JAMES SULLIVAN ON THE NORTH-EAST BOUNDARY. The following letter by James Sullivan is printed from the original manuscript in the Emmet collection in the New York Public Library. Sullivan (1744-1808), who served Massachusetts in various capacities as judge, representative in the continental congress, and governor, was the agent of the United States before the three commissioners, David Howell of Rhode Island, Thomas Barclay of Nova Scotia, and Egbert Benson of New York, appointed in 1796 to determine which river was the St. Croix of the treaty of 1783. Chapter xiv in T. C. Amory's Life of James Sullivan (2 vols., Boston, 1859) is devoted to Sullivan's services in this connection. The Rev. Dr. Smith, his correspondent, may possibly have been William Smith, D.D., first provost of the college of Philadelphia. Detailed references upon the boundary question are given in Winsor's Narrative and critical history of America, vol. 7 (Boston, 1888), p. 171. REVD SIR BOSTON 20th October 1796 When I took the freedom to address you on the subject of the eastern boundary of the United States, I did not expect that you would have either leisure, or inclination to afford so copious, and learned a disquisition on the subject as your goodness has induced you to give. Having not had the honour to be known to you, I was induced at the instance of the honourable Mr Bingham to address you on the important business, merely with a hope, that you would forward through the Secretary of State, any Documents or memorandums, which might be in your possession, and pertinent to the occasion. Whilst I was at Passimaquody Bay I received your obliging letter; and since my return to Boston I have had a copy of another addressed to Mr Bingham and myself on the same subject. Both these contain arguments to prove that the river Scooduck, is the river intended by the Treaty of 1783 as the river St Croix. Το attempt an answer to the arguments, which you have placed, in your letter, in the mouth of the British Government, would in this acknowledgement of your goodness be in my opinion, very improper: because it would give you a great deal of trouble to read it; because, that although those arguments have been relied on by by [sic] that Government, yet many of them are now abandoned; and because it would be an imperfect anticipation of the trial of the question. The Secretary of State has inclosed to me your Sketch of Mitchels map, with the peice of paper pasted upon it. The men who made the Treaty of 1783, do not, I believe, recollect any such paper as being on Mitchels Map at that time; but if the fact was fully established, as you state it, even that addition to the Map would give the rive[r] Magaguadavic as the boundary under the name of the St. Croix. There is no perfect map of Passimaquody Bay, and of the rivers in question, now in being. But all the maps as they are drawn, represent two rivers as running into the Bay, and all of them which were made before the year 1787 call the northern, or eastern river the St Croix: and when it is established that the Maga guadavic, or eastern river of the two, is the St Croix, the point is settled in favour of the United States. You remark, that you never knew, untill you learned it from my history of the District of Maine that a river emptying its waters into the Eastern side of the Bay, was claimed by Massachusetts, as the line of the Province. In your first letter you appear to be confident, that I am, in that Book mistaken, in my assertion, that Governor Bernard ordered a Survey there in the year 1764; and express your idea that it was in 1765 or 1766. That Book was hastily compiled in order to preserve facts which might be otherwise lost to the public. It was not intended as a disquisiiton on the boundary, and is in some instances a very imperfect, and erroneous description of the facts, and places, which now demand our attention. Its merits, or mistakes, can by no means effect the dispute. Indeed Sir, it can be asserted with truth, and propriety, that the dispute between the two nations cannot be understood by any one without his being on the place, or his seeing a better map than has ever yet been compiled. Had you ever been at Passimaquody Bay, you would not have understood L Escarbot, and other writers as you now understand them. However good L Escarbot may be as a Pilot, yet the courses you propose to steer under his direction, will never land you on any Island, which either party would now agree to, as the one on which Demonts wintered; nor on any Island to be found in those waters. The Island is not of much importance as I understand the case, nor do I find any thing in the business which places the Island where Demonts wintered on the western side of the Bay, or in the mouth of a river. Upon receiving your first letter, the idea I had of your great accuracy and attention induced me to believe that I had mistaken the date of Governor Bernards survey. I therefore had recourse to his orders, the journals, and returns, and affidavits, of the Surveyors, and Chainmen which are all in my possession. His orders were issued the 14th of April 1764, and have attached to them the Governors Map of the river St Croix, which appears beyond doubt to be the Magaguadavic. I have the returns, journals and Depositions of the Surveyors, and Chain Bearers now before me. They arrived at Campobello the 8th of May, finished their Surveys and returned to Boston the 30th of June 1764. I have taken their oaths myself on these facts. They are all now alive. The same river was again Surveyed as the boundary, by General Brattle, Colonel Royal and others under the orders of Governor Hutchinson in the year 1770. In the year 1784 General Lincoln, and General Knox were appointed by the General Court of Massachusetts, to go down to the place, and investigate the question. Their report signed by them both is now before me; wherein they declare the Magaguadavic to be the St Croix. You will, I believe, consider these as claims on behalf of Massachusetts. Besides this, the Indians were examined under oath, at the several times before mentioned and all declared, that the river Magaguadavic was always called the St Croix; and that no other river connected with that Bay, was ever called by that name. They have now been Sworn before the Commissioners, and say the same unanimously. Indeed I never had an idea, untill October 1783 that the river Magaguadavic was a contested boundary; nor has any other Person in Massachusetts, ever heard untill that time, that the English claimed any other line, than that river, as the western boundary of Nova Scotia; Excepting that Charles Morris Esq', of whose character you justly make such honorable mention, surveyed the Cobscook as the St Croix, fixed on an Island in its mouth as Demonts Island, and returned a plan of it as the true river to the Governor of Nova Scotia. But notwithstanding, his great ability as a man of science, and his accurate knowledge, which you say he was possessed of, as to the Geography of that Province &c, he now declares that he was mistaken, and the English Government has abandoned all claim to that river as the boundary. Their views in doing this I shall not now say any thing upon. The Singular Provision in the Charter of William & Mary to Massachusetts, in regard to the Land in the territory between Kenebec and St Croix, induced several Grants under the authority of the crown. The opinion of the Attorney and Solicitor General in 1734 that the fee remained in the Crown is of no consequence at this time. The Grant made to you and others, is treated as other Grants made within and without Nova Scotia before the revolution. It is vacated by an Act of Government. And should the line be settled on our claim that Land will still be within the Province of New Brunswick. Though your tenants &c may have taken a part in execution, yet the whole is now regranted, if my information is correct, and your Grant deemed a nullity. I have been used to treat the subjects which have happened to fall under my direction with as much conciseness as their nature would admit of; and in the present case I am of opinion that the interest of neither nation will call up a discussion of what the antient Acadie was, or of what was the line between Acadie and Nova Scotia anterior to the year 1690, consequently all the learning on Pentagoet, and Kenebec will be laid aside; the English have made their claim to Nova Scotia by boundaries in the Grant to Sir William Alexander, and do not pretend with Shirely and Mildway, that it ever extended west of the Scooduck. The Act of parliment of 1774 can certainly have no weight in the decision of the case. I inclose you your first Letter according to your request, with many thanks for your attention and am with sentiments of great respect ABRAHAM CLARK ON AMERICAN AFFAIRS IN 1777. (From the original manuscript in the Emmet Collection in the New York Public Library.) BALTIMORE Febry 8. 1777. DR SIR, I lately heard the Assembly of New Jersey had met but cannot learn where am therefore unable to give a proper direction. The four New England Colonies have had a meeting of Committees from their Legislatures to consult measures for their mutual defence & for regulating Trade & Commerce-Their proceedings are before Congress, and I expect will soon Obtain their Approbation, and recommendation will thereupon be sent to N. York, N. Jersey Pensa. & Maryland to appt. Comees, to meet at Phila. for the purpose of regulating the Price of all Articles of trade &c-the Southern States will also be desired to meet for that purpose,—those matters if passed you will soon have notice of. I am much alarmed with Genl. Washington's Procl". of the 25th Janry.-he hath assumed the Legislative & Executive powers of Government in all the states—I moved Congress to pass a Resolution I produced for preventing its fatal Consequences and the Establishing such a precedent. My motion was Comtd, and is now before the Come. . . I hope our Legislature will take proper Notice of it, whatever issue it may have in Congress, and not tamely Submit their Authority to the Controul of a power unknown in our Constitution; We set out to Oppose Tyranny in all its Strides, and I hope we shall persevere. A Regulation for providing Carriages for the Army & to prevent as much as possible the Custom of impressing hath long been before Congress Comtd. & recomtd, and so it remains- I Wish you will not delay passing a Law for Regulating impresses of this kind... The Devastations of New Jersey by the Enemy will I think make it Necessary to prevent Cattle &c. running at large, as fences on the main road are mostly destroyed and cannot soon be made, and I think, no person ought to be compelled to fence agst. street Cattle at any Time. . . . Mr. Sergeant talks of resigning and Mr. Stockton by his late proceedure cannot Act, I wish their places may be supplied by such as will be reputable to New Jersey, not only by their integrity but Abilities... The Tories in the two lower Counties of Maryland on the Eastern shore & Sussex on Delaware, are very troublesome and C*** ting forces Aided by several Men of War in Delaware but more Especially in Chesopeek Bay. The Militia & two Contin1 Regiments are marching Against them. I expect Congress will soon remove from hence to Lancaster, tho' it is not yet determined if that should happen I shall be greatly perplexed with the Chests. One Chief reason for removing is the Extravagant price of Living here, the poorest of board without any Liquor, a Dollar a day horse keeping 3/6 or 4/ Wine 12/a bottle, Rum 30/ pr Gall. and everything else in proportion and likely soon to rise. am Dr Sir, with great Regard to your House, JOHN HART Esq'. Your Obedt. & Humble, Servt. P.S. The Price of living I only gave you as a piece of intelligence & not to Opperate in our favour, as upon Recollection I feared you might look upon it as interested... I pd. for bringing one Chest here 22: Msrs Scudder & Patterson Consenting. at Writing thus far I hear you are sitting at Haddonsfield. [Addressed:] The Honourable, JOHN HART Esq. Speaker of the Assembly, |