The daily union., 1852-08-18

more than one or two five, or ten, war steamers or
shps OF the line o the coast OF Nicaragua or into the
Mediterranean The Executive has acted with al-suth-
cient promptness, and, when II seemed necessary the
Mississippi sent into those waters From accounts
received il appears that Commodore Perry found the
British authorizes adherng practically to our
struetion OF the convention OF lsls What Is the Mis-
sissppi to do She must not protect fishermen who
according TO construction are eneroachng and
those who are not TO need no protection,
Sir. it has been complained by the honorable senator
from Louisiana MIR SouLEl that Mr. Webster conceded
too much in his official notice OF July 9, 1851. Now
here is Mr., Websters language. After quoting the
~, he says
woald appear that! By sS. S Gqd rigid construction
Q! This article fishing vessels o me United states are pre-
cluded from entering into the bays" &c.
And in the same connexion, he adds:
It was undoubtedly an oversight in the convention Of
1918 to make so large concession 10 England"
That il TO say, il oversight to use language in
that convention which, By strict and rigid construction,
might be made TO yield the freedom OF the great bays
Ii is, then, question OF mere verbal criticism. The Sec
rotary does not admit that the rigorous construction is the
just and true one And so he does not admit that there
any concession" in the sense OF the term which the hon
orabe senator adopts. Now, other honorable senator's ii
recoec arigh-and particularly that very accurate and
exceedingly strong minded senator, the gentleman from
Massachusetts Mr.. DAVIS sl-conceded that the treaty
ioould bear this rigorous construction insisting,
theless just the Secretary of State did, that il was
forced and unjust one The senator from Louisiana dis
sens from him and other Senator's and maintains that il
will not bear that construction at all because, he says,
that the other portions of the convention show that The
'bays' described must be bays within the British donna
ions He adds that, in order 10 bring bay within the
dominion OF any power must be such that its passage
the shall not exceed six miles in width and that
the shores both sides belong TO the power claiming do
mnlon the water cannot assent 10 the force OF this
argument OF the honorable senator from Louisiana. am
the inclined to 60 against II. because believe is
getting pretty late in the day 10 lind the Secretary Of
State wrong in the technical and legal construction Of
instrument II might bring doubt over his eminent
charactetas lawyer and dipomalist Let US test the
argument The honorable senator says that where the
ant hpfh tha nd ph
the strait through which the waters OF the bay flow into
the than six miles wide then there is
dominion over 1t.
| Now, them the Gut Of Canso is most indispensable
communication for fishermen from the Atlantic ocean
TO the Northumberland straits and 10 the Gull OF ST.
Lawrence for reason which any one will very readily
by referring to the map yet the Gut OF Canso is only
three quarters OF mile vde should be sorry to
adopt an argument which Great Britain nigh turn against
US, TO exclude US from that important passage.
| Again | recall the honorable senator's argument, viz :
:" Two things unite 10 give country dominion
inland The first is, that the land both sides
must be within the dominion Of the government claiming
jurisdiction, and then that the strait is not than
miles wide; but that if the strait is more than six
miles wide, no such jurisdiction can be claimed" Now
sir, this argument seems 70 70 me to prove too muen
Boston, all the land around which belongs TO Massachu
ses the United States, while the mouth OF The bay is
six miles wide. It would surrender our dominion
Long Island sound-a dominion which think the State
Of New York and the United States would not willingly
give up II would surrender Delaware bay ; it would
render. think Albemare sound, and the chesapeake
bay; and believe ii would surrender the Bay of Monte
rey and perhaps the Bay of San Francisco the Pacific
coast
Sir, it seems to that have been laborng for
the last fortnight under strange msapprehension that
have been arguing here the freedom of the seas-of
open and broad seasihe freedom of great bays, which
freedom is not practically denied, newly brought
in question Ii is true that the British government deny
right 10 enter the great bays, but II is equally true
that they have done Tor thirty years and il equally
tue moreover, that for thirty years we have practically
i thar rrhf hat
Just we have done throughout all that period
Now, how has all this conu usion come into the Sen
ate, and how is It that we are alarming perpexng and
bewdering the country in so idle and cruel manner !!
hat ground has there been for assuming that the Brit
ish government bad determined 10 revise the conven.
ton OF lSS and 10 enforce its construction By arms
On what did senator's base their appehensons and build
this excitement The honorable senator from Miehi-
gan [Dr CAssl quoted from three newspapers, but
neither OF them organ OF the imperial government
nor even Brush newspaper. He quoted from merely
provincial newspapers; and believe that two OF the
three papers anti ministerial papers Moreover
such they they did not assume TO speak by
thory, but only on report, and by way oil conjecture
Perhaps with those newspapers ihe wish father to
the thought and they thought that their brethren "down
South would take new lesson from the presence
OF assumed extraordinary force in the fisheries My
4 honorable friend from Louisiana based his censure
on the administration for possibly negotiating away
valuable national rights on what he called "sem.
official announcement" OF the fact in the Telegraph"
small newspaper in this city, which is not, as under
stand organ OF this administration bot pretend TO
no more tnan desire, IL snOulu survive, as
fear II may not, 10 become the organ OF future
The honorable senator, however, most candldy con-
fessed, when called upon to the the paper that he
called the announcement semi official" from any
official character that the paper bore, but from the
thorative manner which II assumed. may be
easily made out against the administration you will
quote from the papers friendly Otherwise, which make
up their articles from elegraphic reports. Now, pro
vlncia newspapers are authority one side OF
| am that they equally 50 on the otheL am
very happy 10 produce SUCH for the purpose OF restoring
\ the equsnmity OF the Senate ! read from the New
Brunswicke" provincial paper OF the date OF August
| 80, 1852;
"Nearly all the American papers have labor
under the Impression that the imperial
is about enforce the legal construction gwen the
convention OF 1918 by the Crown officers of England and
prevent Americans from fishing, except the distance OF
Il three marine miles outside OF lines drawn from head
land TO headand We have good authority for asserting
that such not the case IL Is quite true that since the
opinion of the Attorney General and Advocate General OF
Engan given the case submitted by the egsa
OF Nova Scotia, the Of that colony
the urgent request OF the fishermen has evnced desire
the imperial government has steadily refused take
view Of the case, concerning that American fishermen
might properly claim fish outside OF three miles
Of any part OF the OF British North America
within bays more than six miles wide.
"Aciiug under this PRESTON the imperial government
has Tor some years sent few soops-oi-war, other
smaller armed vessels, cruise during the fishing
along the shores OF the colonies prevent fore gn
sells had each such large OF over
that the duty Of keeping foreign fishermen three miles fro
the land indheTenly performed, aud the trespasses
and encroachmens have consequently Increased every
found they take the affair into their hands,
aba ndon their shore fisheries the people Of Unit
ted States, who by the convention Of lsS renounced for
ersF any liberty heretofore enjoyed claimed take
] "A A. g,n II