326 ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 



he tlioiight, moreover, the expedition would fail. The ambassador 

 then addressed himself to the queen, who was devoted to the interests 

 of the Kmperor Ciiarles V., and even suggested tliat, if the King would 

 not defend his territories, they should be ceded to the Emperor who 

 would take care of them. This expedition was to sail through Cabot 

 Strait and make a settlement within it. 



The grant of the King of Portugal in 1521 to Joam Alvarez 

 Fagundez was for the territory "from the line of demarcation on the 

 "south to the boundaries of the land discovered by Corte Reale on the 

 " north," and, if the map of Lazaro Luis of A.D. 1563 is to be accepted 

 as evidence of a grant forty years before, it would seem that a part of 

 the peninsula of Nova Scotia was considered to be witliin the Portu- 

 guese line. 



We may, therefore, feel sure, both on cartographical and historical 

 grounds, that although the line of demarcation, according to the light 

 of the astronomical science of the present day, would pass away out to 

 sea seven degrees westward of this continent, yet as between Spain and 

 Portugal, it was acknowledged to cut the coast of Nova Scotia and that 

 Portugal by right of prior occupation might have held the territory of 

 Baccallaos as against Sjmin. By right of discovery England's claim was 

 prior to all ; for John Cabot touched the main continent in 1497. The 

 point where he touched is indicated by the instructions of Ferdinand 

 to Juan de Agramonte above cited. It was close to the line of demar- 

 cation and, on the map of Sebastian Cabot of 1544, it was at Cape 

 Breton. This la,st point has been sufficiently elucidated by the present 

 writer in previous papers in these Transactions. It only remains to 

 observe that converging lines of inquiry concentrate the interest of 

 geographical historians upon that point of the northeast coast of Nova 

 Scotia. Those who seek for mathematical demonstration in history will 

 lose their labour. The subject matter admits of probable proof alone. 

 Even if the probability should amount to moral certainty, its intrinsic 

 nature will be the same. An erroneous quantity ])ropounded to a cal- 

 culating machine can produce nothing but an erroneous result and hypo- 

 theses worked out by mathematical tables acquire no higher probability 

 on that account, Tlie tendency is in the reverse direction. 



