The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-08-12

Claim Of the Earl Of stirling to the Fishcrtes
Ii 10 somew hat remarkable fact, thai, whilst The
10, nmen,s OF Great Britain and the United States are
understood be negotiating the fisheries, claim
is set up by Lord Stirling which. II it be well founded
shows thai neither government has any rights IA The
subject matter OF their negotiations There are two oir-
cumstances connected with Lord Shngs claim 10 the
fisheries which are calculated at first blush, TO weaken
IFS claim 10 favorable consderations immense mas nj
tude aud ts long standing The claim is founded upon
charters granted as early as 1921 TO Sir Wm Alexander
Earl OF Stirling and Doyan, and embraces all the pubic
or unoccusied lands in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick,
and Prince Edwards Island together with all mines-n
the whole province OF Canada amounting 10 at least ten
millions of acres OF improbable landslide public lands
in The northern parts of Wisconsin and Michigan, in
GLIDING the copper mines OF Lake Supefiorlhe public
lands owned or claimed be owned, by the States OF
Maine and Massachusetts,, within the territory OF
Maine--a strip of country three hundred miles broad,
extending from the head waters Of Lake Superior 10
California and 10 the territory OF Californa-and right
10 the fisheries on all the coasts Of Canada, Nova
Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edwards leland
We Iepea, that the very magnitude OF this claim as
well it's age is well calculated 10 excite disuust
as to its validity But these circumstances constitute
no real obstacles TO the ascertanment OF the legal
rights OF the claIman-hey may, and probably WILL I'M
pose upon HIM the necessity OF making out and ioTiiy
ing his claim with cearness and conelusiyebess
than swould be requisite in bringing forward an odi
nary claim
We are unable 10 how the assertion OF this claim
by Lord Stirling interfere with or embarIass the
pending negotiations the fisheries Great Britain,
as we understand does not recognise the validity OF The
claim while, The United States is only negotiating for
such rights as Great Britain POSSESSES. is capable
of giving II Lord Strings claim is valid, it is
superior to that of Great Britain; and as he is no
party 10 the negotiation, il cannot be affected by
the result. II may hereafter become an important
question for investigation by our government put
in regard TO this matter we speak without any knowl-
edge OF the views of government, and advert to il
only because as item OF intelligence, SO large claim
brought forward in imposing manner, is well calcu-
lated TO arrest public attention
The CLAIM, OF Lord Stirling has undergone the scrui
nv OF eminent lawyers and il s now presented under the
authority and sanction of legal names which, are well
calculated 10 impress the public mind. We have had
an opportunity Of examining publication on the sub
iect by John L. Hsyes, esq, which is prepared with de-
cded ability and in which Lord Strings claim vind
Gated by most imposing array OF facts and authorizes
We find also tina, the Hon. Robert j. aker. whose legal
abilities give TO his opinions the highest claim TO consd
eraion has expressed his "undoubed conviction as 10
the heirshp, identity, and legal rights Of Lord Stirling"
Appended to Mr. Hayes publication shortcut compre
hensye opinion of A. H. Lawrence. esq, of this city.
gentleman Of emnence in his profession. in which he
discusses briefly and clearly what strikes the
main questions in the case, If the hersbip is con-
ceded First, 10 the present claimant of the title Of
the estate the real heir, lineay descended from the
orie nal grantee On this question the facts adduced
by Mr. Hayes seem TO Mr. l.. 10 be conclusve-amongsi
these is the fact that the claimant has obtained two
diets OF uries upon the question Of his herhp to the orig
nal grantee These verdc,s were given in accordance
with the Scotch law, and understanding is that such
Judgment is conclusive The second question Is. wheh
er Lord Stirling Lost his rights by negligence want OF
possession We regard this the most dfic alt ques
ton but MIR. Lawrence arrives al the conclusion that
Lord Strings title remains good. and is affected by
negligence, want OF possession, or lapse OF time.
These remarks will enable readers to understand
the character of Lord Strings claim, and the imposing
force of authority upon which il is brought forward
We repeat that whilst thus concede that the claim
may become important. we do no, see why it should
embarrass the pending negotiations.