should supersede the other in case of conflict; no questions were raised on the record as to the right of the United States to make the treaty under consideration.

§ 473. Justice McLean's views in Lattimer vs. Poteet.Mr. Justice McLean, in construing a certain clause in a treaty made with the Cherokee Indians relating to territory entirely within the domain of one of the States, said that the case involved the power of the United States to vary private rights by treaty. He declared that it could not be denied "that the parties to a treaty are competent to determine any disputes respecting its limits." Continuing he said: "It is a sound principle of national law, and applies to the treatymaking power of this government, whether exercised with a foreign nation or an Indian tribe, that all questions of disputed boundaries may be settled by the parties to the treaty. And to the exercise of these high functions by the government within its constitutional powers, neither the rights of a state nor those of an individual can be interposed."

The views of Chancellor Kent2 and Justice Field have already been referred to.3

§ 474. Northeastern boundary controversy; views of Daniel Webster and Chancellor Kent.-In 1842 the dispute1

§ 473.

1 Lattimer vs. Poteet, U. S. Sup. Ct. 1840, 14 Peters, 4, MCLEAN, J. 2§ 272, p. 411, vol. I.

Ct. 1890, 133 U. S. 258, FIELD, J., and extracts from opinions in § 335, p. 23, ante. For a comparison of views of Chancellor Kent and Jus

See Geofroy vs. Riggs, U. S. Sup. tice Field see § 426, p. 239, ante.

§ 474.

1 NOTE ON SETTLEMENT OF BOUNDARY DISPUTES WITH GREAT RRITAIN. The entire northern boundary of the United States has been the subject of controversy between this country and Great Britain, since 1783. This was the natural result of the boundaries having been fixed originally without actual survey. There have been several arbitrations, numerous boundary commissions, and not less than eleven treaties amongst them (exclusive of those relating to Alaska boundary): the Provisional Articles of 1782 (U. S. Tr. and Con. 1889, p. 370); Definitive Treaty of Peace, 1783 (Id., p. 375); Jay Treaty of 1794 (Id., p. 379, and see p. 382, as to St. Croix River); Explanatory Articles, 1798, as to River St. Croix (Id., p. 396); Treaty of Ghent, 1814 (Id., p. 399); (for Declarations of Commissioners thereunder as to the boundaries, see Id., pp. 405, et seq.); Fisheries and Boundaries, 1818 (Id., p. 415, for art. II, relating to Northwest boundary of Lake of Woods to Stony [Rocky]

between this country and Great Britain over the northeastern boundary reached a very acute condition. Both counMountains, see p. 416, and for art. III as to joint occupation of disputed territory west of Mountains to Pacific, see pp. 416-417); Continuing joint occupation west of Rocky Mountains, 1827 (Id., p. 426); Submitting Northeastern boundary to arbitration, 1827 (Id., p. 429); WebsterAshburton treaty of 1842, settling Northeastern boundary (Id., p. 432); Buchanan-Pakenham treaty of 1846, adjusting northwestern boundary (Id., p. 438); Treaty of Washington, 1871, referring disputed points in last mentioned treaty to arbitration (Id., p. 478). See Wharton's Int. Law Digest, Vol. II, §§ 150, et seq.

It will thus be seen that from 1782 to 1842 efforts had been made to properly delimitate the northeastern boundary. The arbitration of 1827 had been unsatisfactory to both countries and matters reached a crisis in 1842. Lord Ashburton then came to the United States and a treaty was prepared which has ever since been known as the WebsterAshburton treaty. Articles I and II fixed a line which has ever since been recognized as the boundary between this country and Great Britain from the Atlantic ocean to the Rocky Mountains. No cession was actually made as the territory through which the northeastern boundary ran was described as disputed territory."

Articles IV and V of the treaty (U. S. Tr. and Con. 1889, p. 435, U. S. Treaties in Force, 1889, p. 228), are as follows:

ARTICLE IV.

All grants of land heretofore made by either party, within the limits Grants of land, &c., of the territory which by this treaty falls within the within the territory. dominions of the other party, shall be held valid, ratified, and confirmed to the persons in possession under such grants, to the same extent as if such territory had by this treaty fallen within the dominions of the party by whom such grants were made; and all equitable possessory claims, arising from a possession and improvement of any lot or parcel of land by the person actually in possession, or by those under whom such person claims, for more than six years before the date of this treaty, shall, in like manner, be deemed valid, and be confirmed and quieted by a release to the person entitled thereto, of the title to such lot or parcel of land, so described as best to include the improvements made thereon; and in all other respects the two contracting parties agree to deal upon the most liberal principles of equity with the settlers actually dwelling upon the territory falling to them, respectively, which has heretofore been in dispute between them.

ARTICLE V.

Whereas in the course of the controversy respecting the disputed territory on the northeastern boundary, some moneys Distribution of the have been received by the authorities of Her Britan- "disputed territory fund." nic Majesty's province of New Brunswick, with the intention of preventing depredations on the forests of the said territory,

tries made claims to a large extent of territory and some adjustment had to be arrived at in order to prevent actual

which moneys were to be carried to a fund called the 'disputed territory fund,' the proceeds whereof it was agreed should be hereafter paid over to the parties interested, in the proportions to be determined by a final settlement of boundaries, it is hereby agreed that a correct account of all receipts and payments on the said fund shall be delivered to the Government of the United States within six months after the ratification of this treaty; and the proportion of the amount due thereon to the State of Maine and Massachusetts, and any bonds or securities appertaining thereto shall be paid and delivered over to the Government of the United States; and the Government of the United States agrees to receive for the use of, and pay over to, the States of Maine and Massachusetts, their respective portions of said fund, and further, to pay and satisfy said States, respectively, for all claims for expenses incurred by them in protecting the said heretofore disputed territory and making a survey thereof in 1838; the Government of the United States agreeing with the States of Maine and Massachusetts to pay them the further sum of three hundred thousand dollars, in equal moieties, on account of their assent to the line of boundary described in this treaty, and in consideration of the conditions and equivalents received therefor from the Government of Her Britannic Majesty."

The Northeastern boundary dispute was the subject of a great deal of Congressional, and other, debate, and many reports and books were published thereon, amongst them (taken from Poor's Index of Documents):

Message on Relations with Great Britain. President Martin Van Buren. Feb. 9, 1839, Ex. Docs., No. 181, 25th Cong., 3d sess., Vol. IV. 136 pp., 8vo.

Transmitting report of the Secretary of State, and accompanying correspondence, on the subject of the territorial relations of the United States and Great Britain, questions as to boundaries, neutrality, etc.

Report on Northeastern Boundary. Foreign Relations Committee. Feb. 28, 1839, Senate Docs., No. 272, 25th Cong., 3d sess., Vol. IV., 2 pp., 8vo.

Recommends adoption of resolutions denying the existence of any agreement that the territory in dispute on the northeastern boundary shall be placed under the jurisdiction of the British Government until the final settlement of the boundary question, and asserting that if the British Government shall attempt by military force to assume jurisdiction over this territory the exigency will have occurred rendering it the duty of the President to call forth the militia for the purpose of repelling such an invasion.

The Northeastern Boundary. Albert Gallatin, 1840. Published by Samuel Adams, New York, 179 pp., with 8 maps.

The right of the United States to the northeastern boundary claimed by them under the treaty of 1783.

Message on the Northeastern Boundary. President Martin Van

hostilities.

The controversy was finally settled by the Webster-Ashburton Treaty and a part of the territory Buren. Jan. 22, 1840, Senate Docs., No. 107, 26th Cong., 1st sess., Vol. III, 66 pp., 8vo.

Response to Senate resolution; Copies of correspondence relating to boundary and jurisdiction of the disputed territory; also in relation to establishment of military posts in the State of Maine.

Message on the Northeastern Boundary. President Martin Van Buren. Jan. 29, 1840, Senate Docs., No. 266, 26th Cong., 1st sess., Vol. V, 14 pp., 8vo.

Additional correspondence relative to adjustment of boundary and occupation of disputed territory.

Message relating to Northeastern Boundary. President John Tyler. Feb. 5, 1842, Senate Docs., No. 97, 27th Cong., 2d sess., Vol. II, 10 pp., 8vo.

Report of commissioners appointed for the exploration and survey of boundary line between Maine and New Hampshire and the British provinces; Expenditures and estimates for completion of the work; Commissioners: James Renwick, A. Talcott, and J. D. Graham.

Message on the Northeastern Boundary. President John Tyler. Feb. 26, 1842, House Docs. No. 109, 27th Cong., 2d sess., Vol. II, 1 p., 8vo. Declines giving information on the subject.

Message on the Maine and New Hampshire Boundary. President John Tyler, April 7, 1842, House Docs., No. 31, 27 Cong., 3 sess., Vol. III, 49 pp.

Report of northeastern boundary commissioners on Maine and New Hampshire boundary, with map.

Northeastern Boundary. Daniel Webster. Aug. 11, 1842, House Docs., No. 2, pp. 25-104, 27th Cong., 3d sess., Vol. I.

Treaty with Lord Ashburton, and correspondence with same and with authorities of the States of Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts. Memoir on the Northeastern Boundary. Albert Gallatin, 1843. Library of the State Department, 74 pp., with map.

Memoir on the northeastern boundary in connection with Mr. Jay's map, together with a speech on the same subject by Hon. Daniel Webster.

Message on Northeastern Boundary. President James K. Polk. Feb. 9, 1846, House Ex Docs., No. 110, 29th Cong., 1st sess., Vol. IV, 78 pp.

Correspondence with Great Britain in relation to the " Washington treaty;" Free navigation of St. John River; Disputed territory fund. Message on Northeastern Boundary. President James K. Polk. April 3, 1846, Senate Docs., No. 274, 29th Cong., 1st sess., Vol. V, 22 pp. Transmits correspondence of British Minister and Secretary of State from June, 1840, to March, 1841, relative thereto.

Memorial for indemnity for Lands Ceded to Great Britain. March 22, 1848, Senate Mis. Docs., No. 91, 30th Cong., 1st sess., Vol. I, 3 pp.

claimed by the State of Maine was included in the territory relinquished by the United States to Great Britain. Daniel Webster, then Secretary of State, declared in the course of the correspondence that the United States had no power to dispose of any part of the territory of a State by treaty without the consent of the State.2 Chancellor Kent differed with him declaring, that "the better opinion would seem to be that such a power of cession does reside exclusively in the treaty-making power under the Constitution, although a safe discretion would forbid the exercise of it without the consent of any State." Forty-five years later this opinion was di

Citizens of Maine ask for payment for lands in former limits of Maine ceded by treaty.

Report on Claims of Maine and Massachusetts. Senator Bradbury. Dec. 29, 1852, Senate Reports, No. 361, 32d Cong., 2d sess., Vol. I, 24 pp.

On claims of Maine and Massachusetts to indemnity for lands conveyed by those States to enable the Government to fulfill stipulations in the treaty of Washington. Favorable.

Report on claims of Maine and Massachusetts. Rep. David Ritchie. May 4, 1858, House Reports, No. 366, 35th Cong. 1st sess., Vol. III, 2 pp.

66

On claims of the States of Maine and Massachusetts arising under the treaty to settle and define the boundaries between the United States and the possessions of Great Britain; " Claims for protected disputed territory in 1839-41. Committee favorable to payment of claim.

Resolution relating to the Northeastern Boundary. Maine Legislature. Jan. 20, 1871, House Misc. Docs., No. 41, 41st Cong., 3d sess., Vol. I, 4 pp.

In favor of the owners of certain land on the northeastern boundary of the State of Maine being paid for it, as it was ceded to Great Britain by the United States.

Report on Lands Ceded to Great Britain. Senator Wadleigh. July 15, 1876, Senate Reports, No. 466, 44th Cong., 1st sess., Vol. II, 3 pp. Favorable to providing for the compensation of owners of lands ceded by the United States to Great Britain in and by the treaty of Washington of July 9, 1842.

2 For reference to correspondence | VIII, part 1 of Kent's Commentain regard to this treaty see Whar-ries, while treating of the law of ton's Int. Law Dig.. Vol. II, § 150c, nations, in which he says (p. 167): pp. 175, et seq.

"There can be no doubt that the For views of Jefferson and Ham- power competent to bind the nation ilton see note 1 to § 467, p. 382, ante. by treaty may alienate the public So quoted by Professor Woolsey domain and property by treaty. in his International Law, § 103, If a nation has conferred upon its p. 161, 6th ed. See also Lecture executive department, without re