# UK citizen wants to sail Mississippi from Canada south unimpeded. Does Treaty of Paris allow this? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 22, 2011, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033 "2011-12-22T02:26:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/1 "2011-12-22T02:26:17Z")
Re the [Wiki on the Mississippi River](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_River) there is this language in the Treaty of Paris. > [@](#): > > Article 8 of the Treaty of Paris (1783) states, “The navigation of the river Mississippi, from its source to the ocean, shall forever remain free and open to the subjects of Great Britain and the citizens of the United States”. So if citizen of the UK begins in Canada can they sail the Mississippi River to the Gulf without being hassled by US immigration or border guards? ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/2 "2011-12-22T02:34:58Z")
From your cite: “Flowing entirely in the United States, this river rises in western Minnesota…” He won’t be able to start in Canada. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/3 "2011-12-22T02:41:29Z")
More specifically, the Mississippi starts in Lake Itasca in Minnesota. At the time the Treaty of Paris was drawn up, it was believed that the origin was much further north, and that clause made sense. This misunderstanding is also the reason for the Northwest Angle: > **[Northwest Angle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Angle)** > > The Northwest Angle, known simply as the Angle by locals, and coextensive with Angle Township, is a pene-exclave of northern Lake of the Woods County, Minnesota. Except for surveying errors, it is the only place in the contiguous United States north of the 49th parallel, which forms the border between the U.S. and Canada from the Northwest Angle westward to the Strait of Georgia (between the U.S. state of Washington and the province of British Columbia). The land area of the Angle is separat Se... ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/4 "2011-12-22T02:53:00Z")
At the time of the treaty of 1783, the west bank of the Mississippi River was Spanish territory – and later, briefly, around 1803 it was French territory. So, perhaps, the Louisiana Purchase of 1803 may have had some effects on how the treaty of 1783 is implemented by the United States. ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/5 "2011-12-22T03:21:54Z")
> [@astro](#): > > So if citizen of the UK begins in Canada can they sail the Mississippi River to the Gulf without being hassled by US immigration or border guards? Yes. Once your friend legally enters the US there should be no problem putting that inner tube in the water at Lake Itasca and go tubing all the way to the Gulf. Can’t say that other boaters and an occasional Coast Guard boat might take notice, though … ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/6 "2011-12-22T03:32:27Z")
> [@Duckster](#): > > Yes. Once your friend legally enters the US there should be no problem putting that inner tube in the water at Lake Itasca and go tubing all the way to the Gulf. Can’t say that other boaters and an occasional Coast Guard boat might take notice, though … If your friend goes that way, I’d suggest that your friend take that inner tube out of the river and walk around the various locks and dams on the Mississippi River between Cairo IL and Minneapolis MN. I don’t think the lock-keepers will want him taking the inner tube through their locks, and the associated weirs would be far too dangerous for him to float through in an inner tube. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/7 "2011-12-22T03:45:30Z")
So far I haven’t been able to find anything more specific, but the U.S. State Department publication [Treaties in force](http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/169274.pdf) (PDF file) notes that “Only article 1 is in force” for the Treaty of Paris (page 295, which is page 305 of the PDF document as there is a separately numbered foreword & table of contents). ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/8 "2011-12-22T04:37:32Z")
> [@astro](#): > > So if citizen of the UK begins in Canada can they sail the Mississippi River to the Gulf without being hassled by US immigration or border guards? 😕 How would they determine that you were a UK citizen without “hassling” you? But once you show your passport, sure, you can travel the Mississippi. In fact, according to Article III of the later [Jay Treaty](http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jay.asp), we can’t even impose duties on your peltries. Do you have any peltries? ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/9 "2011-12-22T04:54:41Z")
As **yabob** has noted, the [Treaty of Paris](http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/paris.asp#art8)was a bit muddled in places when it came to setting out the boundary between what is now Canada and the USA. With respect to the area just north of the headwaters of the Mississippi, the 1842 [Webster–Ashburton Treaty](http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/br-1842.asp) tried to address this, and among other things set out that “It being understood that all the water-communications, and all the usual portages along the line from Lake Superior to the Lake of the Woods; and also Grand Portage, from the shore of Lake Superior to the Pigeon river, as now actually used, shall be free and open to the use of the citizens and subjects of both countries.” This still the case. Since you are not a citizen or subject of either country, you would not be able to legally do this. The Webster-Ashburton Treaty still was not as clear as it should have been, which is why on the east coast my Uncle Gordie spends Christmas (and a lot of the rest of the year) as one of Canada’s very few remaining lighthouse keepers (we went to automated lighthouses some time back). He and his fellow lighthouse keepers staff the lighthouse on [Machias Seal Island](http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=machias%20seal%20island%20-%20a%20geopolitical%20anomaly&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCIQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dur.ac.uk%2Fresources%2Fibru%2Fpublications%2Ffull%2Fbsb5-3_gray.pdf&ei=X7PyTvu3PKLq0gHIpfiwAg&usg=AFQjCNEcLwFRQgkCA9lsBzx0UD1rpG_Kvw&sig2=IrrP_08EtQ_VO_vogzBDMg)in the Bay of Fundy, and are paid by the Department of Foreign Affairs rather than the Fisheries and Oceans because their purpose is to assert sovereignty. He does this by treating the very rare visitors – including an American who boats over to the island each year to assert American sovereignty (based on the Treaty of Paris) – to a fish fry. Since you are neither a Canadian nor an American, you would not be able to legally do this, however, I doubt very much if Uncle Gordie would mind at all, for he is a very sociable person. What you could do, despite not being a Canadian, would be to [purchase your very own Canadian lighthouse](http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/media/infocus-alaune/2010/02/index-eng.htm). We have approximately 480 active lighthouses and approximately 490 inactive lighthouses that are up for sale. Enjoy! ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/10 "2011-12-22T04:59:56Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > 😕 How would they determine that you were a UK citizen without “hassling” you? > > But once you show your passport, sure, you can travel the Mississippi. In fact, according to Article III of the later [Jay Treaty](http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jay.asp), we can’t even impose duties on your peltries. Do you have any peltries? [Someone please mind my parasol](http://greatsmokiesart.com/mcart/images/parasole1.jpg) while I thrash an impertinent Yankee Doodle. ---
**Author:** ![Sudden\_Kestrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecd19e/32.png) [@Sudden\_Kestrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sudden_Kestrel)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/11 "2011-12-22T06:31:43Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > If your friend goes that way, I’d suggest that your friend take that inner tube out of the river and walk around the various locks and dams on the Mississippi River between Cairo IL and Minneapolis MN. I don’t think the lock-keepers will want him taking the inner tube through their locks, and the associated weirs would be far too dangerous for him to float through in an inner tube. And bring DEET. Lots and lots of DEET. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/12 "2011-12-22T06:54:06Z")
[never mind] ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 6:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/13 "2011-12-22T06:55:39Z")
Given the grievance involved in flying into the US through regular customs this might be worth a try 🙂 Logistics of asking the pilot to take a detour and bailing out over the Caribbean are nothing compared to USCIS at O’Hare 🙂 Seriously though could I (as a UK citizen) actually avoid regular customs if I decide to navigate the Mississippi from the gulf of Mexico ? Maybe I want to enter the country at Waterproof LA as it sounds cool ? Surely lockkeepers are also bound by these treaties ? ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/14 "2011-12-22T11:44:16Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Surely lockkeepers are also bound by these treaties ? Not really: treaties don’t become really effective until they are enacted into domestic law (in this case being federal law of the United States). So (for example) you could cite this treaty to the lock-keeper at [Lock and Dam No 1](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock_and_Dam_No._1) in Minneapolis as he tried to slow your progress down the Mississippi, but he might respond that he’s only bound by the relevant sections of the United States Code as enacted by the United States Congress. Your only recourse might be to try to get Her Majesty’s ambassador in Washington DC to intervene, but good luck with that 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/15 "2011-12-22T12:14:01Z")
Earlier this week I had to remove myself from a Canadian case because my American client refused to believe that an international Convention applied to his matter. He would have made a good lock keeper. ---
**Author:** ![Sigene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df788c/32.png) [@Sigene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sigene)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/16 "2011-12-22T16:28:38Z")
I should note that the lock-keepers are not opposed to small craft going through their locks. Many people travel the entire length of the Mississippi by canoe every year. While not exactly popular, you probably couldn’t write a book about it, because so many stories are out there already of people who have done it. For something really unusual; you can go North up the Mississippi, make a portage into the Red River Basin in North Dakota, then all the way to Hudson’s bay. Eric Sevareid of TV news did it when he was 19 in 1935 (at least the Red river to Hudson bay part) I’ve also met a guy back in the 90’s who kayaked east to west. Statue of Liberty to the mouth of the Columbia River. It was almost entirely a water passage except for the portage across the great divide. I still have his Trip Notes…Now THAT was a great trip and interesting read. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/17 "2011-12-22T16:56:30Z")
Of course, even with the inner tube, when you start out from Lake Itasca, you will scrape bottom, encounter logs, culverts and braided channels. You’ll have to pick it up and wade or portage for a bit early on: [http://www.bucktrack.com/Canoeing\_Down\_the\_Mississippi.html](http://www.bucktrack.com/Canoeing_Down_the_Mississippi.html) > [@](#): > > The early part of the river was the most difficult, confusing, and interesting. Occasionally the river would “braid out” into several different channels, eventually disappearing into the alders or grasses. Here’s a spot where I was forced to drag my canoe cross-country to a better channel. There were other stretches between Itasca and Bemidji where it was even worse. The river would disappear into cattails and “floating bog” where it was too spongy to walk on and but still impossible to boat through. I spent hours floundering half-in and half-out of my boat, looking for the channel. At one time I resorted to taping a mirror to the end of my paddle, which I held aloft to look for the river! Lot’s of people have canoed it, yeah, but I wonder - has anybody inner-tubed it? ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/18 "2011-12-22T17:46:55Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Seriously though could I (as a UK citizen) actually avoid regular customs if I decide to navigate the Mississippi from the gulf of Mexico? Nope–not even under the Treaty of Paris. “Free and open to navigation” deosn’t mean “no customs”. It merely meant that the US couldn’t enact an outright ban on Britons/Canadians travelling and trans-shipping goods down the Mississippi. It was understood that a later commerical agreement would stipulate terms of trade. That later commerical agreement was the 1795 Jay Treaty, which repeated the language on open navigation: > [@](#): > > It is agreed that it shall at all Times be free to His Majesty’s Subjects, and to the Citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the said Boundary Line freely to pass and repass by Land, or Inland Navigation, into the respective Territories and Countries of the Two Parties on the Continent of America (the Country within the Limits of the Hudson’s Bay Company only excepted) and to navigate all the Lakes, Rivers, and waters thereof, and freely to carry on trade and commerce with each other. . . . but then added with respect to customs: > [@](#): > > (A)ll Goods and Merchandize whose Importation into the United States shall not be wholly prohibited, may freely, for the purposes of Commerce, be carried into the same, in the manner aforesaid, by His Majesty’s Subjects, and such Goods and Merchandize shall be subject to no higher or other Duties than would be payable by the Citizens of the United States on the Importation of the same in American Vessels into the Atlantic Ports of the said States. This is an early version of “most favored nation” status–tariffs are permissible, but must be non-discriminatory with respect to other imports. Except for that all-important exception for peltries: > [@](#): > > No Duty of Entry shall ever be levied by either Party on Peltries brought by Land, or Inland Navigation into the said Territories respectively . . . So bring your peltries, and trade away. > [@Sigene](#): > > I’ve also met a guy back in the 90’s who kayaked east to west. Statue of Liberty to the mouth of the Columbia River. It was almost entirely a water passage except for the portage across the great divide. I still have his Trip Notes…Now THAT was a great trip and interesting read. Was that William Least Heat Moon? He wrote a book, _River Horse_, about such a voyage. Jonathan Raban, a Briton as it happens, wrote a book (_Old Glory: An American Voyage_) about taking a small craft down the Mississippi. No word on whether he brought fur. ---
**Author:** ![Sigene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df788c/32.png) [@Sigene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sigene)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/19 "2011-12-22T19:52:34Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > Was that William Least Heat Moon? He wrote a book, _River Horse_, about such a voyage. No it wasn’t William Least Heat Moon. I think he used a powerboat from St. Louis. (Willliam LHM and I used to live in the same city and I’ve met him a couple of times). This guy did it at the same time and actually asked me if I was Least Heat Moon when he met me on the Missouri. Google searching leads to a few hits of people traveling across the continent by water..but not the one I met. Someday, I may find him again but not yet. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2011, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033/20 "2011-12-23T01:51:43Z")
As to the Jay Treaty, the State Department is of the opinion that “Only article 3 so far as it relates to the right of Indians to pass across the border, and articles 9 and 10 appear to remain in force. But see Akins v. U.S., 551 F.2d 1222 (1977).” (Same PDF file as linked to above). > [@](#): > > [Treaty of Amity Commerce and Navigation, between His Britannick Majesty; and The United States of America, by Their President, with the advice and consent of Their Senate. November 19, 1794](http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/jay.asp) > > ARTICLE 3. > It is agreed that it shall at all Times be free to His Majesty’s Subjects, and to the Citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the said Boundary Line freely to pass and repass by Land, or Inland Navigation, into the respective Territories and Countries of the Two Parties on the Continent of America (the Country within the Limits of the Hudson’s Bay Company only excepted) and to navigate all the Lakes, Rivers, and waters thereof, and freely to carry on trade and commerce with each other. But it is understood, that this Article does not extend to the admission of Vessels of the United States into the Sea Ports, Harbours, Bays, or Creeks of His Majesty’s said Territories; nor into such parts of the Rivers in His Majesty’s said Territories as are between the mouth thereof, and the highest Port of Entry from the Sea, except in small vessels trading bona fide between Montreal and Quebec, under such regulations as shall be established to prevent the possibility of any Frauds in this respect. Nor to the admission of British vessels from the Sea into the Rivers of the United States, beyond the highest Ports of Entry for Foreign Vessels from the Sea. The River Mississippi, shall however, according to the Treaty of Peace be entirely open to both Parties; And it is further agreed, That all the ports and places on its Eastern side, to whichsoever of the parties belonging, may freely be resorted to, and used by both parties, in as ample a manner as any of the Atlantic Ports or Places of the United States, or any of the Ports or Places of His Majesty in Great Britain. > > All Goods and Merchandize whose Importation into His Majesty’s said Territories in America, shall not be entirely prohibited, may freely, for the purposes of Commerce, be carried into the same in the manner aforesaid, by the Citizens of the United States, and such Goods and Merchandize shall be subject to no higher or other Duties than would be payable by His Majesty’s Subjects on the Importation of the same from Europe into the said Territories. And in like manner, all Goods and Merchandize whose Importation into the United States shall not be wholly prohibited, may freely, for the purposes of Commerce, be carried into the same, in the manner aforesaid, by His Majesty’s Subjects, and such Goods and Merchandize shall be subject to no higher or other Duties than would be payable by the Citizens of the United States on the Importation of the same in American Vessels into the Atlantic Ports of the said States. And all Goods not prohibited to be exported from the said Territories respectively, may in like manner be carried out of the same by the Two Parties respectively, paying Duty as aforesaid > > No Duty of Entry shall ever be levied by either Party on Peltries brought by Land, or Inland Navigation into the said Territories respectively, nor shall the Indians passing or repassing with their own proper Goods and Effects of whatever nature, pay for the same any Impost or Duty whatever. But Goods in Bales, or other large Packages unusual among Indians shall not be considered as Goods belonging bona fide to Indians. No higher or other Tolls or Rates of Ferriage than what are, or shall be payable by Natives, shall be demanded on either side; And no Duties shall be payable on any Goods which shall merely be carried over any of the Portages, or carrying Places on either side, for the purpose of being immediately reimbarked, and carried to some other Place or Places. But as by this Stipulation it is only meant to secure to each Party a free passage across the Portages on both sides, it is agreed, that this Exemption from Duty shall extend only to such Goods as are carried in the usual and direct Road across the Portage, and are not attempted to be in any manner sold or exchanged during their passage across the same, and proper Regulations may be established to prevent the possibility of any Frauds in this respect. > > As this Article is intended to render in a great Degree the local advantages of each Party common to both, and thereby to promote a disposition favourable to Friendship and good neighbourhood, It is agreed, that the respective Governments will mutually promote this amicable Intercourse, by causing speedy and impartial Justice to be done, and necessary protection to be extended, to all who may be concerned therein… > > ARTICLE 9. > It is agreed, that British Subjects who now hold Lands in the Territories of the United States, and American Citizens who now hold Lands in the Dominions of His Majesty, shall continue to hold them according to the nature and Tenure of their respective Estates and Titles therein, and may grant Sell or Devise the same to whom they please, in like manner as if they were Natives; and that neither they nor their Heirs or assigns shall, so far as may respect the said Lands, be and the legal remedies incident thereto, be regarded as Aliens. > > ARTICLE 10. > Neither the Debts due from Individuals of the one Nation, to Individuals of the other, nor shares nor monies, which they may have in the public Funds, or in the public or private Banks shall ever, in any Event of war, or national differences, be sequestered, or confiscated, it being unjust and impolitick that Debts and Engagements contracted and made by Individuals having confidence in each other, and in their respective Governments, should ever be destroyed or impaired by national authority, on account of national Differences and Discontents. So, alas, it appears the duty-free status of Peltries may have been superseded. Unless Akins v. U.S had something to say about the matter. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-citizen-wants-to-sail-mississippi-from-canada-south-unimpeded-does-treaty-of-paris-allow-this/607033.md?page=2)