RS.
MUDGE AND FEATHERSTONHAUGH.

The progress which has been made in the first portion of the duties
of the commissioners has been set forth in the preceding part of this
report.

Although, as will be there seen, the task of running the meridian line
of the monument marking the source of the St. Croix and of exploring and
surveying the lines of highlands respectively claimed by the Governments
of the United States and Great Britain has not been completed, yet
enough has been done to furnish materials for an examination of the
argument preferred by Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh in support of
the novel form in which the claim of Great Britain has been presented
by them.

In the surveys made by direction of the commissioners under the fifth
article of the treaty of Ghent the difficult character of the country
had prevented any other method of exploration than that of ascending
rivers to their sources. It was believed on the part of the United
States that the determination of the position of these sources was
sufficient for the demarcation of the line of highlands in relation to
which the controversy exists, and no attempt was made to meet the
British argument by the exhibition of the fact that the lines joining
these sources run in some cases along ridges and in other cases pass
over elevations to which in any sense of the term the epithet of
"highlands" may be justly applied. The denial of this mode of
determining the line of highlands by Great Britain has made it important
that both the lines claimed by Great Britain and by the United States
should be explored and leveled--a task which until recently had not been
attempted on either part. The examination of the lines claimed by the
two nations, respectively, has been in a great measure accomplished, as
will be seen from the reports of the field operations of the commission,
while such of these determinations as have a direct bearing on the
argument will be cited in their proper place in this report.

It is to be regretted that the document now under consideration exhibits
many instances of an unfriendly spirit. Charges of direct and implied
fraud are made, and language is used throughout that is irritating and
insulting. It is fondly hoped that these passages do not express the
sentiments of the British nation, as in a state of feeling such as
this report indicates little hope could be entertained of an amicable
adjustment of this question. Any inference to be