260 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 
heir was Nova Scotia. The falsity of this argument is, I believe, fully 
shown in the preceding pages. The Penobscot loyalists themselves 
naturally wished to have that river recognized as the boundary and 
Raymond states, (Winslow Papers, 256), that they sent a representa- 
tive to England to endeavour to have the boundary so fixed.} 
We consider next the reasons why the northern or Chiputneticook 
branch of the St. Croix for the boundary and not the Scoodic or western 
branch was both historically and topographically the correct branch. 
Earlier in this work (pages 168-171), I have examined the cartographical 
knowledge of the time when the St. Croix was first made a boundary, 
and the evidence there given appears to be conclusive that the western 
branch mentioned in the grant of 1621 was not the Scoodie branch, but 
the western source of the northern branch, that being supposed to have 
three minor branches, as in fact it actually has—the Grand Lake branch, 
the Palfrey Lake branch and the Digdeguash Lake branch. I think 
the three branches on Champlain, 1613, may really represent these 
three, and not simply a coincidence, (as will seem possible if one com- 
pares Maps Nos. 6 and 1). The same St. Croix and the same western 
source was specified in later documents, though the “western” source 
was omitted from all after 1763, and it seems to me plain that the 
western source (implied but not expressed in the treaty of 1783), was 
the western source of the north branch in case the latter split into 
three as it was supposed to do in 1621. Moreover, the point is worth 
noting, Mitchell’s map, as I shall show presently, lays down this north- 
ern or Chiputneticook, and not the western or Scoodic branch. Further, 
all topographical reasoning seems to point to the same conclusion. The 
idea in the grant of 1621, in all the subsequent documents, and in the 
treaty of 1783 was to obtain a river boundary running as far inland and 
northward towards the St. Lawrence or the watershed as pos- 
sible; now, as any map will show, there is no comparison 

1797 that respectable opinions in America at that day considered the river St. 
John as the proper eastern limit of the United States. If any such opinion 
existed, aside from Adams, it appears to have escaped record. 
It shows also that Adams was ignorant of the real reason for the naming 
of the St. Croix, which is the more remarkable in that he had in his posses- 
sion in Paris the volumes of the English and French Commissaries in which 
Champlain’s settlement and his naming of the islands and river are more than 
once mentioned. 
It is worth noting that a late writer (Kingsford, Canada, VII., 154) states 
that Penobscot had been called the St. Croix, which is not true, but in details 
relating to eastern Canada I find Kingsford remarkably erroneous. 
? And it was because the Penobscot was not thus chosen that the Penob- 
scot Association, including many who were not Loyalists, came to settle at 
Passamaquoddy, and founded St. Andrews. 
