6

had long been abrogated. The Convention of 1818 was also abrogated. The Reciprocity Act of 1854 too was abrogated. In short, no agreement as to the fisheries now existed, and the Washington Treaty was, as an American would express it, written on a clean slate.' When signed it became the only agreement between the parties. Its fishery stipulations, with which alone we are dealing, are plain and remarkably simple. Though the Americans have talked and written volumes professing to explain these provisions, the truth is that no man of ordinary common sense can misunderstand them, unless he deliberately sets his mind to do so. The pith is in Article XVIII., of which these are the words:

'It is agreed by the High Contracting Parties that in addition to the liberty secured to the United States' fishermen by the Convention between Great Britain and the United States, signed at London on the 20th day of October, 1818, of taking, curing, and drying fish on certain coasts of the British North American Colonies therein defined, the inhabitants of the United States, shall have, in common with the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty, the liberty, for the term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII. of this Treaty, to take fish of every kind, except shell-fish, on the seacoasts and shores, and in the bays, harbours, and creeks of the Provinces of Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and the Colony of Prince Edward's Island, and of the several islands thereunto adjacent, without being restricted to any distance from the shore, with permission to land upon the said coasts and shores and islands, and also upon the Magdalen Islands, for the purpose of drying their nets and curing their fish; provided that, in so doing, they do not interfere with the rights of private property or with British fishermen, in the peaceable use of any part of the said coasts in their occupancy for the same purpose.

'It is understood that the above-mentioned liberty applies solely to the sea fishery, and that the salmon and shad fisheries, and all other fisheries in rivers and the mouths of rivers are hereby reserved exclusively for British fishermen.'

The words of the Convention of 1818 were given in the Article published in the last number of this REVIEW, but that the whole compact may be before the reader, it is here repeated.

'Whereas, differences have arisen respecting the liberty claimed by the United States, for the inhabitants thereof to take dry, and cure fish on certain coasts, bays, harbours, and creeks of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America, it is agreed, between the high Contracting Parties, 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, on the western and northern coast 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 the coast, without prejudice, however, to any of the exclusive rights of the Hudson's Bay Company: and that the American fishermen shall also have liberty, for ever, to dry and cure fish in any of the unsettled bays, harbours, and creeks of the southern part of the coast of Newfoundland hereabove described, and of the coast of Labrador; but so soon, as the same, or any portion thereof, shall be settled, it shall not be lawful for the said fishermen to dry or cure fish at such portion so settled, without previous agreement for such purpose with the inhabitants, proprietors, or possessors of the ground.

And the United States hereby renounce for ever any liberty heretofore enjoyed or claimed by the inhabitants thereof, to take, dry, or cure fish on or within three marine miles of any of the coasts, bays, creeks or harbors of His Britannic Majesty's dominions in America, not included within the above-mentioned limits; provided, however, that the American fishermen shall be admitted to enter such bays or harbors for the purpose of shelter, and of repairing damages therein, of purchasing wood, and of obtaining water, and for no other purpose whatever. But they shall be under such restrictions as may be necessary to prevent their taking, drying, or curing fish therein, or in any other manner whatever abusing the privileges hereby reserved to them.'

The term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII. of the Washington Treaty is ten, 'and further until the expiration of two years after either of the High Contracting Parties shall have given notice to the other of its wish to terminate the same.'

It is unimportant, but it may be mentioned that Article XIX. gave to British subjects free fishing on the American Coasts north of latitude 39°. The Colonial fishermen set no value whatever on this privilege, as they have much better fishing on their own coasts, and, in fact, they never exercised the liberty. By Article XXI. Colonial fish and fish-oil were to be admitted into American ports free. The compensation to be paid by the United States for the privileges thus granted is pointed out by Article XXII, which is in these words:

Inasmuch as it is asserted by the Government of Her Britannic Majesty that the privileges accorded to the citizens of the United States under

Article XVIII. of this Treaty are of greater value than those accorded by Articles XIX. and XXI. of this Treaty to the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty, and this assertion is not admitted by the Government of the United States, it is further agreed that Commissioners shall be appointed to determine, having regard to the privileges accorded by the United States to the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty, as stated in articles XIX. and XXI. of this Treaty, the amount of any compensation which, in their opinion, ought to be paid by the Government of the United States to the Government of Her Britannic Majesty in return for the privileges accorded to the citizens of the United States under Article XVIII. of this Treaty; and that any sum of money which the said Commissioners may so award shall be paid by the United States' Government, in a gross sum, within twelve months after such award shall have been given.'

The reader has now before him the whole agreement, excepting only a few details, which are quite unimportant in the present discussion. The Acts necessary to the carrying out of the provisions of the Treaty were passed by the Imperial Parliament 6th August, 1872, by the Canadian Parliament, 14th June, 1872, by the Legislature of Prince Edward Island (which had not then come into the Canadian Confederation), 29th June, 1872, and by the United States Congress, 25th February, 1873. By a Proclamation of the President, dated at Washington, 7th June, 1873, the 1st of July, 1873, was fixed as the day on which the Treaty should come formally into operation. The twelve years commenced on that day, and ended 1st July, 1885. Some difficulties occurred in the case of Newfoundland, but these were settled; and by a Proclamation issued by the Lieutenant-Governor of that Colony, 1st June, 1874, was fixed as the day on which the Fishery Articles of the Treaty, so far as they concerned Newfoundland, should come into effect. Both Canada and Prince Edward Island anticipated events, and at once opened their inshore grounds to the American fishermen. This generosity was fitly acknowledged by the United States Government as a liberal and friendly' act, and peace and prosperity were again assured for at least twelve years.

The essential difference between the Reciprocity Treaty, and that of Washington, was, that under the first the Colonies were remunerated for the use of their fishery grounds by free trade in certain articles with the United States; and under the second,

by a sum of money representing the balance of benefits secured by the United States.

The next step in the history of the Fishery Question is the award of the Commissioners. These were appointed under Articles XXII. and XXIII. The Treaty worked well. Discontent was not exhibited by either of the parties to it. The fishermen, American as well as Colonial, plied their vocations side by side, and thrived. Order among them was easily preserved, and the fishing industries, Canadian and American, yearly increased in extent and profit. It may be added here that this state of things continued during the whole of the existence of the Treaty, and until its final termination, 1st July, 1886, though the United States Government aver that it was onesided, and that Canada had altogether the best of the bargain. While matters were thus progressing amicably and profitably, the necessary steps were taken to determine the amount of compensation, if any, to be paid by the United States in return for the privileges accorded to the Americans, and this compensation was to cover the whole period of the existence of the Treaty -the ten years with the two years added—at least. The Commissioners were His Excellency M. Maurice Delfosse, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Majesty the King of the Belgians at Washington, appointed by the Ambassador in London of his Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Austria; the Honourable Ensign H. Kellogg, appointed by the President of the United States; and Sir Alexander Tilloch Galt, appointed by Her Britannic Majesty. These gentlemen met at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on the 15th June, 1877, when the Conference was convened in the Legislative Council Chamber. M. Delfosse was nominated President, and Mr. J. II. G. Bergne, of the Foreign Office, London, Secretary of the Commission. The proceedings were very elaborate, the utmost care and industry being bestowed on the preparations for the great trial,-second only in importance to the celebrated Geneva Commission which settled the Alabama controversy. The British statement of claim was contained in the Case of Her Majesty.ch as it rnment,' which was handed in to the Commissionme privileges ast meeting, duplicate copies being furnished to

the United States agent, accompanied by a list of the documents to be used in support of the 'Case.' The Conference was then adjourned for six weeks, in order to enable the United States agent to prepare and furnish to the Commissioners, and the British agent, their counter case. On 28th July the Conference again met, when this document was put in, accompanied by a Brief for the United States upon the question of the extent and limit of the inshore fisheries and territorial waters on the Atlantic Coast of British North America.' The British agent then put in the 'Reply to the Answer of the United States, accompanied by a Brief in reply to the American Brief.' These documents are models of clear statement and learned and forcible argument embodied in the dignified style of State papers. They formed the Record' which the Court was to try.

In order to give the reader some idea of the wide range taken by the disputants in this somewhat novel Court of Equity, it may briefly be stated that the British case dealt with the following among other subjects: The extent and value of Canadian Sea Fisheries, the advantages derived by United States citizens from liberty to fish in British waters, to land for the purpose of drying nets, curing fish, to tranship cargoes and obtain supplies, to form fishing establishments, and from participating in the improvements resulting from Fishery Protection Service of Canada. The advantages derived by British subjects from the possession of liberty to fish in United States waters, and other privileges connected therewith, and the remission of Customs by the United States in favour of Canada, were also discussed. The subjects dealt with in connection with the Newfoundland Fisheries were the advantages derived by United States citizens from the entire freedom of the inshore fisheries, from the privilege of procuring bait and supplies, refitting, drying, trans-shipping, etc.; from the possession of a free market for fish and fish-oil in Newfoundland, together with the advantages derived by British subjects from liberty to fish and the opening of a free market for fish and fishoil.

The British Case' claimed 12,000,000 dollars for the Dominion of Canada, and 2,880,000 dollars for Newfoundland,