victorious party, 
and upon the well recognized principle of spoils for the victor could 
not only make demands to her advantage which Great Britain, the 
unsuccessful party, would naturally yield, but she might fairly expect 
that all doubtful matters would be interpreted in her favour. Further, 
as all accounts of the negotiations show, Great Britain was anxious 
to behave most generously towards the United States, while at the 

1 This cut, as I learn too late to change it, is of the first edition of this 
map, while the second was used by the Commissioners. I have been misled 
by the error in Winsor (America, VII., 181), who reproduces a portion of this 
map and wrongly calls it the second edition. I have, however, given the St. 
Croix region from the second edition in a later cut (Map No. 29). The differ- 
ences between the two maps in the New Brunswick region are slight and 
entirely unimportant to the present subject. The first edition (Map No. 19) 
will give as well as the second the general idea of our topography held by 
the negotiators of the treaty of 1783. 
