Daily Kennebec journal., 1879-02-07


one thousand men, and another which used to
maintain, and ought still to support ten or
twenty times that number But no such un-
pleasant diiema exists: all that the amend
ment calls for is n fair chance for both. Cur
State is not in situation to sacrifice its shore
fisheries.
We have allowed too many ufCur industries
to decline, and the prosperity Of Maine l.
crippled. 1t is not easy to see ourway out OF
our embarrassments. Our population Is
shrinking, both by emigration and the mca-
groness of our families; our farmers boys
move away. some into our cities. more out of
the State We are importing our corn, our
grain. our beef our fish and even our poultry !;
we have long had the weevil for our wheat,
and now we are having the bug for our pota-
toes.
We seem TO he falling off in pretty much
everything but insanity. crime. debt and tax
es. Twenty years ago every other farmer IN
the ncighb0rhood of Lewiston Falls had his
little shoe shop, where he utilized his own
spare hours and his boys. Now the work i
all done in great establishments At the Falls.
The great fish eating up the little ones ON
land rs well a. in the sea Doubtless much
of this is unavoidable, but the danger certain
" lies in the direction of monopoly and cen
tralzaiion and we must do what we can 10
arrest it.
You cannot atfOrdto sacrifice orto endangcr
the livelihood of q, 900 or 10000 industrious
citizens lining the rivers, bays and shores of
half the counties in the State. every one OF
whom is dependent both for his bait and for
his fish on boats or vessels propelled 10y sail
and oar, even il by so doing YOU should
slightly augment the profits of the porgy IN
tercst which has the ocean az its command,
and on the wings of steam can sweep at pleas
ure from the Provinces to Cape Cod. Their
counsel remind Won that our granite trade has
declined. not for lack of granite surely, but
for want If customers; is that q good reason
for allowing the fish in our bays to be driven
from our coast:
Why shall waste your time by further ar
gumcnt of the facts, when our antagonists
c0ncedc that our case is too strong for serious
controversy upon its merits by rcsorting to
stratagcm:
The world does move. Only one year ago
the remonstrantS boldly opposed the bill of
ISIS: this winter you see them abandon their
ground. cOntenting themselves with resisting
onr amendment and that under Il legal quibble.
Confcsscdiy beaten on the merits of the ease.
they seek shelter beneath the British Treaty
of 1871. Perhaps you wonder that a treaty
more than seven years oldis forthc time in
voked by these rcmonsirants, for we heard
But | will not press the point If the fisher
men Of Maine are doomed to destruction. il
is fitting that they should receive their death
blow from a British weapon. 1t is but rctri
butive justice.
Paul Jones deficd the navy of England with
a fleet manned largely by their ancestors, and
if their descendants must perish, let them
meet their fate from a goblin con jurcd in the
name of that power which the Tories invoked
in their unpatriotic struggle against tine heroic
seamcn of the last century.
But the argument of my learned friend,
the senior counsel for the rcm0nStrants, will
be found spccious and falacious
The privilege granted by the article of the
fishing treaty to British subjects is to be 'in
common with the citizens of the United
States" | submit that the purpose of this
provision, like that of the recent amendment
to our National Constitution, is to prevent dis
elimination, not to grant a monopoly. The
negro is not made better than the white man,
by our constitution, neither is the alien cX-
altcd above our citizens by the treaty The
British fisherman is entitled by the treaty to
no higher privileges in the bays and on the
coast of Maine than the Constitution of the
United States always guaranteed to the cti-
zens of all the states. Indeed | understood
the senior counsel to admit this in the first
stage of his argument.
If | am right in this view, then the treaty
amounts to this and no more British fish
ermen shall have the same rights which the
United States Constitution always secured to
citizens of Mass. and Il. |. equal rights with
those of our own State No preference can
lawfully be given to one or the other.
Now it happens that this is precisely the
construction which the Provincial Parliament
of Newfoundland has actually given to the
treaty, by passing a law which forbids its own
subjects and everybody else to fish within its
waters with seinos or on Sunday.
Last summer Massachusetts, fishermen I'M
dert0ok to cOnStruc the treaty after the man
ner of the senior counsel, violating the provin-
cial law by fishing with seines and on SUNDAY
within Newfoundland waters. The result
was that their boats, nets and tackle. were
seized by the Newfoundland authorities and
the Massachusetts, men had to leave. They
complained to our Secretary of State. and in
his remonstrancc to the British government,
from which the senior counsel has read to YOU.
Mr.. Evarts threatened to withhold the five and
a half millions of dollars, which we had been
doomed to pay for this same treaty, until rep
aration had been made for the losses sustained
by the Massachusetts, fishermen and the New
foundland statute had been repealed.
But Lord Salisbury, in a reply of signal
ciearness and ability, (Which the senior coun-
sci did not read), insisted on the uncOndition-
al payment of the money, remarking that
"Her Majesty government prefeJs the view"
that an act of the provincial legislature is to
be presumed to be in conformity with the
treaty until decided by Her Majesty's govern
ment 10 be in violation of it, II is needless
to remind you that the Massachusetts, fisher
men have not been Unidentified. nor the New
foundland law repealed, but our government
has paid over the 81 ,j00,0
perceive that the Senate is taking meas
ures to give the notice required for the ter
mination of this odious treaty for which we
have paid 80 dear, and it is safe to predict.
that before the amendment for which our fish
crmen pray, shall have been adjudged by the
Supreme Court of the United States to be in
violation of the treaty Of 1871. that treaty
will have ceased to exist. And were it other
wise, the only possible effect of such de-
cision would be to give British subjects the
right to carry on the steam porgy fishery
within our waters, privilege which they
have never attempted to exercise nor claim.
and which there is no reason to apprchcnd
they ever will.
The danger which threatens the cxtermna-
tion Of our shore h,hC ries comes from Ma,sa-