IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT 3) V m m ^l /. < *Si % u. \= 1.0 I.I L25 III 1.4 - 6" 2.5 2.2 L8 1.6 "f'^'X^ -'^^ ^'' "> /■ — Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) fl7i2-4503 s. :^s^. «v \\ \ o\ ''W^\ %^' 4P ^ ^ » CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CiHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian da microraproductlons hl.torlqua. Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquea at bibliographiquaa Tha Instituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy avaiiabia for filming. Faaturas of this copy which may be bibliographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha images in tha reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. E Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagte Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^ et/ou pellicuiie Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manqce Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encro de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illuatrations/ Planches et/ou illustrationa en couleur Bound with other material/ Relii avac d'autres documents D D n Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liura serrie peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion le long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appsar within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans la texte. mais, lorsque cela «tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas iti film^as. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplAmentaires; L'Institut a microfilm* la mailleur axempiaire qu'il lui a iti possible dt se procurer. Las details de cet axempiaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent axiger una modification dans la m«thode normaie da filmage sont indiquAs ci-dessous. □ Coloured pages/ Pi Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/oi Pages rastaur^as et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxe< Pages dicolordes, tachatias ou piquies Pages detached/ Pages ditachies Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prin Quality inigale de I'impression Includes supplementary materic Comprend du material supplementaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible |~~| Pages damaged/ r I Pages restored and/or laminated/ r^ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ fyj Pages detached/ Fy] Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ rn Includes supplementary material/ I I Only edition available/ D Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues. Mtc, have been refiimed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partieilement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata. una pelure, etc., ont iti filmies d nouveau da facon d obtanir la mailleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous. ^°X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity 3f : Douglas Library Queen's University The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibili^; of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —»> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grAce A la ginirositA de: Douglas Library Queen's University Les images suivantes ont «t« reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet« de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimte sont film6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en term^nant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont fiimts en commengant par la premlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illrjstration et en termlnant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V cignifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film^s d des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd A partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ■■^■™>-«iii»i»»i ''. J fREATIES '^C-' nKTWEEX The Dnited States AND Great Britain- 1J18CIISSEI) FJiCM A FISHERMAN'S STANDPOINT, I»Y LUTHER MAODOCKS, Secretary National Fishery Association, WASHINGTON, D. 0. Marcn 1st, 1888. Washington. D. C : Gray k Clarkson, Printers. 1888 ^^-'i 1 ;^.\D % / V'J-';--.,-;^- '^■y^..?;^^:.< 'The EDITH ami LORNE PlERcTl Collection ./CANADIANS ilueens University at Kingston 'cm'.^^>i- :^:- -J ■) Si ' d?.*^' .♦f •■' THE TREATY SUMMARIZED. Delimitation in this case means the establishment of the Headland Theory, which we nave always protested against, and gives up thou- sands of square miles of water which, under the treaty of 1783 and 1818, we had a right to use. The Strait of Canso there is no contention about, for it has always been a free highway. We receive under this treaty only humane privileges, such as all civilized or semi-barbarous nations grant to each other, even when there is no treaty to bmd them. Canadian vessels have had full commercial privileges in our ports since 1830. If there is any doubt as to what privileges we have in Article XI there can be no doubt in Article XV as to what privileges we do not have or those which we can have when Canada can send fish free into our markets. To re- move the duty on fish would be to sound the death-knell of the American fisheries. This is sought by Great Britain to destroy our marine power and to add to her strength, and give her colonies the monopoly of our fish markets. The American fishermen decidedly object to having any disfiguring marks put upon their vessels, which are their pride, and say that the Stars and Stripes are sufficient marks for their identification. The tonnage tax mentioned in the protocol is outrageous, and is in- tended to fix a value on privileges which are ours by right, but are WITHHELD by this treaty. There is no word in the treaty which gi-^es the least intimation that American fishermen would receive under it the least recom- pense for the outrageous and barbarous treatment to which they have been subjected by Canada during the past three years, nor for the illegal detention and seizure of vessels by Canada does the United States claim damages. The contention of tlie United States is giving up, and, if this treaty is accepted, the world must liold that we have not been honest in asking for tlie rights which have always been held to be ours, but which this treaty surrenders, and its defenders try to show were merely false pretenses. ITS TEEMS DISCUSSED. The treaty recently concluded at Wasluugton between Great Britain and the United States and which is now receiving the con- Hideration of the Senate, and the ratification of which has been asked lor by the President, is a document which needs the careful consid- Z^IT ^^^''V^T'^ '• H'" ?''^'"«« »"^ ^hose interests are to be affeoted by it ; and particularly is it entitled to receive the great- est attention and consideration from those gentlemen who are in- trusted with the important functions of legislating upon it. Before officml action 18 taken by the Senate upon this treaty, it seems emi! nently desirable that an expression of opinion should be givenTy twi°i''■^•'^!^^\'¥^^'*''"'«' ^""^ *hat it should be viewed from the standpoint of the fishermen, so that the public may know whether, ^If r^?ir''"Sf *^-^ ""^'^ '"*f '^'^^ ^'^ °^««t effected, this docui sTtPrlT "^f" ^^'''^ ''''^'' '^"^ ^"^^"« ^^''' '•equire^ents, or is stated in such a manner as to definitely and absolutelv settle all SZrri"^ t"^V ^^f/"^* *^**' ^^^-^g^ *he treaty has been pu" hshed only a few days, it has provoked an endless diversity of opinion and interpretation, seems to make it necessary to prepare this criticism and to state wherein its provisions may or may n^ot be un! tXTl'nfi"'^'-'''' I* I' ^'^''''^ '^^' they are inimical to the best interests of American fishermen ,.t wT'-f"-i1 t^%^';^^y J"l* concluded, which has been quoted at length It will be first seen that it purports to be a treaty for the Toctbef 20 lSi«T*?v? '^'^'^^ ^''''^' fi^«* «f *^« convention mi«nnS a'- ^•^' ^^l^^\V^^Vose8 " of removing all causes of misunderstanding in relation thereto, and of promoting friendly inter- ^ course and good neighborhood between the United States aud the possessions of her Majesty in North America " It IS doubtless a fact that the gentlemen who acted for the United States earnestly desired to conclude an arrangement which might thlTrLT^'^'Ts'''^-'''^'''^ ^^ °^^' ^■"^"'•^ fi«^^^y '•elations with Ww" ft "" \ American provinces. It is, however, unfortunate. L« nfl!l'"'.?°^i^?'if 'T-' "^*^« U°i*«d St^*«« ^hose interests tnZl T^^ ^^"'^"^ \ ^^' *^"^*y' '^^^ i*« provisions are stated in such ambiguous terms that its proper interpretation is apparently o tt'^lr^T •'^^^':, ^'' °"^^ '' '^' fisherman, who is^unused to the technicalities and construction of diplomatic phraseology, ren- bf ^ J •V'' ''^^'i-P'r- *h^*^«*ty i'^ a practical manner, so that he may avoid complica ions, but we find that men learned in law and experienced in diplomacy, men of rare scholarship and execu- JitlprltiTn.'^^'"' *-'''*^' '^' '' '' ''^'^'' '^ ^-' ^^~^ It is somewhat noteworthy that this present treaty, which is sup- LTi fi *f V^.' ^}^'' "^ '^-^ ''f'^ ^^ ^Sl«' ^°d t« ^«^ definition Sf ?ftis i' .' f «o»^ention, fails to specify, as does the treaty of 1818, the particular coasts upon which our fishermen still retain the right to fish in the littoral waters inside the limit. The failure to make this designation in plain and unequivocal language leaves it open to a doubt whether, if the present treaty is ratified, our fisher- w 8 men may not be deprived of these ancient rights which they have been in possession of since the cenvention of 1818, or earlier nr A ?''u* provides for the delimitation of British waters, bays, creeks, and harbors of the coasts of Canada and Newfoundland, a to wuich the United States renounce forever any liberty to dry nets or cure fish, but nothing is said in that article, nor islny menSon fCr A *°y .""^^^^t^ding sections of the treaty, of any coastR in British >' ^. orth America where our fishermen still enjoy a right to the inshore izTTu /'•««."'?!l^bly \^^f. intended by those who drafted this TnTn/. I °?/if^*' ^^ *]"' kind which Americans have heretofore enjoyed should be surrendered. But the fact that different construe- tions have already been put upon this matter, in the discussions which have appeared in the daily press, and the additionnl fact that those interested in the fisheries are entirely unable to definitely de- cide whether those rights have been surrendered or not, shows con- clusively how desirable it might have been to place this mitter beyond question. In regard to the manner of delimitation, as provided for in this treaty, nj special objection might be made, perhaps, were it not that the treatment received by the United States, in a similar controversy *jie appointment of members to the convention at Halifax, had made this system of settling our fishery troubles exceedingly odious W I,"" TT ^r.^SJT'*"^ ^" *^" *^«^^"««- I* i« °ot yet forgotten how the United States was treated in that affair, and if justice and fair dealing were denied us then, have we any right to expect better preSdmeV*"' *''"^' "^ ^''''' ^''*"^" "^^ her coSs at the In regard to the delimitation of bays, creeks, harbors, &c., it must wn„u r"^ '"^^i *^*' '? accepting this treaty the United States would be surrendering the contention which she has always made imr«n^ .V, • ' '\f.^''^^''' 'I ^^S'^^d to the right of our fishermen to ?hp Rr5t;«r^' fil"? ^°^^^^^« «"t«lde of three miles of the coasts of the Bnt sh North American possessions. If any advantage had been gained to our fishermen by this surrender, there might have beeS an excuse for it, but we certainly fail to see where Iny concession has been made by Canada which may be considered a fai? equivalent for this arrangement, which prohibits our fishing vessels from enter- 'r^Si^T . tr""^ ^ ''"'*''^" ^^'^^*- '^h^ assertion which has been made that these bays are not available to Americans as fishing grounds IS not a defensible one. Even if this is granted, there can ^n^r^rTK ^""•^^^f^^S \¥'^' ^hich we have long possessed ?Tnl ^<.'' ^''' ^l"^^^' been claimed by the ablest statesmen of the Uni ed Mates, unless we obtain for these some equivalent which may be of value to our fishermen. ^ rJhA%T'''''*'''W^ '! proper to refer to Article IX, wherein the right of fishing vessels of the Dnited States to navigate the Strait of Canso 18 afiirmed._ Although there has been «ome diplomatic dis- cussion as o the Tight of American fishing vessels to navigate the btrait of Canso, it is beyond question that this strait has always been considered the highway of nations, and vessels of all classes have navigated it without restriction since the establishment of the independence of the United States. It is true that the President ■tates that : ** The uninterrupted navigation of the Strait of Canso ia expressly and for the firtt time permitted." Well may the Hon. William H. Trescott ask: "Who has ever denied it?" And he continues : " What further or other affirmation do we need than that it is the necessary means of communication which, as an inde- pendent nation, we have used for a century, botween t',a American waters, the right to navigate and fish in, which is ours by the trea- ties of 1783 and 1818."* He rightly believes that an English states- man would as soon think of closing the Strait of Gilraltar or restor- ing the dues at the Strait of Elsinore as he would of closing the Strait of Canso to navigation. In making this new treaty, in which it is claimed there are im- portant concessions for the fishermen of the United States, it is evident that the treaty of 1818 served as a basis for the present ne- gotiations, and that the commercial arrangement between Great Britain and the United States in 1830 has been utterly ignored. When we see Canadian and Newfoundland vessels enjoying in our ports all the commercial rights which our own vessels have, and ob- serve the fact that our Government is exceedingly solicitous to avoid giving thef?e foreigners any trouble ; and when it is clearly under- stood that by the acts and proclamations of 1830 our vessels are entitled to the same rights, privileges, and considerations in the l)orts tf Canada that Canadian vessels receive iu ours, it is certainly a raattf r of surprise that, in a formal treaty of this kind, privileges far more restricted and which fail to secure'to our fishermen all that they should enjoy, are looked upon and mentioned as containing im- portant concessions to the people of the United States — at least this is the construction put upon it in the President's message. The main thing contended for by American fishermen, since the abrogation (1885) of the fishery clauses of the treaty of 1871, has been for the enjoyment of those commercial rights' in Canadian f.'orts — the same rights, nothing more nor less — which Canadians en- joy in the United States. It has not been a matter of fishery rights for which they have contended, because they have distinctly stated and reiterated the statement, time and again, that Canada has no inshore fisheries for which they are disposed to treat or to accept, wliere an equivalent is demanded. The convention of 1818 produced a treaty which was a fishery treaty and nothing else. It gave us no commercial rights, nor had we enjoyed any commercial rights in the ports of British North America under previous treaties, f *New York Herald, February 27, 1888. t Che treaties of 1854 and of 1871 were also fishery treaties. It was conceded at Halifax in 1877, by the Joint Commissioners, that the so-called Washington treaty gave no commercial righ's to fishermen of the United States, and that they were not entitled, under the provisions of that treaty, tc purchase bait, ice, or other commodities in Canadian ports. But although Americans were granted no com- mercial rights in these treaties, it is, nevertheless, a fact that since the reciprocal trade arrangement of 1830 the fishing- vessels of the United States have bought bait and other supplies in Canadian ports, where, also, they have shipped men and transhipped their cargoes ; nor was the ri^ht to do these acts questioned until 1870 when Canada was trying to coerce the United States into making a treaty w hioh would open our markets to her fishery products. Th^n she seized our vessels for buying bait, and refused com ncrcial ri>;lit« wh'ch we \va\ previous' v eiijoved. "The policy of Groat Britain," nays Judge Cliarles Levi Wood- bury, " first expressed by the act of 12 Car. II,, had been to prohibit foreign nations from intercourse by sea with her colonies, either to import into or export from them in their vessels. This policy was in force when the treaty of 1783 was made. The rights of the United States, therein acknowledged, to use the ports, creeks, and shores for the purpose of its fisheries, conferred no right to trade with British North America. In 1818 the laws of the United States also pro- hibited British vessels from importing from or exporting to the colonies, from the ports of the United States, and continued so to prohibit them, long after the treaty of 1818." Thus it will be seen that, in the treaty of 1818, the right to fish within the three-mile limit of certain parts of the coasts of the British Provinces was renounced by the United States, but the right was reserved to our fishermen to enter all bays and harbors within those limits for the purpose of shelter and repairs, and to procure wood and water, subject to regulations which should prevent them from abus- ing the privileges thus conferred upon them. The privileges thus given were not commercial in their nature; they concerned chiefly the safety of fishing-vessels and their crews, and were granted as special rights to enable them to prosecute their voyages with greater safety and with the best assurance of success. These clauses in the treaty of 1818 made the fishing- vessels of the United States a spe- cially privileged class at a time when, as we have seen, no other American vessels \/ere permitted to hold intercourse \7ith the British Provinces. These privileges and rights were not accorded to Ameri- can fishermen from any generous spirit on the part of Great Britain, but because it was held by American statesmen, who had the moral support of the civilized world at that time, that these were rights that were held in common with the subjects of Great Britain, and that it was no concession on the part of the latter government vhat Ameri- can fishermen should retain that which they had so long enjoyed. If this is true, and we believe there are none bold enough to deny it, then the treaty of 1818 should have a liberal construction so far as the rights of American fishermen are concerned. Viewed in this light, it certainly seems unreasonable that this class of mea and ves- sels which were entitled to special rights and privileges prior to 1830 should now, or at any time since that date, be restricted in the enjoy- ment of privileges which are accorded to citizens of the United States engaged in other trades. Now, under the provisions of this recent treaty, and notwithstand- ing the fact that the Canadian vessels are enjoying to-day all com- mercial rights in t'le ports of the United States, our fishing-vessels are deprived of commercial privileges in the provinces unless such may be accorded in case of shipwreck or disaster. Even the ordin- ary rights of humanity, which all civilized and even semi-barbarous nations grant to each other without treaty, are here put down as con- cessions which the fishermen of the United States are expected to value as important considerations. [l\ By referring to Article XI, it will be seen that our vesselfl, when under stresB o( weather or from other casualty, are compelled to enter the portfi bays and harborfl of " eaHtern and northcaHtern coasts of Canada or of the coaHts of Newfoundland " they may be al- lowed to unload, reload, transship, or sell, subject to the customs laws and regulations, all hsh on board, when such unloading, trans- shipment, or sale is made necessary as incidental to repairs, and may replenish outfits, provisions, and supyWoH damaged or lo,f hj disaster ; and in case of death or sickness shall be allowed all needful facilities including ihe shipping of crews." ' In the succeeding paragraph, liberty is granted to United States fishing-vessels to obtain such provisions and supplies as are sold to ordinary trading-vessels. /or their homeward voyage, providing these vessels obtain a license of the customs official, and that the supplies are not obtained by barter. *^ In view of the fact, as has previously been stated, that all classes ofCanadian vessels are enjoying full commercial privileges in the ports of the United States, it does seem remarkable that the granting of the ordinary courtesies of civilization, privileges which no Chris- tian nationis supposed to deny to another in case of distressed and shipwrecked manners, is here made a right to be gravely considered between two friendly and adjacent countries. And when by Article XXIX of the treaty of 18T1, which still remains in force, it is stipu- lated that goods wares, and naerchandise for Canada may be landed at Portland, Boston, New York, and other ports designated by the President, and transship^ ed through the territory of the United States without payment of duty, and that goods, wares, and merchandise for the United States may be landed in Canadian ports and trans- shipped through Canada without payment of duty, it certainly is surprising that the privilege of transshipping fish, as stated in this last treaty 18 made conditional, and is applicable only to a vessel in distress or to one partially shipwrecked, having its catch on board And this provision is made still more striking when it is considered that at the present moment the United States is faithfully observ- ing Its portion of the treaty, and even extending to the Canadians greater privileges than they are entitled to. It is only explainable when we consider how different has been the conduct of Canada dur- ing the past two years, for she has systematically violated this treaty by denying to American fishermen the right to land and transship their cargoes. It is evident that her policy in doing this has been to give the impression, when this ne-v treaty was made, that she granted a privilege to our fishermen, when in fact by this clause of the present treaty they are to be denied the enjoyment of rights to which thev are justly entit ed. There can be no question about the meaning of ealed clause of the treaty of 1871, which has never been re- "It is further agreed that for the like period goods, wares, or merchandise, arriving at any of the ports of Her Britannic Majesty's possessions in North America and destined for the United States may be entered at the proper CMwfoiu house and conveyed in transit- without the payment of diitieH, throufih the «aid possessions unde? such rules and regulation, and conditions for the protection of the revenue as the governinen.« of the said possessions mav from time to time prescribe; and under like rules, regulations, and conditions goods, wares or merchandise may bo conveyed in transit, without payment of duties, from the United States through the said posses- sions to other places in the United States, or for export from ports ia the said possessions,' ' A writer in the New York Tribune of February 27 1888 says- ''Under this article of the treaty of 1871 American fisherman have a clear commercial right to land fish in any Canadian port for transshipment in bond to the United States. Fish and fish oil are merchandise, and may be entered at a Canadian custom-house with- out payment of duty for transportation to the United States. Fisher- Tnen have the same i)rivilege8 in this respect which Canadian or Hntish vessels have when they land in American ports goods des- tined for Canada. If they have not been allowed this pnvilege it lias been because they were deprived illegally in Canadian ports of a commercial right that is positively guaranteed by treaty." He thinks that in the present treaty an attempt has been made to remove the sanction of treaty law by prohibiting the exercise of this right while the duties on fish and fish oil remain in the tariff «chedule. In this respect Article XV of the new treaty oijcrates di- rectly to prevent the transshipment of fish and to rob American .nshermen of one of their treaty rights."' So far as these limited privileges are concerned, which have an- parently been grudgingly granted to American vessels in distress, or those on the homeward voyage, it is well to consider the following' 4ible statements from the pen of Judge Charles Levi Woodbury • ° "Canada has begun this affair. Her excuse is that the words'* for no other purpose' in the treaty of 1818 permanently exclude our iisherraen. She disregards the fact that the agreements of 1830 ex- pressed that they were based on the respective removal of 'all restric- tions on commerce and discriminations on tonnage.' ■^o^}^l^ ^ disingenuous excuse. Clearly, in the fishing treaty of 1818, the words 'for no other purpose' rebut the idea that com- mercial or unnamed trading privileges were intended to be granted to vessels ot the United States. Great Britain had closed all her colonial ports from foreign vessels by law. She opened them in the same way by the proclamation of 1830, and they stand open until -closed by law. _ Since the proclamation the fishing- vessels of Canada bave enjoyed, in the ports of the United States, everv privilege of commerce flowing from those proclamations. Not only did Canada know this, but a perverse disposition h-^s induced her, while continu- ing in their unrestricted use and enjoyment, to endeavor to deprive our fishermen of their similar right in Canada. "There was, after 1830, no law prior to this of 1886 which excluded our fishermen from trading or transshipping cargoes in Canadian ports destined for the United States. Canada, however, claims that 8 the British act of 1819 exclndefi American fisheruien from 'buying- bait * in her ports. By this statute if a foreign vessel, within the waters where the right to fish has been renounced by the United States, or any persons on board, 'shall be foundfishing or to have- be"n fishing, or preparing to fish ' within such aistance of the coasts, etc., the vessel shall be seized, prosecuted, condemned, etc. 'I The clause states that the method of proceeding shall be the same as in proceedings under customs or navigation acts. The prsamble of the statute reads, 'to make regulations respecting the taking and curing of fish,' etc. This does not look like a law to prevent th» buying and exporting of bait, a matter at that time decisively covered, by the act of 12 Charles 11, then in full force. "Cereful examination was made at the time of the Halifax Com- mission of all the records of seizures of American fishermen, and it was found that prior to 1870 not one had been charged with ' buying bait' as a violation of the clause * preparing to fish.' " In 1870, for the first time, this construction was set up and twa American vessels seized, and, among other matters, libeled for buy- ing bait in open port, in alleged infringement of the act of 1819." "^ The same excellent authority says : " Buying and selling bait, like the importation or exportation of it, are commercial transactions, and, therefore, by the pledged faith of the proclamation of " 330, open to commerce by the vessels of each country." And in spite of all this evidence of the clearly established rights of American fishermen to enjoy commercial privileges in the ports oi Car. 4^, and although it is demonstrated that they may, under cer- tain clauses of the treaty of 1871, which still remain in force, trans- ship their cargoes, and that they should be entitled, as one of their rights, to buy bait in all ports of the British provinces, we see in thi» treaty which the Senate is called upon to ratify a positive denial of these rights and privileges. How is it, we may well ask, that the welfare of the American Cslieries has received so little consideration that these sacrifices have been made in this treaty, when no restric- tion whatever is nut upon the Canadians in the matter of buying bait or making other purchases in our ports? The fact that American, fishermen may he able to prosecute the cod and halibut fishery with- out depending upon the British provinces for bait, is no reason why this privilege or the right to purchase ice or other stores should be given up, u nless the citizens of Canada are restricted in a similar man- ner. When former treaties have been negotiated, wherein the welfare of the fisheries have been concerned, it may have been pleaded in extent uation of any mistakes that have been made that tlie gentlemen charged with the responsible duty of negotiation may have lacked that definite knowledge of the subject under consideration, which might have enabled them to avoid mistakes, and which might make to state the terms of the treaty so clearly and so explicitly it possiDie * The Canadian FisherieH Dispute. can Law Ueporter, Maj-June, IShT. By Judge Charles Levi Woodbury. Ameri- 9 !^anMp Xli"^* r" ^' misunderstood. But no excuse of this kind ^ -^wv,^ ! '!? ^^^ P'^'^"^ ^^«^- If tlie '' negotiators" charged with the duty of representing the interests of the American fishermen "ith it'is'^rh""' ^-" i°f---Vr^ '""^ «"^J««* they had toTa" ^n 'y'°;*i^;;^"«^t^e^Jf''ed the requisite sources of informa- tion. Not only have the rights and needs of the American fisher- men, under prev ous treaties, and all matters pertaining ^th is con ZTa^'.I'Z^u^^ f ' ^''''^ '■" '^' ?^^blic press and pamph e s pre- pared by the highest legal authorities, but the fishermen of the Un ted the n±r '71.*' Washington, and have maintained the'e duHng o sKh- i' • ''' ^^'i negotiations, representatives who were ready wishe« Tf • T/''^ ^'""^ expression to their needs and theii wishes. It 18 a rather remarkable commentary to this entire pro- ori8?f tir'-' **1! ^^'^S-f^^- -f '^he fishery clauses of thl tre^aTy IpH Ji ' f /.u"'a^.,*''^ ^'""M?"' °f ^^^^^ ^^'^ negotiations, no authoi- he1rT« •'' *^' '^*^'"'^' ^''^"^'^^'^ h^« been called upon to state the r case in a personal interview with the gentlemen who were offi- ^. of Tlf'fi r'^ '^' responsible dutief of negotiating for the 1 ights of the fishermen. This is a matter for still greater surprise s"S"to'stat: r • '''* '^^ '^"^^ ?^. *^^ fi^'^-^ assoltioXave .;;a?fed thi^S^c."" " P— l-t-view,and have not been Considering the feet that the State Department has had corre- IZrtZTl:^" the British Government in'relation to the den a of inZT A fishermen Of the right to purchase coal in the British prov- inces, and in view of the fact that the day may not be far distant ." ail?r:To"b7a'' extensively employed i'n our'ocean food-fishS inSlIf ? . ^TT o.'P/^sio^^ that no provision has been made sarv nilf '^*^ ""-^l'^' ""'^^ '"f ^^' ^"^^ ^'«««^« *« obtain the neces- bvlhp «nir?7'''''?'^^ P°'*^'.' "°^^'' this privilege is secured to them by the surrender of our market". It must be obvious, to any one who has given the matter reasonable consideration, that the condUrons which prevailed in 1818 and those which exist to-day Le ver^^^^^^^^^ « milar. Previous to 1845 and 1850 our fishing-vessels depended 1 ?v ti^e o"f 7T ^'f ^'' ^"^'' ^"* at the present time coaUsgen- t.' ally the only fuel used, even on sailing vessels, and of course all W T''\' '^1 ^'r^'""' ^P°» ^'- Now, if this treaty goes into tiamed that t is really no more adapted to the present methods and present condition of civilization than' is the obsoLte document known TJ^ " ^o^^^^tion of 1818." So fer as clearness of statement is iuTl'' '" ""'^ questionable if the earLer treaty is not the bes flrn.d^l''''' ""Tu • °'" ™"'^ '^ ^'^' b^^'^ misunderstood and misin: ^erpreted by Great Britain and Canada. Referring to Article XII, it may be said that the fishing-vessels of Canada and Newfoundland, as has been shown, are now and have ihhis-ciaus^had^t^i^S3[s:!r^::;^js::^^.^^ 10 of Canada and Newfoundland shall have on the Atlantic coast of the United States all the privileges reserved by this treaty to the United States fishing-vessels in the waters of Canada and Newfoundland and none othr," it might h?,ve been satisfactory to the American fisher- men. For then the vessels of both countries would have been placed upon an equal basis, so far as the rights in the ports of the respect- ive countries are concerned. We strenuously object to putting any numbers or any marks on our fishing-vessels at the dictation of any foreign power; such "ear marks " put upon them under such conditions we consider would be humiliating to our fishermen. The American flag will, as it ha& always done, distinguish their nationality. It is selclom, if ever, dif- ficult to determine whether a vessel belongs to the fishing fleet or o.therwise. In accordance with Article XIV a vessel may be seized for prepar- ing in inshore waters to fish therein ; and, if the court sees fit, she and her cargo may be confiscated for this violation of the treaty. There is no definition here of what constitutes " preparing to fish," nor is it shown how it may be determined that there might be an in- tent to fish in inshore waters as distinguished from fishing farther from the land. Probably no clause in the treaty may be mote liable to be misconstrued than this, and if we are to judge by the past, there is certainly much reason to apprehend great difficulty from the con- structions which may be put upon it. It is evident that in putting this clause into practical operation our vessels maybe seized at any time on the smallest provocation, or even on the assumption that they are about to engage in inshore fishing or are " preparing " to- do so. This view of the case has evidently been taken by others. A writer in Frank Leslie's makes the following statements relative to prospective troubles for our fishermen in the courts of Canada if thif+ treaty is ratified. "This, in short, is an admirable convention— for Canada and Great Britain. While it is not so manifest a jug-handle treaty a» the so-called reciprocity treaty of 1854, it is at least one-sided enough to secure its prompt ratification on the other side of the line. It leaves all matters of present dispute unsettled, or else refers point.s of contention to the adjudication of Canadian courts. Our experi- ence has not been such as to cause a further longing for the service.s of these tribunals as courts of last resort. A treaty which leaves its. own interpretation to one of the high contracting parties, whicli happens in this case to oe our adversary, will scarcely find much favor with the United States Senate." But the entire aim and animus of this treaty is summarized in the fifteenth article. This tells us that when we are ready to open our markets to Canada and to Newfoundland, and to sacrifice our fish- eries by so doing, American fishermen may receive in British provin- cial ports the commercial rights which are now enjoyed by Britisk 11 subjects in ours, and which we claim we have a similar right to en- joy in theirs at the present moment. The pant unfriendly acts of Canada, and the seizure of our vessels on mere technicalities for the last two years, and denial of all com- mercial rights, and the barbarous treatment of our fishermen, have been for the single purpose of coercing this Government into open- ing its markets and permitting foreign-caught fish to compete with the products of our own fisheries. It is true this treaty does not state this in so many words, but it leaves the question open, and so long as the Uaited States Government is apparently indifferent to the welfare of our fishermen so long will Canada resort to unjusti- fiable means to force us to open our markets to her fishery products. No one who has watched the progress of our food-fisheries can fail to be convinced that those industries will be ruined if we again pernit the free entry of foreign-caught fish. It is not necessary here to re- iterate how unfortunate this would be for the country ; for the main- taining of our fisheries has been shown time and again to be a matter of the most vital consequence to the United States, both as a source of food supply and a resource wherefrom to draw men to man our navy in timeof war. The following testimonial of their usefulness and their importance to the United States is from the pen of the present Secretary of State. He says: " They pursue one of the most useful and meritorious of industries ; they gather from the seas, without detriment to others, a food which is nutritious and cheap for the use of an immense pop- ulation ; they belong to a stock of men which contributed before the Revolution most essentially to the British victories on the North- eastern Atlantic, and it may not be out of place to say they have shown since that Revolution, when serving in the Navy of the United States, that they have lost none of their ancient valor, hardihood and devotion to their flag." Elsewhere he says : " Fishermen, a» you are aware, have been considered from the usefulness of their oc- cupation, from their simplicity, from the perils to which they are exposed, the wards of civilized nations."* The emineni and experienced legislator, Hon. S. S. Cox, bears equally efficient testimony to the usefulness of the fishermen. In a speech delivered in the House of Re])resentatives (May 12, 1884) he says: ^■ *' A legislator caring for the common weal should not only look at the economic value of fish as food for the })eople, but he should also regard the fisheries as a fostering element in seafaring and trainino- for maritime adventure and hardshi|), with a view to the humanities of life saving on the coast and the possibilities of international con- flict." And the importance of the fisheries have been shown by him in the same speech. •' From Cape Hatteras to the Gulf of St. Lawrence," he remarks, » I-etter of Hon. T. F. Bayard to Sir L. West, October 19, 1886. 12 *' where mackerel and menhaden are .aken ; from NorthCarolina to Massachusetts, wliere theoyster and other mollusks ahound ; about the keys of Florida, where the red snapper is caught in abundance ; from the fur-seal fishery of Alaska to the North Pacific, which our whalers penetrate ; from the waters where rolls the Oregon that once heard no sound save its own dashing, but now hears the hum of men en- gaged in a great industry, to the Great Lakes, where white-fish play around the isles made memorable by Perry's victory ; from one end of our laud to the other, over one hundred thousand of hardy men pursue this interesting and adventurous industry. A million of souls depend upon the pursuit. Their fleet is nearly seven thou- sand vessels and forty-five thousand boats." It may be asked how shall we deal with this matter, what can be done to settle the fishery question between the British North American provinces and the United States? This can be done, and it has the sanction of the Forty-ninth Congress. Wipe out all legislative com- mercial arrangements, and let us go back to where we were, so far as commercial intercourse with the British provinces is concerned, when the treaty of 1818 was made. In other words, declare non-inter- course. Put Canada in the same relation to the United States as she was seventy years ago. Then our fishermen would have the same rights they have now under the treaty of 1818, and we should then be in a position to say to her : "Are you willing this should continue, or do you prefer to deal with us on a fair basis and give to all our vessels, as we are willing to give to yours, full commercial rights in your ports? " This may seem a harsh measure to adopt, but is it not justifiable? Can it be claimed that we are dealing unfairly in asking or demand- ing that we go back to the precise conditions under which the treaty of 1818 was made, and then propose to meet Canada half way and give her as much as she gives us, and no more? Beyond question, this was the sentiment of the people of the United States, as ex- pressed in the " retaliatory act" of the last Congress. Nor has the executive branch of our Government been oblivious to the injustice with which our fishermen have been treated by Canada and the deliber..te purpose of the officials of that country to rob Americans of their rights. *' The hospitalities of Canadian coasts and harbors, which are ours by ancient right," writes Secretary Bayard, ''and which these treaties confirm, cost Canada nothing and are productive of advan- tage to her people. Yet, in defiance of the most solemn obligations, m utter disregard of the facilities and assistances granted by the United States, and in a way especially irritating, a deliberate plan of annoyances and aggressions has been instituted and plainly exhibited during the last fishing season— a plan calculated to drive these fish- ernaen from shores where, without injury to others, they prosecute their own legitimate and useful industry."* ♦Letter to Hon. Edward J. Phelps, U. S. Minietei' to Great Britain, under dat« isovember 0, 18HG. ' 13 It is not snrprisinff, in view of this vigorous and truthful fltafp ment of the case by Mr. Bayard, that he Should have s Lned a tre^^^^^^ tt«A' ^''"•^',:^^ ^r.'/ T '^^.P"^' °^ '^' United Staters) in which these vey rights of the American fishermen have been .urrendrred ^ The I rotection of our fisheries is a matter of the utmost conse ^uence to this country nor should their future prospects be placedTn jeopardy, as they have been in the fifteenth article of this treatvW holding oyer them the prospective threat of free trade in fish ^ The statesmen who guided the destinies of this country in its earl v days saw the necessity of fostering the fisheries, and immediate v after the close of the war of independence bounty' laws wTre enacted by Congress which granted to the fishermen certain financial encour ifzzv^zi'i^tz::' ^^°^^^"^^ ^^^^^ -^-*-« «* ^ /-;:; Rr:?«?r?M' ^ ^V" ^'^'■' ^^^""^ t^e close of our second war with Great Wtv 'thnn^'t^'' V'^'' '"'• "^',^ '° ^' *" g^^« '^' fishermen a lamer bounty than they had previously received. With this encouraS ment, and with t^he markets of the United States protected Ta dutv on foreign fish, the American fisheries prospered^ to a rema?kaWe degree ; nor was the increase in thefishing fleet much retarded bv loss and the interruption caused by the war of 181^ '15 or 1 v th^ many annoyances to which our fishermen were subjected by theLrsb interpretation of the fishery clauses of the treaty of 1818^ TheTm pulse which had thus been given to our fisheries continued thLvJ Its effect even after the conclusion of the so-called reciprocity eaT for It took some years for the Canadians to r.Jize and\?roper Iv an' ^^:^:;^::'i:^'^^ ''-^ '-' -- ^--^-^ -^- ^i Thus we find that the American fishing fleet engaged in the cod and mackerel fisheries reached its maxim^um about f862 in which year there was employed in these two branches of the foJd fisheries 214 197 tons of shipping according to the returns of the Bureau of hta istics. Although there has been more or less fluctuation s nee that date the general result has been a decline in our fisheries which IS as marked as It IS deplorable. In 1883 we had employed irthe cod and mackerel fisheries about 74,197 tons, and since St date though I have no statistics at hand to substaritiate the staternent I am positive that there has been a still further decrease in ourTherv marine Considering the growth of the countrv, the demand which exists for food products of all kinds, and the necessity for the main tenance of a large fishery marine, these figures are certainly XI bng and may well arrest the attention of political economists It s too evident to admit of argument that this result, which is nuch to be regretted and which ought to be humiliating to the pride of every American citizen, is due to the facr. that our fisheries have been lei t unprotec ed and the American fi l.rman has had to compete "n hs own markets against the fbreignei , vho is encouraged by bountie and who ,s assisted m every possible manner, as any one may leS who chooses to study the subject. ^ 14 The evil effects which rai<;ht have resulted from the admission of foreign fish into our markets have been fully set forth and ably dis- cussed by numerous writers. Therefore a lengthy discussion of the question is rendered unnecessary here. We may judge of the future by the past, and statistics and the evidence of men who are qualified to speak or write upon this subject, and who are unbiased in their opinions, except so far that they are disposed to urge the protection of American fishery interests from the aggressive policy of foreign powers who are inimical to these interests, show conclusively that the free admission of foreign fish into our markets has been a great injury to the development of our own fislieries. Indeed, not only have our fishing interests been retarded in development, but they declined under the so-called reciprocity treaties in a uianner that was truly startling, as has been previously shown. •• In many places on the [New England] coast," says a writer on this subject, "it was found the treaty had "xerted a very baneful influence. Towns which had formerly sent to sea fleets of fishing vessels varying from twenty-five to upwards of one hundred sail had then barely a remnant left, and in some cases not a single schooner. Some of these outfitting stations were veritable pictures of desolation — merely reminders of a lost industry. One in partic- ular called 'Rigg's Cove,' at Georgetown, Me., impressed me the most forcibly. From here had sailed a few years previously fifty fine schooners. But what a change! At the tinae of our visit nothing remained to indicate its former business importance but neglected and tumble-down storehouses and decaying waarves, against which lay a superannuated fish freighter, the tide flowing in and out of her open seams, and the broken cordage flapping monotonously against her hare spars as if she had come here to die on the scene of her former usefulness. " It may not then be wondered at that, with such examples before -them, American fishermen look with dread and distrust upon any proposition to renew similar relations with the British provinces. The evils they now have under the treaty of 1818, though they are many and onerous, are preferred instead. "Judging from the past, there can be no question that the result of another era of free fishing and "free fish" would be the practical annihilation of our ocean fisheries. And thore can be little doubt that fair success can be obtained and our fisheries restored to pros- perity if they are accorded a reasonable amount of protection, so that, at least, they may be placed on an even footing with foreign com- petitors who are fostered by bounties, and have none of the onerous duties to pay which are exacted from our fishermen. * * *^ " And will it not be a wiser policy to promote by all justifiable means an industry which adds to the country's wealth, and ;'t the same time trains a large body of efficient seamen who must ever stand as a bulwark against its invasion by sea? If this is granted, then "xper't-nce has ])roved that there is only one way to reach the^ d:,ired result. While tree fisii will surely sound tue death knell of 15 the American fisheries, the assurance of American markets for American products will as certainly promote them." * Statements of this kind from impartial observers mipjht be multi- plied to any extent, but, we are sure, enough has been said to impress any one with the fact that we must always protect our fisheries from ■aggressions of foreign officials, and from the free competition of for- eign fishery products, or else, in a very brief time, we shall be com- pelled to rely for fish-food entirely upon a monopoly controlled by foreign capital and operated under a foreign flag. Patriotism and the principle of self-protection should be sufficient to induce every citizen of the United States who has the welfare of his country at heart to oppose any measure which will bring about fluch results, which are certain if we comply with the wishes of ■Canada. And why should Canada complain, as she has done, of what she is pleased to term prohibitive duty on fish, when as a matter of fact our rates of tariff on fishei y products, are only about half of her own rates, and only a few of our industries, if any, are so poorly protected as the fisheries are under the present tariff and the prevailing regulations •of the Treasury Department. Well may Senator Frye exclaim, " Of all our industries this alone is left unprotected, and the men employed in it are the most exposed, the hardest worked, and the poorest paid. ' The duty which England seeks to repeal is the lowest in the list of duties, less than that on any agricultural products, not one-half so great as that on any manufacture, two- thirds Icwer than that on sugar and rice, lower than that on beef, or mutton, or pork."t IJnder our present tariff arrangement salt fish only are dutiable, 1 cent per pound, or two dollars per barrel, being tlie duty on mack- erel, and 50 cents per hundred pounds on most all other kinds of salt fish. This specific duty averages about 10 per cent, ad valorem, which is certainly not a tariff to be complained of when we consider the much higher rates charged on nearly all other kinds of imported goods. But fresh fish are admitted free of duty. In strict accordance with the law such fish are only to be admitted when they are intended for ''immediate consumption," but by a ruling of the Treasury Depart- ment the plain intent of Congress is thwarted, and the fishery interests of the country are suffering a great injury for lack of that protection which should be given to those who deal in fresh food- fish. Under the present system if refrigeration, both by natural and artificial means, it is ])ossible to preserve fresh fish for an indefinite period. Tliese are admitted into o'.ir markets free of dut^, tor the simple reason tliat it is sodithsuh to say definitely whether they are intended for immediate consumption or not, tliough it is no secret with all well-informed men that these products are often kept weeks, *J. W. Collins, in th« Ct^tury Magnzive. October, 18SG. fSe.v CongriMsiunal Record, April 10, 1SS7, page^vtl'B. \ 16 even months, without, being either disposed of or consumed. In fact, for all practical purposes tlie same result is secured as if the fish were- preserved by salt. All must be aware of the tremendous increase in the shipment and consumption of fresh food-fish.* At tiie present moment, fresh fish taken on the far-distant bank* and along the shores of Newfoundland, upon the Columbia River, or in the Oulf of Mexico, may be seen displayed on the stalls of our fish markets in all our larger towns. Thus the fisherman who plies his lines in the southern seas, or sets his nets iu the far West, or dredges oysters in the Chesapeake Bay, is as much concerned in this matter as he who sails from our New England ports or prosecutes his adventures upon the Great Lakes. The truth is — and it is a fact well worthy of consideration by all who are interested in the subject — that not a single pound of fresh fish comes into our markets from the British provinces but it comes directly into competition with the products of onr own citizens who are engaged in fishing in every part of this broad country. Every ])ound of fresh fish thus sold of foreign production prevents the sale of a similar quantity which might be produced by the capital and labor of the United States. Judging by the past, I believe the day is not far distant when nearly all the fish products of this country will be marketed in a fresh condition, and unless we wish to surrender to foreigners our markets and the con- trol of our fisheries it will be seen that we cannot afford to leave them free to compete against our own citizens, upon whom Ave depend to maintain and support the institutions of our country. "We append, for reference, all treaties between the United States and Great Britain which in any manner are specially applicable to our fisheries, and in their chronological order, including in these the treaty before alluded to, which h.as just been concluded : TREATY OF 17 S3. Article III. It is agreed that the people of the United States shall continue to enjoy unmolested the right to take fish of every kind on the grand bank and on all the other banks of Newfoundland ; alsa in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and at all other places in the sea where the inhabitants of both countries used at any time heretofore to fish ; and also that the inhabitants of the United States shall have liberty to take fish of every kind on such part of the coast of Newfoundland as British fishermen shall use (but not to dry or cure the same on that island) ; and also on the coasts, bays, and creeks of all other of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America; and that the American fishermen shall liave liberty to dry and cure fish in any of the unset- tled bays, harbors, and creeks of Nova Scotia, Magdalen Islands^ and Labrador, so long as the same shall remain unsettled ; but so soon as *More than thirty million pounds of fresh food-ii^ih have been imported from Canadti daring the ypar 18S7. No duty was paid on these, nor is any tarilf charge nference arranged to be held here, by virtue of the power in i-v'\ /■ ned by the Constitution, I duly author- V/ SI W ized Thomas F. iiayaid, thu Secretary of State of the United States; William L. Putnam, a citizen of the State of Maine, and Jamen B. Angoll, a citizen of the State of Michigan, for and in the nnme of the United States, to meet and confer with the plenipotentiaries rep- resent ing the Government of Iler Hritannlc Majesty fur the pur^mse of considering and adjusting in a friendly spirit all or any qucHtions relating to rights of fishery in the seas adjacent to British North America and Newfoundland winch were in dispute hetween the Gov- ernments of the United States and that of Her Britannic Majesty, and jointly and severally to conclude and sign any treaty or treaties touching the promises; and I herewith trausmit for your informa- tion lull copies of the power so given by me. In execution of the powers so conveyed, the said Thomas F. Bayard, William L. Putnam, and James B. AngcU, in the month of November last, met in this city the plenipotentiaries of Her Br'- tuunic Majesty, and proceeded in the negotiation of a treaty as above authorized. After many conferences and protracted efforts an agree- ment has at length been arrived at, which is embodied in the treaty which 1 now lay before you. The treaty meets my approval, because I believe that it supplies a satisfactory, practical, and final adjuetmeut, upon a basis honorable and just to both parties, of the difficult and vexed question to which it relates. A review of the history of this question will show that all former attempts to arrive at a common interf)retation, satisfactory to both parties, of the first article of the treaty of October 20, 1818, have been unsuccessful ; and with the lapse of time the difficulty and obscurity have only increased. The negotiations in 1854, and again in 1871, ended in both cases in temporary reciprocal arrangements of the tariffs of Canada and Newfoundland and of the United Statef', and the j)aymentof a money award by the United States, under which the real questions in differ- ence remained unsettled, in abeyance, and ready to present them- selves anew just as soon as the conventional arrangements were abrogated. The situation, therefore, remained unimproved by the results of the treaty of 1871, and a grave condition of affairs, presenting almost identically the same features and causes of complaint by the United States against Canadian action and British default in its correction, confronted us in May, 1880, and has continued until the present time. The greater part of the correspondence which has taken place be- tween the two Governments has heretofore been communicated to Congress, and at as early a day as possible 1 shall transmit the remaining portion to this date, accompanying it with the joint jjro- tocols of the conferences which resulted in the conclusion of the treaty now submitted to you. You will thus be fully possessed of the record and history of the case since the termination, on June 30, 1885^ of the fishery articLes^ 22 ■ct' the treaty of Washington of 18 Tl, wherehy we were relegated to the provisions of the treaty of October 20, 1818. As the documents and papers referred to will siip[)ly full informa- tion of the positions taken under my administration by the represent- atives of the United States, as well as those occupied by the repre- sentatives of the Government of Great Britain, it is not cop^idered necessary or expedient to repeat them in this message. But I believe the treaty will be found to contain a just, honorable, and, therefore, satisfactory solution of the difficulties which have clouded our rela- tions with our neighbors on our northern border. Especially satisfactory do I believe the proposed arrangement will he found by those of our citizens who are engaged in the open sea fisheries, adjacent to the Canadian coast, and resorting to those ports and harbors under treaty provisions and rules of international law. The proposed delimitation of the lines of the exclusive fisheries from the common fisheries will give certainty and security as to the area of their legitimate field ; the headland theory of imaginary lines is abandoned by Great Britain, and the specification in tlie treaty of certain named bays especially provided for gives satisfaction to the inhabitants of the shores, without subtracting materially from the value or convenience of the fishery rights of Auiericans. The uninterrupted navigation of the Strait of Canso is expressly and for the first time affirmed, and the four purposes for which our fishermen under the treaty of 1818 were allowed to enter the bays and harbors of Canada ind Newfoundland within the belt of three marine miles are placed under a fair and liberal construction, and their enjoyment secured without such conditions and restrictions as in the past have embarrassed and obstructed them so seriously. The enforcement of penalties for unlawfully fishing or preparing to fish within the inshore and exclusive waters of Canada and. New- foundland is to be accomplished und.r safe-guards against oppressive or arbitrary action, thus protecting the defendant fishermen from punishment in advance of trial, delays, and inconvenience and unnec- essary expense. The history of events in the last two years snows that no feature of Canadian administration was more harassing and injurious than the compulsion upon our fishing-vessels to make formal entry and clear- ance on every occasion of temporarily seeking shelter in Canadian ports and harbors. Such inconvenience is provided against in the proposed treaty, and "this most frequent and just cause of complaint is removed. The articles permitting our fisliermen to obtain provisions and the ■ordinary supplies of trading vessels on their ' omeward voyages, antl under whicli they are accorded the fuftiier and even more im[)ortant privilege on all occasions of purchasing such casual or needful pro- visions and supplies asiireordinarily granted to trading-vessels, are of great importance and value. The licenses which are to be granted without cliarge and on appli- voation, in order to enable our fishermen to enjoy these privileges, are v,-* .*M- . reasoTialile and propor checks in the hands of the local authorities to identify tlie recipients and prevent abuse, and can form no impedi- ment to those wlio intend to use thera fairly. The iiospitality secured for our vessels in all cases of actual distress, with liberty to unload and sell and transship their cargoes, is full and liberal. These provisions will secure the substantial enjoyment of the treaty rights for our fishermen under the treaty of 1818, for which conten- tion has been steadily made in the correspondence of the Department of State and our minister at London and by the American negoti- ators of the present treaty. The right of our fishermen unuer the treaty of 1818 did not extend to the procurement of distinctive fishery supjdies in Canadian ports and harbors ; and one item supposed to be essential, to wit, bait, was plainly denied ttiem by the explicit and definite words of the treaty Df 1818. emphasized by the course of the negotiation and express de- cisions which jtreceded the conclusion of that treaty. The treaty now submitted contains no provision affecting tariff du- ties, and, independently of the position assumed upon the })artof tlie United States, that no alteration in our tariff or other domestic leg- islation could he made as the price or consideration of obtaining the lights of our citizens secured by treaty, it was considered rnore expe- dient to allow any change in the revenue laws of the United States to be made by the ordinary exercise of legislative will and in promo- tion of the public interests. Therefore, the addition to the free list of fish, fish oil, whale and seal oil, etc., recited in the' last article of the treaty, is wholly lelt to the action of Congress ; and in con- nection theiewith the Canadian and Newfoundland right to regulate sales of bait and other fisliing supi)lies within their own jurisdiction is recognized, and the right of our fishermen to freely purchase these things is made contingent by this treaty upon the action of Congress in the modification of our tariff laws. Our social and commercial intercourse with those po])ulations who have been placed upon our borders and made forever our neighbors is made apparent by a list :f United States common carriers, marine and inland, •connecting their lines with Canada, which was returned by the Secretary of the Treasury to the Senate on the 7th day of Feb- ruary, 1888, iu'answer to a resolution of that body ; and this is in- structive as to the great volume of mutually profitable interchanges which has come into existence during the last half century. This intercourse is still but i)artially developed, and if the amica- ble enterprise and wholesome rivalry between the two populations be not obstructed, tlie promise of the future is full of the fruits of an unbounded prosperity on both sides of the border. . . , The treaty now submitted to you has been framed in a spirit of liberal equity and reciprocal benefits, in the conviction that^ mutua advantage uiid convenience arc the only permanent foundation o f peace and fiien(lslii[) between States, ami tliat with the adoption of the agreement now placed bef<'ie the Senate, a beneficial and satis- i\ I 24 factory intercourse between the two countries will be established so as to secure perpetual peace and harmony. In connection with the treaty herewith submitted I deem it also my duty to transmit to the Senate a written offer or arrangement in the nature of a modus vivendi, tendered after the conclusion of the treaty on the part of the British plenipotentiaries, to secure kindly and peacetul relations during the period that may be required for the consideration of the treaty by the respective Governments and for the enactment of the necessary legislation to carry its provisions into eflect it approved. This paper, freely and on their own motion, signed by the British conferees, not only extend advantages to our fishermen, pendin.' the ratihcation of the treaty, but appears to have been dictated by a triendly and amicable spirit. I am given to understand that the other governments concerned in this treaty will, within a few days, in accordance with their methods of conducting public business, submit said treaty to their respective legislatures, when it will be at once published to the world In view of such action it appears to be advisable that by ()ublication here early and full knowledge of all that has been done in the premises should be attorded to our people. It would also seem to be useful to inform the popular mind con- cerning the history of the long continued disputes growinc^ out of the subject embraced in the treaty and to satisfy the public interests touching the same, as well as to acquaint our people with the present status of the questions involved, and to give them the exact terms of the proposed adjustment, in place of the exaggerated and imaginative statements which will otherwise reacli them. I therefore beg leave respectfully to suggest that said treaty and all such correspondence, messages, and documents relatintr to the- sarae as may be deemed important to accomplish these purposes be at once made public by the order of your honorable body ,. ,, GROVER CLEVELAND. bxEcuTiVE Mansion, February 20, 1888. 1 2 3 4 5 C, 7 8 9 10 11 12 Whereas differences have arisen concerning the interpretation ot Article t of the Convention of October 20, 1818; the United Mates of America, and her Majesty the Queen of the United Aingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, being mutually desirous of removing all causes of misunderstanding in relation thereto and of promoting friendly intercourse and good neighborhood' between the United States and the possessions of her Majesty in North America, have resolved to conclude a treaty to that end and have named as their plenipotentiaries, that is to say • ' The President of the United States, Thomas F. Bayard Sec- retary of State ; William L. Putnam, of Maine; and James B Angell, of Michigan. • / 25 • y 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 20 SO 31 32 33 :u 35 36 37 38 3*1 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 58 And her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain, M. P. ; the Honorable Sir Lionel Sackville Sackville West, K. C. M. G., her Britannic Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to the United States of America ; and Sir Charles Tapper, G. C. M. G., C. B., minister of finance of the Dominion of Canada. Who, having communicated to each other their respective full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon the fol- lowing articles: Article I. The high contracting parties agree to appoint a mixed com- mission to delimit, in the manner provided in this treaty, the British waters, bays, creeks, and harbors of the coasts of Canada and of Newfoundland, as to which the United States, by Article I of the convention of October 20, 1818, between the United States and Great Britain, renounced forever any liberty to take, dry, or cure fish. Article II. The commission shall consist of two commissioners to be named by Her Britannic Majesty and of two commissioners to be named by the President of the United States without delay after the exchange of ratifications of this treaty. The commission shall meet and complete the delimitation as soon as possible thereafter. In case of the death, absence, or incapacity of any commissioner, or in the event of any commissioner omitting or ceasing to act as such, the President of the United States or Her Britannic Maj- esty, respectively, shall forthwith name another person to act as commissioner instead of the commissioner originally named. Article III. The delimitation referred to in Article I of this treaty shall be marked upon British admiralty charts by a series of lines regu- larly numbered and duly described. The charts so marked shall, on the termination of the work of the commission, be signed by the commissioners in quadruplicate, one copy whereof shall be delivered to the Secretary of State of the United States and three copies to Her Majesty's Government. The delimitation shall be made in the following manner, and shall be accepted by both the high contracting parties as applicable for all purposes under Article I of the convention of October 20, 1818, between the United States and Great Britain. The three marine miles mentioned in Article I of the conven- tion of October 20, 1818, shall be measured seaward from low water mark : but at every bay, creek, or harbor, not otherwise specially provided for in this treaty, such three marine miles !' -■ 26 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 60 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 shall be measured seaward from a straight line drawn across the bay, creek, or harbor, in tlie part nearest the entrance at the first point were the width does not exceed ten marine miles, Articlk IV. At or near tlie following bays the limits of exclusion under Article I of the convention of October 20, 1818, at points more than three marine miles from low water mark, shall be estab- lished by the following lines, namely: At the Baie des Chaleurs the line from the light at Birch Point on Miscou Island to Macquereau Point Light ; at the Bay of Miramichi, the line from the light at Point Escuminac to the light on the eastern point of Tabisintac Gully ; atEgmont Bay, in Prince Edward Island, the line from the light a? Cape Egmont to the light at West Point ; and off St. Ann's Bay, in the Province of Nova Scotia, the line from Cape Smoke to the light at Point Aconi. At Fortune Bay, in Newfoundland, the line from Connaigre Head to the light on the southeasterly end of Brunet Island thence to Fortune Head ; at Sir Charles Hamilton Sound, the line from the southeast point of Cape Fogo to White Island, thence to the north end of Peckford Island, and from the south end of Peckford Island to the east Headland of Ragged Harbor.' At or near the following bays the limits of exclusion shall be three marine miles seaward from the following lines, namely : At or near Barrington Bay, in Nova Scotia, the line from the light on Stoddard Island to the light on the south point of Cape Sable, thence to the light at Baccaro Point; at Chedabucto and St. Peter's Bay, the line from Oranherry Islaml Light to Green Island Light, thence to Point Rouge ; at Mira Bay, the line from the light on the east point of Si-atari Island to the northeasterly point of Cape Morien ; and at Placentia Bay, in Newtoundland, the line from Latine Point, on the eastern main- land shore, to the most southerly point of Red Island, thence by the most southerly point of Merasheen Island tothe mainland. Long Island and Bryer Island, at St. Mary's Bay, in Nova Sco- tia, shall, for the purpose of delimitation, be taken as the coasts of such bay. Article Y. Nothing in this treaty shall be construed to include within the common waters any such interior portions of any bays creeps, or harbors as cannot be reached from the sea witliout passing within the three marine miles mentioned in Article I of the convention of October 20, 1818. Article VI. The Commissioners shall from time to time report to each of Vf 2r '. i 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 111) 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 the high contracting parties, such lines as tliey may have agreed upon numbered, described, and marked as herein provided, with quadru{)licate charts thereof; whicli linos so reported shall forthwith from time to time be simultaneously proclaimed by the high contracting parties, and bf binding after two months from sucii proclamation. Akticle VII. Any disagreement of the Commissioners shall forthwith be referred to an um[)ire selected by the Secretary of State of the United States and Her Britannic Majesty's Minister at Wash- ington ; a , his decision shall be final. Article VIII. Each of the high contracting parties shall pay its own Com- missioners and officers. All other expenses jointly incurred, in connection with the performance of the work, including com- pensation to the umpire, shall be paid by the high contracting parties iu equal moieties. Article IX. Nothing in this treaty shall interrupt or affect the free naviga- tion of the Strait of Cansoby fishing vessels of the United States. Article X. United States fishing-vessels entering the bays or harbors referred to in Article I of this treaty shall conform to harbor regulations common to them and to fishing-vessels of Canada or of Newfoundland. They need not report, enter, or clear, when putting into such bays or harbors for shelter or repairing damages, nor when putting into the same, outside the limits of established ports of entry, for the purpose of purchasing wood or of obtaining water ; except that any such vessel remaining more than twenty- four hours, exclusive of Simdays and legal holidays, within any such port, or communicating with the shore therein, may be required to report, enter, or clear ; and no vessel shall be ex- cused hereby from giving due information to boarding officers. They shall not be liable in any such bays or harbors for compulsory pilotage ; nor, when tl erein for the purpose of slielter, of repairing dp nages, of purchasing wood, or of ob- taining water, shall they be liable for harbor dues, tonnage dues, buoy dues, light dues, or other similar dues ; but this enumeration shall not permit other charges inconsistent with the enjoyment of the liberties reserved or secured by the con- vention of October 20, 1818. Article XI. United States fishing-vessels entering the port?, bay^, and harbors of the eaotera and northeaster a coasts oi Canada or of 28 149 150 151 152 15:j 154 155 15fi 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 the coasts of Newfoundland under stress of weather or other casualty may unload, reload, tranship, or sell, subject to cus- toms laws and regulations, all fish on board, when such un- loadmg, transshipment, or sale is made necessary as incidental to repairs, and may replenish outfits, provisions, and supplies damaged or lost by disaster ; and in case of death or sickness shall be allowed all needful facilities, including the shipping 01 crews. no Licenses to purchase in established ports of entry of the afore- said coasts of Canada or of Newfoundland, for the homeward voyage, such provisions and supplies as are ordinarily sold to trading-vessels, shall be granted to United States fishing-vessels in such ports promptly upon application and without charge ; and such vessels, having obtained licenses in the manner afore- said, shall also be accorded upon all occasions such facilities for the purchase of casual or needful provisions and supplies as are ordinarily granted to trading vessels ; but such provisions or supplies shall not be obtained by barter nor purchased for resale or traffic. Article XII. Fishing-vessels of Canada and Newfoundland shall have on the Atlantic coast of the United States all the privilef^es re- served and secured by this treaty to United States fishing ves- sels in the aforesaid waters of Canada and Newfoundland. Article XIII. The Secretary of the Treasury of the United States shall make regulations providing for the conspicuous exhibition by every United States fishing-vessel of its official number on each bow ; and any such vessel required by law to have an official number and failing to comply with such regulations shall not be entitled to the licenses provided for in this treaty. Such regulations shall be communicated to Her Majesty's Government previously to their taking effect. Article XIV. The penalties for unlawfully fishing in the waters, bays, creeks, and harbors, referred to in Article I of this treaty, may extend to forfeiture of the boat or vessel and appurtenances, and also of the supplies and cargo aboard when the offense was committed ; and for preparing in such waters to unlawfully fish therein penalties shall be fixed by the court, not to exceed tliose for unlawlully fishing ; and for any other violation of the laws of Great Britain, Canada, or Newfoundland relating to the right of fishery in such waters, bays, creeks, or harbors penal- ties shall be fixed by the court, not exceeding in all three dol- lars for every ton of the boat or vessel concerned. The boat or vessel may be holden for such penalties and forfeitures. 29 195 The proceedings shall be summary and as inexpensive as 196 practicable. The trial (except on appeal) shall he at the place 197 of detention, unless the judge shall, on request of the defense, 198 order it to he held at some other place adjudged by him more 199 convenient. Security for costs shall not be required of the de- 200 fense, except when bail is offered. Reasonable bail shall be 201 accepted. There shall be proper appeals available to the 202 defense only ; and the evidence at the trial may be used on 203 appeal. 204 Judgments of forfeiture shall be reviewed by the Governor- 205 General of Canada in Council, or the Governor in Council of 206 Newfoundland, before the same are executed. 207 Article XV. 208 "Whenever the United States shall remove the duty from fish- 209 oil, whale-oil, seal-oil, and fish of all kinds (except fish pre- 210 served in oil), being the product of fisheries carried on by the 211 fishermen of Canada and Newfoundland, including Labrador, 212 as well as from the usual and necessary casks, barrels, kegs, 213 cans, and other usual and necessary coverings containing the 214 products above mentioned, the like products, being the produce 215 of fisheries carried on by the fishermen of the United States, as 216 well as the usual and necessary coverings of the same, as above 217 described, shall be admitted free of duty into the Dominion of 218 Canada and Newfoundland. 219 And upon such removal of duties, and while the aforesaid 220 articles are allowed to be brought into the United States by 221 British subjects, without duty being reimposed thereon, the 222 privilege of entering the ports, bays, and harbors of the afore- 223 said coasts of Canada and Newfoundland shall be accorded to 224 United States fishing-vessels by annual licenses, free of charge, 225 for the following purposes, namely : 226 1. The purchase of provisions, bait, ice, seines, lines, and all 227 other supplies and outfits ; 228 2. Transshipment of catch, for transport by any means of 229 conveyance ; 230 3. Shipping of crews. 231 Supplies shall not be obtained by barter, but bait may be so 232 obtained. 233 The like privileges shall be continued or given to fishing-ves- 234 sels of Canada and of Newfoundland on the Atlantic coasts of 235 the United States. 236 Article XVI. 237 This treaty shall be ratified by the President of the United 238 States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and 239 by Her Britannic Majesty, having received the assent of the 240 Parliament of Canada and of the Legislature of Newfoundland ; 241 and the ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington as soon 242 as possible. 30 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 In faith whereof, we, the respective plenipotentiaries, have signed thiei treaty, and have hereunto affixed our seals. Done in duplicate, at Washington, this 15th day of Febru- ary, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight. T. F. BAYARD. WILLIAM L. PUTNAM. JAMES B. ANGELL. J. CHAMBERLAIN. L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. CHARLES TUPPER. [seal [seal [seal [SEAL.^ [seal.' [seal.' I. protocol of fisheries conference. Washington, November 22, 1887. The fisheries conference having formally met, the full powers of the plenipotentiaries were exhibited and found to be in good and due form, as follows: Grover Cleveland, President of the United States of America. To all to whom these presents shall come, Greeting : Know ye that, reposing special trust and confidence in the integ- rity and ability of Thomas F. Bayard, Secretary of State; William L. Putnam, of Maine ; and James B. Angell, of Michigan ; I hereby invest them with full power jointly and severally, for and in the names of the United States, to meet and confer with plenipotentiaries representing the government of Her Britannic Majesty, for the pur- pose of considering and adjusting in a friendly spirit all or any ques- tions relating to rights of fishery in the seas adjacent to British North America and Newfoundland which are in dispute between the Gov- ernment of the United States and that of Her Britannic Majesty, and any other questions which may arise and which they may be author- ized by their respective governments to consider and adjust ; and I also fully empower and authorize the said Thomas F. Bayard, Wil- liam L. Putnam, and James B. Angell, jointly and severally, to con- clude and sign any treaty or treaties touching the premises, for the final ratification of the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, if such advice and consent be given. In testimony whereof, I have caused the seal of the United States to be hereunto affixed. Given under my hand at the city of Washington this eighteenth day of November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight [seal.] hundrvid and eighty-seven, and of the Independence of the United States, the one hundredth and twelfth. GROVER CLEVELAND. By the President : T. F. Bayard, Secretary of State. »» 81 »» Victoria R. & I. Victoria, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith Empress of India, &c., dc, dc, To All and Singular to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting ! Whereas for the purpose of considering and adjusting in a friendly spirit with plenipotentiaries, to be appointed on the part of our good friends, the United States of America, all or any questions relating to rights of fishery in the seas adjacent to British North America and Newfoundland, which are in dispute between our Government and that of our said good friends, and any other questions which may arise, which the respective plenipotentiaries may be authorized by their Governments to consider and adjust, we have judged it expe- dient to invest fit persons with full power to conduct on our part the discussions in this behalf. Know ye, therefore, that we, reposing especial trust and confidence in the wisdom, loyalty, diligence, and <;ircumsi)ection of our right trusty and well-beloved Councillor, Joseph Chamberlain, a member of our Most Honorable Privy Coun- cil and a member of Parliament, &c., &c.; of our trusty and well beloved, the Hon. Sir Lionel Sackville Sackville West, Knight Com- mander of our Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George, our Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to our said good friends, the United States of America, &c., &c., and of our trusty and well beloved Sir Charles Tupper, Knight Grand Cross of our Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. Georo-e companion of our Most Honorable Order of the Bath, Minister°of Finance of the Dominion of Canada, &c., &c., have named, made, constituted, and appointed, as we do by these presents name, make, constitute, and appoint them our undoubted plenipotentiaries ; giv- ing to them, or to any two of them, all manner of authority to treat, adjust, and conclude, with such plenipotentiaries as may be vested with similar power and authority, on the part of our good friends, the United States of America, any treaties, conventions, or agree- ments that may tend to the attainment of the above-mentioned 'end, and to sign for us and in our name everything so agreed upon and concluded, and^to do and transact all such other matters as may ap- pertain to the finishing of the aforesaid work, in as ample manner and form, and with equal force and efficiency as we ourselves could do if personally present ; engaging and promising upon our royal word that whatever things shall be so transacted and concluded by our said plenipotentiaries shall be agreed to, acknowledged, and ac- cepted by us in the fullest manner, and that we will never suffer, cither in the whole or in part, any person whatsoever to infringe the .same, or act contrary thereto, as far as it lies in our power. In wit- ness whereof, we have caused the great seal of our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland to be affixed to these presents which we have signed with our royal hand. Given at our court at Balmoral the twenty-fourth day of October, in the year of our Lord one thou- sand eight hundred and eighty-seven, and in the fifty-first year of our reign. 32 The British plenipotentiaries proposed that Mr. Bayard, Secretary of State of the United States, should preside. Mr. Bayard, while expressing appreciation of the proposal, stated the opinion, in which the other United States plenipotentiaries con- curred, that it was not necessary that any one should preside ; and the proposal was permitted to rest. Mr. John B. Moore, Third Assistant Secretary of State of the United States, acting as Secretary to the United States plenipoten- tiaries, and Mr. J. H. G. Bergne, C. M. G., Superintendent of the Treaty Department of the British Foreign Office, acting as secretary to the British plonipotentiaries, were requested to make the protocols of the conference. After some discussion of questions hefore the conference, it was adjourned to 12 o'clock m. of the 28th of November. PROTOCOL. The treaty having been signed by the British plenipotentiaries desire to state that they have been considering the position which will be created by the immediate commencement of the fishing sea- son before the treaty can possibly be ratified by the Senate of the United States, by the Parliament of Canada, and the legislature of Newfoundland. In the absence of such ratification the old conditions which have given rise to so much friction and irritation might be revived, and might interfere with the unprejudiced consideration of the treaty by the legislative bodies concerned. Under these circumstances, and with the further object of afford- ing evidence of their anxious desire to promote good feeling and to remove all possible subjects of controversy, the British plenipoteu- tiaiies are ready to make the following temporary arrangement for a period not exceeding two years, in order to afford a ''modus vivendi" pending the ratification of the treaty. 1. For a period not exceeding two years from the present date, the privilege of entering the bays and harbors of the Atlantic coasts of Canada and Newfoundland shall be granted to United States fishing vessels by annual licenses at a fee of $1^ per ton — for the following purposes : The purchase of bait, ice, seines, lines, and all other supplies and outfits. Transshipment of catch and shipping of crews. 2. If during the continuance ot this arrangement, the United States should remove the duties on fish, fish-oil, whale and seal-oil (and their coverings, packages, &c.), the said licenses shall be issued free of charge. 3. United States fishing-vessels entering the bays and harbors of the Atlantic coasts of Canada or of Newfoundland for any of the four purposes mentioned in Article I of the convention of October 20, 1818, and not remaining therein more than twenty-four hours, shall not be required to enter or clear at the custom house, providing that they do not communicate with the shore. •?* 33 4. Forfeiture to be exacted only for the offenses of fishing or pre- paring to fish in territorial waters. 6. This arrangement to take effect as soon as the necessary meas- ures can be completed by the colonial authorities. J. CHAMBERLAIN. L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. CHARLES TUPPER. WASHiNaTON, February 15, 1888. \ PROTOCOL. The American plenipotentiaries having received the communica- tion of the British plenipotentiaries of this date conveying their plan for the administration to be observed by the Governments of Canada and Newfoundland in respect of the fisheries during the period which may be requisite for the consideration by the Senate of the treaty this day signed, and the enactment of the legislation by the respect- ive Governments therein proposed, desire to express their satisfaction with this manifestation of an intention on the part of the British plenipotentiaries, by the means referred to, to maintain the relations of good neighborhood between the British possessions in North America and the United States ; iTud they will convey the communi- cation of the British plenipotentiaries to the President of the United States, with a recommendation that the same may be by him made known to the Senate for its information, together with the treaty, when the latter is submitted to that body for ratification. T. F. BAYARD. Wasfinqton, February 15, 188«. WILLIAM L. PUTNAM. JAMES B. ANGELL.