The New York herald., 1878-03-12


American Commissioners could be induced to offer
only 81 000 900 for all the fishery privileges suose
mss,oners declined this oner and would enter into no
negotiation that did not include tho admission OF tho
produces av,n. Of sh: Canadian fisheries INTO INTO ,ns
cesson, highly advantageous 70 Canada and
disastrous disastrous 70 our country, was nnaliy
submit 10 arbitration what amount OF additional CON-
pensation should be PAID Grea. Britain for our right
10 use the inshore fisheries OF Nova Scotia for twelve
years, and the Halifax Commission took the subject
into consideration, ana TWO Commissioners tboth IN
should pay her $5 500 600 IN gold coin, ibs
Of nearly 100000 per annum. The duties ON tho
products OF Canadian fisheries imported into this
country tail remittcd by the troaty) would be
quite another half million dollars anpum, that
million of dollars per annum In gold com for the
privilege OF inshore hshing Op The coast OF Nova
Scotia, where the total catch by American fishermen
beyond what we had the right TO take without this
treaty, would not amount 10 much over $500 900
per annum In other words We are paying 10 Grea.
Britain 81, 10000 per annum Tor the privilege Of
catching less than 100000 worth OF dsh. Such Is
mere outline OF the iac OF The case and the injustice
OF the award is papabe that u Is dculi TO treat
u with the respect due TO all subjects involving inter-
national relations
THE BINDING poRcs ov rHs AWARD
The question as 10 the binding torce OF the award 10
naturally and necessarily one Of the gravest interest,"
mol only on account oil the large amount involved out
ON account OF the very peculiar circumstances under
which The decision against us was reached. Whether
IT'S BEARINGS and one that snoula be most Carefully
considered ana determined. The award was signed
sny BY Sir ~ Ae.anaer Ga The British Gomms
sioner Mr.. Kellogg, refused TO sign It, and affirmed
his dissent IN writing, declaring 10 be his deliberate
opinion that
The ADVANTAGES accruing to ors.. Britain under the
treaty were greater than Hose conferred the United
that t auestonaSe whether il IS conpeten,
for the Board under tho treaty except
with the unanimous sent Of all the arbtrators.
Mr.. Dwight Foster, tho agent OF our govern mens
stated that he had no instructions as to what he
should do under tho circumstances, but no could
not keep silent and give ground Tor tho
Inference tnat our government would consider
the award valid one mention these facts TO show
that objections to the validity oil the were
the result OF aterthounht, but were incorporated
part oil tho proceedings eore the arbi, rutors The
ground on which Mr. Kellogg questioned the compo-
iency OF TWO OF The arorators TO make an award Is
The ARTICLES in tho Treaty OF Washington creating the
Halifax Board OF Arbitration, gave authority
10 a majority OF tho Board TO make an award
Nor Is the thrd Com missioner empowered 10 act
umpire. Both Ia the Tribunal al Geneva and in the
Claims Com mission at Washington il was expressly
decide. In the Halifax Commission no such stipua-
ton was MADE. ana the inference therefore Is strong
II not irresistible that their award should be made
according 10 the general law OF arbitration.
THE LAW ARBITRATION
What that law is. upon English authority may be
briefly stated. Mr. Rcdman, on "Arbitration aud
Awards" considered ono Of the highest authorities in
ON reference to sevefa arbitrator with no provision
that less than all shll award each aud
hs g
signed by all at the same t!mc.
nence, says:-
On reference to several arbitrators together when
there 81. ' NO clause proyng TO, an AWARD made by less
the performance OF the duties OF his office he
act the others can mako valid award.
And Stewart Kyd, earlier, but not less aut orta.
ing 10 the Roman law ana 10 It's permission Tor the
majority OF the urbrators to decide, Mr. Kyd makes
the following statement:-
In this respect law Of England Is different
less number than all .he named make the
II these eminent English authorities are to be &C.
cepted II Is qulte apparent that the HALIFAX
no binding effect IN law whatever. As to tho equity
Of the case have already gwen the uDdsnable
that govern It, Am not now discussing, much
less presuming to define, the action which gov
ernment snouid ultimately lake regarding the aware
II We should follow what oeeve would be the In.
evitable course OF Great Britain under similar
cumstances, we should utterly refuse TO pay single
penny and ground our refusal both on the law and
the equity OF the case.
CHARACTER OF THE TREATY.
The treaty as u stands Is mockery OF JUSTICE and
will work the destruction OF a great many American
pay 81, ,o0o 900 per annum Great Britain ior de-
btroying the great fishery interest Of America and
still further GRIPPING and wsAkening US as CONNER
cIal Power. For the utter abro of the treaty
should DO willing 10 pay the annual indemnify ior the
years during which We have used the inshore fish,
cries, during which years the Canadians have had
free access to the markets Of torty-ave mons
or would be willing TO pay double
might by this course anticipate by period of scven
years a return to that policy which alone insure
the prosperity, or even save the hie oil and
Important trade, iDdlssoIubly associated win our
commercial devel0pm and absolutely essc ntial 10
our success and prestige as naval Power; and paw
ing thus unfair price for thc inshore fisheries
as long AS We shall have them all
possible ground for mpula.on. even by the ignorant
ment and the good iath and lair deal
Ing OF our people. When We were poor
esteemed tho value Of the fisheries that We
their development by rewards and 0ount,es These
our fishermen a preference IN our own markets.
Even that Is gwen away BY the PROVISIONS oi the
treaty, and now by the Halifax award. II we accept It
aud continue The treaty, We pay Great Britain
Sl00O,O0O per annum Tor destroying school OF COM
mcrce which, properly nurtured, viii be her great
rival In the future. Against such policy enter my
emphatic protest, f stand alone believe that the
products OF American industry land should
Tue first best chance In American markets.
believe the American fisherman should be preferred
by us to the Canadian fisherman, and II we cannot
pay hin u bounty 10 encourage aud sustain him let
at lcast not pay bounty to Great Britain 10 do
slroy him.
MI. PLUMB rcp) of Kansas sent to the Clerks desk
and bad read letter from constituent 10 the elect
that the British government tho provinces gained
advantages far exceeding those gained by our Usher.
men; that the money, II paid would not be Tor any
advantage gained by our fishermen. but 10 MAINTAIN
tho national honor.
Mr. DAWES, (ren) OF Mass, SAID tho fishermen OF
Massachusetts, as we'll AS those Of Name, whe hcy
did not express an opinion or eudeavor to influence
Congress IN regard TO the oil tho award, they
desired II TO be UNDERSTOOD tnat part oil this money
10 be paid or an advantage gained for them. he
agreed wtt the senator from Maine and the cor
respondent OF the Senator from Kansas tnat the ad
vantagcs gained by tue British government and the
CauadIan provinces lar exceeded any gained by our
fishermen. IL might be best TO pay the award, but
should be understood that VIC gained notning by IT.
Mr.. HAMLis, rep OF Me-, said he did not oppose
the resolution Al The proper time the result oil the
Fishery Commission would be transmitted TO Congress
with a recommendation that the money bo appropr,-
atcd. He agreed With MS colleague mr. Blane) mat
got no equivalent for the money. The hvnor oil
the government domanded that we maintain the 90.
legation imposed upon US lie did not desire any pre-.
judgment OF The duty of tho Senate. When the time
came to appropriate the money Senators must re-
mbcr the arbitrator was finally taken by the as
oil our governmen mt. and the national nonor de-
manded that all requirements should be mot
Mr. BLAINE sau lac agreed WITH hrs colleague but
he thought merit would be greater should we step
forward and pay So 5cO 900, for when got nothing
Tho resolution vi Mr.. Blaine Was then agreed to.
ESLisrMESr.oP coLoRED CITIZENS
Mr.. BURNSIDE, (rcp) vi H. l., gave notice that on
Thursday next he would ask the Senate 10 CONSIDER
the bill to remove all restrictions existing IN re
gard 10 the isment OF the colored citizen In any