The New York herald., 1878-10-21
How the British Claim for COmpensa-
ton Was Made Up.
A MONSTROUS BILL.
Equities OF the United States Counter
Claim for an Offset.
NO VALUABLE PRIVILEGE GAINED.

Many no DOUBT then first learned that commission
had been sitting at Halifax having the subject
under consideration: Others were aware that some
points lett undetermined by the Treaty OF Washington
oil 1871 had stipulated by that treaty, referred
10 arbitration but had idea OF their possible
pitude; while even the best informed. including the
very negotators OF the Treaty OF 1871. and those
most nearly connected with the commission ITSELF
were, 1t seems wholly unprepared Tor the result--an
award of $4,000, 900 against the United States.
While the public prints teemed with denuncations
OF the chief arbitrator and virtual umpire, Of the
fact and manner of his selection, II was astonishing
how little curiosity they expressed to learn the
grounds upon which decison so unexpccied was
based and how little said satisfy curiosity
tho public might naturally feel on The subject.
Nor tho mystery any better understood when Mr..
Blaine in two speeches during the winter commun,-
catcd to the Senate statistics showing the very slight
acruai yield the United OF the Canadian in.
shore hsneries Of late years and The other hand
exhibited the loss incurred by the United States
through the REIMBURSEMENT under tho treaty OF the
duties hitherto accruing Imports OF fish and fish
oil from Canada, and the corresponding gain 10 Cana
diana Not even did the admrable letter OF Mr. Evart
of May 16 1875 transmitted by tho President Con-
gress the following daywhiIe showing many reasons
why such award should not have been made-at
all make apparent By what process had been arrived
at But the letter alluded 10 documents transmitted
with II, and tbese, 1t mgnt be hoped, would at last
furnish some light
These documents were so vouminous that 1t was
untilthe middle OF July that printing could
DO completed, and tnat they issued Ex. Doc.
No. 80, OF the House OF Representatives,. They
form altogether three ponderous octave volumes
OF thousand pages each, 3, ,495 pages In
all. They consist OF the ''case" of Great Britain,
the "answer' OF tho United States ana the '.reply"
of Great Britain, OF great mass OF oral testimony
taken before The commission, of alidavits, exhibits
and other evidence offered either slde OF the argu
ments OF counsel, aud then a momentous haf-page,
whereupon, without word of antecedsnt explanation
calculation, inscribed, over tho signatures OF
two OF the Commissioners. "s5 500 600 in gold to be
paid by the government OF the United States 10 The
government OF Her Britarnc Majesty" and over the
signature OF the remaining Commissioner is insc ribcd.
less nothing 10 be paid by the Same to tho
same.
Lot SEQ, that all is before which be-
fore the Com mmission, whethor we can NJ oil iii up
satisfactorily to ourselves this hiatus between the
closed case and the hnd.ng. and whether We confirm
The award arrived at by IN sjority OF tho Commits
sioners
THE BRITISH
And FIRST we turn 20 thu .case" OF Great Britain
THIS 10 tho statement OF her claim by herself As
ouch IL must embrace all naf sne intend ds TO demand
expects 10 prove. And, indeed. no exception,
II would seem, could be made to IT by reason
OF insu efficiency. Whether we consider the va
riety OF the grounds OF claim stated or the
amount finally set up Il must be admitted
that Great Britain has not failed TO do herself full
justice We shall reverse the orccr followed by the
case first, the most interesting item tho
amount claimed. THIS is, "ln respect TO The Domn-
Ion OF Canada" sI2 ooo ooo respec, TO Newfound-
Ian z Qlai of II 4 I'm
what Great Britain claims ''over and above the value
Of any advantages conferred British subjects under
The FISHERY articles OF the Treaty OF Washingto "
Tho grounds OF claim cover thirty pages The gist OF
II Is summarized IN tho following sentence (page
p6jslt has been stated the preyions portions Of
this chapter that average number OF at least
thousand United States vessels annualy frequent
BritisE Canadian waters. The gross cntch OF eacn
vessel per "trip been estimated at IS. 600, con-
siderable portion OF which Ia net pront resulting from
the privileges conferred by tho treaty" From a
statement inrther In the OF Newfoundland
fpase los) appears tnat The net profit Is rcckoDed at
twenty per cent. which would give $1,120 net
profit Of each vessel Now, although Great
Britain does not state what proportion Of
Ihis alleged net pront sho would think 1t
proper charge for the privilege OF fishing
10 her waters. IL IS clear that 1t could not be The
whole OF IL For u the whole OF the net profit OF
the baro privilege OF hshing, who would engage In
2 Ii is not Great Britain tna furnishes the capital
the vessel and its ouiat nor who pays the
Of the crew, or the running expenses, or the
and lbo interest on the outlay nor does
she incur what Is, PERHAPS more than all the grsa.
even deliver or guarantee 10 the fisherman certain
quantity OF nsh all that she supplies IS tho privilege
OF catcaing, II he can, some nsh within certain
limit.
j. Now whu, proportion OF tho profits should Great
Britain receive in Of wbatshe furnishes, OF
what tho other party furnishesf Looking Mt u as
mmercfal Transaction, what proportion could the
other partpanord 10 pay hcrg Wouif any Bri4isb or
merchant undertake to guarantee 10 pay for
The privilege III question, in view OF his outay aud his
risks sun equal 10 one-ourh part OF the net profits,
above cacuiAtedf
But let us assume that Great Britain shall receive
one lour part the net profits her cslcuia-
lion OF them This would DO $3.50 per vessel. That
tnls sum is Tar beyond the estimate placed ~ Great
Britaia herself upon the privilege s shown by the
tact that, when lew years since that government
adopted the system OF issuing licenses 10 American
nsnermen, the prices fxed by itfor these licenses
IA foilows:ln the nrst year tlS66J the license
leo was hfty cents per ton. The average tonnage OF
nshing vessels a appears by the official British return
Of licenses issued tpp l97-2s does not certainly ex
coed sixty TONS Tnus the prce xed by Great Britain
herself fOr the privilege ia question that year was $50
for each vessel -Four nunared snu nfy-iour vessels
took oa licenses tnat year. In 1907 tbe lee raised
81, say 900 per vessel; zy5 vessels received
licenses IN that ear. The next year tue lee was
ralscd 10 $2 per ton, say sl20 per vessel, tne
highest price attained In that year only sixiy-one
licenses were taken out; IN tne next tniry zone, and
the sysiem was then Abandoned On page 81 OF the
British occurs the following passage:-"rnB
sys,em tinet cf issuing licensesl, alter beng
maintained Tor four years. was discontinued
owing 10 the neglect OF American fishermen
$40 provide themselves With nccnses.' The rate
charged had IL b, on paid was cvidenY satisfactory
10 Great Britain. If l0UO vesscl--i number which
Great BRIAN claims avail themselves OF her priyi
Iege--Lad paid at and from that Tune Sl20 year
sptccc the FISHERY Commission, We may presume,
would have Doe sailed into existence. Twohundrcd
aud sahty dollars vessel is then moro than twice
a. uch Great Britain herself asked Tor tins privi
Iege before sne TO bring Ia her bill before this
Commission. Two nundred AMI eighty dollars apiece
xgl IL n We lve
years rs SO, 360, 100.
fnis tneu 80 far as any positive showing OF ngures
eoes is the extrome statement Of Great Brains case
III the exception Of nxing tho proportion 70 wncn
sh. would consider herself entitled of the net prohss
Of the business-a point which she leaves inoenhte-
A ~ her own Abatement la tho OF Newiound-
land iurthcr tpage 1881 she Claims one-tehth only
OF The net pront,. The other data-tho number of
vcssels-the amount OF their pronis nrc ncr own.
But we have tnat The total oil her claim ior
the Dominion of Canada alone, and that. too over
aud above the value OF the concessions made undcr
LreaLx BY Ina unilad Slatea TO Ganada. Is