ment of the fisheries on the northern and western coasts of Newfoundland, and under this claim have taken upon themselves to exclude the citizens of the United States from that part of the fishery which is carried on between Cape Ray and the Quirpon Islands, along the whole western coast of Newfoundland, the enjoyment of which in common with His Majesty's subjects was conceded to the United States by the convention of October 1818.

The American plenipotentiary appears to be of opinion that His Majesty's Government is bound either to make the rights which his country has obtained under that convention, in common with His Majesty's subjects, respected by the French, or in case of the French substantiating their exclusive claim, to make compensation to the United States for the loss of so large a portion of their fishing ground. It strikes us on a first view of the case as presented by Mr. Rush that the circumstances are not of a nature to be settled by negotiations between him and us; but we defer submitting any distinct opinion on this point, until we have made enquiry into the state of the regulations under which the fishery is practically carried on along the western coast of Newfoundland.

We have the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient humble

servants

To The Right Honble GEORGE CANNING &c &c &c

W. HUSKISSON
STRATFORD CANNING.

No. 57.—Statement respecting Newfoundland Fishery, given in by

Mr. Rush.

By the 13th article of the treaty of Utrecht of 1713, the sovereignty of the Island of Newfoundland was ceded by France to Great Britain. France being allowed the right of fishing and of drying fish from Cape Bonavista, on the eastern coast, to the place called Point Riche, but on no other parts.

The provision of this treaty were renewed and confirmed by that of Aix-la-Chapelle of 1748, and also, as far as relates to Newfoundland and the French fisheries on its coast, by the treaty of Paris of

1763.

By the treaty of peace between the United States and Great Britain of September 3rd 1783, article 3, it is stipulated 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.

By the treaty of the same date between Great Britain and France, articles 4th and 5th, the right of Great Britain to this island was confirmed, (the small adjacent islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon being excepted), and the right of the French to fish on a certain part of the eastern coast as above recited, was exchanged for that of fishing on the remainder of the eastern, and on the whole of the western coast, as far down from the north as Cape Ray. See also the declaration and counter-declaration of the plenipotentiaries of the two Governments annexed to this treaty, which are material as respects fishing rights.

By the treaty of Paris of 1814 between Great Britain and France, the former restores to the latter, the colonies, fisheries, factories, and establishments of every kind, which France possessed on the 1st of January 1792, in the seas or on the continents of America, Asia, and Africa, with the exception of Tobago, St. Lucia, and the Isle of France. By the 13th article of this treaty it is declared that "as to the French right of fishery on the Grand Bank of Newfoundland, on the coasts of the island of that name, and the adjacent islands, and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, everything shall be restored to the same footing as in 1792."

Finally by the convention of October 20, 1818, between the United States and Great Britain, it is provided, article 1st, that "the inhabitants of the said United States shall have for ever, in common with the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, the liberty to take fish of every kind on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland, which extends from Cape Ray to the Rameau Islands, and on the western and northern coast, from the said Cape Ray to the Quirpon Islands." By the same convention, the United States are allowed to dry and cure fish on the southern part of the coast of this island, as above described, but not on the western coast.

110

From the preceding statement it follows, that the French have the right of taking and drying fish on the western coast of the Island of Newfoundland. The United States claim the right of taking fish on the same coast. But this the French deny, saying that the right both of taking and drying belongs to France exclusively. Their cruisers have accordingly in 1820 and 1821, ordered off the American fishing vessels, whilst within the acknowledged jurisdiction of the coast, threatening them with seizure in case of refusal.

It may be that France will allege in support of her doctrine, that by her treaty of September 3, 1783, with Great Britain, which gave her the right of fishing and drying fish on the western coast of the island, it was intended that this right should be exclusive; that the words of the treaty, and, above all, those of the declaration annexed to it, show this to have been the meaning, as France obtained the western coast in exchange for a part of the eastern coast with a view to prevent quarrels between the French and British fishermen. To this end, as it may perhaps be also alleged, the words of the declaration provide that British subjects were not to "interrupt the French fishery on this coast by their competition in any manner; and further provide that the "fixed settlements" which had been formed there (by British subjects it is presumed) should be removed. The United States will insist on the other hand, that Great Britain never could have intended by her treaty of 1783 with France to grant a right of fishing and of curing fish on the western coast to French fishermen exclusively, but that the right of British subjects to resort there in common, must necessarily be implied. That a contrary construction of the instrument cannot be received, the sovereignty of the whole island having been fully vested in Great Britain, and even confirmed by this very treaty. That it can never be presumed that she intended so far to renounce, or in any wise to diminish this sovereignty as to exclude her own subjects from any part of the coast. That no positive grant to this effect is to be found in the treaty, and that the claim of France to an exclusive right, a claim so repugnant to the sovereign rights of Great Britain, can rest on noth

ng than a D

gut. That all that the waris zur thx d Aarat, s te the treaty can be constrieď z nem doud never whilst exercising their right m by their aber.com

『r,ttp༅,"," ༄ ཨ ** was drawn up, and which as will postati mal, a verrespondence which tas taken སམསྨྱོ The Master of the United States at Paris, and the Iduoni, wall serve to show more distinctly the grounds a daims to evict the United States from so essenof their fishing rights on the coast of this islani The ts of four letter from Mr. Gallatin to Viscount leted January the 22nd, March the 14th. April the and two from Viscount Chateaubriand to Mr. Soy the 28th and April the 5th 1823.

are annexed. For the articles of the treaties Torve) between the United States and France cente and alludes, see volume 1. of the Laws of 1813, pages 80 and 131.

"Y Bush (nited States Minister 4. Cummin

nje und Minister Plenipotense the instructions of his Is Whipsty's Principal In the following case. Cookyny hour the United 1, anlon, on the twen

tieth day of October 1818, it is, amongst other things, provided, that the "inhabitants of the said States shall have, for ever, in common with the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, the liberty to take fish of every kind on that part of the southern coast of Newfoundland, which extends from Cape Ray to the Rameau Islands, on the western and northern coasts of Newfoundland from the said Cape Ray to the Quirpon Islands, on the shores of the Magdalen Islands, and also on the coasts, bays, harbours, and creeks, from Mount Joly on the southern coast of Labrador to and through the Straits of Belleisle, and thence northwardly indefinitely along that coast."

After the ratification of the above convention, the fishermen of the United States proceeded, according to its stipulations to take fish on the western and northern coast of Newfoundland between the limits of Cape Ray and the Quirpon Islands; but, in the course of the years 1820 and 1821 whilst pursuing in a regular manner their right to fish, within these limits, and being also, within the strictest territorial jurisdiction of the island, these fishermen found themselves ordered away by the commanders of the armed vessels of France, on pain of seizure and confiscation of their fishing vessels.

This order was afterwards ascertained to rest upon a claim set up by France to an exclusive fishery upon that part of the coast of the island, a claim conceived by the Government of the United States to be without just foundation, and in violation of the rights of the citizens of the United States, as settled by the foregoing article of the convention of 1818.

The Government of the United [States] forebore at first to make any representation of the above occurrence, so injurious to the interests as well as rights of their citizens, to the Government of His Britannic Majesty, cherishing the hope that the difficulty which appeared to have arisen would be removed on a fit representation to the Court of France. A correspondence accordingly took place upon the subject, between the American plenipotentiary at Paris, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of His Most Christian Majesty, which, has not terminated in a manner satisfactory to the Government of the United States, it appearing from it that France distinctly asserts an exclusive right of fishing within the limits in question. Copies of this correspondence, consisting of three letters from Mr. Gallatin dated the 22nd of January the 14th of March and the 2nd of April 1823, and two letters from Viscount Chateaubriand dated February the 28th and April the 5th of the same year, the undersigned has the honour to inclose for the more full information of Mr. Canning. It will be seen that the United States claim for their citizens the right to take fish only, not to cure and dry the same, within the limits from which France would interdict them, and that their claim is in common with the subjects and fishermen of His Britannic Majesty. The undersigned has not been furnished with any affidavits or other formal proofs to substantiate the fact of the fishing vessels of the United States having been ordered away by French vessels of war as above mentioned, since it will be seen by the notes of the French Minister of State that no question is raised upon that point, but that the fact itself is justified under a claim of right, thereby rendering superfluous all extrinsic evidence of its existence. The grounds of justification, assumed by France, are believed by the Government of the United States to be satisfactorily refuted by their plenipotentiary,

in the correspondence enclosed, and although France has placed her claim as against the United States upon the footing of treaties once subsisting between the two Powers, it will not fail to be perceived, that she also asserts in the most unqualified manner her anterior, unlimited and exclusive right to the fishery in question under the treaties of Utrecht and of Paris; consequently as preexistent to her former treaties with the United States, and paramount all title in any other Power. In the note of Viscount Chateaubriand of the 5th of April, it is stated that the chargé d'affaires of France at Washington had been instructed to enter upon explanations with the Government of the United States concerning this interest, and was then about to be again written to on the same head; yet it becomes the duty of the undersigned to say, that no adjustment of the subject has taken place, and that the fishing vessels of the United States still remain under the interdiction put upon them by the cruisers of France.

The undersigned in fulfilling the orders of his Government to bring under the official notice of Mr. Secretary Canning the circumstances of the above case, does so in full reliance that, through the friendly dispositions of His Majesty's Government, the whole subject will receive such attention as it will be seen to merit. The United States seek only the fair and unmolested enjoyment of the fishing rights which they hold at the hands of Great Britain under the convention of 1818, satisfied that Great Britain, whether as regards the guarantee of those rights, or the maintenance of her own sovereign jurisdiction over this island and its immediate waters, will take such steps as the occasion calls for, and above all as are appropriate to the just and amicable intentions, which it may be so confidently supposed will animate the Government of His Most Christian Majesty, as well as that of His Britannic Majesty, towards the United States, touching the full rights of the latter under the Convention aforesaid.

The undersigned prays Mr. Canning to accept the assurances of his distinguished consideration.

LONDON MAY 3d. 1824.

1 George Street Portman Square.

The Rt Hon GEORGE CANNING

RICHARD RUSH.

His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

112

No. 59.-1824, May 6: Letter from Mr. Stratford Canning to
Mr. G. Canning.

The Rt Honble GEORGE CANNING,

LONDON, May 6th 1824

SIR, Agreeably to your directions communicated to me this evening by Mr. Planta, I have examined with attention the note and accompanying documents submitted to you by the American envoy under date of the 3d instant. It appears from these papers that the Govt. of the United States desire the intervention of Great Britain in order to obtain for their citizens the actual enjoyment of the right to take fish on the western coast of Newfoundland, in virtue of their con