New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-04-25

dictated. as m THIS instance, by imperial coo.,a.r.
tons
The French. We have said claim an .,,i...
night OF fishery on that part OF the coast Of N.v.
foundland extending from Cape John on the nara
east. round to Cape Key on the west This clam |.
made in virtue Of the Treaty and Declsrssio, a.
l7SS, which confirmed and extended the rich. AZ
fishery enjoyed BY the French under the Troat, AZ
Utrecht On the part OF the coast We have sp.ss,
hed they were to De- allowed to FISH free from iats
ruption by the competition of British fisherman
The French oOnstrue this As couferrng an etcl,s;,.
night along the whole coast in question, and anna,
to the terms of the declaration which accompsn;a,
and explains the treaty in support Of their view.
The declaration says, " IAs Britannia Maie.t, IN
" take the most positive measures for Preventing
" his subjects from interrupting in any manner \,
" their competition, the fishery of the Fr.,l
" during the temporary exercise OF il, which !,
granted TO them upon the coasts of the Island Of
4" Newfoundland" There might fairly BE- d;fs,r.
nee of opinion as to whether this guaranty ss,n.
Interruption meant more than that the Fronss
should be honestly permitted to fish wherever tia,
had a mind on any part of the coast specified
This ia the view of the case which was formerl,
maintained by every British Minister, and BY Lard
Palmerston among the rest, until the time of as
ordship's Administration. when the position VISA
practically abandoned, and the justice of II,
French claim conceded. The latter are no,
without strong arguments in support of their own
view of the case tho strongest OF all is to be found
in the Declaration just referred to, which, in eOa
tinuation of what We have now quoted, proceeds
as follows: For this purpose namely, to pre-
vent British subjects from interrupting the fish
cry of the French, A" His Britansic Majesty ..a
cause The fred settlements rhieA shall b. t,sn4
&" there TO be remOred" In further proof Of the in
tention OF the Treaty, the procamations of succs-
siye Governors Of Newfoundland are appealed to.
in which British fishermen are ordered to romovs
from within the limits allotted to the French aaa
also an act of the British Parliament, a few yean
subsequent to the Treaty comforting power On
the Governor TO take measures to protect tho
French from cOmphtion by the forcible removal. If
necessary. of any British fishing settlements on the
coast
These appear to be- strong arguments in favor Of ths
Frcrcb claim To an exclusive right Of fishing bat
there are argumentsin reply which not destitute
Of reason. The stipulation of the British Govern
ment it is said TO cause the removal of fishing set
Elements and the subsequent steps taken by it with
view TO carry out this provision, were only oblgi
tory TO the extent of securing the French in the
81 Gsb;p ipht fraa
ton These rights, it Is alleged, they have been
permitted so to enjoy to the fullest extent. These
fisheries are practically not interrupted by comPot
ton. and the British settlements on the coast
which existed in some cases previous to the
treaty. have grown up with the full con-
currenee of the French, who have found tho
resident population useful in various ways. for
supplying bait, for taking care of their property
during Winter, and rendering a number OF other
needful services. Ii is stated, indeed, that tho
French have expressly encouraged the formation OF
these settlements and il is believed that the object
in threatening their removal is merely to coerce
the Colony into the admission OF the French to
share in the important fisheries At Labrador and IN
the Straits of Bellesle which was to have been
conceded to them by the late Convention, aud
which they have long been anxious to obtain.
Practically, il would seem that the fishermen at
these settlements do not in any way interrupt
the French by their competition" As regards
ST Georges Bank, where the principal settlement
exists. the French have never thought it worth
their while 10 fish for cod there and the Colonial
fishermen depend almost entirely on the herring
fishing which is chiefly carried on at seasons Of
the year when the French have no right to be Ga
the coast at all.
II thus appears that the question in dispute Is
rather difficult one, either side of which may be
mentioned with plausible show Of reason. 1t IA
of a nature not likely to be much simphfed by the
local investigations of Commissioners, and Count
Walewski is doubtless correct In thinking that
Commission Of Inquiry does not promise To Do "
much use The only real end il is likely TO serve
il to gain time and 10 staye of settlement.
There is no question actually at issue regarding
the observance or breach Of treaties which requires
TO b. settled by evidence. The question turns
entirely on the Interpretation Of the treaty, as !"
which the French views totally differ from those
of the Newfoundland Colonists, and Of all the
British Ministers previous to the time OF Lora
Clarendon. When the labOrs Of the Commission
are at an end as they viii be in the course Of
few months, the questions Of Interpretation and
mutual concession, will necessarily arise, aud from
the disposition manifested by the parties chiefly
interested We do not anticipate that tho real dli-
fculty involved will be very easily got rid o.
France seems determined to 60 on gaining ground
& nh IL hak