[GANONG] BOUNDARIES OF NEW BRUNSWICK 407 
The next part of the line is the parallel of 48°. This was no 
doubt in part determined by the fact shown by the arbitrators map 
(Map No. 32), that this parallel was thought to form almost another 
tangent line to the highlands ; in part too, no doubt, it was suggested 
by the fact that it was an even parallel. That it was chosen instead 
of 47°, 50° of the commission of 1848 was no doubt to give some 
additional territory to New Brunswick in compensation for the loss 
of the angles on each side of the seigniory of Madawaska. It is of 
interest to note, by the way, that this parallel thus figures for the 
second time in our history as the northern boundary of New Bruns- 
wick, the first time being in the New England patent of 1620. In 
this use of the same parallel in 1620 and 1851, however, we have 
undoubtedly only an accidental coincidence and no causal connection. 
Finally, we turn to the selection of the Restigouche and the Mis- 
touche. The choice of the Restigouche near its mouth followed natur- 
ally from the fact that it had practically been agreed upon by the pro- 
vinces themselves, as manifested in the selection of it by both provinces 
in all of their proposed compromise lines for some years past. The choice 
of the Mistouche, really the Patapedia, was determined, no doubt, by 
the fact that it was the first large river east of the Kedgewick. Que- 
bec had repeatedly proposed the latter river, and when it was desired 
to award New Brunswick additional territory in compensation for the 
Madawaska Seigniory, the lands between the Kedgewick and Mis- 
touche were chosen. <A curious mistake, however, resulting favorably 
to New Brunswick crept into this part of the line. (Place-nomen- 
clature, 277). As a matter of fact the Indians apply, as I 
have myself found, the name Mistouche not to the Patapedia 
but to a small stream to the westward of it now called Tracy’s 
Brook ; and moreover, a comparison of the map of the arbitrators 
with a modern map (Nos. 30, 32) will at once show that the stream called 
the Mistouche on the former map while unquestionably the Patapedia 
at its source, empties by Tracy’s Brook.t When the line was run in 

undertook it (Papers of the Corps of Royal Engineers, new series, IV., 3). 
These tangent lines, so simple upon paper, are suggested by the course of the 
watershed upon Graham’s map of 1843, here adopted by the Commissioners 
(Map No. 32). In reality, as the latest maps show, the watershed is here much 
more complicated than is suggested by Graham’s map. 
1 TJ have been able to trace the origin of this curious error. The type 
map for the Restigouche is that of Von Velden of 1786 (compare Cartography, 
397). He places and names the mouth of the Mistouche correctly, but con- 
fuses the Patapedia with Red Pine Brook and hence places it much too far 
east. He is followed in this by all maps down to Baillie of 1832 which 
appears to correct it, though applying no name to the river. All of these 
maps show the Mistouche only at its mouth, and the first I have found to 
