simple," and instructed Mr. Dayton to renew it in the form originally prescribed. The result was that the negotiations failed. Subsequently, when, on account of the Trent affair, it was feared that there would be war between the United States and Great Britain, Lord Lyons was instructed to say that Great Britain was willing to abolish privateering as between the two nations, if the United States would make the same engagement.

Meanwhile the principle of the immunity of private property at sea made headway in Europe. During the Italian war of 1859, all parties being signers of the treaty of Paris, the rules were strictly maintained; but in the treaty of Zurich, November 10, 1859, it was stipulated that, as an extension of the previous rules, Austrian vessels which had been captured and not yet condemned would be restored. Similar proceedings took place after the Mexican war, by a decree of the Emperor Napoleon on March 29, 1865. At the outbreak of the Danish war, in 1864, first Denmark and then Prussia and Austria, applied the old laws about prizes. But in the treaty Denmark agreed to restore the merchant ships captured, or pay for them. Thus, as Bluntschli says, "this treaty implicitly recognized the doctrine that, even in maritime war, private property ought to be respected." At the beginning of the war of 1866 the principles of Paris were carried still further, Austria, Prussia, and Italy all agreeing not

only to give a special protection to neutral vessels, but to exempt from capture even enemy's vessels which should not be carrying contraband of war, or trying to violate the blockade. At various times chambers of commerce of maritime cities-English, German, French, Belgian, and Danish-had passed resolutions in favor of the immunity of private property; and on April 18, 1868, on the proposition of Dr. Aegidi, the Federal Diet of North Germany passed almost unanimously the following resolution :

"The Federal Chancellor is invited to profit by the friendly relations at present maintained with foreign powers to begin negotiations for maintaining, by means of treaties, the freedom of private property on the seas in time of war, and make it the recognized principle of international law."

The Federal Council accepted the vote of the Diet, and invited the Chanceller to act according to the resolution which had been adopted. In consequence, according to the Provinzial'sche Correspondenz of Berlin, of August 26, 1869, the German minister at Washington was instructed to begin negotiations on this subject with the United States.

At the beginning of the war between Germany and France, in 1870, M. Garnier-Pagès, deputy of Paris, proposed, in the French legislature, that the capture of hostile commercial vessels should be abolished, as well as the blockade or the bombardment of commercial and open towns, the right of attack remain

ing limited only to military ports and towns. This law was, however, only to be applied in cases of reciprocity. Although urgency was then granted to this proposition, the sudden revolution prevented its consideration. The Germans, on their side, by a royal ordinance of July 18, 1870, declared that French commercial ships would not be captured unless under the conditions in which neutral ships might be captured. There was no question about reciprocity. Selfish reasons, that is, a large commercial marine, a small navy, and an undefended coast may have entered into this; but the declaration was certainly an advance in international law. France did not reciprocate in exempting German commercial ships from capture, and on January 12, 1871, information was given to neutral countries that this declaration would be recalled after four weeks' delay, in order to protect neutral property which might in consequence of the declaration have been placed on French ships. Hostilities had ceased, however, before the four weeks had expired; and the threat of reprisals was therefore without result.

A sufficient time having elapsed after our civil war for us to forget the disturbance which it had caused us in every way, we again took up this principle, which we had been ready to relax in a moment of need. By a treaty of commerce concluded with Italy on February 26, 1871, we stipulated for all that we

had ever maintained. By Article 12 it was agreed that private property should be exempt from capture or seizure on the high seas, or elsewhere, by the armed vessels or by the military forces of either party, excepting, of course, contraband of war, and vessels attempting to enter blockaded ports. By Articles 13 and 14 blockades were more exactly defined, and the category of contraband of war was limited to arms and munitions by Article 15. In Article 16 it was recognized that citizens of either country may trade with the enemies of the other; that free ships make free goods, contraband excepted, but that this stipulation shall be applied only to those powers who recognize the principle. Stricter regulations were also made for the exercise of the right of search.

VIII.

THE FISHERIES.

Treaty of 1783.-Treaty of Ghent.-Our Contention.-Treaty of 1818.-Difficulties, Complaints, and Seizures.—Diplomatic Correspondence.-Treaty of 1854.-Its Abrogation. —New Difficulties.—Treaty of 1871.—The Halifax Award. -Abrogation of Treaty.-Temporary Prolongation of Privileges. Present State of the Question.

THE question of the fisheries on the coasts of British North America is one which has occupied our Government since its foundation, and which, though several times settled by temporary arrangement, has now reached a point, through the lapse of these arrangements and the abrogation of treaties, where it is again under the actual consideration of our Government.

By Article 3 of the treaty of September 3, 1783, which recognized the independence of the United States,

"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, also in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and at all 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