Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1852-08-07

wordss
And the United hereby renounce forever any ber
y heretofore enjoyed claimed by the inhabitants
to take dry, fish within three miles Of
Of the coasts bays creeks harbors of his Britannia
ajesys dominons in America not included within the above
mentioned limits"
They renowned the right to take fish within three miles
OF any OF the coasts bays creeks harbors Of her B
fannie MaJestys dominions Now the proviso to
the remuneration
Povided ho,oerer That American fishermen shall be 40
mtted to enter such bays harbo purpose of shell
ter repairing Of damages therein, of purchasing OBJ
tanning water, and for no other purpose whatever"
That IS what is renowned. The enyoys inform you
that they chose to the rights which we're given
up and they chose to do it distinctly and detail that it
might be known what surrendered at the time The
true question 49, What do they by the language
hey use know that in using these terms they
cluded from the coasts bays harbors and creeks and
the British Government raise question of construction
namely, that we cannot fish within three miles of any of
these bays that excluded to distance of three
miles not only from the coast but also from these bays
including, In that term Fundy and other large bays
But sir, anayze the article little further and you
will ascertain what the terms Of the exclusion are and
what they apply to- YOU have right to come within
three marine miles of the coasts within three marine
miles Of the bays and within three marine miles of the
harbors and creeks. What, then is meant by the word
bays The latter part of the provso which have just
read explains the whole Of it. They have a right
enter" ITO enter" what? q To enter such bays &c.
undoubtedly referring to the bays mentioned in the former
part OF the artclethe bays renowned And for what
nave right 10 such bays Why,
sir they have right to enter them for the purposes of
shelter and of obtaining wood water and for the
purchase Of bait All these things enumerated the
treaty ITSELF and they have right to all such bays
Tor such purposesthat is all the bays renouaced Now
let me ask If the Bay Of Fundy is bay enter for shell
ter, or for wood, or water or bait +? No. sir And
these great open from headland to headland in the
Gulf of st. Lawrence, where understand they have
stretched line and forbid vessels to enter within these
headands and thereby excluded them from of the
most fisheries in that gulf places where vessels
are to enter for the purpose of obtaining bait and shelter
and wood, and water? Sir the term "such bays, and
the uses to be made Of the privilege show clearly
and distinctly what the purposes and intentions
and these not the waters renounced by the
bays Then, in conformity with all this, have the
contemporaneous practical construction of this treaty
These open bays all enjoyed by the fishermen of the
United States from the making of this treaty for
than twenty years. without any serious interruption
complaint and they enjoyed this right practically as
construction acceded to all hands. They were per-
mtted to fish every where except within three miles of
the coast being excluded only from the and the
small bays and harbors of the coast. These the
bays renounced and Others All else were left open
to the fishermen. t'
Now this construction put upon the treaty conempora
With its execution and its continuance twenty
years undsturbed to stamps it with decided
character of authority The treaty capable of that
sruction without any violation to language and other
fair or just construction be put upon it. Now, is it
to be pretended after all this has happened that under
the opinion of the law officers the Crown lines are to be
stretched from headand headand across the Bay of
Fundy, and certain portions of the Gulf of St.
Lawrence, Of still doubtful character and that our
fishermen to be excluded from grounds which they
have always occupied? No, sir. 1t is stringent
fair and unjust construction given the instrument and
moreover it is which, in my opinion the people of
this country meyer will acquiesce in.
Ihe term is exceedingly indefinite in its app-
cation to the XAters of the ocean Take for instance
Hudsons Bay and Bafins Bay, which parts of the
great ocean, and compare the of the applied
such waters with Its application to those ndentatons Of
the coast which serve harbors of refuge and pro-
perry so called There is also the Bay of Fundy, large
body of water from which fishermen sought
to be excluded but in which they have the right of fish
ing at the distance OF three miles from the British coast
not only in accordance with the of the convention
but also by another right which pointed by the
Senator from Michiganthe right of coterminous pro-
prietorshp; it having the of Maine the side
and the coast of Nova Scotia the other forming the
headlands of That boy IL flows along OF the
United States for considerable distance, and therefore,
under the British construction fishermen
titled to fish there. This language of the British
thorIes is much less applicable to the Bay OF ST. Law
renee for that is much part of the open the
Gulf of Mexico. The headlands little nearer to-
gether il is true, but il much part of the open
any of thosewhich all nations have right enjoy
Now to undertake to shut fishermen out from that
gulf is very singular and stringent and, in my appre
henson very unustifabe construction TO the treaty
do not desire TO enter into discussion of this matter at
length This, it me- is not the fit proper
cason for that But nevertheless it is open to in
qury and the main point in controversy is the
sruction of this treaty and have not precisely
this view given to it, thought that would make these
statements that the attention of the Senate be drawn
TO it, and it is drawn to it, and the construction which
have given is taken in connection with the contempora
construction given the time together with the
use Of the fisheries for so long time, think the Senate
will conclude that my construction is the true one
IL Great Britain wants war; undoubtedly she can have
it; but do not believe she wants any such thing and
do not believe she will maintain the position she has
assumed; DO believe she will maintain her preten
sons to extent to violate and break up the pacific
lations which exist between do not think she
will do it; hope not mt least.
Mr. HAAlLIN followed, going into a critical examina-
ton Of the treaty descnntng the correspondence in
lation to it, insisting that the Interpretation put the
treaty by the American Government right and should
be sustained at all hazards giving opinion that the
conduct Of England could be submitted TO without
dishonor and disgrace. Mr. ii. did not conclude his
remarks
THE MILITARY ACADEMY.
Mr.. SHIELDS, from the Committee Military Affairs,
to which referred the memorial of the Board Of Vis
appointed to attend the examination of the Military
Academy, recommending an increase Of cadets and
tension Of the term Of education FIVE years. and
larged Of studies, asked to be discharged from
the further consideration Of the same, md that the
municaton from the Secretary Of War in relation to the
subject be printed which agreed to.
Thc Secretary says in his letter the committee that
in merely military point Of view there is certainly
need Of any increase in the number Of cadets the
number taught Mt the academy is than sufi-
cien meet all the demands Of the service Viewed
question Of political expediency, the committee fully
competent the Department to judge Of the utility Of
extending the benefits Of this excellent establishment
He remarks that the system Of education pursued there
is not exclusively military, but is qualified better than
that adopted ut most universities and colleges to prepare