"The practice of nations hath, for the sake of safety and tranquillity, abridged this freedom of the ocean, by annexing to the coast a reasonable tract of the water; and Great Britain, by availing herself of this usage, may possibly arrogate the exclusive enjoyment of the banks, as appurtenant to the island of Newfoundland.

"These banks, the nearest point of which is thirty-five leagues distant from Cape Race, are too far advanced in the Atlantick to be a dependance of the shores. There has been great division among writers in determining to what extent the sea is to be considered as incidental to the territory which it washes. Some have apportioned one hundred miles, others sixty, and others as much as could be seen from land in a fair day. (See Anderson's Hist. of Commerce, Vol. II. Appendix, 17.)

"If we pass from theory to the stipulations of treaties, we shall find better aid, but by no means uniformity. By better aid, we mean British precedents; for against these, a British king surely will not struggle.

"In the second year of James the First, commissioners were appointed on the part of England and Scotland, to treat of and conclude a union of the two kingdoms. By the articles for the regulation of trade, the sea, for the space of fourteen miles from the coast of Scotland, was reserved to Scotchmen only; and it was reciprocally provided in favour of Englishmen. (See Spotswood's Hist. of Scotland, 483, and II. Anderson, Appendix, 17.)

"Should this example be thought to lose the force of its application, from having been the agreement of the subjects of one and the same prince, a letter may be quoted from Secretary Stanton to Lord Carlton, the English ambassador at the Hague, bearing date the 21st of January, 1618. In it the ambassador is commanded to urge the states-general, in the name of King James, to publish a placard prohibiting their subjects to fish within fourteen miles of his coasts until the main business should be finally accommodated by commissioners.

"The treaty of Paris, 1763, to which his most christian majesty as well as his Britannick majesty was a party, excludes the French from the exercise of the fishery in the gulf of St. Lawrence only within three leagues from the shore, extending the distance round Cape Breton to fifteen leagues.

"By inspecting the ancient treaties between England and

the dukes of Britanny and Burgundy, we shall find that the portion of the sea which is supposed to belong to the coast is so far from being increased beyond fourteen miles, or even three leagues, that the liberty of fishing in every part thereof is asserted. See treaties between Henry Sixth, and the duchess of Burgundy, Edward Fourth, and Francis, duke of Britanny; Henry Seventh, and Philip fourth, arch-duke of Austria; and duke of Burgundy and Henry Eighth and Charles Fifth, emperor and duke of Burgundy.

"Had the kings of England esteemed the fisheries the property of the crown, they would not have admitted aliens to a promiscuous fishing with their own subjects without some valuable consideration, or an acknowledgment by way of salvo jure. But, instead of a proceeding like this, they have in a succession of ages deliberately omitted to challenge to themselves the sole right of the fisheries.

"Queen Elizabeth too, being involved in a dispute with the king of Denmark concerning the fishery at Wardhuys, near the North Cape, instructs her plenipotentiaries to deny that the property of the sea at any distance whatsoever is consequent to the banks.' The king of Denmark in his reply does not attempt to establish what she had thus denied, but rests his exclusive claims upon the authority of old treaties between the two crowns. See Rymer's Foedera, tom. 16th, p. 425.

"Thus it appears, upon strict principles of natural law, the sea is unsusceptible of appropriation; that a species of conventional law has annexed a reasonable district of it to the coast which borders on it; and that in many of the treaties to which Great Britain has acceded, no distance has been assumed for this purpose beyond fourteen miles.

"Were these rules then allowed to influence the pretensions of Great Britain with respect to the banks of Newfoundland, they would be readily condemned. Nor could they be supported, were the sea appendant to the shore as far as thirty leagues, the greatest distance, perhaps, which has at any time been ceded to the king of England by treaty.

"Nations may indeed, either by positive contract, or by long and silent acquiescence under exclusion, renounce their privileges in the sea. But the United States have not only never disclaimed their right of fishing therein, but have been in the

constant enjoyment of it during the existence of British government, and occasionally so ever since the Revolution.

commerce.

"It deserves attention, that the fisheries furnish the inhabitants of a considerable part of the United States with an important proportion of their subsistence, and the means of their Should they lose this resource by the accomplishment of independence, an event from which very different expectations have been cherished, and which ought to bestow equal advantages on all who have laboured equally in giving birth to it, such a loss cannot fail to be attended with disappointment and mortifying comparisons.

"2. With respect to the boundaries of the states. The patent to the council of Plymouth, bearing date the 18th of November, 1620, is the patent from which the eastern states proceed.

"New Hampshire claims under the royal commission appointing Benning Wentworth, Esquire, governor of that province, on the 13th July, in the fifteenth year of the reign of George the Second.

"Massachusetts claims under the charter granted by William and Mary, on the 17th October, 1691. The treaty of Paris fixes the Mississippi as the western limit of the old colony of Massachusetts Bay, which is one of the colonies incorporated by that charter. See old charter of 4th March, 1628-9.

"The charter of April 23, 1662, granted by Charles the Second to Winthrop and others, is the ground of the territorial claims of Connecticut. The treaty of Paris is allowed to restrict that state also to the Mississippi.

"On the 8th July, 1662, the same prince granted the charter under which Rhode Island claims.

"New York assigns, as sources of her title, the grant from Charles Second to the duke of York, in 1663, the capitulation of the Dutch in the same year, the treaty of Westminster, 1674, and the renewal or confirmation of the duke's grant immediately after the treaty. This state adds, that the lands on the west side of Connecticut river belong to it under the farther (right) accruing by the subjection of the Five Nations, the native proprietors; and that the country, as far northward as the river St. Lawrence, and westward without known limits, is

the property of New York, as having been formerly possessed by those tribes of Indians and their tributaries. The treaties with those nations in 1684, 1701, 1726, 1744, and 1754, are particularly referred to.

"On the 23d June, 1664, the duke of York conveyed, out of his aforesaid grant to Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret, the limits which New Jersey claims. Upon this ground, and the resignation of the government into the hands of the crown on the 14th August, 1703, is the title of this state built.

"Pennsylvania claims under the charter granted by Charles the Second, on the 4th of March, 1681-2, to William Penn. "Delaware claims under two grants from the duke of York to William Penn, on the 24th August, 1683.

"On the 20th June, 1632, Charles the First granted to Lord Baltimore the limits which Maryland claims.

“Virginia claims under the charter granted by James First, on the 23d May, 1609, to the treasurer and company, the resumption of the country into the hands of the king, and the charter of Charles Second to the colony of Virginia, on the 10th October, 1676. The treaty of Paris marks its western boundary.

"North Carolina and South Carolina claim jointly in the first instance under the charter of 1662, to Clarendon and others, and its confirmation in 1664, with an extension of limits. The British statute of 1729, enabling the king to pay the consideration of the surrender of the proprietors, makes a material point in their case. The separate claims of these two states depend upon the act which divided them. The treaty of Paris defines the western boundary of each.

"The first grant on which Georgia relies, is that made to the trustees on the 8th June, 1732, and limited to the west by the treaty of Paris. The second grant is the proclamation of 1763.

"Were the lands included within these limits merely such as were granted to individuals and settled, or granted and not settled, at the time of the Revolution, they could not be brought into controversy. For no question can arise concerning boundaries until the recognition of independence; and this event, by deposing the king of Great Britain from the rank of lord paramount and chief magistrate of America, destroys the only principles by which lands falling within the two preceding de

scriptions could return into his power. But the views, interests and conduct of his Britannick majesty forbid us to expect that he will acknowledge the territory remaining ungranted at the era of independence to be, in like manner, the property of the United States, or of the particular states within the limits of which it is comprised.

"It is therefore incumbent on us to show

"First, That the territorial rights of the thirteen United States, while in the character of British colonies, were the same with those defined, in the instructions given to Mr. J. Adams on the day of August, 1779; and,

"Secondly, That the United States, considered as independent sovereignties, have succeeded to those rights; or,

Thirdly, That if the vacant lands cannot be demanded upon the preceding grounds, that is, upon the titles of individual states, they are to be deemed to have been the property of his Britannick majesty immediately before the Revolution, and to be now devolved upon the United States collectively taken."

GREAT BRITAIN, 1783.

DEFINITIVE TREATY OF PEACE.

Concluded September 3, 1783. Ratified by the Continental Congress January 14, 1784. Proclaimed January 14, 1784.

"In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. "It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, Duke of Brunswick and Luneburg, Arch-Treasurer and Prince Elector of the Holy Roman Empire, &c., and of the United States of America, to forget all past misunderstandings and differences that have unhappily interrupted the good correspondence and friendship which they mutually wish to restore; and to establish such a beneficial and satisfactory intercourse between the two countries, upon the ground of reciprocal advantage and mutual convenience, as may promote and secure to both perpetual peace