The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1878-11-15
Lord Saiisbury's Reply to Secretary
Eyarts ON the Fish Question.

WASHINGTON, November 14.-The fol
lowing is Lord Salisbury's reply to the dis
patch Of Secretary Evarts concerning thu
injuries sustained by the American fisher
men in Fortune Bay, and the attitude o
the home governmentin regard 10 colonia
legislation affecting our rights under the
Treaty Of Washington: sa's
FoRIrGS OFFICE, Nov. ], 1878.
SlR:-Her Majesty's Government have
had under their consideration the dispatch
from Mr.. Evarts, dated 2Sth OF September
and communicated to me on the 18th ult.,
respecting the complaints made by the
Government OF tho United States OF injur-
les sustained by the American fishermen
in Fortune Bay in January last. This dis.
patch is in reply to my letter OF the 2Sd OF
August, in which l forwarded q copy oi
the report furnished by Capt. Sullivan, OF
Her Majesty's ship "Sirius," on the oc-
currence in question.
Mr.. Evarts now says that the United
States Government have not been put in
possession OF the dispositions which form
the basis OF that report, and are unable
therefore, to say whether on their con-
sideration the view which the Government
OF the United States takes on these transac-
tions on a swornstatement from their own
citizens, would be at oil modified. Her
Maiesty's Government have not had an
opportunity Of considering the statements
in question, but the depositions%hich &c,
companied Capt. Sullivan's report, and
which ! have now the honor to forward,
appears to them, in the absence OF other
testimony, to be conclusive. As regards
the facts OF the case, apart, however, from
facts in respect to which there appears 10
be material divergence between the evil
dence collected by the United States Gov
ernment and that collected by the Colonial
authorities, Mr. Eyarts takes exception to
nv letter OF the 2Sd on the ground OF my
statement that the United States fishermen
have been guilty OF breaches OF
law. From this he infers an opinion on
nv part that 1t Is competent for British
authority to make laws in the suppression
of the treaty binding American fishermen
within the three mile limit. In pointing
out that American fishermen had broken
the law within the territorial limits OF Her
Aiaiesty's dominions, ! had no intention
Of inferrcntially laying down any princi-
pies OF international law, and no advan-
tage would, think, be gained by doing
so TO greater extent than the facts IN the
question absolutely require. hardly be-
lievc, however, that Mr.. Evarts would in
discussion adhere to the broad doctrine
which some portions OF his language wonld
appear to convey, that no British authors
ty has any right to pass any kind OF law
binding ON Americans who are fishing in
British waters; for II that construction be
lust, the same disability applies to any
other power, and the waters must be de-
liyered over to anarchy. On the other
hand Her Alajesty's G0V.willreadily admit
what is indeed self-evident that the Brit
ish Sovereignty, as regards these matters,
is limited in its scope by the engagements
OF the treaty OF Washington, which can't
be modified or affected by municipal leg.
islation. l cannot anticipate that with re-
gard to these principles any difference will
be found to exist between the views OF the
two Governments. II, however, 1t be nd.
mitted that the Newfoundland Legislators
have the right of binding Americans, who
fish within their waters, by any lawswhich
do not. contravene in the existing treaties,
1t must iurtherbe concededthat duly deter.
mining the existence OF any such contra
yention must be undertaken by the govern.
ments, and cannot be remitted to the dis
cretion OF each individual fisherman; for
such discretion, il exercised on one side,
can hardly be refused on the other. II
any American fisherman may violently
break law which he believes TO be con-
trary to the treaty, q Newfoundland fisher
man may violently maintain 1t II he be-
lieyes 1t in accordance with the treaty. As
tho points In issue are frequently subtitle
and require considerable knowledge,
nothing but confusion and disorder could
result IRON such mode OF deciding the
Interpretation OF the treaty. Her Majesty's
Government prefer the view thata law
enacted by the legislature OF country,
whatever It may be,.ought to be obeyed
by natives and foreigners alike who arc
soiourning within the territorial limits Of
It's jurisdiction; but that i a law has been
inadvertently passed which is in any de-
gree or respect at variance with the rights
conferred on foreign power by treaty,
the correction OF the mistake, as commit,
ted, at the earliest period after its exist
ence shall have been ascertained and rec
ognizcd is matter Of international obli-
CATION.
It is not explicitly stated in Mr.. Evarts'
dispatch that he considers any recent acts
OF the colonial Legislature to be inconsist-
cnt with the rights acquired by the United
States under the treaty ofWashington, but
II that is the case Her Majcsty's Govern
ment will, in friendly spirit, consider
any representation he may think right to
make upon the subject.
With the hope OF coming to satisfac-
tory understanding, have, etc,
TSigncd. SALISBURY.
T, Enbn IIrIsb Esn