102 



'■ sissippi, js not to be allowed to British subjects, with their goods 

 »' or effects, unless such articles shall have paid all the duties, and 

 *♦ be within all the custom house regulations, applicable to goods 

 '* and a.Tects of citizens of the United States. An access through 

 '•'• the territory of the United States to the waters running into the 

 *' zvestern side of the Mississippi, is under no modification whatev- 

 *' er to be stipulated to British subjects.'* 



Such then was the state of things in relation to this interest ia 

 question, at the time when the war of 1812 broke out ; and at the 

 negotiation of Ghent, the same question of boundary again occurred 

 for adjustment. The right of the British to a line from the Lake 

 of the Woods to the Mississippi had never been renounced : and^ 

 at the last negotiation between the parties, four years after the 

 United States had acquired Louisiana, and with it all the Spanish 

 rights upon the Mississippi, the British government, in assenting 

 t& take the 49th parallel of latitude, as a substitute for the line fo 

 the Mississippi, had expressly re-stipulated for the free navigation 

 of the river, and free access to it from our territories 5 to both of 

 which Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney had been explicitly authorized 

 to ciccede. 



Under this state of things, it had never been admitted by the Bri- 

 tish, nor could we maintain against them by argument, even that 

 the Mississippi river was within our exclusive jurisdiction : for so 

 long as they had a right by treaty to a line of boundary to that ri- 

 ver, and consequently to territ»ry upon it, they also had jurisdic- 

 tion upon it ; nor, consequently, could the instructions of 15th 

 April, 1813, had they even been still in full force, have restricted 

 the American commissioners from making or receiving a proposi- 

 tion, for continuing to the British the right of navigating the river, 

 which they had enjoyed, without ever using it, from the time of 

 the treaty of 1783, when the United States had received, by cession 

 from them, (he right of enjoying it jointly v/ith them. 



Bearing in mind this state of things, we are also to remember, 

 that, in the conference of 19th August, 1814, and in the letter of 

 that date, from the British to the American plenipotentiaries, {See 

 Wait's State Papers, vol. IX. pp. 334 arid 338,) they had claimed a 

 new northwestern boundary line from Lake Superior to the Missis- 

 sippi, and the free navigation of that river. To this the Americaa 

 commissioners had answered on the 24th of August, 1814: The 

 undersigned perceive that the British government " propose, with- 

 " out purpose specifically alleged, to draw the boundary line west- 

 " ward, not from the Lake of the Woods, as it nozv w, but from 

 " Lake Superior:" and they objected to it, as demanding a cession 

 of territory. 



The British plenipotentiaries, on the 4th September, 1814, re- 

 plied : 



" As the necessity for fixing some boundary for the northwestern 

 •' frontier has been mutually acknowledged, a proposal for a discus- 

 * sion on that subject cannot be considered as a demand for a ces- 



