One of President Andrew Jackson's first test of his diplomacy, was the Case of John Baker who was accused by the British of conspiring with others to transfer British territory to the United States. Jackson had to defend the decision to send the case to arbitration under King William II of Netherlands. The Case of John Baker, a citizen of the State of Maine became an international affair bringing renewed attention to the border disputes between Maine and New Brunswick.
For many years after the War of 1812, the border between British Canada and Northeastern United States remained in dispute, specifically the Maine-New Brunswick border. This land known as the Madawaska territory was very rich in timber, and both the United States and Great Britain were granting licences to their citizens to engage in lumbering. One of the first Americans, to move to the area were the Baker brothers, Nathan and John along with Nathan's wife and three children. After the death of Nathan, John took over the business of lumbering along the upper St. John river. Over the years, there were many conflicts between the American settlers and the British authorities, but they escalated in 1820 when Maine first gained it's statehood. The state of Maine sent out surveyors to mark out their territory and reported back in surprise that there were living on the banks of the St. John River, thriving communities of French speaking Acadians who were British subjects. As an effort to bolster the argument that the territory was American land, business owners like John Baker would place an American flag on their property. On July 4th 1827, John Baker raised an American flag on his property along the junction of Baker Brook and the St. John River and was arrested by the New Brunswick authorities arrested Baker who held him in prison until he could pay a 25-pound fine. The United States sent an official letter demanding that Baker be set free and paid "a full indemnity for the injuries which he suffered", but the British government refused claiming that Baker had interrupted the mail from Canada, displayed the American flag, and conspired with others to transfer his territory to the United States.
The arrest of John Baker became an international affair, because at the core was the argument over whose land the American flag was hoisted on. If New Brunswick authorities were to release Baker, they would be setting a precedent that the land was United States territory, and for America to back down would be to admit that Baker was on British territory. Under the terms of article V of the Treaty of Ghent, Great Britain and the United States were to settle this dispute, and for six years now negotiations had gone nowhere. This peculiar incident was one of the factors, that led to the decision on September 27, 1827 to send the Maine-New Brunswick disputes to arbitration. Albert Gallatin, the current U.S. Minister to London was authorized to negotiate the terms of the arbitration and on January 12, 1829, William II, the King of Netherlands was chosen and agreed to be the arbitrator.
Thus, one of the first items of foreign affairs that President Jackson had address was the arrest of John Baker, and the decision to turn over the demand for his release to arbitration. It was also, the first item Jackson addressed in his first State of the Union address. Few history books today pay much attention to John Baker, nor the disputes in Madawaska territory, nor the Aristook war followed in the 1830s (also known as the "Pork and Beans" war), but in 1829 the case of John Baker of Main was national news. On August 14, 1828 the Niles' Weekly Register published a series of letters between Lord Aberdeen of Great Britain and William Beach Lawrence, U.S. Secretary of Legation and charge d'affaires to Great Britain, where they each made their case regarding the release of John Baker of Main, "citizen of the United States". Now, in his first State of the Union address, President Jackson had to defend the decision to send the case of John Baker to arbitration. His words, are a bit difficult to understand, so I will take them here on sentence a time.
In the opening sentence, Jackson introduces the decision that was made by the two sovereign nations to send the border dispute to arbitration. There comes a point in time, when two nations are unable to reach agreement on very important and delicate subjects, that arbitration becomes necessary.
"Under the convention for regulating the reference to arbitration of the disputed points of boundary under the 5th article of the treaty of Ghent, the proceedings have hitherto been conducted in that spirit of candor and liberality which ought ever to characterize the acts of sovereign States seeking to adjust by the most unexceptionable means important and delicate subjects of contention."Each of the parties, the United States and Great Britain had submitted their initial arguments to king William II, and closing arguments are being prepared.
"The first sentiments of the parties have been exchanged, and the final replication on our part is in a course of preparation."In the third sentence, Jackson mentions the "peculiar importance" this arbitration placed on a patriotic member of this Confederacy. I believe that would be John Baker. In 1828, Confederacy did not mean a member of the Southern Confederate states, but rather it just means alliance or league or perhaps union. The nation was called a confederacy before the constitution was ratified, and the word had no specific meaning before the civil war. Thus, Jackson, is crediting the case of John Baker as renewed attention to be placed on resolving the 5th article of the Treaty of Ghent.
"This subject has received the attention demanded by its great and peculiar importance to a patriotic member of this Confederacy".Jackson, now wanted to establish confidence that the arbitration will would be resolved in our best interests. Jackson writes, that based upon the existing treaty of Ghent, the United States is standing on solid ground regarding the Case of John Baker and a resolution of the border disputes tilting in our favor. Jackson threw in a comment about the "high reputation" of the commissioners. Perhaps, he is referring to John Quincy Adams who led the initial negotiations. This may be an attempt to win over his opponents who were supporters of Adams in the last election.
"The exposition of our rights already made is such as, from the high reputation of the commissioners by whom it has been prepared, we had a right to expect."The last sentence is the most confusing, but I believe the "citizen of the State of Main" is John Baker, while the adjectives "character, talents, and intimate acquaintance" are meant to be attributed to King William. By reading it this way, I believe that Jackson is writing that we as a nation are committed to the release of John Baker, and willing to submit his case to King William of Netherlands. Jackson's argument is that since King William has already taken on the delicate task of arbitration, and has displayed a friendly disposition, he could be trusted with this case. Jackson argues, that King William II can be trusted, because he is a man of both character and talent, and is intimately acquainted with the situation.
"Our interests at the Court of the Sovereign who has evinced his friendly disposition by assuming the delicate task of arbitration have been committed to a citizen of the State of Maine, whose character, talents, and intimate acquaintance with the subject eminently qualify him for so responsible a trust."Finally, Jackson concludes that Congress should have nothing to fear, because he has full confidence that our cause is just and and in the uncompromising and proven independence of King William.
"With full confidence in the justice of our cause and in the probity, intelligence, and uncompromising independence of the illustrious arbitrator, we can have nothing to apprehend from the result."
Here is the excerpt in full:
"Under the convention for regulating the reference to arbitration of the disputed points of boundary under the 5th article of the treaty of Ghent, the proceedings have hitherto been conducted in that spirit of candor and liberality which ought ever to characterize the acts of sovereign States seeking to adjust by the most unexceptionable means important and delicate subjects of contention. The first sentiments of the parties have been exchanged, and the final replication on our part is in a course of preparation. This subject has received the attention demanded by its great and peculiar importance to a patriotic member of this Confederacy. The exposition of our rights already made is such as, from the high reputation of the commissioners by whom it has been prepared, we had a right to expect. Our interests at the Court of the Sovereign who has evinced his friendly disposition by assuming the delicate task of arbitration have been committed to a citizen of the State of Maine, whose character, talents, and intimate acquaintance with the subject eminently qualify him for so responsible a trust. With full confidence in the justice of our cause and in the probity, intelligence, and uncompromising independence of the illustrious arbitrator, we can have nothing to apprehend from the result.
By 1831, Jackson won his case, and had the pleasure of announcing to Congress and the nation that John Barker was to be released.
"It affords me satisfaction to inform you that suggestions made by my direction to the chargé d'affaires of His Britannic Majesty to this Government have had their desired effect in producing the release of certain American citizens who were imprisoned for setting up the authority of the State of Maine at a place in the disputed territory under the actual jurisdiction of His Britannic Majesty. From this and the assurances I have received of the desire of the local authorities to avoid any cause of collision I have the best hopes that a good understanding will be kept up until it is confirmed by the final disposition of the subject."
References
Presidency.ucsb.edu. (2018). Andrew Jackson: First Annual Message. [online] Available at: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29471 [Accessed 12 Aug. 2018].Presidency.ucsb.edu. (2018). Andrew Jackson: Third Annual Message. [online] Available at: https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/third-annual-message-3 [Accessed 28 June 2019].
Niles, H. (2012). Weekly register. volume 36 of 76. [Place of publication not identified]: Gale, Sabin Americana, pp.pgs. 190 - 196.
ThinkMaine. (2018). How Maine’s little-known war changed America forever. [online] Available at: http://thinkmaine.bangordailynews.com/2015/06/23/home/how-maines-little-known-war-changed-america-forever/ [Accessed 12 Aug. 2018].
Upperstjohn.com. (2018). John Baker. [online] Available at: http://www.upperstjohn.com/people/johnbaker.htm [Accessed 12 Aug. 2018].
Wagner, D. (2018). 1827 John Quincy Adams - Maine Boundary Disputes with New Brunswick. [online] Stateoftheunionhistory.com. Available at: http://www.stateoftheunionhistory.com/2018/04/1827-john-quincy-adams-maine-boundary.html [Accessed 12 Aug. 2018].
No comments:
Post a Comment