[aanonG ] BOUNDARIES OF NEW BRUNSWICK 408 
son. Since, however, Canada greatly desired to possess the Fiefs of 
Madawaska and Temiscouata, he wished to assign them to her, while 
keeping the upper St. John for New Brunswick, and, calling in the aid 
of Lieutenant Simmons, a skilled engineer acquainted with the country, 
he drew up this new line to award those Fiefs to Canada with as little 
disturbance to the general arrangement as possible. It is shown by a 
letter of Dr. Lushington to Mr. Falconer (Blue Book, 38) that the 
Mistouche was made the boundary instead of the Kedgewick in order to 
give the territory between those rivers to New Brunswick in compensa- 
-tion for the Madawaska Seigniory restored to Canada. 
From this award Mr. Falconer strongly dissented, and his reasons 
therefor are given in a letter and a long opinion (published in the Blue- 
book, pp. 37-67), which is a recapitulation of the position of Quebec. 
It is, moreover, far and away the most forcible and able presentation of 
Quebec’s case which appears in the whole course of the literature of this 
boundary discussion. He argues that the highlands of the Proclamation 
of 1763, of the Quebec Act of 1774, and of the Treaty of 1783, were one 
and the same, and that the British Government in maintaining during 
the international dispute that the highlands of the treaty of 1783 were 
the Mars Mill highlands, gave their assent to those highlands as the 
southern boundary of Quebec, a conclusion which he is able to find also 
other evidence to sustain. This of course was Quebec’s strongest argu- 
ment, and gave her a claim to the entire disputed territory. With re- 
morseless logic he forces this argument home, and puts the government 
in the position of seeming to acknowledge bad faith in the international 
dispute in case it now rejects this boundary for Quebec. The paper 
contains also a very valuable history of the entire dispute, and is 
throughout a remarkably valuable document. Having, however, argued 
for the right of Quebec to the whole of the disputed territory, he admits 
that under the circumstances a conventional boundary is needful. He 
examines the various propositions made for such a line both by New 
Brunswick and Canada, and concludes by giving his adherence to the 
line proposed by Mr. Price, and already considered (page 401), namely, 
a line from the mouth of the Madawaska north-east parallel with the 
straight line of the international boundary to the Kedgewick, and by 
that river and the Restigouche to the sea. He proposes, however, a mod- 
ification, in that the north-east corner of the Simon Hebert grant at the 
mouth of the Madawaska should be the starting point, and the line 
should be a compass line instead of a strictly parallel line. Somewhat 
later (April 14, 1851) he proposed a modified line, one from the river 
St. John due north to the south-west corner of the Simon Hebert grant 
at the mouth of the Madawaska and prolonged to lat. 47° 50’, and along 
that parallel to the Kedgewick and thence to the sea. 
