In order to explain why such a question should be brought up forty-seven years after the treaty had been signed, he showed that it was founded on some indefinite or ambiguous clauses of the treaty of 1783, but not proposed until 1820.
Here was a delicate point for His Majesty to settle without giving offence to either English or Americans.

But Sir Howard was resolved to support the claim which contended for the rights of his nation--for justice and for truth.

He was not desiring territory, but protection and security to the interests of his people, _security_ to prevent the Americans from claiming the privileges of the St.John river or classifying the Bay of Fundy rivers with those emptying into the Atlantic.

However, a decision at length was given which did not meet the wishes of either party, but the matter was set partially at rest.
Soon afterwards Sir Howard was engaged in discussing the cause and events of the Belgian insurrection.

He showed to the British Government the design which France had contrived to her aggrandizement by the dissolution of the Netherlands, and urged intervention on the part of the British Government.