Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-07-18
DAILY NATIONAL ERA.


has herself repeatedly urged. Then, as to
the Fisheries-they either belong TO the
whole world, or there is no God. Eng
land should be ashamed Of her heathenish
selfishness, in Withholding from the world
this food, which the bounty Of Heaven has
provided so abundanty for the world. A
true Christianity will yet bring on the day
when one man shall look upon another as
brother-ay, and even as another self.
II will be no grateful recollection to Eng
lishmen, in that day, that Englishmen
were, once, so selfish, mean, and wicked,
as to refuse to let hungry feIlow-man
catch fish by their side.
But, Notwithstanding our right TO the
Fisheries and TO the St. Lawrence is as
clear as England's, / shall, nevertheless,
rejoice in our permission to use them.
For two reasons, especially, shall rejoice
init. First, England will never be disposed
torecall the permission; for England, along
with the rest of the world, is becoming
more, and notless, enlightened and liberal.
Second, use and time will turn this per-
mission into prescription; this privilege
INTO right; this conditional grant into alb
solutc and uncnding enjoyment. | do not
forget that Vattel says, that title to sea-
fisheries cannot be gained by prescription;
nor do forget, that his reason for saying
so is, that such title cannot be lost by dis
use. OF course, am willing to waive all
claim to the possibility of prescription, if
it is conceded on the other hand that
do not need prescription, because my title
is perfect already. / will here remark,
that it would be idle for England to ac-
knowledge the common right Of all ma
lions to the fisheries Of the sea, so long as
she should deny to those nations that ac-
cess to the shore, which is essential to the
enjoyment Of the fisheries. The simple
truth is, that our right to the fisheries in
wolves our right to the shore, to Just the
extent, to which the latter right is needed
TO make the former right available. To
deny us such right to the shore, is to deny
our right to the fisheries
The value, to this nation, of its free par
ticipation in the fisheries, would be great,
and ever increasingly great. They already
furnish a very considerable item in our
food, Notwithstanding the restrictions
upon our use Of them. These restrictions
removed, and our consumption Of fish
would be indefinitely extended.
/ have heard it objected to the Treaty,
that it requires our Government to abolish
the bounty on Goldfish. | am glad, if it
does abolish it, or in any way provide for
its abolition. There is plausibility in the
call for our patience under duties on for
eign manufactures, or, in other words,
under bounties on our own manufactures.
There is plausibiity in it, because the
promise is made to us, that, ere long, our
manufactures will be well established, and
selfsustaining and that then we shall be
relieved of paying bounties on them. But,
it is not pretended, that the skill of Amer
lean fishermen is ever to outgrow the need
of bounty. On the contrary, if there is
need Of bounty now, there will be the
same need Of it, hundred years hence.
1t comes to this, then, that the Director to
such provision of the Treaty would have
us go on forever, paying bounty on cod
fish (already several hundred thousand
dollars year)-and all this, not for the
purpose Of our getting, either now or ever,
cheaper or better Goldfish, but solely for
the purpose of having Americans, instead
of foreigners, catch the Goldfish that we
eat.
The objection, under consideration, is
unreasonable. | add, that il reflects dis
grace upon our country. Ii does so, be-
cause it implies, that, with the fisheries
and all needed facilities herewith thrown
wide open 10 us, we are, nevertheless, to
be dstanced in our fishing competition
with our neighbors. had supposed, that
the boast of the Yankees is, that they can
beat. the British, in every thing. Must
fishing be excepted from the boast'
| spoke of the st. Lawrence. Our free
use of that noble river would be an inval-
liable benefit to us. Together with its
lakes, il drains an extent of country,
scarcely less than that drained by the Mis-
sissippi. Much of our craft upon those
lakes is capable of ocean navigation
and during the five months in the year, in
which il is locked up in ice, it would be
upon the ocean, could il get there. Now,
this addition TO the service of this craft,
would, Of ITSELF render very important the
opening of the ST. Lawrence TO us.
am aware, that the reputation of the
mouth Of the St. Lawrence for safe navi-
CATION is bad. But it is such, only be-
cause il is navigated, at improper seasons
Of the year. Let il be nayigated IN no
other than the proper season; and let our
canals and railroads be allowed to serve
in its stead, the remainder Of the year,
and it will no longer have this bad repuz
tation. Not only is the st. Lawrence the
shortest route to England; but the fact,
that it is the coolest route is, in regard TO
much important lading, an argument in
its favor, instead of an objection to it.
There is no assignable limit to the pro-
ductiveness in Indian corn of our West