Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1853-03-05

the doubt by raising the presumption that the shores
these bays &c. and the shores OF the general were
to be considered in the light and treated the
| footing"
An extract from another despatch Of Lord Stanley Of
the 18th of September will also show that it was intend
ed to admit the American fishermen into all the outer
bays Of certain dimensions ii will also unhappiy show
the why that liberal policy abandoned which
had been adopted, Lord Stanley in his letter Of the
10Th of May 1885, had stated with great justice for the
4 interests Of both countries"
Her Maesty's Government have atentvely consider
ed the representations contained in your dispatches Of
18th Of June and I'd Of july respecting the policy of
granting permission to the fishermen Of the United States
to fish in the Bay OF Chaeur and other large bays Of
similar character the coasts Of New Brunswick and
Nova Scotia and apprebeudng from your statements that
such general concession would be injurious the
interests OF the BrtsR North American Provinces, we
have abandoned the Llention had entertained on the
subject and shall adhere to the strict letter of the trea
ties which exist between Great Britain and the United
States relative to the fisheries in North America except
far they Lay relate the Bay Of Fundy which has
been thrown open to the Americans under certain re-
srictions."
You will be able to Judge from these authorities whe
ther my letter of the 26th Of April lS45 is justly charge
able with having msled the American public as to the
fact that the further relaxation Of the exclusion Of
fishermen from the great bays had been at my instance
referred to the Colonial Office and to the consideration Of
her Maesty's Government Should the entire despatch
from Lord Stanley Lord Falkland Of the 10th of May
1916, be published, apprehend that will not only
still more plainly show this which is apparent from the
fragment Of it that has appeared at Halifax but also that
the reasonableness of the American argument had been
practically recognised by her Maesty's Government
! Lord Malmesbury alludes to two erroneous suppo-
stons that prevailed he believes in the United States
last summer-one, that it the intention of her Males
TVS Government to revoke the concession of 1915
to the Bay Fundy and the other that notwths tand-
a. <ha terms of
ermen are privileged either by usage or night, to fish
upon any part the British coast within three marine
miles of the shore.
| have already remarked on the uncertainty which
listed the first point the real design of the Bris
naval movement As far as am aware the misappre
tensions in this respect extensive in England Is
in America With regard to the second supposed erro
whatever suggestion to that effect may have been thrown
in the heat of unprecedented debate, only sy
that has happened to to fall in with any PEI
who entertained the opinion Lord Malmesbu-y him
self, on the next page of his despatch, says
"Her Maesty's Government are not aware that it hs
at any time been maintained by the Government of tie
United States that there be, that there has esr
been supposed to be- the slightest doubt that her Mas
y's Government not only entitled but bound to ma-
tain that distance free from encroachment."
i Lord Malmesbury remarks that the encroachmentff
the French included with those of the Amercanan
the notice given by Mr. Champion to the late Secrealof
State of the 9Th of July last This certainly showed
no exclusive action contemplated against American
fishermen and accordingly calculated to mtgatehe
alarm which for short time prevailed The importance
which Lord Mamesbury justly attaches to the joint
ton of the supposed encroachments both of Franceand
the United States in the notice given by Mr. Cramton
on the 9th of July makes it of regret lat
in the Queens speech at the opening Of the presentes
sion of Parliament the American encroachment. on are
men as the cause of he naval movement
have already disclamed the intention of going ito
general discussion of the fishery question but thg it
proper to alude to important msapprehension the
British argument which, though has doubt hat the
chief agency in producing the difference of opnio be-
tween the two Governments the true intent othe
convention of 1s1s has not believe, been pointsdout
in the diplomatic discussions between the United Aaes
and Great Britain. Lord Aberdeen in his note 4 the
10th of March, 1885, announcing the relaxation the
Bay of Fundy, thus expresses himself:
Her Majestys Government must still maintain and
IN this uV they fortified By high legal authority thai the
Bay of Fundy is rightfuy claimed by Great Brainls
bay within the meaning of the treaty of 1918 and hey
equally maintain the position which laid down inthe
Of the undersigned dated the 18th of April last tat
with regard to the other bays the British Amercan
coasts, United States fisherman has under that
yenton the right TO fish within three miles Of the
Of such bays designated by line drawn from had-
land to headand of that entrance
The thigh legal authority here referred to not
communicated to by Lord Aberdeen and is beloved
to have been communicated to the Government of
the United States But think do not err in suppong
the ausion to be to the opinion signed j. DodsonAnd
Thomas Wilde then the law officers of the Crown gwen
on requsition Of Lord Palmerston in 1841 In This
opinion which has been published Halifax these dis
tngushed ursts say that right exists the par Of
American citizens to enter the bays Of Nova Scotia there
TO take fish, although the fishing, being within the lay
may be at greater distance than three miles from the
shore of the bay, Of opinion that The term had
land used IN the treaty 10 express tie part Of the lana
hare before mentioned excluding the interior Of the nys
and the inlets Of the COAST
Now neither the term headland" nor any thing eou-
vaent synonymous, in the convention Of 1918
and this legal authority which mo doubt mainly
strumeual in leading the Home Government to adopt The
colonial construction Of the treaty in this respect
upon imaginary basis The law officers Of the Crown
made up at Halifax, in which the word headland" ap-
pears for part Of the treaty between the United States
and Great Britain which they required to expound
The Government Of the United States cannot but regret
that official opinion which had the effect Of reversing
the construction of the convention which Great Britain
had acted from 1918 to 1912, which excluded fish
from of the best fishing grounds after the
undsturbed enjoyment Of quarter Of century, and
finally brought the countries the verge Of deplorabe
collision should have been given by the law officers Of
the Crown without careful perusal of the text Of
the treaty.
WISH before closing this despatch to call your