Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1852-07-31

for such purpose with the inhabitants proprietors
possessors Of the ground And the United states barh
forever any liberty heretofore enoyed or CHIN
cd by the inhabitants thereof to take dry or cre sl
on or within three marine miles Of any Of the
creeks rnaroors Of his Britannia Majestys dominions
America not Included within the aboyementioned limits
froVldea however that the American fishermen shall y,
admitted 70 enter such bays harbors for the
shelter and OF repairing damages therein of purcbas;
wood, and oStsning water, and for no other
whatever But they shall be under such restrictions
may DC necessary to prevent their taking drying or cur
ing sA therein or in any othy manner whatever abus
ing the privileges hereby reserved to them"
1t is under shis article-whieh gives us all the
right we have, and which was intended TO define
clearly the privileges grantedthat the present con-
troversy arises. 1t will be seen by comparison that
this article is not the same as that in the treaty az
1853. This grants to us certain privileges about
which there is no serious difference Of opinion And
then, on our part, we renouce forever any liberty
heretofore enjoyed or claimed by the inhabitants of
the United States TO take, dry, or cure fish on or
within three marine miles Of any Of the coasts
bags, creeks, har6css of the British domnions in
America" &c, with prooiso that we may enter
Now, the British Government has for many years
claimed and insisted, certainly with great plausi-
blity if not with entire correctness, that, by the
true construction of this article, we renowned all
right to fish within three miles of any 5ay or Aar-
Dor, as well within that distance to any coast ex
cept those specified and that this is most manifest
from the froriso, which permits us to enter those
hous md hnrb g.,
thereby precuding the inference that we could enter
them for fishing
Our Government has by argument resisted this
construction of the treaty by Great Britain, and the
controversy has been going on for many years Our
fishing vessels have from time to time been seized
for fishing within the prohibited bags and harJors
and condemned to forfeiture. We have remon-
strated and made reclamation, and yet nothing is
settled Great Britain adheres to her construction
and has invariably done SO from the beginning
But as matter of grace, in 1915 she permitted our
vessels to fish in the Bay of Fundy, provided they
did not approach within three miles of the shores or
smaller harbors bays on either side. No one
doubts that when our vessels presume to fish within
three miles of the shore, they violate the treaty and
WS VI OEeat DTLdlll, ana are laDie 10 SEIZURE ana
Forfeiture and this must be equally the case for en-
tering any bay or har5or, if the construction put
upon the treaty by Great Britain be right But, if
it be not right it is strange that our Government
has acquiesced in it so long, without proposing an
arbitration to settle it.
The truth is, we suspect, that our Government
has contented itself with demonstrating and protest
ing for the last twenty thirty years, simply be-
cause it has not confidence in the construction which
it puts upon the treaty; and hence all these pro-
tracted difficulties. We think the time has now
come when this Government should abandon this
pretension, and inform its citizens that the construc
ton for which the English contend is the true one,
and that they must govern themselves accordingly,
or abide the consequences or else it should insist
upon Its own construction, and maintain our rights
under it by an adequate force, propose arbiua
ton to settle the true construction of the treaty
The matter should no longer be left in doubt.
We have made the treaty, and we must abide by it.
Our motto is, "Ask for nothing but what is right,
and submit to nothing that is wrong" and we have
full confidence that the Administration will act
up to it.