Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1878-11-15

around the centre of each. She
passed the station this morning in
tow of tug, headed towards Nor
folk.
The State Department publishes
the reply of Lord Salisbury to
Minister Welsh regarding the dis
patch from Secretary Evarts, of
| September 28th, containing this
Governments complaints regarding
the injuries to the American fisher
men in Fortune Bay last January.
Lord Salisbury writes "This
dispatch is in reply to my letter of
the 23d of August, in which [
forwarded a copy of the report
furnished by Capt. Sullivan, of Her
Majesty's ship, Sirius On the
occurrence in question, Mr.. Evarts
now remarks that the United States
Government has not been put in
possession of the depositions which
form the basis of that report, and
are unable, therefore, to say
whether upon their consideration
the view which the Government of
the United States takes of these
transactions, upon the sworn state-
ment Of their own citizens would
be at all modified
"Her Maiesty's Government
have not had the opportunity of
considering the statement in ques-
ton, but the depositions which ac>
companied Captain Sullivan's re-
port land which | now have the honor
to forward, appeared to them in the
absence of other tsstimoney, to be
conclusive, as regards the facts in
the case. Apart, however, Fl ON
the facts in respect TO which there !
appears to be a material divergence
between the evidence collected by
the United States Government and
that collected by the Colonial au>
thorities. Mr.. Eyarts takes ex-
ception to my letter of the Odd on
the ground of my statement that
the United States fishermen con-
cerned have been guilty of breaches
of the law. From this he infers
an opinion, oh my part, that it is
competent for British authority to
pass laws in supersession of the
treaty binding American fisher
men within the three mile limit.
" In pointing out that the Ameri-
can fishermen had broken the law
within the territorial limits of Her
Majesty's dominions, [ had no in
tention Of inferentially laying down
any principles of international law,
and no advantage would, l think,
be gained by doing so, to a greater
extent than the facts in question
Absolutely require. [ hardly believe,
however, that Mr.. Evarts would, in
adhere to the broad doc
trine which some portions Of his
language would appear to convey,
that no British authority has any
right to pass any kind of law pass
ing Americans who are fishing in
British waters, for if that conten~
ton be just, the same disability ap-
plies a .t0rtiori to any other Power,
and the waters must be delivered
over to an anarchy.
son the other hand, Her Maj
esty's government will readily ad-
NIT, what Is evidently self evident,
that British sovereignty as regards
these matters, is limited in its scope
by the engagements of the treaty of
Washington, which can not be mod,
fled or affected by any municipal
legislation. | can not anticipate
that with regard to these princi plies
any difference will be found to exist
between the views of the two gov
erments."
'If, however, it be admitted that
the New Foundland legislators have
the right of binding Americans who
fish within their waters by any laws
which do not contravene existing
treaties, it must further be conceded
that the duty of determining the
existence of any such contraven-
ton must be undertaken by the
Governments, and can not be re-
mitted to the discr; ton of each in
dividual fisherman; for such
if exercised on one side,
can hardly be refused on the other.
IF any American fisherman may
break law which he be-
ieves to be contrary to the treaty
= New Foundland fisherman may
maintain it, if he believes
It in accordance with the treaty.