Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1852-07-31
TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1852.
ENGLAND AND THE FISHERIES.


gress AZ from structures Of the Press, we should
infer that the history of our fisheries is but imper
fectiy understood 1t is said that the British Gov
ernment has manifested determination to enforce
her rights against us by arms, and that naya
foree mas been ordered to the fishing grounds fol
thas purpose. But what those rights are, IL not
stated. On the other hand, there seems to be a
desire that Government should send out a naval
armament to protect our fishermen, and repeI the
apprehended aggressions of the English But still
no enc tells us what rights are which are thus
in jeopardy, and which call for the strong arm Of
power Tor protection. 1t is easy to get up an ex-
eitment- Some Of our fishing vessels, it is said,
have been seized, and, without stopping to inquire
whether rightfully or wrongfully, selfvalant pa
tnots seem to assume the latter, and make dis
pay OF their patriotism by urging hostile measures
Now, we have no apprehension but that the
lights Of this country will be jealousy guarded and
fully maintained by this Administration. While it
moves with caution, and clearly that it is right
and its opponent wrong before it ventures to act,
yet this being ascertained it acts with rmness and
decision and has yet failed of success or been
| compelled to take step backwards
That this subject may be understood, it is neces-
sary to give brief history of our right in the New
foundland fisheries While the United States
formed part of the territory of Great Britain they
were OF course all enjoyed in common as British
subjects. We fshed upon the banks of Newfound-
land, which were in fact part of the ocean and
we ished in all the bays and CULTS, and along all the
shores of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, the coast Of
Labrador, and the islands of Cape Breton, New
foundland and the other islands in the Gulf of ST.
Lawrence and resorted to their shores for the pur
pose OF drying and curing the fish thus caught. But
we did this at that time not as American citizens
but as British subjects.
AT the treaty Of peace between the United States
and Great Britain in 17S3 by which she acknowl-
edged our independence, and in which boundaries
were agreed upon between us and England all the
territory connected with these fisheries was retained
by Great Britain, and, as we ceased to be British
subjects we ceased to have any right in it as such
Where kingdom or state is bounded by the ocean
it is rule of international law that the urisdic-
ton of such Government not only covers the whole
land, but extends one marine league into the sea-
The consequence therefore, of this rule would have
been, that Great Britain would not only have exer-
csed exclusive jurisdiction over all the land con-
nected with the fisheries but over the sea for three
marine miles from the shore. This, to be sure,
would not have prevented our people from fishing
on the Grand Bank, nor any where else in the ocean
at more than one marine league from the land,
whether that land was part of the continent or
some island belonging to Great Britain But then
it excluded US from the best fisheries, which were
often the shore, and the general right of fish
ing in the ocean comparatively valueless with
out che right to enter upon the land in the vicinity
to cure and preserve the fish This was well under
stood by those who negotiated that Treaty of Peace
and Independence the part of the United States,
and they therefore secured participation in this
privilege by the third article Of the treaty Of 1888
in the following words:
t agreed that the people of the United States shall
continue to enjoy unmOlested the right to take fish
every kind the Grand Bank and all the other banks
of Newfoundland also in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and
at oil other places in the where the inhabitants OF
both countries used at any time heretofore fish, and
also that the inhabitants of the United States shall have
liberty to take fish Of every kind such part Of the
coast Of Newfoundland British fishermen shall USE
(but not to dry the that island aud
also the coasts bays and creeks Of all other of his
Britannia Majsstys dominons in America; and that the
American fishermen shall have liberty to dry and cure
fish in any Of the unsettled bays harbors and creeks
Nova Scotia, Magdalen Islands, and Labrador so long
the shall remain unseted but the same
either Of them shall be settled shall be lawful
for the said fishermen to dry fish at such settle
men without previous agreement for that purpose with
the inhabitants propretors possessors Of the ground
We continued to enjoy the right of fishing thus
secured until 1912, when the war put an end to it ;
and it was not renewed by the treaty of peace. At
ter the war Of 1872 VIC attempted to exercise the
right granted by the treaty of 1888, and insisted
that it of those rights not abrogated by the
war. JOHN Q. ADAMS, our Minister at the British
Court at that time, made most able and ingenious
argument in favor of our claim, and was as ably
| answered by Lord BATHURST, Secretary for the
Colonies in a mastery production, which rumor
attributed to Mr.. CANNING, who was then just
rising into political Importance Great Britain set
up pretensions that could not be sustained by the
law Of nations, and insisted on rights under the
treaty of 1888 that by the same law we're clearly
abrogated; and the controversy finally resulted in
the treaty of 1918, by the first article of which it
is provided:
Whereas differences have arisen respecting the iber
ty claimed by the United States for the inhabitants
thereof to take dry and fish certain coasts bays
harbors creeks mic