The Portsmouth inquirer. [volume] (Portsmouth, O. [Ohio]) 1849-1855, 1852-07-30
Fish-s'Free Trade and sailors Rights, y

Fish-'Free Trade and sailors Rights"
Thestrange movement Of the British gov
eminent in entirely changing the cons!ruc-
tion of the treaty of 1918, shows but little
friendship for the U. States on the part of the
Tory Ministry.
BY the treaty ofl8l8 it was stipulated that
the American fishermen might fish within
certain described limits upon the coast Of
Newfoundland; and beyond these limits, at
any place not within three marine leagues of
of the British Colonial coast, bays, creeks, or
harbors Intosuch bays, creeks, or harbors,
they could not enter, except for purposes Of
shelter or repairing and reiitting their vessels.
The plain object and meaning Of this pro-
hibition was TO prevent their fishing close
upon the British coast within those waters
over which, according to national law. Brit
ish Jurisdiction could properly be extended.
1t was intended 10 keep American fishermen
from coming within three marine leagues of
the British coast, in pursuit Of their game---
leaving all beyond that limit free 10 the enter
prise and industry of the world, as the open
sea. Those vast collections of wa ers--- Hud
sons Bay, Baffin's Bay, the Gull ST. Law
renee, being hundreds Of miles across,
would naturally be considered parts Of the
open sea, and within their limits American
fishermen would be supposed to be under the
same RESTRICT ons as upon any other parts Of
the British coast; in fishing there they would
be required to keep at distance ofat least
three marine leagues from the shore. And
this is the construction which has been prac-
tically put upon the treaty. by both coun-
tries, from the date of its conclusion to the
present time.
But with this treaty, as thus construed,
the Colonial fishermen have not been con-
tent. They have constantly sought to drive
the Americans from the advantages which
have been guaranteed 10 them, and to secure
for themselves virtual monopoly of the
fsheries. Up 10 the present time, however,
they have been unable to enlist the home
government in support of their extravdgant
pretensions. 1t was not until 1881, thirteen
years after the treaty was concluded, that
they procured anything like an official rec2g-
milton of the justice of the construction
which they sought to put uponit.
Notwithstanding this decision no ministry
until the present one has ever been willing
to carry out the pretentions Of the Colonists.
The Derby ministry, finding themselves de-
feated in their attempts TO re-impose duty
on foreign corn, and unable 10 restore the
monopolizing policy of this Colonial trade,
are now bent on driving American fishermen
from the Atlantic ocean. They have set
novel construction upon the treaty, and
without any notice whatever 10 our govern
ment, have sent and armed fleet to enforce
that construction. This is nothing less than
downright insult, and we are pleased to see
that Mr.. Webster is prepared to give his
whole time to the question. England has
been twice taught TO respect American rights
already, and if Mr.. Webster's arguments are
not weighty enough, why, as Gen. Scott will
soon be at leisure, he can have chance 10
'fgh. his battles o'er," and give the British
good thrashing out of revenge for The one
which the democrats will give him.