undoubted rights under treaties is one which in this country is not materially affected by changes of Ministry; and the real question therefore is what are those rights, and how they are understood respectively by Great Britain and the United States.

The rights are laid down in the Treaty of 1818, as quoted by Mr. Webster, that is, undoubted and unlimited privileges of fishing in certain places were thereby given by Great Britain to the inhabitants of the United States; and the Government of the United States on their part renounced for ever any liberty, previously enjoyed or claimed by its citizens, to fish within three marine miles of any other of the coasts, bays, creeks, or harbours, of the British dominions.

A point in dispute in regard to this matter subsequently arose as to the interpretation to be given to the term "bay," namely, whether an American vessel could fish within a bay so long as she was beyond three miles from the shore, or whether the words of the Treaty "within three miles of any of the bays" meant within three miles of a line drawn from headland to headland; and in the year 1845 a correspondence ensued between the British and United States' Governments, which led to the dispatch of a letter from Mr. Everett, the United States' Minister in this country, to his Government, dated London April 26th 1845. This letter has been published by Mr. Webster, and is unfortunately calculated to cause an incorrect view to be taken of the subject by the American public; for Mr. Everett therein stated that Lord Aberdeen's note of the 10th of March 1845 conceded to American fishermen the right of fishing within the Bay of Fundy, but left doubtful the question of other bays, and that he had accordingly claimed the same right as regards other bays; and it is to be inferred from Mr. Everett's expressions that Lord Aberdeen had replied that he would submit that question to the Colonial Office, and that meanwhile the concession was to be limited to the Bay of Fundy.

Now, if Lord Aberdeen's notes to which Mr. Everett alluded had been carefully examined by Mr. Webster, and had also been published, Mr. Webster and the public of the two countries would have seen that, instead of conceding a right, Lord Aberdeen expressly reserved it; but that, in order to prove the friendly feeling of Great Britain towards the United States, Her Majesty's Government, by Lord Aberdeen's note, "relaxed," as regards the Bay of Fundy, the right which Her Majesty's Government felt bound to maintain of excluding American fishermen from that bay, and, moreover, it would have appeared that Lord Aberdeen in the letter referred to merely stated that he would submit to the Colonial Office the question relating to the seizure of two particular vessels, the "Washington" and "Argus," and that, as regarded the bays, his words were to be taken as applying to the Bay of Fundy alone.

It appears however, partly by Mr. Webster's communications with you and by terms of his official publications, and partly by the proceedings in the Senate of the United States, that it is supposed in the United States first that Her Majesty's present Government have resolved to overrule the decision of the Government of 1845 and to withdraw the privilege then granted to American fishermen to fish in the Bay of Fundy; and 2ndly that, notwithstanding the express terms of the Treaty, American fishermen are privileged either by usage or right to fish upon any part of the British coast within three marine miles of the shore.

Both suppositions are entirely founded in error. Her Majesty's Government, so far from having any intention of now excluding American fishermen from the Bay of Fundy, are prepared to maintain that the relaxation granted in 1845 was reasonable and just and should be adhered to; and, in giving orders to strengthen the naval force employed to maintain the exercise of our rights under the Treaty of 1818, they could not contemplate that the Government of the United States would assume that a relaxation formally granted as regards the Bay of Fundy was thereby cancelled without the equally formal notice which Her Majesty's Government would undoubtedly feel themselves bound to have given to an ally of the British Crown, had such an act been intended.

But in regard to the 3 mile distance Her Majesty's Government are not aware that it has at any time been maintained by the Government of the United States that there can be, or that there has ever been supposed to be, the slightest doubt that Her Majesty's Government are not only entitled, but bound, to maintain that distance free from encroachment.

Whatever construction either Government may put upon the term "bay" as used in the Treaty, there can be no possible question as to the 3 mile limit from any British shore; and when therefore Mr. Webster alluded in his official publication to the seizure of the American vessel "Coral" in the Bay of Fundy, near Grand Manan, he must have overlooked the fact that Grand Manan was British territory, and that the "Coral" was taken almost within musket shot of the shore. It is for the prevention of such infractions of treaty, and not with any view to disturb arrangements made in good faith with the United States' Government, that Her Majesty's Government issued orders to their officers to put a stop to illicit proceedings; proceedings which are not merely contrary to treaty, but which are mixed up with smuggling transactions damaging to British interests.

Little therefore as Her Majesty's Government could have contemplated the impression which this matter appears to have produced in the United States, still less could they have imagined that the orders given by them to Vice Admiral Sir George Seymour to attend personally to this matter should have been construed into an offensive proceeding and one calling for the strictures which, without any defence on the part of the United States' Government, it occasioned in the Senate: for, although it is true that the flag of the Commander in chief is hoisted on board a ship of the line, and that in the execution of his instructions Her Majesty's ship "Cumberland" was ordered, with other vessels, to the fishery station, this measure was not 171 adopted with a view to show an imposing force, but in order that Her Majesty's Government might have the advantage, in a matter requiring judgment and discretion, of the presence of an officer so highly distinguished for both qualities, and whose recent judicious conduct in an affair at Grey Town called forth the praise of the officers and of the Government of the United States.

As I propose that this despatch shall merely explain away certain points which have clearly been misunderstood, I shall abstain, for the present, from entering into a discussion upon the interpretation to be given to the term "bay;" and upon this part of the subject I will only add that Her Majesty's Government intended to leave the matter precisely where it was left in 1845 by the Governments of Great

Britain and the United States; namely, that the relaxation as to bays applied, as is stated in Lord Aberdeen's note to Mr. Everett of the 21st of April 1845," to the Bay of Fundy alone," any further discussion of that question being a matter of negotiation between the two Governments.

I cannot however conclude without adverting to the fact that the proceedings of Her Majesty's Government which have called forth so much animadversion on the part of the United States were adopted, not merely with reference to the protection of British fisheries against American encroachments, but also against similar encroachments on the part of French fishermen; and that a considerable proportion of the armed craft employed for protecting the British fisheries in North America were placed there in order to use means equally used by the French Government to protect French rights.

Now with regard to such species of protection the Governments of Great Britain and France have not been in the habit of evincing any national jealousy, or of considering that offence was thereby intended. On the contrary, both Governments have found that the surest mode of preventing misunderstanding was to join in effectually protecting their respective lines of demarcation.

Such protection, or rather guard, is constantly maintained by both Governments in the British channel, where the fishery is regulated by a Convention between Great Britain and France, whereby the lines are clearly laid down, and where, notwithstanding the mutual precaution adopted by the cruizers of both nations, the fishermen of both countries are repeatedly found encroaching. But such encroachments are not countenanced by either Government. The cruisers of each Government are instructed to warn their own countrymen whenever they observe them disposed to cross the line of demarcation; and the fishermen who trespass pay the penalty of their improper proceedings. In like manner, trespasses have been committed by French and British fishermen respectively on the coast of Newfoundland; and, in order to avoid disputes, the two Governments resolved to endeavour by negotiation to establish rules for the mutual regulation of the fisheries; but, pending the conclusion of such negotiations, Her Majesty's Government and the Government of France have placed a force off the coast of Newfoundland to watch the proceedings respectively of the fishermen of the two countries.

You will read this despatch to Mr. Webster, and, in leaving a copy of it with him, you will not fail to assure him, and to request him to assure the President of the United States, that Her Majesty's Government continue to feel the same anxiety that has long been felt in this country for the maintenance of the best relations between the two Governments: and it will be to them a source of sincere satisfaction if the attention which has thus been drawn to the subject of the fisheries should lead to an adjustment, by amicable negotiations, upon a more satisfactory footing than at present, of the system of commercial intercourse between the United States and Her Majesty's North American Colonial Possessions.

I am with great truth and regard, Sir,

your most obedient humble servant

JOHN F. CRAMPTON, Esq.

92909-S. Doc. 870, 61-3, vol 4-29

MALMESBURY

No. 102.—1852, August 11: Letter from the Earl of Malmesbury to Mr. Crampton.

No. 79.

FOREIGN OFFICE, August 11, 1852.

SIR: In your despatch No. 106 you state that the President of the United States had suggested to you and to Mr. Webster the propriety of entering into some temporary arrangement with regard to the Fishery Question now pending, by which the danger of collision between British subjects and American citizens might be averted during the interval of time which must necessarily elapse before a permanent settlement of the points in dispute can be effected.

The arrangement proposed by the President in his conversation with you is stated to be simply as follows; that the British authorities should for the present abstain from seizing American vessels found fishing in disputed waters; but you add that the President in a communication addressed to Mr. Webster had further suggested that, by mutual agreement between the Governments of the United States and of England, the vessels of both countries should forbear to fish in those waters until the respective rights of each could be finally and amicably settled.

172

It is impossible for Her Majesty's Government not to do justice to the motive by which the President appears to have been actuated in suggesting the above arrangement: and any proposal calculated to give time for the removal of misapprehension and the subsidence of excited feeling on the part of the people of the United States before a permanent settlement of the existent difference is attempted, cannot fail to meet with their warm and cordial

concurrence.

But however desirable the object which it is thus sought to attain, Her Majesty's Government cannot but perceive that the proposed arrangement as it affects the rights of British subjects, rests on a basis of such manifest inequality as to render its acceptance by England impossible.

No question has ever been raised, on the part of the United States or of any other Power with regard to the right of British vessels to fish within the limits of the disputed waters, their privilege to do so is undoubted and indubitable, and in waiving this privilege even for a limited period, they would be parting with that which confessedly belongs to them by the express provisions of the Treaty of 1818. The only point concerning which any difference of opinion either does or can exist, is whether the right so enjoyed by British subjects is a right belonging exclusively to them or one which they share equally with the citizens of the United States. Her Majesty's Government cannot consider it as a just or reasonable demand on the part of the Government of the United States that British subjects should be called upon temporarily to abandon at considerable loss to themselves, a privilege their title to which has never been questioned merely on account of the claim which has recently been put forward by the citizens of another State, to exercise a similar privilege, concurrent with, but in no way invalidating that already exercised by Her Majesty's subjects.

Compelled therefore for the reason already stated to reject the proposition abovementioned but earnestly desirous by all means in

their power to avert the chances of collision between American citizens and British subjects, Her Majesty's Government will at once adopt the precaution of repeating the instructions, on which during a long series of years British Admirals commanding on the North American station have invariably acted, and they will further instruct Sir George Seymour to use the utmost forbearance and moderation in dealing with such American vessels as may be found manifestly infringing the terms of the Treaty.

It is almost needless to add that in regard to the Bay of Fundy where a special permission to fish has been granted to American fishermen, their vessels will be in no way interfered with, but it must be understood that the three mile limit from the shore will as before be maintained.

Her Majesty's Government hope that these precautions, in taking which no time will be lost will sufficiently indicate to the President of the United States, the earnest desire which exists on their part to guard against every possibility, not merely of actual collision between the inhabitants of the two countries, but even of a demonstration of hostile or unfriendly feelings during the conduct of the important negotiation on which both Governments are about to enter. I am with great truth and regard,

Sir, your most obedient humble servant,

JOHN F. CRAMPTON, Esqr.

MALMESBURY.

P. S. You will take an opportunity of speaking to the President on this subject, and you will read this despatch to him.

M.

No. 103.-1852, August 12: Debate in United States Senate on North American Fisheries. Speech of Mr. Soulé, of Louisiana.

On the message of the President of the United States transmitting information in regard to the fisheries on the coasts of the British possessions in North America

Mr. SOULE: In delivering out my sentiments with reference to the difficulties which have arisen lately between our fishermen and Her Majesty's Colonial subjects of North America, and in passing an opinion on the course which it has pleased Her Majesty's Ministers to pursue in relation to those difficulties, I shall endeavour to express myself with the utmost moderation and reserve.

The subject is one of considerable moment and delicacy; involving interests of vast national importance, which we can neither barter away nor surrender, and raising questions of momentous bearing, but too well calculated to stimulate and augment the excitement and irritation already produced by the high-handed measures which have occasioned this debate; and it is not to be supposed that I be willing to approach the grave questions which it suggests, without keeping in view the high responsibilities under which I speak. No, Sir; I know too well the unhandy materials with which I have to deal, and you need not apprehend that I be, for a moment, unguarded, in the use which I may have to make of them.