FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186  
187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   >>   >|  
is even doubtful whether the settlement near Fredericton was a part of French Acadie, for it seems to have been formed by persons who escaped from the general seizure and transportation of their countrymen. This settlement was broken up in 1783, and its inhabitants sought refuge at Madawaska; but it can not be pretended that this forced removal of Acadians subsequent to the treaty of 1783 was an extension of the name of their country. The whole argument in favor of the British claim founded on the limits of ancient Acadie therefore fails: First. Because of the inherent vagueness of the term, on which no settled understanding was ever had, although England held it to be synonymous with Nova Scotia and France denied that it extended more than 10 leagues from the Bay of Fundy. Second. Because by its original definition in the grant to De Monts it excludes the whole disputed territory on the one side; and Third. Because in its practical sense, as a real settlement, it is wholly to the east of the meridian of the St. Croix, and this excludes the whole of the disputed territory on the other. The portion of the territory granted to the Duke of York, and which is now the subject of dispute, therefore can not be claimed as a part of Acadie, as it never fell within its limits either by charter or by occupation. _Note VIII_. [Extract from the award of the King of the Netherlands.] Considering that in 1763, 1765, 1773, and 1782 it was established that Nova Scotia should be bounded at the north as far as the western extremity of the Bay des Chaleurs by the southern boundary of the Province of Quebec; that this delimitation is again found with respect to the Province of Quebec in the commission of the Governor-General of Quebec of 1786, wherein the language of the proclamation of 1763 and of the Quebec act of 1774 has been used, as also in the commissions of 1786 and others of subsequent dates of the governors of New Brunswick, with respect to the last-mentioned Province, as well as in a great number of maps anterior and posterior to the treaty of 1783; and that the first article of the said treaty specifies by name the States whose independence is acknowledged; but that this mention does not imply (_implique_) the entire coincidence of the boundaries between the two powers, as settled by the following article, with the ancient delimitation of the British Provinces, whose preservation is not mentioned in the trea
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186  
187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Quebec
 

Because

 

Province

 
Acadie
 

territory

 

settlement

 

treaty

 

subsequent

 

limits

 

British


respect

 
delimitation
 

mentioned

 
article
 
disputed
 

settled

 

Scotia

 

ancient

 

excludes

 

French


boundary

 

Chaleurs

 

southern

 

commission

 

language

 
proclamation
 

Fredericton

 

Governor

 

General

 

Netherlands


Considering

 

Extract

 
occupation
 

western

 

bounded

 

established

 

extremity

 

implique

 

mention

 

acknowledged


States
 
independence
 

entire

 

coincidence

 

Provinces

 
preservation
 

powers

 
boundaries
 
specifies
 

governors