Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-06-10
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
THE FISHERY QUESTION.

months ago, but which has not until now reached
the public eye. The subjoined synopsis of it ap-
pears in the Commercial Advertiser. The CORE
spondence took place in the summer of 1852, and
IS chiefly valuable as showing the condition of the
negotiation, and the temper of the two Govern
ments when the present Administration came into
power,
The first letter in the series isdated August TO- 1882
and is from Mr.. LAWRENCE then United States Minister
at London, to the Hon DANIEL WEDsTEE Secretary OF
State, detailing the particulars Of interview with Lord
MALMEsBURY at that gentemans request TAia was at
the time when much excitement prevailed here respecting
the sending of armed vessels by the British Government
to the of their North American colonies for the
protection of their fisheries Lord Malmesbury claimed
that the subject not properly understood in the Uni
ted States and assured the American Minister that the
British Government did not intend to assert any new
principle but only protect the rights Of the coonsts
in the fisheries which had been neglected by their pre-
decessors that what had been done had been done at
the urgent request of the coonsts themselves that the
concessions made by Lord Aberdeen of the right to fish
in the Bay of Fundy, fully recognised by the Bri
fish Government and would not be Withdrawn that
armed force there at that time to keep the Anne
rican fishermen three miles from the British shores in
accordance with the provisions of the convention of 1878
that the orders the both with respect to the
French and the American fishermen and, finally that
armed into those waters to give offence either to
the Government to the people of the United States
the sole object being maintain the neglected rights of
the colonists.
To these assurances Mr.. LAWRENCE replied that he
deeply regretted the taken by the British Gov
eminent for that the sending of nineteen armed steamers
to those waters without notice to the Government Of the
United States whether intended not, had the APP
pearance Of hostile movement and he thought would be
construed by his Government into attempt to coerce
the United States into system of trade which it was
we'll known the provinces had long sought for He fur
Their the hope that instructions would be prompt
" sent cut to the Admiral the fishing station and to
the authorities in the Provinces which would neutraze
the effect that the movement would otherwise probably
have This conversation took place on the th of August
On the 9th Mr. Lawrence again invited to meet Lord
Malmesbury at the Foreign Office who by way of apology
for having given previous notice to the United States
of the step taken by the British Government said that
the necessity of doing had occurred to Lord
Derby, principle to be asserted, but that
dispatches preparing for Mr. Champion the sub
jeet and would be Immediately sent off. Mr. Lawrence
adds
'.Thus terminated the interview of yesterday The
Government satisfied feel that they have committed
in ordering large naval force to those waters
during the fishing season. and still greater one in send
ing without seasonabe notice to the Government OF the
United States and willing do every thing in
their power to allay excitement. If comprehensive
plan of trade between the British North American colo
and the United States be adopted it will super
sede the necessity Of taking up the fisheries separately
that cannot be done, still believe that arrangement
favorable to both countries be made which will settle
forever the question of the North American fisheries
The second letter is from Lord MALMEsBURY to Mr.
CHAMPION, and is dated August TO- 1t comments upon
the publication by Mr. WEBSTER of the information re-
cered by hin -AsrAtnr the Of armed Brit
ish feet the fishing grounds which excited much
attention and uneasiness at the time Lord Malmesbury
expresses the sncerest regret Of the British Govern
that such publication should have been made with
ont what appears her Maesys Government sufficient
inquiry into the circumstances of the CASE for the
of friendly alliance which happily subsist between
the two Governments would, the hand, not have
warranted her Majestys Government in adopting any
measures which might be held to be offensive to the
United States and, the other hand could have
Justified the Government of the United States in sup
posing that any such measures were intended" But
Lord Malmesbury nevertheless that neither Gov
eminent designed to act discourteousy to the other
to provoke collision unfriendy feeling and enters into
explanations AS have never yet had any full and
official of the motives and purposes of the British
Government with respect to the whole proceeding that
time, we quote at some length from this letter:
If Lord Aberdeen's notes which Mr.. Everett alu
ded had been carefully examined by Mr.. Webster and
had also been published Mr. Webster and the public
of the two countries would have that instead Of
concedng right, Lord Aberdeen expressly reserved it
but that in order to prove the friendly feeling of Great
Britain towards the United States her Maestys Govern
ment, by Lord Aberdeen's note, relaxed, regarded
Bay of Fundy the right which her Majesty Go
felt bound to maintain, of excluding American fish
from that bay and, moreover, it would have APP
peared that Lord Aberdeen, in the letter referred to-
merely stated that he would submit to the Coopal Office
the question relating to the seizure of two particular
sells, the Washington and Argus and that regarded
the bays his words to be taken applying to the
Bay of Fundy alone.
81 appears, however partly by Mr.. Webster's
muncatons with you and by terms Of his publications.
and partly by the proceedings in the Senate of the United
States that it is supposed in the United States rs that
rule the decision of the Government of As and with
draw the privilege then granted to American fishermen
hsh IN the Bay Of Fundy and secondly, that, notwh
standing the express terms Of the treaty American fish
ermen are privileged, either by usage right fish
upon any part of the British within three marine
miles Of the shore.
Both suggestions entirely founded in error Her
Maestys Government so far from having any intention
Of now excluding American fishermen from the Bay of
Fundy, are prepared to maintain that the relaxation
granted In 40 was reasonable and just and should be
adhered to- and IN giving orders strengthen the naval
force employed to maintain the Of our rights un
der the treaty Of 1873 they could that
the United States would that relaxation for
may granted regards the Bay Rundy was thereby
cancelled without the equally formal notice which her
Majestys Government would undoubtedly feel themselves
bound to have given to ally Of the British Crown had
such act been intended '.... .|
g But in regard 10 the three miles distance her Ma
jestys Government not that il has tr