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
|