The Sun.
London, England, 1852-08-11 00:00:00

of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
HERALD.—Mr. Webster has spoken at Marsh-
field. He is answerable for much needless and dan-
gerous excitement, when be tells a popular audience
to rest assured that the matter of the fisheries along
her Majssty's coasts in her North American colonies
" is a subject on which no one slept at Washington."
We cannot say as much for the wakefulness of our
British administrators for many years past. Mr.
Webster will surprise Europe by the precipitate
course he pursues on this occasion. We had ex-
pected better things from one who is not only a most
eloquent speaker, but who has no small claims to take
his place among the foremost of living statesmen.
insHepiirsaotinnoeof
of
his severe and
thosewhomDanattaetedley musescribes with all the
Dig
mostcaanCs
soannurte°oderei for And yethi a
he trdl ,
oagm
soonrbaivaidl'9itsic2o'
Itt,gnroorunredahsoevh,aosns(w) rhaieshhlytosesi,:zaendd,.hellh7haas t
nv
dee
ort
eh,
set
rhhafeat ,scati
yap;
of the English Government? Liat they have violated a
treaty. No! and he cannot say s^. Toe most clear and
indisputable, and let us add, undisputed provisions of the
last treaty, the treaty on which this whole ques-
tion depends, not only sanction what they do, but
would justify much more than they intend or wish to
etTect. Does he allege that, without violating the
provisions of the convention of the 20th of October,
1818, her Majesty's present Secretary of State for
Foreign Atnirs has strained in any degree their ins-
port? Not even this is advanced. Is the complaint
that those provisions have been put in force without
necsesity, and with harshness ? Something like this
is hinted. We shall soon see with what truth ; and,
brief as shall be our remarks, we can promise to dissi-
pate a whole cloud of misrepresentations. But, first,
let us say one word respecting the most vehement of
Mr. Webster's accusations. He protests against the
English Government because they have now put
upon the treaty in question an interpretation differ-
ent from that which Lord Aberdeen adopted in
1845. This is at variance with all the facts of the
case. Lord Aberdeen interpreted the treaty pre-
cisely as it is now interpreted by her Majesty's
Government; and, what is more, Mr. Everett and
the American Government, as we can show, then
accepted this same, and still, in all respects, un-
changed interpretation. On the 20th of October,
1818, the two Governments agreed, and signed the
treaty, that all along her Majesty's open coasts in
America the Americans should be allowed to take
fish at a distance from the land not less than three
marine miles. Within that distance, even on the
open coasts, the possessors of the settlement had pro-
prietorship of territory and jurisdiction, by law, by
international right generally, and by virtue oithis
treaty expressly. Then came the question of the
" bays, harbours, creeks, and inlets." From these
(with the exception of some distinctly and categori-
cally named, from Cape Ray to the Itameau Islands,
and from Cape Ray to Quirpon Islands, and even
these under certain restrictions), the American
fishermen were clearly prohibited by the convention.
Stress of weather and other extraneous exigencies were
allowed as excuse for intrusion. This being so, then
arose the question of the Bay of Fundy. The Ame-
ricans represented that, though a bay, it was so
extensive that it partook of the character of the high
sea,
suala d
and cto
ofisn
the coast on either band. Lordd 14,
conceded the requested advantage three
marineAber these,
mwiiltehsinfreni
the
ma friendlye, spiritB4
—not as a right, but as a permission. We may here
remark that the demand for this permission, as well
as the grant of it, guarded
by a reference to, and
reservation of; the law and right to
withhold and to
withdraw it, wholly overthrow the argument of a
supposed " right by prescription" as
against the ad-
mitted force of the treaty; for if, indeed, there then
existed a " prescriptive" and suffered possession
of
thirty years' standing (as stated by Mr. Webster),
why accept it as a concession, why not protest
against it as a favour ? But it is urged that it was
harsh suddenly to withdraw this leave. It is
not withdrawn. The American fishermen can
still pursue, and have not for one instant
been checked in pursuing, their avocations
in the British waters of the Bay of Fundy.
What of this American smack that has been seised ?
It was seized in that part of the Bay of Fundy where
the Americans were never allowed to fish at all—.
namely, within musket shot of the British coast.
Much has been said of the duty incumbent on her
Majesty's Secretary for Foreign Affairs to have given
notice of the measures he was about to adopt. Notice
of what measures? Here is the mistake. Notice,
indeed, was given. Yet is there no change of policy
whatever, of which a notice might be necessary.
There is merely a change from the supposed protec-
tion and maintenance of the undoubten rights of our
poor fishermen, to the actual protection and mainte-
nance of those rights. There is no change except
from culpable inaction to the performance of an
avowed and bounden duty. Is it necessary for a new
Government to give notice that it intends to respect
treaties, to enforce all clear rights, and to discharge
its most sacred obligations ? Nevertheless, notice was

given to the United States Government in June last
that, for the purpose of securing to our fishermen
what remained to them of their indisputable
rights, after Lord Aberdeen's concessions, an
additional naval force (the former one
being inadequate), would be stationed in
those seas. Were the squadron twenty times
as numerous, the American fishermen will not
be prevented, even in the Bay of Fundy, from filling
their nets, provided they do go within three miles'
distance from the coast, and not under the very sha-
dow of our countrymen's homes. For such a mere
measure of police no notice was needful, though a
notice was actually given. When the French in-
crease their naval force in the British Channel for the
protection of their fishermen, they neither give a no-
tice to us, nor are we so foolishly jealous as to expect
it. Every state disposes as it pleases of its navy, and
moves it from station to station in full freedom,
without notice to other Governments. No new duty
whatever is to be performed by our ships on the
shores of our British American colonies. An old ser-
vice is to be discharged more efficiently than the force
already there was able to accomplish. At the same
time it is to be observed that our fleet, though in-
creased, is not greater than that which the French
maintain on their own fisheries; nor is it unworthy
towards whom we have adopted the self-
of notice that the French, against whom, or rather,
as that
mea-
sures, have evinced no such susceptinilitY
which Mr. Webster is endeavouring to excite
.amcoonng.
our kinsmen of the United States. We uisf;;eicnessity
eluding, 55y a word on the subject of the
of the
same
of these measures, and of the conditionsa,he English
fishery, as they affect the two
The Americans
fish in the Bay of Fundy by g
ri
ht;irtue of a friendly
take fish there by courtesy,.
snddlin state. Since 1845
permission granted to a five% y
their nets into these
the two nations have drop
dissimilar conditions ; and,
nations._
waters, side by side,
we may add, with very cilja _
d a right to the produce,
English fishermen/ who
,bad American market,
Fi
Bsimilar advantages. The
ne to pay a duty of 20 per cent.
and there is comP.e;-, to the same port fish which he
The American
brivnirtue of the liberality of the Go-
has taken only:in9
competitor, and receives a large
carries his fish to th
which the welcomed intruder.
Go-
vernment of
bounty
bounty, the
sins neingsuessor
well OUT countrymen
.uendnde
bcti"uany derived from the duty which the
pays. Thus there is a double ac-
d a double cause at the same
trijogub tif:lioPrDese to
have t hea valuerigh
right, secured
the produce to
w
'enanhance the price of the commo-
dities to which his rival has access only by courtesy,
dities
the courtesy of the country to which he belongs who
atrteioant.ietso
it'us'ininetitfhnoirsofnmpaealr.nner so signally injured. Mr. 'Webster
soya that the American fishermen shall be protected
e hook and line, and bob and sinker." We also have
fishermen in those waters, and the waters are theirs ;
and we want no more for them, and we have long
been content with much less than fair play for " their
hook and line, and bob and sinker."

THE ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.—We are glad to
learn that posts are now being Put down for the erection of
the telegraph between Glasgow and Ayr. Communication
by this means between Ardrossan and the metropolis of the
west will, it is expected, be completed in about two months,
and between Ayr and those towns shortly after.—North Bri-
tish Mail.

DR. NEWMAN.
all the Roman Catholic
congregations to
late trial. The means
—A correspondent says that a cir-
cularmal Wiseman was read on Sunday
letter from Card.
ject are left to the discretion
contributetb towardsu the expenses chapels in London, requesting the
ensuestactlS otibl -
o
the
carriryestisn,ganod
in most
places a collection will be made after eachp of the services of
next Sunday. The letter states that Pr. Newman's ex-
penses amount to 7,5001., and that of this 2,500/. has been
already collected.
DURHAM CITY .--In consequence of the death of
there
tilaanfdter that
Mr. T. C. Granger, Q.C., which took place suddenly at
York on Thursday last, there is a vacancy in the representa-
tion of this city. Mr.iGrooger's remains will be interred in
elit'ehauter Pnrgotectionist candidate at the
It‘b,ielllb'eumnpuleacCtivheurscthe,psLtoakndenonb,yneietxhterTphaurrtysdauyn,
do eventncle r;butry,aLuodrdthAeddo
last election, will again offer himself. Mr- IL W. Fenwick,
of South Hill, will he brought forward in the Liberal in-
terest. Lord A. Vane was defeated by Mr. Atherton by some
three or four votes at the last election, and the contest will
necessarily be a close one. Alter the death of Mr. Granger
was known in Durham, soma influential electors put them-
selves in communication with Sir George Grey, but in con-
a previous arran em
sequence his , g ents the Rightßaronet
declined having name put in nomination, otherwise the
seat would have been secure to him.

NEW POST-OFFICE REGULATION,-17 a new 1.3'
gulation issued by the Postmaster-General, which came into
operation last week,
all lettersposted in the United King-
dom, or within the metropolitan district for places in the
kingdom, must either have a stamp thereon, or be sent
p
unpaid, no prepayment by means of money being allowed.
This new regulation will have the effect of simplifying the
official accounts, and also of keeping the actual collection of
the revenue more directly in the hands of the Post-office au-
thorities
at S.t. Martin's-le-Grand than before.