The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-08-19

Mt to make that concession In iofo, the Ameri-
cans might Justly expect some clear notification If
Il was at any subsequent period to be Withdrawn.
Mr. Webster does not appear to have been aware
of the existence Of this document when he wrote
his first communication as he has made it the sub.
iect Of second letter ; and it is not impossible
that considering the lack Of experience in Her Ma
jesty's Government, Lord Malmcsbury, Sir John
Pakington, and the Queens Advocate were equally
uniformed. But in March, lS45, Lord Derby was
himself Secretary of State for the Colonies, and it
appears from the tenor Of Mr. Everett's despatch
that the subject was expressly referred to the Colo
NAL office, and therefore the Lord Stanley Of that
date Is as much responsible for the concession in the
Bay OF Fundy as Lord Aberdeen himself, for the
colonial interests affected by it peculiarly I'M
der his charge. That note is certainly plea IN Ia
vor Of the Americans present occupation and ENJOY
ment Of fishing rights in the Bay OF Fundy which
do not legally belong to them. But although cour.
tesy requires that such concessions should not be
Withdrawn without and without notice, 1t can
not be contended that limitations and renunciations
formally established by treaty are permanently
abrogated by mere note from the Secretary OF
State for the time being, and the same power that
waves a right at time may assert it at another.
We entertain doubt as TO the right in this case,
as to the language OF the treaty, which is unmis
takably clear, and cannot be evaded but in the
present state OF our information on the subject, we
feel much less confidence In the policy Of the
which the British government has thought proper to
adopt at this particular time. If the right of fish
ing in the Bay Of Fundy had been conceded by
former government, and had passed into long usage,
by suherance or otherwise, among a numerous class
of foreign fishermen, we think that they were enti-
tied to ample notice that it would be withdrawn,
not on the eve of the fishing season, but year be-
forehand. Yet We learn from Sir John PakDgton's
despatch that the strict and immediate execution
of the treaty of ISIS one of the subjects which
pressed most urgently on the attention of Lord Der
by's government. Further, there is time at
which it is so unadvisable to engage in
diplomatic disputes, or even in negotiations,
with the American government, as in that
period which Immediately precedes the cleo
t0n of n President The existing government will
not commit itselfto any positive engagements; the
candidates for power on both sides eager to work
upon the exctabe national feelings OF the public,
and to raise cry even of war for eeotioneering
purposes; the government which will have to deal
seriously with the subject is not yet installed in Of
hce, or even sure OF obtaining it We cannot sup
pose that this step, with reference to the fisheries,
has been taken from any motive so absurd and in
judicious as the idea that we can drive the Ameri-
cans into commercial treaty by squadron oflight
vessels the banks of Newfoundland, or in the Bay
Of Fundy. Indeed, one OF the points of which we
complain in the debate in the United States Senate
is, that this contemplate motive was imputed
to this country The only effect of su,h
an attempt would be to render all future
negotiations more difficult since the Anne
ricans will certainly not concede what
is just and reasonable in itself to display of
force. But in the present state Of parties in the
Union the time is i'll chosen to press any such ne
g0tistions at all We have to do with q govern
ment protesting strong protective principles, but
liable to be turned out of Office by its political and
COHIueICldi dnpdEOHlsIs III u rev m0Htus Inc pTu-
dent course would, therefore, have been to give
notice that the privilege of fishing beyond the limits
of the convention Of 1918 would be withdrawn
next year, and the provisions of that agreement
meye strictly enforced and then to await the effect
which the Presidential election may have on the
policy of the American government, and its
negotiations with ourselves. We strongly depre
cate all appeals to popular passions either
side of the Atlantic, when questions of this
tuIe arise, as they will arise, between the two
govgnments They are questions of law, to be
settled by fair negotiation, and we esteem it for
tunate that Mr. Webster should still be in office
TO render this service to his country for the real
vice 70 be rendered in such is to bring the diff
ference 10 an amioable and pacific conclusion. The
Americans seem in some danger Of forgetting that
this is no question of interference part with
their territories waters, but simply how far they
entitled to extend their fishing operations on
British coasts and in British waters. If the legal
stipulatoDs which in existence are not to govern
their proceedings their fishing vessels may be cap
tured and blood may be shed, not by the naval
forces which sent there to keep the peace, but in
the bros and alterations of the fishermen them
selves. There is far less danger of collision from
naval officers instructed TO uphold and obey the law,
than there is from interested and irritated parties
and in the meantime we trust that measures will be
taken 10 remove all grounds OF appre hension COM
plant, without suTrenderipg any Of the rights Sc
cured 20 our own colonial fisheries BY the treaty
of 1878.
THE AMERICAN FISHERIES
To the Editor of the London Times
Sir-1he leading article in the Times of the Sd
inst, on the subject Of the British North Ameri-
can fisheries, involves a maritime question of such
vital importance to the permane1ce of our naval
power, that hope you will devote the corner Of
column in your paper (perused and pondered over by
civilians and statesmen) TO convey, in few words
possible the real cause of the progressive decay,
ane now total abandonment of that once important
nursery for seamen, with which the duties Of my
late naval command required that | should make |
myself intimately acquainted.
The -esult of authentic information derived from
official documents, most of which obgngly |
furnished by the jealous and indefatigable COVER
nor then presiding in Newfoundland. proved that
the British bank, or deep fishery, formerly en-
poyed 400 sail Of square rugged vessels, and l2000
seamen and that nov not of these follow their
vocation in consequence of the ruinous effect Of
bounties awarded by the French and North Ameri.
can governments The former pay their fishery |
l0f for every quina Of fish debarked in the ports
OF France, and Of additional on their expectation ,
in French vessels to foreign States once exclusive
iy supplied by England-a transfer which cannot |
be viewed simply as a mercantile transaction, see
ing that the substitution of a greater number of |
foreign transatlantic fishing vessels, having more
numerous crews, constitutes statistical difference
amounting to 26,000 sailors against England with
out including the United States-a fact that ought
not, and, being known, cannot be looked on with |
indifference. !
Trans Atlantic steam packets receive national |
support, amounting to hundreds of thousands of
pounds year, without complaint being made. even |
by the most jealous free trade advocate, because
such vessels may prove useful in How, then. |
can the policy Of granting premium, thus forced
upon us in order TO preserve nursery for seamen
be considered otherwise than the cheapest of |
manning our ships of war; Such premium, for the |
deep sea fishery vessels resorting to Europe, ought
to be accompanied by immunity to our nshore CO. |
lonial fishermen from the tax on food (from which |
the parent State is, happily, free), andby release
from other imposts, from which the French fisher
man, under naval authority, is wholly exempt
Brevity being essential to admittance into your
columns, reference may be made, for important de-
tails, TO "Morrices Fishery Of Newfoundland" con-
taring petitions and remonstranees of the inhabit-
ants, which assuredy have been read by our
colonial administIa alton, though pressngly urged |
for consideration
Vessels of obviously not required for the |
protection Of the deep fishery which has ceased
TO exist nor they necessary for the security Of
the undisturbed colonial punts which fish inshore.
The stationing more vessels Of war to guard the |