It is not, therefore, true that the stationing a military force at the Lake Temiscouata is a new measure on the part of Her Majesty’s authorities; neither is it true that that measure has been adopted for other purposes than to maintain the security of the customary line of communication and to protect the buildings, stores, and accommodations provided for the use of Her Majesty’s troops when on march by that route; and it was with a view to correct misapprehensions which appeared to exist upon these points, and thus to do away with one needless occasion of dispute, that the undersigned conveyed to the United States Government the information contained in his note of the 26th of January.
With regard again to the construction of barracks and other buildings and the preserving them in an efficient state of repair and defense, a similar degree of error and misapprehension appears still to prevail in the minds of the American authorities.
The erection of those buildings within the portion of the disputed territory now referred to, for the shelter of Her Majesty’s troops while on their march and for the safe lodgment of the stores, is no new act on the part of Her Majesty’s authorities. The buildings in question have been in the course of construction from a period antecedent to the provisional agreements of last year, and they are now maintained and occupied along the line of march with a view to the same objects above specified, for which the small detachments of troops also referred to are in like manner there stationed.
The undersigned will not refrain from here remarking upon one point of comparison exhibited in the present controversy. It is admitted by the United States authorities that the armed bands stationed by the government of Maine in the neighborhood of the Aroostook River have fortified those stations with artillery, and it is now objected as matter of complaint against the British authorities with reference to the buildings at Lake Temiscouata, not that those buildings are furnished with artillery, but only that they are defended by palisades capable of resisting artillery. It would be difficult to adduce stronger evidence of the acts on the one side being those of aggression and on the other of defense.