Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1886-08-25

and with all its measures achieved. the
wages of the American laborer will fall Al
certainly as effect follows cause.
TEE FISHERY QUESTION.
The Fishery dispute between the United
States and Great Britain has passed through
many singular phases in the last seventy
years but never before. / think, vast surround
ed with such extraordinary circumstances as
we find existing at this moment. Before dis
cussing the merits of the American case II
may be interesting to recall the process by
which the question has been placed IN 1T
present attitude.
On the 3lst day of January, 1885, several
months before the fishing season of that year
began, President Arthur issued proclama'
ton giving notice to the people that the fish,
cry articles of the Treaty of Washington
(lS7l) had, according TO the conditions OF
the Treaty, been formally terminated The
President made the results that would How
from this action plain and unmistskable by
warning all citizens of the United States that
none of the privileges secured to them ov
these articles will exist after July LIST, 1885"
This termination of the treaty had been de-
creed by an overwhelming vote of both
branches of Congress and was now made
final and effective by the Presidents procla-
nation. This course had been earnestly de
sired by the American fishermen, was fully
understood by them and was completed with
out protest from a single citizen of the Uni
ted States.
Five weeks after President Arthurs pro-
clamstion was issued. his term closed, and
with the new Administration Mr.. Bsyard be-
came Secretary of State. In three or four
days after he had been installed 10 office the
British Minister, Honorable Sackville West,
submitted proposal to continue the recpro-
cal fishing arrangements until January l,
1886. After brief correspondence Mr..
Bayard accepted the offer. In other words,
Mr. West and Mr.. Bsysrd made treaty OF
their own by which American fishermen were
to be allowed to fish in British waters six
months longer, and British fishermen should
freely fish in American waters for the same
period. When Mr.. West first proposed this
extension of time, in his note of March IL, he
based his suggestion solely upon the gener-
Gus ground that as the treaty would terminate
during the fishing season considerable hard
ship might be occasioned to American fish
ermen if they were compelled to desist fish
ing at that time" This exact point had been
foreseen, had been carefully considered by
Department. and by the American fishermen
they had discounted it" and were
fully prepared for it, when to
their exceeding surprise the British Minister
seemed to be moved with compassion for
their possible sufferings. Apparently with
out other motive than disinterested benevo-
lence, Mr.. West was anxious to allow them
six months more of that precious time which
the Halifax Commission had declared to be
worth to American fishermen a half million
dollars per annum.
But reading little farther in this remark
able diplomatic correspondence, we find that
Mr.. West instead of acting from motives of
pure generosity towards American fishermen
was really paving the way for shrewd trade
and a new treaty. A regular understanding be-
tween himself and Mr.. Bayard was reduced to
writing, showing that he received large con-
sideration for leaving the British waters open
to American fishermen six months longer. The
consideration was a pledge from Mr.. Bayard
under date of June 18th, 1885, that the Pres
ident would at the next session of Congress
recommend the appointment of a Commission
in which the Governments of the United
States and Great Britain shall be respectively
represented, charged with the consideration
honorable basis of the entire questions of the
fishing rights of the two Governments and
of their respective citizens on the coasts OF
the United States and British North America. "
The stipulation was deinite and reduced to
writing that "in rieW and in consideration OF
such pr omiSed concentrations By the Prest
dent" the British would for the ensuing six
months enforce no restrictive regulations
against American fishermen. In addition to
all this Mr. Bayard gave significant intima-
ton to Mr.. West that the refunding Of duties
meanwhile collected under our custom laws
upon Canadian fish might be brought before
the Commission thus promised.
Accordingly, in the following December, six
and half months after Mr. Bayard's memo
randum pledge that the President would make
the recommendation to Congress, the Pres-
dent actually did incorporate it in his annual
message and gave it in language which was a
transcript rerbatim of the words which Mr..
Rayard gave to Mr.. West. Itwould certainly
be apart from my desire to pass any personal
criticism upon the President, of whom l wish
at all times to speak in terms Of respect but,
viewing this as public question and speak
ing only with the freedom of private citi-
zen, must express my belief that this
transaction was throughout most extraordina-
ry and Unprecedented. 1t was extraordinary
and unprecedented and altogether beyond his
proper power for a Secretary of State in the
recess of Congress to revive any part of a
treaty which Congress had expressly termin-
ated; it was extraordinary for a Secretary of
State to begin negotiations for the renewal of
treaty which every department of Govern
ment hac just united in annulling; it was
extraordinary for Secretary of State to en-
ter into a trade with foreign Minister for a
present benefit to be paid for by the future
action OF the Government, and most of all was
1t extraordinary that a pledge should be
given to a foreign Government that the
President of the United States should in the
furthermore than half year distaut-make
specific recommendation, on a specific sub
Ject, in specific words to the Congress of the
United States. That pledge was given and as
held in the British foreign office in London,
and it took from the President all the power
of reconsideration which the lapse of time
and the change of circumstances might sug-
gest and impose. 1t robbed the President
pro hae rice of his liberty as ar executive.
He was no longer free to insert in his annual
message of December what might then seem
expedent on the question of the fisheries,
but was under honorable obligations to insert
word for word, letter for letter the exact rec
ommendation which the Secretary of State
in the preceding month of June had
promised and pledged to the British Minis
try. The matter presents curious specu-
lation in the working of our Government.
What, for instance, could or should the Pres
ident have done, if before the date of his an
nual message he had become convinced as a