{"newspaper_name": "The Arkansas banner.", "edition": "01", "page": "p3", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 3422, "word_count": 586, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9607999920845032], "ccnet_perplexity": [936.7000122070312], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
'of Americans choose to settle in any part ol the territory they may do so; and so may millions of Englshmen. That this would ,oe very lnconvenient to both parties IS eb-

 svious, and luckily the country is so miserable sa one that there is no chance of its occurring But few thousands of the people of each nation were to proceed thither, and do, them

 ,seives over the best valleys, much disagreea- lbie, perhaps mischievous, quarreling might iensue It is clear that this ough, to be pre-

 vented as soon as possible by partition.

 s'An1fAwe now come to the question us 10 the

 smode and terms oI partition. The maximum claim of England and the minimum of America Is the Columbia; the smaximum of America and the minimum of England is the 10th parallel If each were lmad enough to insist on it's maximum a col.

 ,lision must ensue.

 The best mode of arrangement would bc

 that which has been offered by England, ant though not accepted, not definitely rejected Ibv Amerca--arbitratio The dispute aiict |all is a mere question of national prie, ant

 the pride of neither nation could be offended |by submission to an award. If that awart lwere to give the whole country down tJ the Mexican frontier to England, America would Isuller no real loss. She would only be pre- |vented from wasting her resources and violat. ling her constitution in the acquisition and

 defence of what must, in effect, be distant |colony. If the award were to give the whole Territory to America, the value of the mono !poly is injurious to the English people, we should not bitterly grieye al an event which would reduce the value of the company's |stock one per cent.

 Arbitration be unatainable, the only mode |ol accommodation is mutual concession; and the terms which we suggest for that utual

 are those which, if we were arbi lirators, we should award, namely, that the boundary should be the 10th parallel, until

 lit meets the Pacific and then the sea- Oul sonly real claim rests on contigpity, and this

 !would give us more than mere contiguity :enttles Us to. This would give us the whole iof Nancouver's island, and it would give Us Ian abundance of good harbors. It wonld

 also give us the country which is best fol 1the purposes for which we use it-the fu

 trade. The furs to the north of the d9tIl

 parallel are better and more abundant than ,lhose 10 the south. All balancing. however.

 3of the positive advantages to be obtained, by the one nation or by the other on partition,

 lis mere ehildshness. The interruption of sconfdence for single week costs more than

 ! the whole country IS worth A mere arma- lment, though followed by accommodation. Iwonld cost more than thousand times it's

 lvalue What proportion, therefore, does i

 bear to a war?

 Whatever be Lord Aberdeen's policy, tht opposition will, we trust, not add to its diff

 lculties. The American negotators will em- lploy against him all sorts of misrepresentation lof principle and facts; for though inc national

 law of the American courts and legal writers

 is admirable, that of their diplomatists, ant

 indeed of dipomatlsts in general, is usually ; tissue of sophistry and lalsehood. We trus

 lhat the English negoiators will not follow ltheir example. We trust that they will no

 adeny every principle of law, however sacred

 which they find opposed to them, and every

 l fact, however notorious, that makes agains

 1 them.