Final Adjustment of the Boundary 263 
trading and not a national vessel. As he furnishes no reason for this dis- 
tinction, the undersigned will confine himself to the remark that a mer- 
chant vessel bears the flag of her country at the masthead, and continues 
under its jurisdiction and protection in the same manner as though she 
had been commissioned for the express purpose of making discoveries.” 
In this great and prolonged diplomatic contest, one of the 
most interesting questions discussed was as to what extent con- 
tinuity of boundary furnishes a just claim in connection with 
those of discovery and occupation. This question grew out of 
the claim on the part of the United States that the Louisiana 
territory extended to the Pacific ocean. This claim was denied 
on the part of Great Britain. It was insisted, however, with 
great ability by Secretary of State Calhoun, and subsequently 
by Secretary Buchanan: First, that the claim was valid under 
publie law, and, secondly, that Great Britain, having asserted the 
validity of the doctrine in reference to her possessions in this 
country as against France, even to the extent of going to war 
with that power in 1763, was estopped from denying the validity 
of the doctrine as against the United States, especially inasmuch 
as our people had contributed so much to a result in that con- 
test favorable to Great Britain; and it was further contended by 
our diplomatists that Great Britain, whatever may have been 
her rights in Oregon territory, relinquished all to France by the 
seventh article of the treaty between Great Britain and France 
at the close of that war, in 1783. 
The controversy in reference to the correct northern boundary 
of the Oregon territory, whether the forty-ninth parallel, as now 
agreed upon, except along the straits of Fuca, or 54° 40° north, 
is one familiar to all. Spain unquestionably always asserted 
claim as far north as the sixty-first parallel, but in her treaty 
with Russia 54° 40’ was recognized. It was claimed, however, 
that by the treaty of Utrecht in 1713, which provided for deter- 
mining “ the limits to be fixed between the bay of Hudson and 
the places appertaining to the French,” the boundary between 
Louisiana and the British territories north of it was actually 
fixed by commissioners on latitude 49°. Whether this is true 
or not is a matter of very serious disputation. A careful exam- 
ination of all history bearing upon the point leads me to the 
conclusion that such was not the fact. 
In reply to the claim of the United States to go to 54° 40%, it 
was asserted that whatever might have been the right of Spain, 
the latter in ceding to France in 1800 stipulated to convey only 
