[GANONG ] BOUNDARIES OF NEW BRUNSWICK 355 
Blue Book of 1843 marks it as the British claim. In this connection 
may be mentioned the aberrent maps, accompanying the claims set up 
by Wilkinson and others. 
(c) Mitchell’s map and its history. This subject has been treated 
in the preceding pages, and is fully traced by Winsor, by Moore and 
others. There were two editions of Mitchell’s map, of which the first is 
given herewith (Map No. 19). The second edition was used by the 
commissioners, and differs somewhat from the first edition, of which the 
north line section is here given (Map No. 29), but the differences are 
not essential to our present subject. I have traced in a preceding mono- 
graph the place of this map in our cartographical history (Cartography, 
377). Very important in the controversy is the error of this map, an 
error characterizing all of the maps of that time, in making the high- 
lands on the north line separate St. Lawrence from St. John waters. 
The origin of this error I have traced in the Cartography (365). 
(d) General maps showing the north-west angle of Nova Scotia. 
In general all maps published from 1763 to 1783, and some after, agreed 
in placing the north-west angle on the watershed south of the St. Law- 
rence, and a full list of these is given in the Case of the United States 
laid before the King of the Netherlands, appendix to the Definitive 
Statement. A different interpretation was initiated by the French 
Lattré map of 1784, which showed the British claim, and in England 
it appeared on various maps after 1783, of which an example is the 
Kitchin map earlier reproduced (Map No. 27). This subject is, how- 
ever, so fully treated by Winsor in his papers cited below, that no 
further consideration of it is here needed. 
(e) The “red line” map. In most of the partizan discussions of 
this question upon the British side, there figures prominently a “ red- 
line” map, which is said to have been in possession of Webster at the 
time the treaty of 1842 was negotiated, showing the boundary according 
to the British claim drawn by Franklin’s hand, and this statement is 
repeated from writer to writer without investigation. The subject was 
first discussed in a remarkably clear and impartial article upon the 
Treaty of Washington in the North American Review in April, 1843 
(467), and has since been considered by Winsor (in America, VII., 180, 
and in the Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, Oct., 
1887). As shown in the former article, Sparks, the American historian, 
early in 1842, found in the French archives a letter dated a few days 
after the signing of the preliminaries of the treaty, from Franklin, one 
of the American negotiators, to Vergennes, the French minister, stating 
that he had marked on an enclosed map with a red line the boundaries 
of the United States. Sparks at once searched for this map, and among 
the sixty thousand in the archives he found a Danville map of 1746 on 
