This witness also stated that he was not aware whether any of these vessels had fishing licenses from the Canadian Government. Q. Is the privilege of using the inshore fishery of any use to you as fishermen ?-A. No; personally, I say no. Q. Do you know that practically yourself?-A. That is my opinion. Q. You never fished inshore ?-A. No. Q. Therefore you are not able to say so from your own knowledge?-A. I fished off shore for the very reason that I thought I would do better there. I had a perfect right to come inshore. Q. You lost money, you say?-A. Yes. Q. Did you ever try inshore fishing?-A. No. Q. But you say the privilege of inshore is of no value-A. That is my opinion. Q. For what reason -A. I gave you my reasons. It would keep the vessels out of the harbors, and they would get more mackerel. Q. What else?-A. Then we would not have so many draughts. They lay in the harbors too long, and go into harbors when it comes night. Q. Is it not the practice for the fishermen to run into the shore and drift off, and then run in again?-A. It is not always you can drift off shore. Q. Is the privilege of going inshore an advantage to you?-A. If the mackerel were inshore, it would certainly be an advantage; if they were not inshore, it would not be an advantage. Q. You never tried whether the inshore was not better that the outshore fishing; why did you not try it ?-A. Because I thought I could do better outside. Q. Year after year you lost money. As a business man, why did you not try fishing inshore like other fishermen who have made money?—A. I don't know where they are; they are very much scattered. Q. Why did you not try ?-A. Because I thought I could do better off shore. Q. Do you know of any vessel which fished within three miles of the shore?-A. Not personally. Q. Why do you say not personally?-A. Because I do not know any one. them in there fishing. I never saw Q. Did you hear of any vessel which fished inshore ?-A. I could not tell what I have heard. Q. Have you heard of vessels fishing inshore-A. I could not answer that. Q. Did you ever make any inquiries?-A. No; I was not interested. Q. You fished off shore, lost money, and never tried to fish inshore, and never made any inquiries as to whether there was good fishing there or not?-A. Yes. This is from the record of the evidence of Charles H. Brier, of Belfast, Me., called on behalf of the Government of the United States: By Mr. Doutre : Q. Can you find out easily whether you are three miles or four miles or five miles off!— A. I don't know how we can. Q. Suppose you were about five or four miles, would you call it off shore or inshore?-A. I would call it inshore. Q. Then what leads you to say you caught about half of your trip inshore and half out ? — A. Because we did, I suppose. We had a license to fish inshore and we did. Q. You were not afraid of going in there? So long as you found fish you fished there ?— A. Yes. Q. Well, you had no reason whatever, had you, to take a note of the quantity taken inshore or outshore; what reminds you now of the fact?-A. I don't know anything to remind me, only that we fished about half the time off shore and caught about as many fish off shore as in. Permit to refer to one locality to show how completely our learned brethren on the other side have ignored our evidence. I select this instance because the absence of contradiction is, perhaps, unusually striking. Grand Manan, on the west side of the Bay of Fundy, I have intimated, has received the especial attention of United States counsel, and many witnesses were called to contradict the very strong case made out by Mr. Thomson there. Let me call your attention to the other side of that bay, and to the attention bestowed to that part of the Province of Nova Scotia by my learned friend, Mr. Weatherbe. If you look at the map you will find St. Mary's Bay on the southwesternmost corner of Nova Scotia, on the eastern shore of the mouth of the Bay of Fundy. From Cape Split, near the head of the Bay of Fundy, follow down the eastern shore of that bay to Brier Island, at the very extremity of Digby Neck, a strip of rocky soil, averaging one or two miles in width, which forms the barrier between the Bay of Fundy and St. Mary's Bay, a bay six miles in width at Petite Passage. From Brier Island go to the head of St. Mary's Bay thirty miles, aud follow the sinuosities of the opposite coast to its mouth, and proceed southwardly along the shores of the old French settlement of Clare toward Barrington-that ancient town which was founded by fishermen from Cape Cod, who settled there with their families in 1763. Here is a coast line on the western part of Nova Scotia 250 or 300 miles, including the whole length of Digby and Annapolis Counties, with the finest zones and currents and temperature on the globe for a great fishing-ground, swarming within three miles of the shore, as you will find by turning to the 413th page of the British evidence, with codfish, haddock, pollock, halibut, herring, and mackerel. In 24 hours, with the Speedwell, Professor Baird would extend the list of edible fish very much. It is true, we did not call witnesses from every part of this coast. It would have occupied too much time. We did, however, produce sufficient evi dence. Take Brier and Long Islands-about 14 miles in their entire coast line. These islands are within about five or six hours' sail of the United States, and will in a few months be almost connected by rail, after you cross St. Mary's Bay, with Halifax. The inspector of fisheries at Brier Island, Holland C. Payson, who was cross-examined by Mr. Dana, has carefully collected information. The people of these two islands alone catch $200,000 worth of fish annually. It would be fair to put the catch of that entire coast at three millions and a half. Ezra Turner, from Maine, whose testimony is to be found on page 235 of the American evidence, and who has fished in the British waters for thirty or forty years, swore that Maine is bankrupt in the fisheries from end to end. This is corroborated by a number of American witnesses, and by the official records of the nation. In the American Answer it is claimed that the poor people of our fishing villages are saved from destitution by the American fishermen. Mr. Payson and Mr. Ruggles-the latter a descendant of the celebrated General Ruggles-say their people do not pay a cent of poor-tax. The almost destitute fishermen from the bleak coasts of Maine and from New England, since the Treaty of Washington, during the last four years throng these friendly neighboring coasts of ours, and from these two islands alone they carry away annually from one-third to one-fourth as many fish as are caught by the inhabitants-say $50,000 worth. They come with small vessels, which they haul up or anchor, and they establish themselves on the shore and carry on these fisheries side by side with their Canadian brethreu. This exercise of the right is gradually growing annually. These American fishermen admit their distressed condition at home, and the great advantages they enjoy by access to our coasts. These fisheries of ours, with those on the New Brunswick shore, including the Grand Manan, are a great blessing to our neighbors. This is no fancy picture. Here is a list of the affidavits filed to establish the facts. Here are the facts from fourteen men, whose statements could have been fully sifted : The statements of Holland C. Payson and Mr. Ruggles as to the value and extent of the fisheries in the Bay of Fundy and the southern coast of Nova Scotia are corroborated by the affidavits of— 155. Joseph D. Payson, Westport, Digby County. 207. Livingston Collins, Westport, Digby County. 218. Wallace Trask, Little River, Digby County. Whitfield Outhouse, Tiverton, Digby County. 222. John W. Snow, Digby, Digby County. 223. James Patterson Foster, Port Williams, Annapolis. More than seven weeks before the United States Agent closed his case, we produced two of the most intelligent and respectable men in the district. While Mr. Dana was cross-examining them, his countrymen were on the shores of Digby fishing with their vessels. A messenger in a few hours could have detected any exaggeration in their statements. From that hour to the end of their case not one word of all that evidence has been contradicted or shaken. These New England fishermen continue under the Treaty of Washington to pursue their ancient calling and their number is increasing on the western and southern shores of Nova Scotia and at Grand Manan, and all around the Bay of Fundy. Mr. Dana calls this practical pursuit of the fisheries in British waters a franchise, an incorporeal faculty. Call it what you will, is it not a great advantage to his countrymen? Is it not the salvation of the State of Maine? Is it not affording an increasing number of Americans safe and steady employment? These fisheries do not fail. I invite the careful attention of the Commission to pages 399 and 412 of the British evidence. Are these fisheries not supplying cheap and wholesome food to citizens of the United States? Is it not making hardy sailors of her stalwart sons? Mr. Dana can appreciate that. Mr. Foster says he fails to find any evidence, except as to the bend of Prince Edward Island and Margaree. Can you "pencil in hand," measure by arithmetic the benefit of the right of fishing to the people of a whole coast who have been trained to no other pursuit, and whose families are dependent on the return of the boats from Brier Island and the other coast of Nova Scotia ? What goes on here at one extremity of these wonderfully varied and prolific fisheries is going on at the other extreme-at Gaspé and the mouth of the St. Lawrence, and at all other points varied by the circumstances of place. I wish to call your attention to an error-shall I say a geographical error?-of our learned friends. The learned Agent for the United States says he can figure this question up pencil in hand. He admits with all the assistance of Mr. Babson and his figures (which are not evidence at all) he admits one link in the chain of his argument is wanting-the Port Mulgrave returns of 1875. Does the learned Agent know that the Port Mulgrave returns are entirely incomplete. Mr. Foster seems to be laboring under the delusion that every American fisherman reports himself as he passes through the Strait of Canso. This is really not the case. Look at the map and read the evidence and then see if it is possible to say how many fishermen never sail in the direction of the strait. All round the eastern and northern side of the Island of Cape Breton there are the finest mackerel grounds in the Gulf of St. Lawrence or the world. No United States witnesses could be produced to call this a dangerous coast. There are a number of fine harbors-the ancient port of Louisburg among the number-open all winter. This latter port is now connected by forty miles of railroad with the magnificent harbor of Sydney. James McKay, of Port Mulgrave, inspector of fish, was called and examined as a witness before the Commission. He says, "No one man stationed in the Gut of Canso can get an accurate list of the vessels that go through there. To do so is a moral impossibility." James Purcell, revenue officer at Port Mulgrave, says: "The number of light-dues collected would not be a fair return as showing the actual number of vessels that pass through the Gut of Canso." B. M. Smalley, fisherman, of Bedford, Maine, was called on behalf of the United States and examined. I invite the Commissioners to read his evidence: Question. Now don't you think the same fish go out and in? Is it your idea that certain schools keep in one place, and certain schools in another?—Answer. Yes, it is my opinion the mackerel go out and in, and we know they do. But it is my positive idea that the best fish that go into the Bay Chaleurs go through the strait and by Sydney. Q. Do you mean the Strait of Canso?-A. No; the Strait of Belleisle, and come down to Sydney. Q. What time?-A. Well, they are passing up and down there after the month of August, until they all go out. Q. You think these are not the same as you catch off the north of the island ?—A. No, I don't. Q. Do you think your opinion is general?-A. Yes, sir. Here are a few extracts from the evidence on file: Archibald B. Skinner, inspector of fish at Port Hastings, Cape Breton, has been 32 years engaged in the fishing business, and has been a practical fisherman: During the Reciprocity Treaty a large fleet of American fishing-vessels came to this coast during the summer season to carry on a fishing business. The number increased during the treaty, until at the termination a fleet numbering hundreds of vessels were engaged in fishing around the coast of Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, Prince Edward Island, and the Magdalen Islands. These principally took mackerel and codfish, but they took other fish as well. A large portion of the American fishing-fleet is now going every year up the eastern side of Cape Breton, and fishing in the vicinity of Scaterie, Cape North, and the sections around there. I understand that these grounds are very rich in fish. To reach these localities they are under no necessity whatever of passing through the Gut of Canso. They may, directly after they come from the Bay of Fundy, either pass along the coast of Nova Scotia and reach the Gulf by way of the northern part of Cape Breton, or pass north in the vicinity of Newfoundland. George C. Lawrence, merchant, Port Hastings: Not nearly all the American fishing-vessels passing through the Straits of Canso are noted or reported. A great number pass through every year that have never been noted or reported at all. The Newfoundland herring-fleet from American ports go thither along the eastern side of Cape Breton instead of passing through the straits, and toward the latter part of the season large quantities of the most valuable mackerel are taken by Americans on the eastern shore of Cape Breton, between Cape North and Louisburg, and thereabouts. Alex. McKay, merchant, North Sydney, Cape Breton: None of the codfish-vessels, to my knowledge, go through the Strait of Canso. They come around the southern and eastern coast of Cape Breton, and many mackerelmen do the Mackerelmen fish around by Scaterie, and it is therefore shorter for them to come round by the southern and eastern sides of the Island of Cape Breton. same. James McLeod, master mariner, Cape Breton: Last summer I fished from Cape North to Scaterie, during the cod season, and saw at that season great numbers of American fishermen there engaged in fishing. Within the last two years I have seen many American fishermen, from Cape North to Scaterie, engaged in mackerel fishing, and have seen at one time between twenty and thirty American fishermen so engaged within sight, and think that there would be in that vicinity at one time about one hundred. William Nearing, fisherman, Main-a-Dieu, Cape Breton: All the codfish and halibut fishermen come around the southern and eastern coasts of Cape Breton, and do not run through the Strait of Canso. During the past five or six years I have seen, on an average, upwards of one hundred American fishing-vessels each year around in this vicinity. William Edward Gardiner, merchant, Louisburg: The American vessels which come here do not pass through the Strait of Canso. I have seen in one day from fifty to sixty of these American vessels. These American vessels came round the southern coast of Cape Breton and did not run through the Strait of Canso. During the past five or six years I have seen on an average during the fishing season over a hundred American fishing vessels in and near the waters where I fished, and I have often found it difficult to keep out of their way. Those American vessels take all kinds of fish-mackerel, codfish, and halibut. On board these vessels there are from sixteen down to ten men on each. Isaac Archibald, merchant, Cow Bay, Cape Breton : The Americans in this bay have often practiced throwing bait overboard, and thus enticing the mackerel off shore. John Peach, fisherman. Cow Bay, Cape Breton, fished from Cape North to Scatarie, and in Cow Bay: The Americans fish from three miles off shore close up to the land for mackerel, and come in among us inshore fishermen and take the fish away from us. James Fraser, master mariner, Sydney: During the past ten years I have seen one hundred and sixty American vessels fish in Sydney Harbor for mackerel in one day, and large fleets of American fishing vessels visit our harbor daily for the purpose of catching mackerel during the mackerel season year after year. John Ferguson, Cow Bay, Cape Breton : I have seen from forty to fifty American vessels pass through the "Kittle" between Scatarie and Main-à-Dieu in one day. John Murphy, fisherman, Lingan, Cape Breton : During the past five or six years I have caught mackerel inshore around Lingan Harbor, and last year I have seen from ten to fifteen sail of American vessels engaged in taking mackerel. The American mackerelmen who fish around here come around the southern and eastern coasts of Cape Breton, and all the codfish and halibut fishermen come around the same way. Angus Matheson, fisherman, Sydney, Cape Breton : I have caught them in Sydney Harbor, until the bottom of the boat touched the ground. The Americans always come inshore for the mackerel, and when they did not fish them inshore they baited them off to beyond the three miles. At a time when the imaginative faculties of the learned American Agent and counsel had not been appealed to by their government-at a time when it had not yet been discovered that the Americans derived their title to our fisheries from the achievements of a Massachusetts army and navy-our American friends had another basis to rest their claim, also not to be found in the treaties. Until quite recently, American fishermen were under the firm impression that the mackerel was an American-born fish, from the neighborhood of Newport, Rock Island, Cape Henlopen, Cape May, and other places on the American coasts, which were and are spawning grounds. Under that notion, whatever mackerel was to be found in Canadian waters were nothing but the migrating product of the fertile American coasts. That theory was touchingly impressed upon the minds of the Joint High Commissioners during the winter and in the early spring which preceded the Washington Treaty. The mackerel of the Canadian waters were represented as a |